The Debate: Will RTO mandates help or harm businesses?
WPP’s RTO mandate has riled up employees, but are businesses right to clamp down on working from home? Our writers hash it out in this week’s debate
Harm: Flexibility leads to better performance
The debate over which is “better” between remote, hybrid, or full-time return to office work seems endless. And I think we’re missing the point.
If we believe that building productive, collaborative, and innovative teams hinges on how many days our people work in an office, we’re oversimplifying a complex issue. I understand why some leaders prefer office mandates – it removes ambiguity and might lead people to self-select into their chosen environment. But this approach doesn’t guarantee high performance, which is more likely what leaders really want. Return to office mandates are solving the wrong problem.
Instead, we could learn from fractional leaders who thrive by adapting to varied work contexts. Whether in the office, remote, or hybrid, these professionals fine-tune their communication and relationship-building skills to succeed, regardless of the setting. Their approach depends on the work at hand, the people involved, the resources available and timelines. And most importantly, they decide where and how they work – and it works!
Collaboration isn’t about location; it’s about mutual flexibility. Teams learn to give and take, showing up when needed to grow essential skills together. The office remains valuable for certain activities, but the key point is that we need to empower our people to determine what works best for them. By shifting our focus from one-size-fits-all rigid structures to trust, autonomy and adaptability, we allow our people to craft roles that align with their goals and create meaning in their work. This is far more powerful than enforcing 9-to-5 office presenteeism and is much more likely to foster true high performance.
Sara Daw is a fractional leadership expert, Group CEO of The CFO Centre and The Liberti Group, and the author of Strategy and Leadership as Service – How the Access Economy Meets the C-Suite
Help: Workers who show up to the office go further and faster
At the start of last year, my company, Reed, which deals with more than 30m job applications a year, predicted that employers would increasingly mandate days in the office and would reward what we dubbed the ‘in-person premium’. That came to pass, with more and more businesses issuing return-to-office (RTO) mandates. Our most recent research shows that many employers are keen to see workers back in the office more of the time and those who are more present will be more likely to get on.
More than two-thirds (68 per cent) of 251 companies (representing at least 170,000 employees) polled by Reed say those who work in the office will go further and faster, being singled out for promotions or pay rises. This is hardly surprising. Covid, which necessitated home working, is now five years behind us. I’m not saying working from home can never work – some limited time away from colleagues can offer time and space for strategic thinking or writing up important pieces of work.
But proper face time with co-workers is essential for any productive business. I suspect the work from home revolution has hampered Britain’s productivity problem and limited economic growth, and many business leaders know this. The default now should be to show up, be present but retain some flexibility as appropriate.
I believe the ‘in-person premium’ will become even more important this year. Reed was the first to warn of the possibility of recession, with vacancies down 24 per cent last year on 2023.
The Chancellor’s National Insurance rise, a tax on jobs, has yet to take effect. So this year will see an employer-led, buyers’ market. It’s clear that those willing to be present in the office will stand the best chance of prospering in this difficult economic environment.
James Reed is the chairman and CEO of the Reed Group
The Verdict: RTO mandates may be necessary, but they should come with a carrot
The push to get workers back to the office and reverse the WFH revolution, considered by many workers as the pandemic’s only silver lining, is a topic too often simplified to the interests of the employer (productivity) against that of the employee (flexibility – and perhaps an extra hour in bed). But it’s a debate with strong adherents on both sides, as demonstrated by our combatants today.
As Daw suggests, and as we have seen with the recent employee backlash to WPP, RTO mandates come with a not insignificant risk of damaging employer-employee relations. Not giving workers a choice in whether they return to the office can, understandably, leave them feeling untrusted by their employer to manage their own time. This is not merely a problem for employee self-esteem, but also for company performance – unmotivated employees are unlikely to work as hard.
But, as Reed points out, there may be a different way to empower employees: pay rises and promotions. And news this week that Lloyds will now link staff bonuses to office attendance shows the ‘in-person premium’ is already taking hold. Will it work? That remains to be seen, but the offering of incentives over the imposition of mandates seems likely to go down better with employees.
Where both Daw and Reed agree is this is not a one-size-fits-all problem. Perhaps RTO mandates are a necessary jumpstart for some, but hopefully businesses can settle into a common sense approach. And for those who are trekking back to the office against their will today, a silver lining for you: you can pick up London’s premier business paper on the way.