Remote work has become the new norm, with approximately 30% of workers in the U.S. continuing to work from home. This shift has allowed companies to reshape their operational costs and explore new ways of working. However, a recent study suggests that return-to-office mandates are not necessarily implemented to enhance firm value, but rather to shift blame for poor performance onto employees. Employee job satisfaction has also seen a noticeable drop. As a result, office occupancy rates are at an all-time low, and commercial real estate is experiencing high vacancy rates. The debate now centers on whether return-to-work mandates are beneficial for the workforce or for business bottom lines. Companies must find a model that aligns with the preferences of all stakeholders, including customers, employees, and shareholders. Airbnb found success with their Live and Work Anywhere program, which balanced remote work and in-person gatherings. However, some companies, like WebMD, continue to poorly communicate demands and threaten their employees. The World Economic Forum saw the CEO of L’Oreal criticize remote work, claiming it led to a lack of attachment, passion, and creativity in employees. Mandating in-office attendance poses questions about employee behaviors and employer reactions. Enforcing attendance may lead to engaged talent leaving or being reprim
https://www.forbes.com/sites/qhamirani/2024/01/26/ceos-are-using-return-to-office-mandates-to-mask-poor-management/