Return-to-office (RTO) policies remain one of the most divisive issues in the workplace today. Leaders argue that being physically present fuels culture, collaboration, and innovation. Employees — backed by mounting labour market data — argue the opposite: flexibility is now a baseline expectation, and it is strongly tied to engagement, retention, and wellbeing.
The truth is that neither extreme works. Full RTO damages retention and inclusion. Full remote risks innovation and connectedness. The evidence, both across our clients and in global studies, points to a middle ground: an in-person culture, underpinned by flexibility.
Why Some Leaders Still Push for RTO
The case for being in the office isn’t without merit.
Collaboration and innovation: Microsoft research, published in Nature Human Behaviour and covered by MIT Sloan and Life, found that remote work increases individual productivity but weakens “second- and third-degree connections” — the weaker ties across an organisation that drive knowledge sharing and innovation. Informal interactions in the office remain catalysts for creative problem-solving and mentorship.
Culture and belonging: Shared presence reinforces identity, values, and learning. Junior employees in particular benefit from visibility and coaching opportunities that are harder to replicate remotely. Engagement data from our clients shows performance improves when leaders increase their visibility and communication.
Accountability and performance signals: In industries like investment banking or law, in-office presence is still read as a marker of commitment. Leaders themselves often feel reassured by the visible cohesion of teams in one place.
Why Flexibility Can’t Be Ignored
The data for flexibility is equally compelling — and arguably more decisive.
Retention and recruitment: Across our clients, we’ve seen sharp increases in female attrition after RTO mandates, with flexibility often cited explicitly as a reason for leaving. Recruitment pipelines also weaken when hybrid options are removed. The ONS reports hybrid working saves an average of 56 minutes of commuting a day — time that employees re-invest in wellbeing, rest, or family.
Engagement and wellbeing: Our client data shows engagement falling sharply under RTO mandates, with absenteeism rising in parallel — a clear sign of reduced discretionary effort. ONS data confirms wellbeing gains from flexible work: more time for exercise, family, and recovery.
Productivity: Stanford’s Trip.com study of 1,600 employees found hybrid workers were just as productive as office-based peers, but attrition fell by 33%. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics analysis also shows a modest but positive correlation between remote work and productivity across industries.
Market positioning: Flexibility is now a differentiator in the talent market. Competitors who embrace it gain advantage, particularly with women and younger generations. By contrast, rigid mandates at firms like Amazon and Disney have been met with reputational backlash and hiring challenges.
The Risks of Extremes
The evidence is stark:
Rigid RTO mandates increase attrition, particularly among women and caregivers; damage employer brand; and risk higher absenteeism and lower engagement.
Fully remote models erode innovation, weaken cross-functional ties, slow skill development for juniors, and can reduce client confidence in industries where presence matters.
A Smarter Way Forward
The future of work lies in principled hybrid: an in-person culture, flexible by design.
Three principles for success
Works for the team: Anchor days for face-to-face collaboration, with flexibility around them.
Supports performance: Use in-person time for mentoring, innovation, and culture-building; remote time for deep work.
Builds trust and accountability: Empower managers to set expectations with their teams. Hold people accountable to outcomes, not hours at a desk.
Implementation priorities
Frame flexibility as a strategic enabler, not a concession.
Equip leaders with toolkits to apply hybrid policies fairly and consistently.
Monitor attrition, engagement, productivity, and client satisfaction quarterly.
Position flexibility as a competitive differentiator in recruitment, especially for women and younger generations.
The Bottom Line
Strict RTO mandates may feel decisive, but they are a blunt instrument that often drives away the very talent organisations most want to keep. Full remote, meanwhile, risks culture and innovation.
The evidence is clear: culture isn’t built on shared pain — it’s built on shared purpose. A tiered RTO policy might look like leadership by example, but if moving up means losing flexibility, you create invisible ceilings for caregivers and quietly narrow your talent pool.
In 2025, people don’t follow leaders just because they’re in the office more. They follow leaders who make being there worth it.
For more great insights, connect with https://purposefulchange.com
