Should We Go Back to the Office?

A few years ago, working from home was a privilege enjoyed by a lucky few. Then, almost overnight, it became normal for millions of office workers. Now the pendulum is swinging back. Across the world, companies are asking their staff to return to their desks, some for two or three days a week, others full time. Not surprisingly, the debate has become rather heated.

Let us start with what employers say. Many managers argue that people work better together when they share a physical space. They claim that new ideas often come from unplanned conversations by the coffee machine, and that young employees in particular learn far more by watching experienced colleagues than by joining yet another video call. Some business leaders have also suggested, more quietly, that it is simply easier to know what people are doing when you can see them.

Workers, on the other hand, tend to tell a different story. Many insist that they are more productive at home, where there are fewer interruptions and no colleague talking loudly on the phone at the next desk. They point out that a long commute can easily add two hours to the working day, and that this time is far better spent sleeping, exercising or seeing their children. Parents and people with health problems, in particular, say that flexibility has made it possible for them to keep their jobs at all.

Both sides have a point, and the research, frankly, does not settle the argument. Some studies have found that remote workers are just as productive as office workers, whereas others suggest that certain kinds of work, especially creative teamwork and the training of new staff, suffer when nobody meets face to face. The honest answer seems to be that it depends on the job, the team and the person.

Nevertheless, I would like to admit something. When I first started working from home, I loved it. No commute, no uncomfortable office chair, and lunch from my own kitchen. After about a year, however, I noticed that I had stopped meeting anyone new at work. My younger colleagues, who had joined the company during that period, told me that they had never really felt part of the team. One of them admitted that she was afraid to "bother" people with questions in a chat window, whereas in an office she would simply have turned around and asked.

That is why I find the all-or-nothing positions on both sides unconvincing. Forcing everyone back five days a week, regardless of their circumstances, risks losing talented people who have organized their lives around flexibility. Yet letting everyone work alone forever ignores the fact that workplaces are communities, not just collections of laptops.

In my view, the most sensible approach is a planned hybrid model. Rather than asking people to come in on random days, teams should agree on the same two or three days, so that the office is actually full of the people you need to see. Those days should be used for meetings, training and collaboration, while quieter, focused work can be done at home.

Of course, no arrangement will please everybody. But if managers trusted their staff a little more, and staff accepted that some things really are better in person, the question would stop being "office or home?" and become something far more useful: "What is this particular day for?"