Asklemmy

43757 readers

1526 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

413

why are companies trying so hard to have employees back in the office? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by andallthat@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

236 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have posted this on Reddit (askeconomics) a while back but got no good replies. Copying it here because I don't want to send traffic to Reddit.

What do you think?

I see a big push to take employees back to the office. I personally don't mind either working remote or in the office, but I think big companies tend to think rationally in terms of cost/benefit and I haven't seen a convincing explanation yet of why they are so keen to have everyone back.

If remote work was just as productive as in-person, a remote-only company could use it to be more efficient than their work-in-office competitors, so I assume there's no conclusive evidence that this is the case. But I haven't seen conclusive evidence of the contrary either, and I think employers would have good reason to trumpet any findings at least internally to their employees ("we've seen KPI so-and-so drop with everyone working from home" or "project X was severely delayed by lack of in-person coordination" wouldn't make everyone happy to return in presence, but at least it would make a good argument for a manager to explain to their team)

Instead, all I keep hearing is inspirational wish-wash like "we value the power of working together". Which is fine, but why are we valuing it more than the cost of office space?

On the side of employees, I often see arguments like "these companies made a big investment in offices and now they don't want to look stupid by leaving them empty". But all these large companies have spent billions to acquire smaller companies/products and dropped them without a second thought. I can't believe the same companies would now be so sentimentally attached to office buildings if it made any economic sense to close them.

(page 5) 39 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Owners and executives may own companies that own the buildings and don’t want their investments to fail.

[–] Seanya@feddit.ch 1 points 1 year ago

If we don't lay off employees, how can the stock price rise? With the stock price rising, the cost of labor decreases, killing two birds with one stone.

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

Sadly, I suspect this is another case of "many people are not good at their jobs". Not necessarily the workers, but company leadership.

Most new businesses fail. Many established businesses fail. Some of that is skill, or lack there of, but a lot is also luck.

If one lacks skill and my company has a run of bad luck, then blaming the most recent change is rational. This is true even if one has refused to, or been ineffective at, adjusting to changed circumstances.

Blaming a failing business on something outside oneself is an ego saving move.

I expect the biggest pushers of return to office, that also have no clear business need, are not doing well. I anticipate many backward looking reports about a large number of projects and businesses failing due to a lack of ability to adjust.

[–] pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I know someone who works in IT at a place where they found that keystrokes rose 40% in office and significantly more work was completed as measured by story points. Keystrokes aren’t a great way to measure productivity, but it’s very suspicious that people somehow had to type less when they have to type to talk to anyone and often don’t have to in office.

It’s not perfectly scientific, but businesses pretty much never have scientific data to work with and the evidence they have says people overall are more productive in office.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] HughJanus@lemmy.ml -5 points 1 year ago (17 children)

The real answer is that people are more productive in the office with more oversight and build relationships with their coworkers that help them to do their jobs better. Companies invest thousands of dollars in "teambuilding" events that benefit the company and employees in no way other than to foster these environments. It costs their employees more time and money for transportation, which means they have to pay them more. They are not stupid. They are not trying to upset their employees just to cost themselves more money.

There is no other rational explanation. Any other explanation is illogical, as it costs the company more money to have and maintain an office building. It's just based on people angry about the fact that they have to leave home.

load more comments (17 replies)

load more comments