Why New Work hasn't failed – but has been misunderstood

For years, the New Work debate revolved primarily around one question: How can companies position themselves as attractive employers – not least against the backdrop of the skilled labor shortage? Increasingly, however, the realization is gaining ground that at its core, it is about much more. It is about placing collaboration in organizations on a new foundation.

For a year or two now, voices declaring the end of "New Work" have been multiplying – pointing, among other things, to the difficult economic general conditions. A closer look, however, reveals: It is not New Work that has failed. Rather, several illusions associated with the term have burst.

New Work is not a toolbox for beautiful facades

In many organizations, New Work was long understood as a kind of construction kit with which a new corporate culture can be generated. The hope was:

A little working from home and more flexible working hours,
a more modern office design with a coffee corner,
a more casual first-name culture and less rigid dress codes

are enough – and already the corporate culture changes virtually by itself.

This assumption falls short. For New Work was never intended as a collection of external measures that merely change the appearance of a company. At its core, it is about significantly deeper principles such as

• self-determination,

• purpose-orientation, and

• taking responsibility.

These aspects are more substantial than the question of whether employees address their superiors formally or informally, or whether they can occasionally work from home. They affect the fundamental understanding of work, collaboration, and operational togetherness.

The current disillusionment is therefore primarily based on a misunderstanding of what New Work actually means. Many organizations have changed symptoms without seriously questioning the underlying patterns of thought and action as well as structures. Also because this process is more uncomfortable, creates more friction, and not infrequently makes conflicts visible.

Self-determination sounds attractive – but is often uncomfortable

The strive for more self-determination sounds enticing to many at first. It becomes difficult where it then becomes concrete. For in practice, self-determination also means doing more of the following:

• making decisions,

• enduring uncertainty, and

• taking responsibility.

This is a real challenge for many employees – especially since they have often worked for years in systems in which precisely these behaviors were neither expected nor systematically encouraged. When they suddenly receive more scope for decision-making and action, empowerment does not automatically arise. Often, uncertainty arises first. The manager is responsible for ensuring that their employees learn this step-by-step first. Just saying "do it yourself" is not enough. 

The consequence of 'non-leadership' in the direction of self-responsibility is then not infrequently overwhelm instead of empowerment. And this quickly leads to the misinterpretation: New Work does not work. Yet in many cases, only the prerequisites for New Work to become effective at all are missing.

Leadership is needed more than ever – just differently

Another key point: New Work was frequently misunderstood as a turning away from leadership – almost as if it meant a leaderless state. In fact, the opposite is the case. New Work does not need less leadership, but a different form of leadership:

• less control, more guidance,

• fewer detailed instructions, more clarity in thought,

• less hierarchy, more supportive accompaniment.

Managers today face the task of giving employees security and confidence without being able to completely resolve the uncertainty. They must create spaces in which people can act self-responsibly – and at the same time support them in accepting this responsibility.

This requires new or at least more pronounced skills: reflectivity, strong communication skills, trust, and tolerance of ambiguity, i.e., the ability to endure ambiguous situations without prematurely falling back into old control patterns.

The attitude is decisive

Perhaps the most important lever of New Work, however, lies even deeper: in the attitude. As long as the view of humanity held by many managers is shaped by

• mistrust,

• the need for control, and

• the assumption that performance is primarily created through close management,

new forms of collaboration will hardly establish themselves permanently in everyday work.

New Work only works in an environment in which

• employees are not seen merely as service providers, but as co-creators,

• leadership is understood not primarily as a position of power, but as a responsible and supportive role, and

• mistakes are not immediately penalized, but are also used as learning opportunities.

Without this change in attitude, structural adjustments remain ineffective. Externally, modern offices, flexible working hours, and new language rules may look attractive. But employees perceive very quickly whether there is actually a different understanding of leadership and collaboration behind these changes – or whether only the surface has been changed.

A new culture of collaboration remains necessary

Regardless of the current debate surrounding New Work, the need remains in many companies to further develop their collaboration, learning, and leadership culture. For the modern world of work is still characterized by dynamics, complexity, and uncertainty.

Classic, highly hierarchical patterns of thought and action are increasingly reaching their limits here. Organizations simple have to react faster and act more proactively; but also think and act more innovatively. In addition, they should 
make better use of existing knowledge and share it more systematically.

This can only succeed if collaboration is designed to be more flexible, self-responsible, and purpose-oriented.

New Work can continue to be an important orientation framework for this – but only if it is not understood as a toolbox where you assemble a few elements and then receive the finished solution. New Work is rather a continuous process of reflection and development.

From the myth of New Work to real collaboration

New Work is not dead. What is ending, however, is the phase of simplification – that is, the idea that profound changes can be achieved solely through visible but ultimately superficial measures.

The current disillusionment is therefore not a step backward, but a necessary step forward. It forces organizations to seriously address questions such as:

• How do we really want to work together?

• Which view of humanity shapes our actions?

• And how ready are we actually to take on the responsibility that is associated with New Work?

New working worlds do not emerge through new furniture, new terms, or new regulations alone. They emerge through new ways of thinking – and through actions that follow from them. Yes, that is true, and therein lies the actual challenge: to develop a culture of collaboration and leadership that empowers people and makes organizations fit for the future.

PS: This blog post appeared in a slightly modified form on, among others, the website of the magazine "Die Wirtschaft"  - https://www.die-wirtschaft.at/inspiration/new-work-ist-nicht-tot-doch-die-illusionen-platzen/. I would be happy to give a keynote speech or seminar on this topic in your organization.