The consequences of the mandatory return to the office

We are now discovering the harmful consequences of the mandatory return to the office. And it’s not a pretty picture.

A trio of compelling reports – the Greenhouse Candidate Experience Report, that of the Federal Reserve Questionnaire of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (SHED), and Unispace’s “Returning for Good” report – collectively paint a grim picture of this emerging storm.

Unispace finds that nearly half (42 percent) of companies that mandated office return saw higher employee turnover than they expected. And nearly a third (29 percent) of companies enforcing office refunds are having a hard time recruiting. Imagine – almost half! In other words, they knew it would cause some downtime, but they weren’t ready for the serious problems that would ensue.

Maybe they should have been. According to the Greenhouse report, a whopping 76 percent of workers are ready to jump ship if their company decides to pull the plug on flexible work schedules. In addition, workers from historically underrepresented groups are 22 percent more likely to consider other options if flexibility goes out the window.

In the SHED survey, the seriousness of this situation becomes clearer. The research equates the dissatisfaction of shifting from a flexible working model to a traditional model with experiencing a two to three percent pay cut.

In the game of talent acquisition and retention, flexible work policies have quickly emerged as the queen on the chessboard – authoritative, decisive and pioneering. The Greenhouse, SHED and Unispace reports, when viewed together, provide compelling evidence to support this claim.

Greenhouse notes that 42 percent of candidates would reject positions without flexibility outright. In turn, the SHED survey confirms that employees who work from home a few days a week appreciate the arrangement very much. It’s like enjoying a day at the beach while still being connected to the digital world.

Curious about what lures employees away? The Greenhouse report cracked the code:

In other words, excluding career-oriented factors such as pay, security, and promotion, the flexible work policy excels brighter than the Vegas Strip in employee desires.

Interestingly, Unispace throws another factor into the mix: choice. Overall, according to the report, the employees with the highest feelings for the office were happy (31 percent), motivated (30 percent), and excited (27 percent). However, all three of these feelings decrease for those with a mandatory office return (27 percent, 26 percent, and 22 percent, respectively). This highlights that employees are more open to returning to the office if it is by choice, rather than forced.

As we navigate these changing work landscapes, we cannot ignore the human elements at play. Like invisible puppeteers, cognitive biases subtly shaping our decisions and perceptions.

Imagine a thriving tech startup successfully operating in a hybrid model during the pandemic. As the world normalized, leadership decided to return to pre-pandemic, face-to-face working arrangements. However, they encountered resistance, an unexpected wave of sales.

This situation illustrates the powerful influence of the status quo bias. This bias, deeply rooted in our human psyche, inclines us towards maintaining the current state or resisting change. Employees, who had tasted the benefits of flexible working, were averse to giving up these newfound freedoms.

If there’s one overarching theme that resonates in the reports from Greenhouse, SHED and Unispace, it’s this: Companies need to embrace the wave of flexible work policies or risk going adrift. As we head into the future of work, flexibility isn’t just a passing trend, it’s a necessity, the new standard.

PART: