Shifting the perspective on return-to-office

What appears to be one of the enduring lessons from the pandemic era is that work doesn't necessarily need to happen in an office. Yet, many organizations would still prefer it did. Given the time that has passed, it would be logical to think the business community would have sorted this out by now, but it's clear from the endless published stories that's far from the case:

"Dell said return to the office or else—nearly half of workers chose 'or else'," read one headline, which, along with hundreds of articles, cited claims by Business Insider that it has seen internal Dell tracking data that revealed nearly 50% of the workforce opted to accept the consequences of staying remote. This is despite Dell's policy that by classifying themselves as remote, workers agree they can no longer be promoted or hired into new roles within the company.
Wells Fargo fired over a dozen employees last month after an internal investigation revealed workers were engaged in a "simulation of keyboard activity creating impression of active work," and employed mouse-jiggling technology according to a filing with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.
A study last month out of the University of Chicago found that RTO mandates at three large companies—Microsoft, SpaceX and Apple—had a negative effect on the tenure and seniority of their respective workforces. Notably, the study found that long-tenured and senior employees are more likely to leave than junior employees, and frequently they're leaving to join direct competitors.

To be fair, both proponents of return-to-office, as well as defenders of remote work, point to different research that defends their positions. But I think if Odiorne were still alive he'd be asking, "Why do you care so much about where someone physically works … shouldn't you be more focused on whether they are meeting their objectives?"

Instant Insights /

This management theory could reshape the return-to-office debate

Related Stories

Recommended For You