It wasn’t that long ago that you had the option of working from your lounge in your slippers like a futuristic dream approaching utopia.
And yet, here we are now on the cusp of a full-fledged revolution at a distance, as I watch a line of business leaders frantically retreat toward outdated notions of “bums on benches.” Or as I like to call it: “the return of the status quo.” Excuse me while I stifle a yawn. Because if there’s one thing I’ve learned from more than a decade of drumbeating about the virtues of working from home, it’s that naysayers are usually driven by something more about control (and a touch of mistrust) than real. Business sense.
Let’s be perfectly clear: I’ve been touting the work-from-anywhere mantra since 2011, if not earlier — my Business Matters article five years ago, “Working at Home Can Lift Positivity, Productivity, and Profitability” should be etched in the hearts of every business owner Forward-thinking. At that time, I remember the scientist patting me on the head and saying, “Yes, honey, nice idea,” while I double-checked that no one was playing solitaire in the back corner of the office. It was as if you were telling a Victorian mother that you planned to feed her precious son a vegetarian sausage. Horror. Uncertainty. Mild panic that everything we knew about corporate life was about to disintegrate into chaos.
After a few years, well, more than a few years, we’ve all seen exactly how feasible it is to work from anywhere. There are fewer excuses for old attitudes now. Technology has made it ridiculously simple, cheap and flexible to replicate all the necessary functions of a physical workplace without dragging your bleary-eyed body onto a crowded commuter train. Of course, this does not mean that a standard headquarters has no purpose. Some people really like the camaraderie and structure of a shared space. But insisting that this is the only way? This is a bit like refusing to let your kids have a smartphone because you thought carrier pigeons were okay all those years ago.
One of the first arguments I remember making, in another Business Matters article titled “Bodies and Bums Cost Money, Can Go Virtual,” was that paying for an army of chairs to be occupied from nine to five is expensive and, frankly, doesn’t make sense . In the modern era. You spend on real estate, electricity, toilet paper, and for what? A chance to watch accounting-type Sandra away in real time? Daily conversation over the coffee machine about last night’s show? I have nothing against Sandra’s captivating conversation, but let’s be honest: a good Zoom or Teams meeting can provide the same interaction, minus the leaky transitions. If you want to promote human interaction, schedule weekly meetups or monthly off-site well-meets. But making it mandatory every day seems as archaic as delivering a carbon copy receipt.
Yet that’s exactly what many companies are doing, hitting the big red “back” button to signal progress by forcing everyone to return under fluorescent lighting, chained to desks once again. We hear the same tired logic: “Productivity is declining,” “Team spirit is missing,” or (my personal favorite) “People can’t be trusted to do their work from home.” Let’s unpack those, shall we?
First, productivity. It’s surprising how often remote employees end up working longer hours just because they don’t have to endure the pain of commuting. Keep in mind that people can set their own schedules, do their best work when they actually feel awake, and take breaks that don’t revolve around obligatory small talk in the kitchen. This is not laziness. It’s just the opposite. People who don’t fit into a 9-to-5 routine often discover a sweet spot for production that fits their natural rhythms. And guess what? This usually means more accomplishments, not less.
Secondly, the myth of team spirit. As if the only thing that ties the workforce together is the ability to physically see each other in an open-plan environment. Team spirit comes from shared goals, supportive leadership, and clear communication – not the faint smell of microwave curry and the crackle of frenetic typing. Anyone who’s spent more than a week in Zoom-based collaboration will know that there’s real camaraderie that emerges when you work collaboratively toward the same goals, even if you’re in different zip codes. And if you miss hugging your colleagues in person, you can get together once every two weeks or a month to get that big, warm hug — no harm done.
Finally, the issue of trust is perhaps the most vexing of all. Why would you hire people you don’t trust, and then focus on babysitting them nine to five in the office? If your business model depends on eagle-eyed managers hunting down slacker employees, there’s something rotten about the process. Good workers get the job done. Exceptional people will do best when given the freedom to shape the way they work. In contrast, micromanagement breeds resentment and stifles creativity. We have a word for that, and it starts with “toxic.”
Ultimately, companies pushing strict guidelines on returning to the office are not just ignoring the evidence that has emerged in the past decade that remote work is beneficial; They flip the V sign of the future. People have proven they can be more productive, more balanced and, most importantly, work from spaces that suit them – whether that’s a home office, a beach hut in Cornwall, or a Wi-Fi café in the mountains. I’m not saying offices should be eliminated entirely. I suggest they be a choice, not an obligation. A tool, not a trap.
So, yes, I consider the “bring back offices” brigade as misguided as internet evangelists — clinging to the comfortable toil of the old ways rather than forging ahead in the new ways. We can do better than that. In fact, we already have. The argument against telecommuting made sense in the 1980s, but in the 21st century, it is as relevant as Filofax. And if you ask me, irrelevance may last a long time.
So let’s turn this reactionary idea on its head. A flexible approach allows companies to hire the best, retain the best, and get the best from them. Insisting on the old “bodies in the building” model is shortsighted, narrow-minded, and will inevitably lead to an exodus of talented people who know they can be just as effective – or more effective – at home. And after more than a decade of making this case, I’ll say it louder for those living back there: The real, thriving companies of this century will value results, not face time. And the rest? They’ll be left standing with their squeaky swivel chairs, wondering where it all went wrong.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.