It wasn’t so long ago that having the option to work from your lounge in your slippers felt like a futuristic dream bordering on utopia.
Yet here we are, practically on the doorstep of the full remote revolution, and I’m watching a queue of business leaders feverishly backpedal towards outdated notions of “bums on seats.” Or, as I like to call it: “The Return of the Status Quo.” Pardon me while I stifle a yawn. Because if there’s one thing I’ve learned from a decade-plus of banging the proverbial drum about the virtues of working from home, it’s that the naysayers are usually being led by something that’s more about control (and a touch of distrust) than genuine business sense.
Let’s be perfectly clear: I’ve been peddling the work-from-anywhere mantra since 2011, if not earlier—my piece in Business Matters a five years ago, “Working at Home Can Lift Positivity, Productivity, and Profitability,” should have been etched onto the hearts of every forward-thinking employer. Back then, I remember the world patting me on the head and saying, “Yes, dear, lovely idea,” while proceeding to double-check no one was playing solitaire in the back corner of the office. It was like telling a Victorian mother you planned to feed her precious son vegetarian sausages. The horror. The uncertainty. The mild panic that everything we knew about corporate life was about to disintegrate into chaos.
Fast-forward a few years—well, more than a few—and we’ve all seen precisely how viable working from anywhere can be. There are even fewer excuses for archaic attitudes now. Technology has made it simple, cheap, and ridiculously flexible to replicate all the necessary functions of a physical workplace without actually dragging your bleary-eyed body onto a crowded commuter train. Of course, that’s not to say the standard HQ has no purpose. Some people genuinely love the camaraderie and structure of a shared space. But to insist that it’s the only way? That’s a bit like refusing to let your kids have a smartphone because you think carrier pigeons were doing just fine all those years ago.
One of the earliest arguments I recall making, in another Business Matters piece titled “Bodies & Bums Cost Money, Can Go Virtual,” was that paying for an army of chairs to be occupied from nine until five is both expensive and, frankly, pointless in the modern age. You’re shelling out for the real estate, the electricity, the toilet paper—and for what? A chance to watch Sandra from accounting type away in real time? A daily chat over the coffee machine about last night’s telly? I’ve nothing against Sandra’s enthralling conversation, but let’s be honest: a good Zoom or Teams meeting can deliver the same interplay, minus the leaky commute. If you want to foster human interaction, schedule weekly get-togethers or one good off-site a month. But making it mandatory every single day feels as antiquated as a carbon copy receipt.
And yet, that’s precisely what many companies are doing, pressing the big red “Reverse” button on progress by dictating that everyone scuttle back under the fluorescent lighting, tethered to desks once more. We hear the same, tired rationale: “productivity is slipping,” or “team spirit is lost,” or (my personal favourite) “people can’t be trusted to do their work from home.” Let’s unpick those, shall we?
First, productivity. It is breathtaking how often remote staff end up working longer hours simply because they don’t have to endure the pains of a commute. Factor in that people can set their own schedules, do their best work when they’re actually feeling awake, and take breaks that don’t revolve around obligatory small talk in the kitchen. That’s not laziness; it’s quite the opposite. People who aren’t pigeonholed into a 9-to-5 routine often discover a sweet spot for output that suits their natural rhythms. And guess what? That usually means more deliverables, not fewer.
Second, the team spirit myth. As if the only thing binding a 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 microwaved curry and the pitter-patter of frantic typing. Anyone who’s spent more than a week in a Zoom-based collaboration will know there’s a genuine camaraderie that sprouts when you’re working collectively towards the same objectives, even if you’re in different postcodes. And if you ever miss hugging your colleagues in person, you can meet up once a fortnight or month for that big, warm embrace—no harm done.
Lastly, the trust issue is perhaps the most bewildering of all. Why hire people you don’t trust, and then fixate on babysitting them from nine to five in an office? If your business model depends on eagle-eyed managers hawkishly scanning for slouching employees, there’s something rotten in the process. Good workers get the job done. Exceptional ones will do it better when given the freedom to shape how they work. Micro-managing, by contrast, breeds resentment and stifles creativity. We have a word for that, and it begins with “toxic.”
At the end of the day, businesses pushing a rigid return-to-office directive are not just ignoring the past decade of evidence that remote work is beneficial; they’re flipping a V-sign to the future. People have proven they can be even more productive, balanced, and, crucially, content working from spaces that suit them—be that a home office, a beach hut in Cornwall, or a Wi-Fi café in the mountains. I’m not saying offices should be eradicated entirely. I’m suggesting they ought to be an option, not an obligation. A tool, not a trap.
So, yes, I consider the “bring back the offices” brigade to be as misguided as dial-up internet evangelists—clinging to the comfortable drudgery of the old ways rather than forging ahead with the new. We can do better than that. In fact, we already have. The argument against remote work made some sense back in the ‘80s, but in the 21st century, it’s about as relevant as a Filofax. And if you ask me, long may that irrelevance continue.
So let’s collectively knock this regressive idea on the head. A flexible approach allows businesses to hire the best, keep the best, and get the best from them. Insisting on the old model of “bodies in the building” is short-sighted, blinkered, and will inevitably lead to a mass exodus of talented folks who know they can be just as effective—or more so—at home. After over a decade of championing this cause, I’ll say it louder for those in the back: real, thriving businesses in this century will value outcomes, not face time. And the rest? They’ll be left standing with their creaky roller chairs, wondering where it all went wrong.
Read more:
Why forcing a return to the office is a step backwards for business
