Although discussions about hybrid and remote work ,and forcing workers back to office full time, should be seen through the lens of data and evidence, this is rarely the case.
In fact, much like DEI, remote work has become a highly political and polarizing topic. Which is why rational arguments and objective examination of the facts are generally eclipsed by emotional, intuitive, or ideological opinions. Sadly, this also means nuances are far less common than categorical or extreme positions.
Consider the recent meltdown by JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, one of the corporate pioneers of ditching working from home policies to bring people back to the office. He cursed at his staff during a town hall in reaction to the news that they were signing a petition against the full-time return to the office: Dont waste time on it, he told his staff, I dont care how many people sign that f**king petition, according to a recording obtained by Reuters. Dont give me the sh*t that work from home Friday works.
To be sure, JP Morgan (like any other company) has the right to decide whichever working modality or approach they like, and employees can decide whether they object or not. Ultimately, those who dont wish to put up with it, or anything else at the company, should feel free to go elsewhere, not least since many organizations (including in banking and finance) still offer hybrid work, which most employees prefer. Likewise, any CEO or business owner should obviously decide on how and where people work, which is a key part of the job characteristics and organizational culture for employees to consider.
RTO mandates as a power play
Furthermore, it is plausible that back-to-the-office mandates are partly intended as a trigger to get demotivated workers to quit, or at least test their commitment, motivation, and work ethic. In this sense, back-to-the-office mandates could exert some kind of Darwinian or evolutionary pressure whereby unmotivated or demotivated workers quit, leaving career-obsessed, hyper-committed, and ultra-loyal employees inside the tent whats not to like?
To be sure, maverick CEOs and executives, from Jamie Dimon to Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, project such an aura of power, vision, status, and invincibility, that they have a cult-like influence on their followers (to the point that employees are more like followers than workers). It is not something that can be emulated by everyone, at least not without adverse consequences: like plummeting morale, engagement, and trust.
Trust is the critical issue leaders ought to consider before emulating Dimon with back-to-the-office mandates. And there is already a crisis of trust, with recent Edelman reports suggesting that 68% of people distrust their managers/leaders (up from 56% in 2021), and various indicators highlighting a big gap between employees self-perceived performance, and their managers expectations. As Microsofts CEO Satya Nadela recently noted, 85% of employees feel overworked, yet 85% of managers feel their employees are slacking.
What happens when you force employees to do something
To be sure, there is something illogical about the assumption that those same employees who are assumed to be too demotivated to be productive when working from home will somehow become really engaged and productive if you force them into the office, against their will. One certain outcome if you do that, is that, if those workers dont quit (which will depend partly on the strength of the market, the economy, and alternatives) they will try very hard to pretend to work, and fake productivity, when they are forced back to the office full-time.
Ideally, decisions about remote, hybrid or in-office work should be based on facts, evidence, and data. Not external data from independent scientific studies, but organizations own internal data: after all, most organizations are awash with data on productivity, which should allow them to compare and contrast productivity differences between people who spend more or less time at the office, and ideally focus on output rather than input.
Sure, it is plausible that being in the office can provide people with a stronger connection with the culture, learn from others, bond and collaborate more effectively but then this should result in measurable improvements in what people deliver and achieve.
Failing that, any mandate will be more reflective of the ego and power of the boss than an intention to help people to achieve and deliver their best, and be part of a culture that treats them like rational and mature human beings.
