Return-to-office: What leaders are getting wrong

Note: Transcripts are automatically generated from episode audio, and are not fully corrected for spelling, grammar, and formatting.

FRANCIS FREI: If you look at all of the evidence, I don’t think there is any, like not a single study, that says unequivocally return-to-office helps.

BOB SAFIAN: I know you advise CEOs and business leaders. When you raise this with them, what do they say?

FREI: I have learned they can’t handle it directly. Otherwise rational people, otherwise performance-oriented people, this is like a third rail. We get down to it, they’re like, I just don’t like it.

It’s just conspicuous that at this moment in time when performance matters so much that they’re taking their personal preference over the company’s performance.

SAFIAN: That’s Frances Frei, professor at Harvard Business School and co-host of the TED Media Podcast, Fixable. We’re seeing a sweeping rise in return-to-office policies, from big corporations to the federal government. I wanted to speak to Frances, who does deep research in just this area, to understand why the push for full-time return to office is taking hold, and the implications for business performance and employee satisfaction.

Frances also digs into the coming impact of AI on corporate life over the next year. Plus, if you’re like me and overwhelmed by the volume of meetings on your calendar, she shares how we can improve our efficiency and outcomes with just a few simple changes. So let’s get to it. I’m Bob Safian, and this is Rapid Response.

[THEME MUSIC]

SAFIAN: I’m Bob Safian. I’m here with Frances Frei, professor at Harvard Business School and co-host of the TED Media podcast, Fixable. Frances, thanks for joining us.

FREI: Oh, so thrilled to be here, Bob. Thank you.

Copy LinkWhy return-to-office policies are rising

SAFIAN: So you’re an expert in many things in workplace issues — your research, your podcast, you took a leave to work at Uber as SVP of leadership and strategy to address the workplace culture there — there’s so much discussion right now about return to office, RTO, for federal employees and on the corporate level. Amazon, JPMorgan, others calling staff into the office full time. Why has this discussion popped up so much at this moment?

FREI: I’ll give you my hypothesis, which is that people of a certain age, of a certain income bracket, all uniformly really like to see people when they’re at work. They just like it. They’re used to it when they walk around. It just makes them feel better when the offices are full. It makes them feel like work is going on. And so, if you notice who is calling for these RTOs, the demographic is super narrow — like, by age, by shirt sleeve. I mean, it’s incredible who wants it. I personally believe it’s out of nostalgia. And I’ll tell you why. There is no evidence to support that it actually leads to better results. In fact, all of the evidence points in the other direction. So, what’s amazing to me is these otherwise pretty brutally performance-oriented people are willing to take a performance hit at the altar of their nostalgia.

SAFIAN: You’ve been resisting this idea — this pull — that sort of statistically, numerically, it’s a bad idea. Can you explain that?

FREI: There are some places that you might have to do it. If you’re serving customers live and they’re pulling into the driveway, you gotta be there, right? But if you look at all of the evidence and all of the academic research, I don’t think there is any, like not a single study, that says unequivocally return to office helps. What it says is, employees value flexibility to a startling amount. And then what it also says is that productivity — not only does it not go down when you have hybrid work, because that’s really what it is, you know. So many of these places where employees could come in three days a week, and now they’ve changed it to five.

The value proposition for the employees just got a lot worse, and the value proposition for the firm got no better. It’s a super curious thing, and every study shows this.

SAFIAN: And the idea that being in office all the time strengthens company culture — like, that’s just a myth.

FREI: It’s silly because, again, we’re going from three days to five days. What they like to do is say, “Oh, well, compare it to zero days.” I know very few companies that had all remote. This is typically a three-day-to-five-day thing. And what often happens, the rest of the research shows us, is that when people are there all the time, they come in wearing noise-canceling headphones because we didn’t give anybody a private office. If you did give them a private office, they shut the door. And then if you don’t have a private office, you put on noise-canceling headphones so that you can get work done.

SAFIAN: Or you can all be on the same Zoom together in the same room, right?

FREI: With your laptops up, because that’s good meeting maintenance. What we’re doing is forcing people to be together for activities, even when they aren’t needed to be co-located. What you really want to do is bring people together when it’s valuable.

Copy LinkThe emotional pitfalls of uniform in-office policies

SAFIAN: Can you give us sort of a snapshot of what’s happening right now? Who’s back? How often? Is it different in different fields?

FREI: So most of the headlines are from the CEO who formerly said, “I care about performance. Employees are telling me that they’re going to do better work at three days. Let’s test it.” And everyone who did it saw engagement go up and performance go up. But they still didn’t like it because their sentiment went down. There was a period of like two years where CEOs were grumpy.

