We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
LAST UPDATE | 20 Sep 2024
AMAZON, ONE OF the world’s largest employers and a key investor in Ireland, has just announced a return-to-office (RTO) mandate requiring staff to return to the office five days a week starting in January 2025.
Similar announcements have been made recently by other big global employers with US-centric workforces, such as Starbucks and Nike.
While the move is significant and highly visible, it also presents an opportunity to interrogate why this is happening. For all the recent breaking news on the supposed demise of remote work now that the pandemic has finished, it is important to engage with experts in the field of distributed work and to examine the data behind why remote and hybrid operating models — when implemented correctly — can have a significantly positive impact on people, profit and the planet alike.
Is it therefore time for companies and all other stakeholders to stop focusing on ‘where-to-work’ and instead focus on ‘how-to-work’?
In a recent conversation between global remote ecosystem thought leaders Nick Bloom (Stanford Professor | LinkedIn Top Voice In Remote Work | Co-Founder wfhresearch.com) and Dan Bladen (Co-Founder & CEO of Kadence) it was noted by Nick that firstly there is not much strong evidence outside of Amazon that this move is good for business performance. It was also noted that this may not be their final take on a flexible work policy and that this is in fact a 3rd or 4th version, so it will be worthwhile to review what has actually been implemented or enforced and then take stock of the impact.
At Grow Remote, we recognise that flexible work policies aren’t suitable for everyone or every company. We also know from our community and data that remote work brings positive social and economic impact to local communities. So, while some employees may be happy to return to the office, others will find this news extremely disruptive to their social, economic and environmental values and needs.
For example, an Amazon Software Engineer shared this immediate reaction to the mandate on LinkedIn:
Research from the University of Galway and the Western Development Commission supports the sentiment behind this public reaction. Their 2023 Remote Working Survey found that 92% of respondents indicated remote/hybrid working would be a key factor in deciding to change employers. The IBEC HR Update 2023 found that 52% of respondents had more difficulty attracting and retaining talent for on-site roles compared to flexible/hybrid ones.
Remote work flexibility clearly also has a positive impact on employee engagement and retention. A recent Gallup study found that exclusively remote and hybrid employees have significantly higher engagement than on-site workers. In contrast, remote-capable employees required to work on-site have experienced the largest drop in engagement since 2020.
There is also financial evidence: a recent Flex Index report revealed that fully flexible public companies outperformed their peers by 16 percentage points in revenue growth from 2020-2022.
The FRS Recruitment Employment Insights Report 2023 also highlights increased productivity in remote workers: more than nine out of 10 believe they are as productive or more productive when working from home. Employers agree, with over 75% saying their employees are as productive or more productive remotely.
Forcing a full RTO (return to office) mandate is clearly a risky move, now that the business case for distributed work and flexible work policies is backed by both data and demand.
Annie Dean, Global Head of Team Anywhere at distributed work champions Atlassian, has consistently emphasised that the debate around remote work should focus on “how-to-work” rather than “where-to-work” and that many CEOs mistakenly see the return-to-office as a solution for productivity issues. She insists that in reality, it’s evolving work practices that are the key to success not only in a distributed work environment (where company employees are based in various locations) but in any successful business.
Closer to home, Irish companies like Otonomee have embraced distributed work and are thriving. Chief People Officer Brendan Ring recently stated, “We believe in giving employees the choice of where they live and work. It’s about giving people autonomy to do their best work.” Otonomee raised €1.5 million in 2023 and recently launched a recruitment drive for over 150 new team members with many of those jobs landing in Ireland.
Amazon’s decision is significant but not indicative of a global trend. There are many companies, such as HubSpot, Globalization Partners, Nearform, GitLab, Workvivo, Revolut, Airbnb and WP-Engine who continue to embrace remote and hybrid work models and thrive.
These companies and many more are hiring remotely in Ireland today and you can access their career pages directly from our public career resources pages. We have +250 more of them listed as well as +10 jobs boards that are dedicated to remote employers to help make remote more visible and accessible.
Transitioning to a flexible work model is not without challenges. Companies like Amazon face really complex issues related to policy, property, culture and management. Remote work is not about simply sending employees home with laptops; it requires intentional restructuring of systems, processes and skills development.
For companies just starting or struggling with remote work, resources are available. Grow Remote has developed targeted training programs like “Leading Remote Teams” and “Transition to Remote,” designed to help organisations navigate these complexities.
Big brand employer returns to office mandates don’t mark the end of remote work. They instead highlight the need for continued systemic changes, support for companies transitioning to remote work and the need to shine a light on those who embrace it and thrive. The future of work includes hybrid, flexible and globally distributed models.
