The debate about returning to work (RTO), which began at the beginning of this year, has grown. The workplace flexibility of the Pandemic era is being replaced by rigid attendance policies, which are framed as necessary for culture and collaboration.
These decisions seem to be increasingly detached from workplace realities and employee preference. We must ask ourselves, as organisations spend significant resources to enforce these policies, if they serve real business needs or if they are just a way for leadership to satisfy their desire for visible occupancy .
The Great Disconnect
It’s not about avoiding the work. It’s about evaluating its value. When employees resist mandates they are expressing legitimate concerns over whether their physical presence will enhance their contribution. Recent research revealed that only half of employees want to spend more than 1-2 days at the office.
One common argument against in-office mandates for remote work is that it limits productivity. Research shows that the reality is quite different. Half of employees report greater productivity when they work remotely, as opposed to a quarter, who prefer an office environment. This productivity gap highlights the problems with mandates that are one size fits all. They ignore individual preferences and working styles which directly affect performance.
While leaders may claim to value productivity, their policies can often undermine it. Organisations risk losing productivity by forcing their employees to work in environments that do not optimise their output. This outdated management model assumes that visibility is equal to value. This management playbook is from another time, when presence was confused with performance.
This disconnect has measurable consequences. Since implementing strict return policies, many organisations have seen an increase in turnover. Nearly 60% of employees don’t think these mandates will improve the company culture, which is often cited as a reason for their implementation. When policies are not achieving their stated goals and may even reduce productivity, they should be seriously questioned.
The Myth of Culture Through Proximity
Many return-to office mandates are justified by appealing to “company cultures” while failing to deliver this promise. Gartner research shows a fundamental misalignment of leadership’s vision for culture and employee experience. The rhetoric about building culture through office attendance is increasingly hollow.
The culture of a company is not created by proximity, but rather through a shared purpose, trust, and meaningful engagement. If organisations prioritize physical presence above these elements, then they run the risk of creating a superficial company culture. This is a culture that looks good with numbers in person but leaves employees feeling empty.
The results are immediate. Gartner found that companies who enforce rigid office policies may see as much as 30% of their employees consider leaving within a year. Employees who feel that their preferences for work are ignored in favor of an arbitrary culture ideal disengage from not only the office but also from the mission of the organisation.
Why flexibility is an imperative for business
Accessibility is also affected by rigid office requirements. Lancaster University research shows that 8 out of 10 disabled workers report positive health effects from working at home. In a time of economic inactivity caused by ill health, rigid work arrangements could exclude over one million disabled workers.
Flexible opportunities are still scarce despite this fact. Recent data from DWP’s ‘Find a Job portal’ shows that only a small fraction of positions offer hybrid or remote arrangements. This disconnect between the needs of workers and the opportunities available creates unnecessary barriers for employment.
The Best Companies Rethink the Workplace
Leaders who are forward-thinking take a different approach. Instead of mandating office days, they create purposeful reasons for gathering. Redesigning the physical space around collaborative activities that are facilitated by in-person interactions is what they do. They’re focusing on impact, not attendance.
The shift in workplace culture requires a thorough examination of assumptions. Does culture develop more through shared values and purpose or proximity? Do offices promote better work or just perpetuate pre-pandemic practices?
Organisations that are successful will be those who view office space as a tool for specific purposes, rather than a standard requirement. They understand that hybrid working doesn’t just refer to where employees work but also how they provide value.
The New Work Framework: Beyond Mandates
The future of the workplace requires a fundamental shift in perspective. Leaders should ask how they can create an environment that employees want to be in, rather than asking how to bring them back to work.
It means developing data driven approaches that balance the needs of collaboration with individual wellbeing. It is about designing spaces to enhance productivity, not hinder it. It is important to listen to your employees and find out what they need in order to do their best work.
The return-to-office directives are a choice that must be made: either enforce rigid policies that drive away talent or empower people with flexibility to attract and retain them. Evidence suggests that rigid requirements focused on presence rather than purpose will continue facing resistance.
It’s not a question of whether employees should go back to work, but whether the workplace deserves their return. Organisations will only be able to achieve the physical presence that they want if workplaces are designed around real needs, not executive preferences.