It was like, ugh — like if you got them in private, they just couldn’t believe this remote work. Even if they had said, “We’re a hybrid-first location,” they all just resented it.

SAFIAN: Because they’re paying for all that extra real estate that they’re—

FREI: Well, I actually don’t even think it’s that as much as it is that they just want to see people. It just makes them feel better. Now, of course, this flies in the face of every single international organization in the world. You could only see a subset of the employees in any specific physical geography, but that is just lost.

Even the CEOs of international companies — still, they wanted to see people in their location. And so what happened is, there were a few first movers. And a few big dogs said, “We’re gonna do it, or else.” Made their employees furious. Their research suggests that the best employees are the ones that are leaving.

They feel like tough guys because they stood up to the employees.

And then the other people who were resentful were like, “Well, look, we have license to do it. He did it. He’s tough. We can do it.” And so I think right now they all feel like they’re getting away with it. Although the early evidence — when they look at who’s leaving and the productivity gains that haven’t manifested and the engagement scores that have gone down — the early ones who are willing to look, because most people are just saying, “Don’t tell me.”

But the ones that are looking are like, “Oops.” So, I expect the pendulum to switch back.

SAFIAN: They sort of falsely extrapolated that like, well, if three days is fine, why not five? And there are things that they didn’t get about that shift from three to five.

FREI: Well, yes, so from three days to five days, they thought, I want better performance, and this is the way to get better performance. If I said to you, I have a great idea to improve performance, it’s gonna make my employees less happy and like make them less individually productive.

Even if I don’t tell you what my black box idea is, are you going to be psyched to have it happen? The only person who can push something like this through is an emotional CEO.

SAFIAN: I could see an argument that like, it’s better to have one uniform policy for an office as opposed to different rules for—

FREI: Of course.

SAFIAN: Jobs may be more effective full time in—

FREI: Of course.

SAFIAN: So, why shouldn’t we make it consistent?

FREI: We are optimizing on everything except for this blunt instrument. Why are we taking a blunt instrument to our entire employee base? It’s not for performance reasons. It’s for emotional reasons.

SAFIAN: And, are there parts of it — I mean, obviously about like control, trust, all those things sort of—

FREI: Well, I think they, the problem is they reveal that they don’t trust their employees, and they reveal that they are not looking at the data. Because there’s no performance data to support them, and so they reveal two, I think, unpleasant things, which means the employees who have a choice, which are your best employees, they’re looking at their CEOs right now and if they’re not thinking this too shall pass, like my CEO just saw their friend do it and now they’re doing it, but you know, we just got to grin and bear it and it will change. But if they’re like, oh my gosh, my CEO really feels like they believe this, I’m gonna go to a CEO who cares more about performance than this, who wants to win and is not going to indulge their emotions at the expense of our performance.

Copy LinkHow business leaders respond to RTO data

SAFIAN: I know you consult with and advise CEOs and business leaders. When you raise this with them, what do they say?

FREI: This is one of the few issues… So I’m a very direct person and I have learned they can’t handle it directly. So this is an issue where you got to come at it from the side, but even then, otherwise rational people, otherwise performance-oriented people, they just — this is like a third rail. They just say, when we get down to it, they’re like, I just don’t like it.

I mean, they start with bluster of performance and and I show them all the data and I’m like, but let’s look at the internal data.

And then they just admit, “I just prefer it.” And that’s of course a fine reason. CEOs are allowed to do that. It’s just conspicuous from an outside person that so many are picking something at this moment in time when performance matters so much that they’re taking their personal preference over the company’s performance.

SAFIAN: Emotion takes precedence over data. Despite the availability of more information than ever in today’s world, sometimes human impulses carry the day. That’s a reminder to all of us to check our assumptions, and try to make sure we’re clear-eyed about decisions.

After the break, Frances and I talk about the impact of AI on office life, including how she uses AI as a research assistant. Plus, her tips on making meetings more meaningful. We’ll be right back.

[AD BREAK]

Before the break, Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei deconstructed why full-time return to office is in vogue, despite data contradicting it. Now Frances explores how return to office relates to the war on DEI, the impact of AI on corporate life, and making the most of your meeting time. Let’s jump back in.

Copy LinkThe unintended consequences of enforcing RTO

SAFIAN: When President Trump signed his executive order requiring federal workers to be in person five days a week, I wondered how much of that sort of decision was about signaling support for those who don’t have the option of working remote — bus drivers, store clerks, factory workers, people who don’t work in offices.

It’s like we run the risk of creating a two-caste work system, right? If white-collar folks don’t do what everybody else does or something.

FREI: Look, it’s hard to not look at his policy and look at the head of DOGE and look at the policy he implemented at his company.