Companies that fail to adapt risk falling behind in talent acquisition, employee engagement, and profitability. It is now time to change the conversation and focus on unlocking the social, economic and environmental benefits that distributed work can bring to people’s lives, local communities and employers.
Graham Harron is Impact & Data Lead at Grow Remote.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Obviously the author has a vested interest in keeping remote working a thing, this article should be marked as an advert. Each company will make decisions that suit them and their workforces productivity.
@The next small thing: He does provide evidence. Flexibility is good for the environment and for workers’ quality of life.
@The next small thing: The nature of employment will continue to change, especially as more jobs will be taken over by Ai and robots. It poses great questions for the future, What is the nature of a job? etc. Agreed it will be vastly different across the spectrum of ‘work’. I think if your work requires an amount or set of deliverables then really who cares where you are or what time you keep as long as that work is complete and presented to the deadline.
@The next small thing: Remote working isn’t a product to be advertised and labelled as such. He’s not shilling deodorant.
@Megan Ward: In before someone else catches that Grow Remote is a company – you got me there!
Senior middle management becomes vestigial if no one is in the office. A bit like an appendix. If everyone returns they can justify their existence again.
@Derick R M: It’s so needlessly tiresome.
@Derick R M: they also can’t use the technology
Companies also using return to work as method to get rid of people.
@Temp Stuff: And rightly so. My next door neighbor avails of this WFH lark. Spends most of the day out fishing and hiking. Then comes back in the late afternoon and evening walking around with his plug in headphones and microphone walking around his front and back garden overtaking his conversation because he can’t hear and disturbing the peace into the very late evening and early night. Amazon is right! The office is where work should be done. 9 to 5 end of story.
@Brian k.: If he’s able to go under the radar and do all that while working from home, it doesn’t say much for the amount of work his company are happy for him to do, and time in the office would just be spent arsing around filling the hours. I can’t for the life of me imagine caring whether someone else works in the office or not, when it doesn’t affect me and me work.
@William Slevin: Bingo. Disturbing neighbours isn’t on, but it’s strange to directly tie that to an assertion that every office worker should be on site and work 9 to 5.
@Megan Ward: nope, couldn’t care less what/ how other people earn their ‘crust’….. Gotta wonder if the poster has a bit of the ‘ green eyed monster ‘
@Brian k.: Jesus Brian, joint the dots. His employer is likely based in a different time zone if he’s off during the day and working at night.
You sound like a delightful neighbor!
@Buster Lawless: I don’t think he realises either that employees who are watched like hawks in the office are watched like hawks when at home too, constant check ins to make sure they’re online and pulling of stats. A ‘once the work is done, I don’t care when’ style manager isn’t going to be standing over shoulders monitoring screens in-office.
The notion that the office being the solution to someone ‘doing nothing at home’ (in his eyes) and that a micromanager who would be militant in the office simply can’t figure out how to keep an eye on remote staff is funny.
Amazon is indeed an example of caring for their workers. That was sarcastic btw. Only the dinosaurs don’t adapt, and then disappear eventually.
Amazon is anti-environment. There is simply no need for all those commuting hours to happen.
From the vast majority of conversations I’ve had with the vast majority of my co-workers people just see working from home as a way to do as little work as possible for as long as possible.
If that weren’t the case companies wouldn’t be so anxious to get staff back into the office.
I’m not an employer but if I were I would want my staff where I could see them knowing that they are doing what I’m paying them for.
@Stanley Marsh: If you were an employer one would hope you’d be capable of keeping track of work that is being done without standing behind someone at their desk.
Also, if you were the only paying them you’re not going to be able to constantly watch everyone anyway. Even a manager would find that hard. A CEO can’t spend their day walking around the office, watching staff at their desks and checking computer screens. When most of the country were in the office full time, productivity stats came from MI reporting. If a company’s MI reporting systems are so bad that they can’t keep track of what’s going on, that needs to be improved.
I enjoy the days I’m in the office, but at the end of the day, we are long past the point of needing to watch people to know whether work is being done or not. If it’s not being done, sure, bring the person back into the office and see if they improve – but there, your problem lies with that employee, not remote working as a whole.
@Megan Ward: Except that it not all about ‘work being done’.
Most contracts state that a person must be at work between, for example, the hours of 9am to 5pm with an hour for lunch.
They don’t state anything explicitly about ‘productivity’ on specified timescale.
I work in a small office of 10 with 2 management.
During Covid we were all at home for some we did the same amount of work, some probably did more, and some admited that they took every opportunity to put on a wash, hang out the clothes, take longer / more breaks etc.
