A bit of magic
We have been asked on multiple occasions what firms might want to concentrate on in relation to SMCR, COVID and an eventual "return to the office" or in indeed a "hybrid working structure".
With this in mind we have come up with a suggestion that we consider to be a little different. As the late Paul Daniels used to say: "you'll like this, not a lot, but you'll like it".
Post the financial crisis in 2008 you will remember that the FSA effectively brought in a "two week holiday rule".
The idea behind this rule was that front office staff in particular were required to have no access to work technology, clients and operations, with a view that this would provide a "break" or "fail safe" related to potential wrong doings. The result would be that their work would be covered or separately overseen and this discourage improper or reckless behaviour and provide an additional control mechanism that could pick up any anomalies in an individual's behaviour (effectively an opportunity to 'discover' the Nick Leeson type behaviour).
Working practices 13 years on and the control environment
One of the major impacts of COVID is that working practices have changed for the foreseeable future.
Fewer people will be in the office in general and a "hybrid" working from the office/home structure will become (or is) more common place.
In the short-to-mid-term it is also the case that the control environment and access to technology is different between being at home and in the office. At its most simplest physical proximity provides a different platform with which to provide oversight or indeed spot potential conduct risks e.g. employee stress or more erratic behaviour. Further, there may be certain arbitrage opportunities between being in and out of the office in a non-structured way (and the purpose of this thought piece is not to identify such).
The "reverse holiday rule"
Accordingly, as people begin to return to the office in more meaningful numbers over the coming months we wonder whether firms might create an "in the office" expectation over a concentrated (without a break) period of time.
This is not to say that staff need to be in the office for "X" days per week or month, but rather that certain staff need to ensure that - when it is permissible under COVID rules - there is a continued period of, for example, two weeks where they do work from the office (to be clear we consider they should be allowed to go home at the end of the day!)
Control environment
This will also provide employers with a strong "control environment" to track data in a really purposeful way. For example, does being in the office increase the use of recorded lines or change the output of other behavioural data such as the way or frequency in which employees interact with each other or indeed their clients? Such data might be invaluable in the future with respect to identifying potential opportunities or indeed control gaps that can be effectively managed as we adopt a more hybrid work working environment.
Paul Daniels and marmite
And that is what we are describing as the two week "reverse holiday rule".
On reflection perhaps this is less Paul Daniels and a little bit more marmite.
Please let us know if you love it or hate it.
Authors: Jake Green, Tim Cant, James Perry and Lorraine Johnston
