Employers have made considerable efforts and obtained remarkable results in asking workers to spend more time in the office over the past two years. But while even complying employees usually regret the decreased flexibility those tighter rules involve, some defiant staffers are resorting to tricky ways to safeguard their cherished work-from-home permissions: by being sufficiently irritating to their colleagues and managers that they’re allowed to work remotely in order to give everyone else some peace.
That’s the situation explored by business consultancy Korn Ferry in a recent blog post titled “A New Career Strategy: Be Insufferable?” It examines the case of an employee called Bob, who serves as an avatar for the mercifully limited number of real workers seeking to gain personal objectives through a program of workplace annoyance. In this instance, that goal is renewed work-from-home permissions. Their method of attaining it? Being sufficiently aggravating in the workplace that both managers and coworkers wind up thrilled at the idea of Bob working remotely.
“Off-putting employees are discovering that their less-than-congenial behavior may have an upside for them: the opportunity to work from home,” noted the Korn Ferry post. “Managers enforcing return-to-office policies may be less inclined to insist on the regular attendance of workers who are not engaged.”
How does that happen now that businesses have made big strides to increase in-office presence again—often overcoming more direct employee resistance to those orders?
Because, like many of the more problematic staffers whom virtually all employers and coworkers are unfortunately familiar with, Bob uses a mix of recurring techniques to reach his remote-working goals.
Those may include passive-aggressive behavior such as being regularly late for meetings, where he then asks questions applicable only to himself and talks over collectively pertinent inquiries as he does so. He may also complain about the difficulty or utility of certain assignments, claim coworkers have lighter workloads, or even question the very validity of company projects being pursued.
Think of him as a slightly vindictive Michael Scott, busted down to employee rank but still unflinchingly and doggedly behaving in ways that set him apart as the office Cringe Monster.
But since most manipulative workplace Bobs are cagey enough to avoid violating company policy or conduct rules, they can’t easily be reported to HR or formally disciplined for their relentless in-office aggravation. So how do their managers respond?
At times, by restoring office harmony, engagement, and lower blood pressure through the path of least resistance.
“When Bob’s attendance slipped from the required four days a week, the manager ended up doing . . . nothing,” the blog post recounted. “Let Bob stay home. Why not?”
That route may seem logical, like letting grains of sand crunching in the workplace gears fall out on their own or dumping a painful pebble out of the office shoe. But Korn Ferry experts say there are real risks in opting for this pragmatic and soothing solution.
For starters, they note, granting company Bobs the remote-work permissions they’re angling for may not only appear to reward their objectionable conduct, but also may generate resentment from engaged and disciplined colleagues who’d also like to work from home.
It also may create even more divisiveness and bad blood when staff Bobs pop back into the office on required days.
“The risk is that Bob’s bad behavior is not only tolerated, but rewarded,” noted Korn Ferry senior client partner and engagement expert Mark Royal. “It just becomes harder and harder for people to collaborate.”
Second, giving in to a Bob may undermine a lot of the progress employers have made in convincing workers that spending increased time in the office is neither negotiable nor a finished process.
For that reason, the post says, managers need to think very carefully about whether granting staff Bobs their remote-work objectives restores enough workplace peace and unity to offset the potential negative fallout. As part of that, they should also ask hard questions about whether keeping that kind of divisive employee on board any longer makes sense in the first place—whether they work from home or in-person.
And finally, Korn Ferry senior client partner Tamara Rodman warns that even if company Bobs are given more remote privileges, that may not resolve the underlying problems they pose.
“Annoying people, unfortunately, exist virtually as well,” Rodman notes.
—Bruce Crumley
This article originally appeared on Fast Company’s sister website, Inc.com.
Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
