**London**: The advertising industry is divided over WPP’s new in-office policy, with professionals highlighting potential risks to diversity and inclusion. As debates arise about flexible and hybrid working models, experts urge a more nuanced approach to collaboration that accommodates diverse employee needs.
The topic of supplier relationship management (SRM) has increasingly garnered attention in the advertising industry, particularly in light of WPP’s recent announcement regarding a four-day in-office mandate. Following CEO Mark Read’s directive in January, discussions have erupted surrounding the impact of such a policy on collaboration and inclusion within the workplace. Industry professionals have raised concerns about the potential risks associated with inflexible working arrangements, particularly for individuals with varying personal circumstances.
Fern Miller, co-founder and chief strategy officer at Uncharted, highlighted that the assumption of a return to the office being universally beneficial is an oversimplification. Miller argues that a rigid office mandate can disproportionately favour certain personality types and working styles, excluding those who may live in more affordable areas, lack childcare, or face other accessibility issues. “Given our industry’s belief in creativity and innovation, you’d expect smarter solutions,” she noted.
Thom Binding, co-founder of the Creative Communications Workers Union, expressed concern that inflexible work policies could undermine Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) commitments. He stated, “Making work inflexible again is catastrophic to DEI commitments across the industry.” Binding emphasised that flexible working arrangements are critical for empowering workers who require mobility and mental health support, as well as providing access for individuals from lower-income backgrounds.
Aimée Luther, managing director at The Liberty Guild, posited that return-to-office mandates may ignore the complexities of individual working realities. She remarked, “Return-to-office mandates are a classic example of well-intentioned logic steamrolling over the messy, irrational realities of work and inclusion.” This sentiment is echoed by James Bailey, chief executive of iProspect, who cautioned that hastily made mandates might leave managers inadequately prepared to handle their employees’ diverse needs.
The discussion also reflected concerns specific to working parents. Joeli Brearley, founder of Pregnant Then Screwed, noted that flexible working, particularly remote and hybrid models, significantly reduces the ‘motherhood penalty’ experienced in various sectors. She stated that such arrangements not only facilitate better accessibility for parents but also for disabled individuals who may struggle with traditional office environments.
In contrast, some industry leaders believe that a return to the office might bolster camaraderie and creativity. Jason Cobbold, chief executive of BMB, suggested that a strong culture of belonging can arise from being together, while Paul Burke asserted that working from home contradicts the ethos of inclusion. Burke argued, “How can you talk about inclusion while working primarily from home? You’re not ‘including’ anybody, least of all yourself.”
The potential for hybrid working models emerged as a strategic solution in balancing the benefits of in-person interaction with the need for flexibility. Amina Folarin, chief executive of the UK group at Oliver, noted that while face-to-face presence offers valuable networking opportunities, rigid office mandates may alienate talent. “The solution lies in hybrid working… it allows us to maintain the benefits of office presence while ensuring we don’t create barriers for diverse talent,” she advised.
Leila Siddiqi, director of Diversity & Inclusion at The IPA, spoke on the psychological climate created by these mandates, suggesting that they could undermine the progress made toward flexible working during the pandemic. Siddiqi offered that agencies may need to reaffirm their commitments to inclusion in light of these changes.
As the advertising community grapples with the implications of WPP’s in-office policy, it is clear that perspectives on collaboration, flexibility, and the shifting power dynamics between employees and employers are diverse. The ongoing dialogue raises important questions about the future of workplace inclusivity in an industry that continues to navigate the evolving landscape of work.
Source: Noah Wire Services
Subscribe to Industry Updates
