Illustration Henk van Ruitenbeek This finding is from a survey by the Wageningen PhD Council among over 300 PhD candidates. There are big differences between buildings: half the PhD candidates in Zodiac don’t want hot desking, compared to 90 per cent in Lumen.
PhD candidates are worried above all that they will have to work from home more. They also think hot desking will affect social contacts with co-workers. And they fear the flexible workplace ‘will add uncertainty to daily routines’. By which they mean having to search for a free desk and for their supervisors.
What is striking in the responses is the poor communication about the accommodation plan (with hot desking as its core component). Less than a third of PhD candidates think they have been properly informed about what the flexible workplace will mean for them. Chair holders don’t involve PhD candidates enough in the plans. This is despite the fact that PhD candidates vastly outnumber permanent staff in many groups.
![[The Proposition] ‘Adding social and environmental costs to the price of goods will speed up the formation of a sustainable industry.’](https://www.resource-online.nl/app/uploads/2024/03/DeStelling_online_1812_UK.png)
Great, very revealing piece!! But it’s not only PhDs. Many permanent (including professors and chairs) and non-permanent staff (in addition to PhD candidates) don’t feel involved enough in the housing/accommodation plans. And when staff do speak up, many feel unheard. So thanks again for publishing this strong “signal” in the Resource.
+1 Kevin.
What continues to baffle me is the continued misconception that more communication could change people’s opinion about a subject so close to their core value.