Depending on the type of work you do and the size of the company it would be naive to think that management can measure productivity easily so that it is obvious and conclusive that a person is not doing their job properly if not in the office.
@Stanley Marsh: The point is that being at your desk from 9 to 5 doesn’t mean that you’re working every minute of that time (lunch aside). As an employer, what would ultimately be more important – that someone is sitting in their chair for all of that time, or that goals are being hit and they’re doing as much work as they can (without sacrificing accuracy and completeness – faster isn’t better for every type of work, obviously). I would guess the latter. For call centre jobs it’s important that the person is there constantly, but they still have to put in the work for the rest of it to be considered a good worker.
If someone says that they kept hopping off to do housework and their manager sees no difference in their output compared to when they were full time in the office, that’s an indicator that their 9 to 5 wasn’t spent actually working and that there’s scope for a higher workload. Something I’m sure managers and employers are well aware has always been a thing for some.
Of course people are contracted for certain hours, but clearly some employers and managers prioritise keeping an acceptable output and that’s for them to decide, not john62728 on the Journal who has no skin in the game but is adamant that no one does any work remotely and that it should be banned.
@Stanley Marsh: I would add that I don’t care how hard my colleagues work, provided their slacking doesn’t heap far more onto my plate to the point I can’t do my own job. When one person’s laziness affects their colleagues, that’s certainly one of the times to be pulled up on it and time to see if they do any better in the office. I’ve worked with slackers and hard workers both in the office and at home (not currently, which is great). That the slacker was in the office all day didn’t help anyone.
@Megan Ward: Apologies for the tardy reply but I’ve a lot of work to get done this afternoon.
My basic point is that people are far more likely to do their work in an office environment and obviously even the happy-clappy, ping-pong playing, bean-bag-sitting 90s tech startups who are now global giants agree.
“I would add that I don’t care how hard my colleagues work, provided their slacking doesn’t heap far more onto my plate to the point I can’t do my own job.”
Good for you but many would disagree and find it annoying.
And there’s also the reality that it would almost certainly affect you at some point.
@Stanley Marsh: Exactly my friend. My thoughts also on this subject.
@Megan Ward: All the more reason to get people back into the office. That way as a supervisor I can watch and observe who’s doing what and not skipping off work. Especially those that are supposed to be working from home. Taking extra long breaks and going off fishing and hiking!
@Brian k.: I’ve already replied to you in another thread, do you think your man’s manager, who clearly doesn’t care if he’s online during the day, would be standing over his shoulder in the office?
@Stanley Marsh: Oh it definitely annoyed me working in retail as a student because it always lead to more work, and it annoyed me at the start of the ‘corporate’ career – now I don’t care what they do once obstacles to getting my work done aren’t there and I’m getting recognition for what I do. If I were in a situation where ‘20 of these need to be done, split them between you – oh wait, Bob didn’t do his so you have them all’ then sure, but I’m not.
Every business has their way of measuring success and output, if there are failings and they suspect it’s because people are arsing around at home then sure, bring them in. Lazy people will still be lazy and micromanagement annoys most people, especially those who know they are putting a good graft in.
This conversation reminds me of those about the speed of work. If person A can get the same amount of work as person B done in half the time, and there is a limit to the number of tasks required each day, person A is going to slow it down or fill the rest of their time with other things. A faster worker can sometimes get more done than the next person, even if they arse around a bit. Like you’ve said, everywhere is different and not every workplace has output that’s easy to quantify but a lot of managers are aware that WFH staff might be throwing a wash on or hoovering during their work day, if there is still a decent amount of work being done, potentially more than colleagues, most aren’t going to punish for the sake of it. Especially on a ‘what if’!
Get everybody back to work now. Lazy lazy people.
@Ol Dirty Bstard: And what about those who can’t do the commute due to an illness or disability? I’m currently working from home as I’m recovering from a stroke.
@JuiGkBDA: that is serious illness dawg., you cannot work
If posters actually checked out the data for during Covid, they show that productivity increased when people worked from home.
I work from home. I sit at my desk at 8.30 AM and work until 5 PM.
The vast majority of those who work from home do not treat it as a way to do less.
Amazion would do well to drop its cloud services contract with Israhell
Ya the laptop people who work for a company should be working from the company office, working from home only necessary in limited circumstances, people are becoming lazy anyway and endless wringers when it comes to work and many other issues also.
@Ned: Why would a company that exists online, need an office? That makes no business sense at all.
Flexi game changer of the 21st century, it will become part of norm or if you wish to have a lye in morning.
have your say