All together, not very passionately

In corporate jargon, working people are called “human resources.” This definition betrays a mechanistic view of labor and creates a paradox. Work physically requires the presence of people’s bodies, yet tends to ignore those very bodies. This removal of the body erases its needs, hiding its depth and variability.

In the traditional model of in-person work — everyone in the same office, at the same time — the differences in bodily needs find no space. Perhaps only in a joke about the late colleague struggling to get out of bed or in stories about notorious desk-neighbor disputes on air-conditioned days. But this issue is serious and complex, affecting productivity, well-being, and not least, the happiness of workers.

Let’s try to delve deeper. Starting with space: bodies perceive temperature differently. Research shows significant variations in hot/cold sensations: factors like age, gender, metabolism, and circadian rhythms can cause perceivable differences of 2–5°C among people working in the same environment. Moreover, thermal preferences change throughout the day: some people prefer warmer environments in the evening, aligning with the physiological drop in body temperature, while mid-day they tend to favor cooler conditions.

The idea of asking different people, with different bodies and perceptions, to spend their working life in a single environment is truly shortsighted. It leads to frustration and discomfort. How can different thermal needs be accommodated with just one centralized climate control?

Let’s analyze time. Here too, our bodies operate differently, depending on circadian rhythms. About 40% of people can be identified as morning or evening types, while the rest fall somewhere in between. Morning chronotypes perform better in the morning, while evening types peak in the afternoon and evening. The idea of a standard schedule, traditionally skewed to early morning, clashes with evening chronotypes. It’s an artificial timetable that imposes rigidity and ignores the fact that people’s performance fluctuates throughout the day.

Let’s add one more reflection on food. Again, a standardized lunch break time fails to acknowledge the complexity of bodily needs. We are biologically diverse and have different rhythms. How can it be expected that everyone leaves their computers and goes to the cafeteria at the same time? For many, it’s a strain, a discomfort. Standardized meal times do not respect metabolic rhythms and can cause blood sugar imbalances and stress.

The variation in bodily needs is objective. The rigid, traditional 9-to-5 work model ignores differences in perceived temperature, biorhythms, metabolism, and health. One fixed time slot — including lunch — imposes an artificial model on bodies that function at different rhythms. One single workplace imposes a standard climate on bodies with diverse perceptions.

Once again, agile work is the answer. Flexible hours and the ability to vary the place where one works reduce forced coexistence time and cater to individual needs. It improves productivity and well-being. Being able to work in harmony with one’s own time, in preferred spaces, according to personal needs, are the most striking effects of agile work. People say it, science confirms it.