“What if we talk to each other? ” — this is the title of our 2019 Paris Workplace survey. Let's face it, it occupies a special place in the series of studies that we have been conducting for five years now with the Institute. Ifop (12,000 employees in Île-de-France interviewed, 400 questions asked since 2014).
This year, we are indeed exploring something that relates to our human condition. The study gives us an essential — and reassuring — truth: man is a social animal, which expresses a visceral need for contact with his peers.
Probably not a surprise for anyone reading these lines. And yet... However, have companies really integrated it into their management methods and spatial organization?
Today, 59% of employees say they feel a form of isolation in their company. 26% even say that they feel “often isolated”, even as open and/or shared offices, emails, instant messages, instant messages, conference calls and other videoconferences are multiplying.
Connecté mais seul, ensemble mais seul… tristes paradoxes
These “often isolated” employees are less happy at work, are much more likely to admit to being “often stressed by their work” and also consider themselves less efficient than their colleagues.
And the trends of the century are not necessarily going to make things better. Thus, teleworking — which 41% of Île-de-France residents use at least once a week — doubles the risk of isolation, but also stress... and even the fear of being fired.
The proliferation of emails and instant messaging, far from improving communication between teams, is increasing friction. Beyond 20 interactions with different people per day, the probability of having tensions between colleagues and with your hierarchy increases by 150%. And, as in arterial or electrical systems, this overvoltage causes serious risks: employees subject to an overdose of exchanges also consider themselves less efficient, they are more likely to leave their company, or even to “go crazy” altogether.
So maybe it's time to bring the pressure down.
For this, a simple and ancestral solution exists. “What if we talk? ” is in fact more of an answer than a question. Because Ifop figures make it possible to establish the correlation between the number of face-to-face exchanges with colleagues and the feeling of isolation. When you talk to at least three people “in person” during a working day, isolation is halved. And unsurprisingly, employees overwhelmingly prefer face-to-face exchanges (77%) to relationships by email (13%) or telephone (10%).
However, this observation is not an invitation to trade inflation. Too frequent interruptions and an overdose of exchanges in the same day, even face-to-face, create exactly the same problems as an excess of emails.
The role of managers and organizations is not to multiply interactions ad infinitum but, on the contrary, to limit them to a fair proportion in order to guarantee quality exchanges. Here we come: the best indicator and determinant of performance and well-being in companies lies in the quality of relationships between colleagues. An obvious thing? No doubt. But the statistical reality is so striking that it deserves all managers to stop for a moment. There is a perfect (and strong) correlation between the quality of relationships with colleagues and a sense of performance at work.
So in concrete terms, what can businesses do to fight isolation and create quality interactions?
First, they need to understand that the workplace is today's first — and most powerful — social media. In France, the office is first and foremost experienced as a social space, before being a workspace: 42% of employees come to the office for “social life with their colleagues” (the first reason mentioned, in front of the fact of “working more efficiently”). And young employees, even more than their elders, are sensitive to this relational dimension.
Businesses need to (re) think about their workplace accordingly.
Because employees who maintain the best relationships with their colleagues have, more often than average, convivial spaces in their offices (84% vs 66%), and spaces intended to work collaboratively (62% vs 47%). These are all elements that are not neutral for businesses, at a time when square meters are so rare and so expensive in Paris.
But these choices pay off. In the end, companies that manage to cultivate the best relationships are rewarded — employees who rate the quality of relationships in the company as “very good” also rate the performance of their company as a whole very positively: 7.6/10 vs 5.9/10.
Here is a pleasant conclusion: the quality of relationships at work can be thought of, designed, and even created... and those who work the hardest at them reap the benefits: there is justice!