And when I wanna go home, I’m goin’ mobile… —from “Goin’ Mobile” by Pete Townsend
Last time around, we took on the topic of working remotely as this practice has gained much appeal among estimators and project managers over the past couple of years. Brought on by the advent of the pandemic, many bidmeisters got a taste of the obvious benefits of home-based estimating and leaned toward continuing the practice once the contagion subsided. And who could blame them? With fuel prices what they are and with traffic becoming more and more congested in most of our city centers, the elimination of the commute alone would be enough to entice any bidmeister into becoming a “Zoomer” (remote worker who uses Zoom to stay connected). Predictably, we focused on a number of additional benefits last month, such as close proximity to the family, and flexible on-task hours. In fact, I think we became so enamored of the pluses that we gave short shrift to the several minuses that attach to the practice.
And so, in an effort to find a more balanced treatment, I polled a number of my colleagues around the country—employees and employers—for their take on the pros and cons of virtual employment. Admittedly, these following comments only reflect anecdotal (and very subjective) evidence regarding this recent development, but I believe they present an accurate picture of an ongoing debate.
Since we already devoted an inordinate amount of space to exploring the upside of remote work, it’s fitting that we focus on the possible drawbacks. Now, one might think there would be a natural divide over the topic between employees (pro) and employers (con), and for the most part, this assumption seems to hold. However, my first several stumbling blocks were surprisingly offered by bidmeisters themselves. Bruce of San Diego pointed out that, as the phenomenon catches on, demand for new office space will fall off, thus blunting a portion of construction that has experienced healthy activity in the past. This is an astute observation that has been missed in all of the articles that I’ve researched on virtual work. Another rather negative aspect of remote work comes with applying for a position that is not grounded geographically. Julian of Goodyear, Ariz., attests that competition for virtual jobs is much more competitive as applicants from all over the country are vying for the same position by the hundreds, not just a dozen or so applicants from the same general area, as was traditionally so. David, an exactimator from the Atlanta area, cites difficulties with time management, given the inevitable distractions that attach from working in the home environment (do some laundry, walk the dog, pick the kids up from school, etc.). For myself, I find the concept of working from home a good fit for estimators who spent hours on end doing virtual work that can be performed off-site just as well. However, I miss the camaraderie generated with F2F (face-to-face) interaction with colleagues.
My personal grumble segues nicely into comments made by Jay, part owner of a large Phoenix-based drywall company. His main complaint rests with the general loss of team-oriented development and the forfeiture of the organization’s benefits that can only come with F2F contact. He cites the importance of corporate culture—a firm’s values, ethics and morale—and he notes that the evolving nature of this concept is kept thriving only through live contributions made F2F. Problem-solving, Brian of Cleveland further observes, is often collaborative; consider the strategies that are born from casual conversations occurring over coffee. What my friends are focusing on is a part of a larger issue facing virtually all of humanity at this juncture: high tech estrangement and its attendant loneliness.
However, there are a number of means and methods available that at least partially address the issue of connectivity that many owners (including Jay) have employed or currently employ. Regularly scheduled conference calls and video chats allow colleagues to collaborate on common issues, or to brainstorm on mutually shared problems. Another approach to the problem of estrangement comes with what Zoomers are dubbing the “hybrid work week,” which is just a techie term for working remotely part-time and working on-site part-time. And while these measures offer a partial remedy to the distance issue, they fall short of preserving the spontaneity enjoyed with the multiple casual conversations occurring in a localized F2F environment.
In conclusion, I must say that the notion of working remotely has gained much attention lately (especially among estimators, as the individual nature of our work conforms nicely to the concept), and rightly so. But while the actual practice is gaining rapid acceptance, the ongoing debate over the pros and cons of “goin’ mobile,” as presented here, continues.
Vince Bailey is an estimator/project manager in the Phoenix area.
