Kenneth Glad
Companies continue to change where employees are expected to work. The debate now reaches beyond desks and schedules, touching on job security, fairness and the quality of management.
Employers have practical reasons for bringing people together. New recruits may learn faster beside experienced colleagues, some meetings work better in person, and certain jobs depend on secure systems or specialist equipment.
Problems arise when the working day looks much the same after everyone arrives.
An employee may spend an hour travelling to headquarters, open a laptop and join video calls with colleagues elsewhere. The company records an office visit, but the worker sees little collaboration that could not have happened at home.
Commuting also takes time, adds transport or childcare costs and reduces control over the day. A broad appeal to “culture” may not explain why a particular team must attend on a particular morning.
A University of Pittsburgh analysis of S&P 500 companies found that return-to-office mandates were associated with lower job satisfaction. Researchers did not identify improvements in company performance or market value.
The finding does not prove offices are unnecessary, but it does challenge the assumption that fuller buildings automatically produce better results.
McKinsey research also found that useful office work depends on planning. Mentoring, training and problem-solving do not appear simply because employees share a location.
Managers may therefore need to explain each office day in practical terms. A product workshop or training session gives employees a clear reason to travel. A schedule filled with individual work and remote calls does not.
Workers prepare for trouble
Many employees appear unconvinced that collaboration is the only reason behind stricter attendance policies.
EnhancV surveyed 1,000 full-time workers in the United States who had faced new or tougher office requirements. Seventy-two percent suspected the rules were intended to encourage voluntary resignations.
Thirty-six percent said they had applied for another job while at their current workplace. The same share had started a side business or found another source of income after the policy was announced.
Another 46 percent admitted to “coffee-badging,” entering the building long enough for attendance to be recorded before leaving.
Badge records make that reaction difficult to detect. They can show that someone entered a building, but not whether the visit improved a project, helped a colleague or led to a better decision.
Microsoft’s Work Trend Index described a divide between managers worried about output and employees who believed they were already productive. It also found that 73 percent wanted a better reason to attend than company expectations alone.
When entry data becomes the main measure, employees learn to satisfy the measurement. Better attendance figures may coexist with weaker morale and more job searches.
Hybrid work offers another route
A randomized trial published in Nature tested an arrangement allowing employees to work from home two days each week.
Job satisfaction improved, resignations fell by one-third and performance grades did not decline during the following two years.
The trial cannot be applied automatically to hospitals, factories, shops or every office role. It does, however, show that hybrid work can reduce departures without harming assessed performance in some workplaces.
The choice is not limited to fully remote work or a five-day return. Different tasks may suit different settings.
Training, negotiation and complex group work may justify meeting in person. Writing, analysis and other focused assignments may be easier elsewhere.
Fairness is also important. Employees will notice when senior staff keep flexibility while others lose it without explanation. Differences based on security, equipment, customer access or individual needs can be stated openly. Exceptions based mainly on influence are harder to defend.
Companies should also look beyond building-entry totals. Resignations, hiring delays, missed deadlines, staff feedback and completed work reveal more about whether a policy is succeeding.
A busy office may look reassuring from the executive floor. The real test is whether the people inside are working effectively and still want to remain.
Sources: EnhancV, University of Pittsburgh, McKinsey, Microsoft, Nature