In fact, I believe the subject line was a curious subject line and identical for both the government and for his organization. And so, if you wanted to follow the breadcrumbs, I think you can follow the breadcrumbs to the exact same set of CEOs that, as they get more and more sway, there is no question this is their preference.

SAFIAN: Calculation necessarily—

FREI: I have no idea what’s on the mind of the president, so I don’t know what he’s doing it for. There are some people who wanted — who have confessed in private — that they wanted to have a workforce reduction without having a layoff, and that this was a reliable way to do it.

Now, when you say back to them, “Yes, people are going to leave, but you realize it’s your best people that are going to leave, right? It’s the people with options.” That’s the part where they’re like, “Oh, I’m not sure it’s going to play out that way.” Of course it’s going to play out that way.

Copy LinkConnection between RTO and DEI?

SAFIAN: Is there any connection between the RTO wave and the animosity toward DEI initiatives? I mean, you’ve mentioned on your podcast that women especially value work location flexibility.

FREI: I don’t believe that this is a cynical way to get rid of women. I don’t believe that. I do believe that there were people who had an emotional reaction to DEI and they wanted it to go away because they felt uncomfortable around it. They have an emotional reaction to hybrid work, they wanted it to go away, and they saw their window.

The reason DEI came around is because some people didn’t get to participate in a meritocracy. And now there is a different set of people who don’t like DEI because they feel like they don’t get to participate in a meritocracy. The natural next step is how do we figure out that everyone gets to participate in a meritocracy?

Now, the truth is, if you look at the long arc of time — I love competition and the market weeds out emotional responses over performance. Performance will win ultimately, but it’s going to be bumpy for people along the way as we indulge these emotional responses.

If any of the leaders listening to this think they really need team members back in the office more frequently, that it will be better off — like every other decision for improving performance — look to the data. Go test it like you test everything else, just bring your everyday rigor to this as well. I don’t even think you have to look outside the company. I bet you have data in your own company that will show if you’re right. And maybe you do have a context where it matters. Let the data guide you.

SAFIAN: And if your organization is fully remote now, and you realize, “Oh, the data says I need to bring people in more often than I have been.” But in this environment, it’s really tricky. Like, it’s going to be interpreted in different ways.

FREI: I’m not sure. I mean, if you designed a business to be fully remote and now you’re finding out that you’re not winning in the market the way you did, and now you want to do a test to see if you can do it with a couple of days, I think you do it. Some employees will come with you, some won’t. I’m all for winning. That’s what I stand for. And if you find that you will win with something else, it is actually your fiduciary responsibility to do it. Now do it with dignity.

And so if it’s an abrupt change for the employees, if you have to go from zero days to two days because that’s what your customers demand or that’s what’s needed, do it with kindness in your heart. But none of us should be pouring liquid cement on our policies. We should stay very adaptable.

SAFIAN: Any change in this, you’re likely to have some fallout with some employees. That shouldn’t restrict you from trying something different, because maybe there is something that will be more effective for your business.

FREI: I don’t want to give in to the emotions of some employees. I don’t want to give in to the emotions of the CEO. I really want us to be — and I don’t mean to sound so crass —but I want us to be ruthlessly performance-oriented.

Copy LinkHow AI will continue to impact the workplace

SAFIAN: I have to ask you about AI.

FREI: Yeah.

SAFIAN: I’m curious what kind of an impact you think AI will have on workplace culture and on all of these discussions.

FREI: Oh, so first of all, I don’t know, and I don’t think anyone else knows. Let me just begin with that, but I will just dream with you about what I’m seeing. In my lifetime, we’ve never seen anything like this, which has the ability to so dramatically change our capacity.

I use ChatGPT all day, every day. I have it open in a browser, and it is another one of my research assistants. It’s never tired. It’s infinitely patient. I’m polite to it. It’s polite to me. It’s a beautiful relationship. And I can ask it anything. And it’s helpful. It used to be helpful on a quarter of it. Now it’s helpful on 40%. Then 60%. I am startled at how even questions it wasn’t helpful for two months ago, it is helpful today.

I’m editing something in Final Cut Pro and I’m getting this error. Can you guide me on how to troubleshoot it? I just bought a coffee machine, I’m getting this error. Can you guide me through troubleshooting? Once you realize it can guide you through troubleshooting on anything, you never have to pick up a manual for anything ever again.

So I use it for that kind of clarification that a Google search would have taken an infinite amount of time. I literally ask it the questions I have in the language that I have them.

