SHRM President and Chief Executive Officer Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., SHRM-SCP, answers your workplace questions each week. Do you have a work-related question you’d like him to answer? Submit it here.
My company just announced a full return-to-office mandate, five days a week, starting next quarter. We've been hybrid since the end of COVID and, as far as I know, productivity hasn't dropped since people started working remotely. Morale is already taking a hit over this news. Is this just about control, or is there something else going on? — Priya
I wouldn't assume this is about control. There could be a number of reasons your company believes having employees back in the office full time is the right decision for the business.
It's easy to look at employee productivity and ask, "If the work is getting done, why change anything?" That's a fair question. But productivity is only one measure leaders consider when determining how work gets done most effectively. They may also be looking at collaboration, culture, mentorship, innovation, employee development, and whether the current model supports the organization's long-term business needs.
Now, this doesn't mean employees have to like the decision. If people have been working successfully in a hybrid environment, asking them to give up that flexibility is a significant change. Leaders should recognize this and be prepared to explain the business rationale behind it.
But as I often say, there's no universally good or bad workplace culture, except one that is illegal, unethical, or immoral. The same principle applies here. Fully remote, hybrid, and five days in the office are not inherently good or bad. What works for one organization may not work for another. The question is whether the model supports the organization's strategy, culture, and business needs — and whether leaders are clear about why they've chosen it.
Where organizations run into trouble is often with communication. Broad references to "collaboration" or "connection" may not be enough for employees who are being asked to make a significant change to how they work. The more clearly leaders can explain what they hope to accomplish and why more time together will help, the easier it is for employees to understand the decision, even if they disagree with it.
So, how should you approach this?
Ask your manager, respectfully, if they can provide more context around what prompted the change and what leadership hopes to achieve. There may be factors behind the decision not immediately visible from where you sit.
You're allowed to be unhappy about losing flexibility. But that doesn't necessarily mean the mandate is wrong. You may simply want something different from your workplace.
And that's ultimately what you need to decide. If your organization is prioritizing an in-person workplace and you're looking for more flexibility, ask yourself whether you can thrive under the direction your organization has chosen.
At the end of the day, your employer has to make the decision it believes is right for the organization, and you have to decide whether the decision works for you. You don't have to agree with it. But before you assume it's about control, understand what's driving it.
Was this resource helpful?
Validate your HR expertise
Earning your SHRM-CP credential makes you a recognized expert and leader in the HR field.
Related Content
Transform HR with mobile technology to streamline workflows, enhance communication, and boost employee engagement across distributed teams.
A new study found that talent development practitioners believe performance-based assessments are more effective at measuring employee learning outcomes than knowledge tests.
As AI makes deeper inroads into organizations, employee concerns about the technology continue to grow. Here's how HR leaders can address the fear of AI among their own staff, as well as in the wider organization.