Technology Holdouts are Ruining Their Colleagues' Lives

There should be a clear understanding as to when to use emails, Slack, and Zoom, and that there is no way to opt out of such forms of communication.

‍

It’s a known fact that most of us have a dirty IT secret that we don’t want our coworkers to find out about. There are some people who have difficulty sending calendar invites or generating Zoom links when they try to do so. There are other people who have a tough time figuring out how to save their documents as PDFs. When a colleague asked you to comment on their slide deck-if only you knew how to do it-you would gladly oblige. 

‍

We may think that almost three years after we were forced to quickly master the intricacies of videoconferencing software and collaboration tools on the fly by hundreds of millions of employees around the globe—and sometimes not very willingly—we would have made a great leap toward universal technology literacy by now.

‍

That is not the story I heard from several managers whom I interviewed as part of my research, all of whom asked not to be identified for the sake of avoiding shaming their staff. The leader of a team whose members are largely older than she told me she wants the people she supervises to feel comfortable asking questions. Nevertheless, she finds it frustrating that employees consistently come to her with IT problems rather than contacting the company's help desk or just searching online to find answers to their problems.

‍

Keeping in touch at work

Even though younger people seem to be more technologically savvy, they often have their own blind spots when it comes to technology. Several managers have told me that they have had to talk to members of their Generation Z team about checking their emails, saying things like: "You need to check your emails. Regularly.” 

‍

One of the reasons for this is that new technologies are not replacing older ones, and that is part of the problem. Rather than separate for long periods of time, they are able to coexist for a long time. As Neil Postman, one of the world's foremost media theorists wrote in his book Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, the new technology does not add anything to the world or subtract anything from it. Everything changes when it happens."

‍

We often find that becoming proficient at a new skill (for example, moderating a conference call on Zoom), can result in us being more sloppy with those skills we have already mastered. Our email etiquette is becoming worse; our Slack direct messages are becoming unthoughtful; we seem to have forgotten about delay-send. Our tendency is to assume that just because someone in our circle of friends knows how to do something, it means they are the best person to ask for instructions on how to do it. 

‍

There is a possibility that such behavior is a result of exhaustion and burnout. But often it's also about the dynamics of power in the workplace. There are different types of incompetence, such as common incompetence and what is referred to as strategic incompetence (or weaponized incompetence). 

‍

This form of resistance goes back a long way, and it was born of a system of office castes that is now largely defunct. There was no need for businessmen back in the 1970s and '80s to learn how to use a word processor or Xerox machine, nor did they need to worry about juggling their incoming calls; their secretaries did it for them instead. With the advent of the personal computer and "lean" enterprises, the trend for "lean" enterprises was born. Whether we like it or not, white-collar workers became their own secretaries in the workplace: they answered the phone, drafted and distributed memos to colleagues, and made appointments for appointments. During this time, there were those who entered the workforce without knowing any other way of living. Some people, demoralized or afraid of losing their jobs as a result, quietly acquiesced to this situation.

‍

Some have resisted this redistribution of labor, either due to their seniority and the ability to retain their secretarial support, or because they maintained their jobs despite refusing additional duties. The latter camp behaves as if they still have assistants, but they're their colleagues - usually juniors, usually women - who perform tasks not in their job descriptions so Bob can continue working as if it's 1994. ( An example would be a female employee who must take notes at every meeting.) 

‍

There are times when leaders' resistance to new workplace technologies isn't (explicitly) about power. In the first place, they are too far removed from their employees' everyday communication styles to understand the importance of learning them. Slack's senior vice president, Brian Elliott, hears this disconnect in ongoing conversations with executives about their issues with the return to the office. 

‍

The leaders who aren't using these tools are more likely to be found lamenting the post-pandemic decline in engagement and drop-off in productivity, which is a direct result of not using those tools. In many cases, based on the age of the boss, he or she has never built a complex, trusting relationship with a subordinate online. The older generation didn't have friends on AOL Instant Messenger or Tumblr; they can't imagine meeting the love of their life on OkCupid or Tinder, just as younger workers may not be able to imagine forming a friendship (or falling in love!) through snail mail.

‍

Essentially, executives are looking at the old dance floor, finding it empty, and are feeling anxious about the fact that it is empty. As middle managers, it will be our job to convince them that what's going on the dance floor that they can't see is actually as good as what's happening on the dance floor. There is no denying that it is not easy - and this is one of the reasons why in a study released this fall by Future Forum, it was middle managers who reported the biggest declines in work-life balance over the past year, as well as increases in stress levels.

‍

Technology disconnects, whether they are a result of tool overload, a lack of training, or an executive looking at the wrong dance floor, all point to an underlying problem, an opacity that extends across the organization when it comes to how employees work, how they communicate with one another about their work, and how they understand the responsibilities of others to complete it.

‍

There comes a time in an organization's life when it should ask itself: how has the way we perform tasks evolved over the years, especially as new technologies have been introduced that have altered the working process, and who still seems to be struggling with basic elements? What is the best way to identify and address these gaps without embarrassment or blaming anyone in the process? 

‍

Next, organizations should identify all the ways in which their employees are currently communicating, then be transparent about what the norms are for each communication method. This will prevent communications from being duplicated (and ignored), as well as enable people to develop rhythms that allow them to do their jobs well while not being tied down to their inboxes. For instance, email is for announcements; Slack rooms are for any sort of conversation that should be public for all those in the team to see; direct messages are for quick questions and should be marked with urgency levels; phone calls, unless previously arranged, are for emergencies. It is necessary to have a conversation with someone's manager if they refuse to follow this system and refuse to abide by it.

‍

By being explicit about what means of communication are used for what communications, the anxiety that arises from not being able to communicate is reduced. With this feature, you will be able to check your email twice a day instead of every 20 minutes like you used to. This allows employees to prioritize when and how they will monitor various communication tools instead of endlessly, exhaustingly cycling through all of them at the same time. In this way, it is possible for new employees to ease their way into the communication culture of the organization rather than immediately becoming overwhelmed by it. There are several ways to erect guardrails around work, and this is one way to achieve that. It makes the specific use of technology a part of the job description, not an option that employees can opt for or opt out of. 

‍

There will always be someone to pick up, respond to, and accommodate all that's left behind when we are ruthless in the pursuit of our own products and preferences. There is a significant amount of invisible and uncompensated labor that is done by that person both at home, as the partner who makes the rest of his or her life run, and also at the workplace. 

‍

Even though stubbornly refusing to adapt, to compromise, or to find a compromise may make your life easier, it will make your coworkers' lives significantly harder as well. There is no better way to ensure equity in the workplace than to stop mindlessly treating your coworkers like your IT department if you are serious about equity. Take the time to learn how to do the things that don't come naturally to you, if you are tired of feeling vulnerable about them, so you will not inadvertently add more work to the plate of others through the things that don't come naturally. The truth is they almost certainly do not mind if you have been telling yourself for a long time that your co-workers don't care about you. 

‍

One woman told me that she had a long history of resisting the idea of using a digital calendar, even though her entire team had been using them for quite some time. As her boss put it at one point, she, quite frankly, was ruining everything for the team by what she was doing. A decision she thought was personal became a decision that everyone had to make. Those words were exactly what she needed to hear. 

‍

Technology disconnects can occur for a number of reasons, and just because an app is new doesn't mean everyone should use it. All employees, managers, executives, and everyone else should examine their resistances, avoidances, and refusals and ask the question: “Am I ruining it for everyone? ”