Even amidst the Covid pandemic, when remote work became the norm for so many of us, concerns remained about the ability to be innovative when working apart from our peers. These fears were based not just on the evidence before us, but considerable previous research showing the valuable role physical proximity plays in our creativity.

For instance, research from Cornell found that we’re generally much more likely to be innovative when we’re sat face-to-face with someone. The researchers suggest that we’re best able to learn and engage with others when we can see not only the hands of our colleagues but also their eyes, gaze, and facial movements as these communicate invaluable social information about the task.

Similarly, research from BerkeleyHaas found that remote work during Covid wasn’t very good at supporting collaboration between colleagues. The study found that when we work remotely, the breadth of our conversations shrinks considerably, with this inhibiting our ability to be creative (more on this later).

Less creative

A third study, from the University of Essex and University of Chicago, suggests this trend is certainly widespread. The researchers found that remote and hybrid working was generally fantastic for our work-life balance, but it was bad in terms of our creativity, with remote workers typically producing fewer, and poorer quality, ideas than their on-premise peers.

“Innovation in the workplace can occur through random, spontaneous ‘watercooler’ conversations between employees,” the researchers explain. “However, these ‘productive accidents’ are less likely to occur when employees work from home. Our research has found that innovation is suffering as a result.”

The evidence of worker productivity (and happiness) while working remotely during the pandemic has prompted many employers to waver in the face of a growing number of their peers mandating a return to the office policy, with a hybrid approach a compromise between the two. The concerns around innovation and creativity under such an approach have persisted, however.

“Of course, this cost to innovation may be acceptable, given the significant benefits for employees in terms of work-life balance, which makes more flexible employers more attractive,” the researchers explain.

“Our findings imply that companies should take steps to coordinate when employees are in the office. Innovation does not work well if half the team is in on Mondays while the other half is in on Wednesdays. Instead, set days where the whole team is expected in the office. While this limits the flexibility of hybrid work, our results suggest that innovation benefits as a result.”

Social proximity matters

So how can the proximity gap be overcome and remote workers remain as creative and innovative as their on-premise peers? A recent study from INSEAD suggests that so-called “social proximity” could be key.

The study suggests that the value of physical proximity is unquestionable, but that social proximity can nonetheless help us if we’re not able to be physically close to our peers. The researchers found that when we’re physically close to one another, it’s less important that we have strong social ties. So, when we’re operating in a more remote or hybrid environment, the strength of our social ties is crucial if we want teams to function well.

Obviously one of the key selling points of physical proximity is the ease with which conversations can occur, whether over the fabled water cooler or simply chatting to our neighbors. These conversations are crucial to the innovation process, with a Harvard study showing that physical proximity even underpins startup success.

In a recent article, I highlighted some of the tremendous benefits from remote and hybrid working, whether in terms of employee engagement, retention, or even productivity. Innovation, collaboration, and creativity remain key sticking points to overcome, however, if this style of working is to remain popular among managers.

The INSEAD study suggests a third way is possible, and if managers can intentionally boost the social connectivity of the workforce, then they can overcome the fabled Allen Curve and ensure that remote workers are as creative as their on-premise peers. That seems to be the best of both worlds, delivering benefits, such as productivity and innovation, for employers, and engagement and work-life balance for employees. It seems all that’s left to do is ensure that the evidence to hand is used to make these decisions and guide what managers do. That, perhaps, is the biggest barrier of all to overcome.