That’s one set of things. But here’s another one. I will be preparing something and I’m like, Oh, that’s interesting. The company went up here and down there. ChatGPT, in the last five years, can you give me 10 examples of companies that went up here and down there? I’ll be like, Oh yeah, those three. Oh, of course. That fourth one. And I’m like, seriously, that one too? Now I treat it like an RA, which is a trust and verify relationship, and that’s the relationship I encourage people to have with it. With an amazing RA, you have to go and make sure. But just for how many answers it gives me — if I had perfect recollection and was always well-rested, I would get many but not all of them — I have yet to stump it completely. It comes back with incomplete things, but I have yet to ask it a question that it has not been helpful for, and it gets increasingly more helpful.

SAFIAN: So it is going to radically change what we’ve thought of as corporate office work?

FREI: Oh my gosh. Corporate office life, education, our relationships with our family members.

And if you’re not using it directly, you will be interacting with people who are using it directly. It increases quality and reduces time. This is a pretty breathtaking thing. And I don’t think we’re anywhere near the frontier of it increasing quality and reducing time, which is why I don’t know what it’s going to be like, because I can’t see the curve bending yet. I’m sure it will sometime, but it’s not on the horizon I have.

SAFIAN: But you don’t expect that office life is going to go away?

FREI: Oh no!

SAFIAN: With your research—

FREI: No, we’re not going to be like saying, I’ll be right back and go do a two-hour search that was a waste of time. And I come back frustrated. The beautiful creativity and all of that stuff is unleashed because it removes the obstacles that would sap our energy and our time.

SAFIAN: When you think about AI and the return to office, do you have a sense of what this will look like in, say, a year? Are we going to see more reversals from CEOs about return to office? More hybrid work?

FREI: Well, I mean, if you ask me, what’s got a stronger coefficient on performance, AI or RTO, it’s AI. I mean, it’s not even close. What you do with AI is going to dwarf any mistakes you make with RTO. It really just is. Now, that’s in the beginning. And it’s because different companies are adopting AI at different speeds. At some point, I believe, certainly within a year, everyone is going to be using it, and you’re no longer going to get the disproportionate advantage. Everyone’s lives will have changed.

Copy LinkFrances Frei on how to optimize meetings

I will tell you the thing that’s most on my mind today about office work is meetings. My research suggests, on average, people can spend 50 percent less time in meetings. So if you spent 40 hours in meetings this month, we can run our meetings better so that you will spend 20 hours and every single performance measure will be better. We are off the efficient frontier in meetings, and we now have ideas of what’s happening, and this is, to me, thrilling. Now, AI is going to give you more than a 2x return, so still AI is going to be better, but this is a 2x improvement, and we will end up with better decisions, better engagement, like better, better, better, better.

SAFIAN: And you say time in meetings — so not necessarily fewer meetings, but more efficient meetings?

FREI: One is we’re inviting too many people to our meetings, and we’re running them ineffectively. So it’s being judicious about who comes. And here’s a teaser: it’s judicious about who comes live. Because there are lots of ways to consume information, only one of them is simultaneously live.

I feel like a lot of meetings could be recorded. I could then take that recording and put it through ChatGPT, and it could give me a summary of it and I get it all much more efficiently.

Here’s what we have learned. Audio is better than video — listen to it at one and a half speed while you’re in motion. You will retain more of what happened than the people who were there live. This is magic dust that you can sprinkle on your calendar, and you get back 50 percent of your time.

And my only plea is, once you sprinkle the magic dust, please don’t fill it in with other meetings. Do all of the important things you’re supposed to be doing outside of meetings.

SAFIAN: And the meetings themselves, when you say they’re not as efficient in the way they’re run, it’s that we’re not clear why we’re having the meeting or we’re not—

FREI: Yeah, so there’s a few things. Both. So one is, if a meeting doesn’t have an agenda, there is a pretty low ceiling on how effective it can be. So we have to have an agenda. Now, for a whole bunch of reasons, but here’s one reason that people don’t always realize. I need to know when to declare victory. And what I mean by that is when I get to the third item of the meeting, even if it’s a two-hour meeting and we’re in minute 40, when we’re done with number three, declare victory.

Congratulate everyone for how much they helped each other. Give them back the most precious resource you can — their time.

SAFIAN: Frances, this has been great. Thanks so much for doing it. I really appreciate it.

FREI: Oh Bob, this was a delightful conversation. Thank you.

SAFIAN: I like the way Frances combines the prioritizing of business results with an appreciation for the human elements. Whether it’s return to office, AI or meetings, we need to be informed by both the data and our own tendencies. As Francis explains, there are ways to solve for both. And if you’ve listened to this episode at 1X speed while sitting at your desk, try it next time at 1.5 speed, while you’re out walking. Regardless, I hope you find our time together worthwhile. I’m Bob Safian. Thanks for listening.