Remote Work Wars: You’re Fighting the Wrong Battle!

It’s been five years since the pandemic broke out, yet the most enduring legacy of that time seems to be the endless debates about office attendance policies. Unfortunately, many leaders have reverted to outdated management approaches in response to this issue.

The problem is clear: as human beings, we need face-to-face interaction to innovate, collaborate, and thrive. At the same time, during the pandemic, we learned how flexibility greatly improved our work-life balance. Most of us can agree that remote work offers both benefits and challenges.

According to a Gallup poll, 55% of employees prefer a hybrid work model, 30% prefer fully remote work, and only 15% want to return to the office full-time.

In response, they enforce rigid policies—three days a week in the office, or even five, as Amazon recently did.

But because this issue deeply affects people, imposing rules without input leads to significant resentment. It’s a perfect illustration of the clash between old leadership paradigms and new ways of working.

A Better Way: Involve People in the Solution

Imagine if employees were treated like adults. Instead of being handed top-down policies, they could be invited to help solve the company’s dilemma:
“We want more collaboration and a strong office culture, AND we want to trust employees and provide flexibility. How can we achieve this together?”

When people are treated as wise, responsible adults, involved in solving shared challenges, and trusted to care about the company’s success, they become constructive. They generate creative solutions and are more likely to accept policies, even if the final version doesn’t match their personal preferences.

The opposite approach—treating employees like troublesome children—leads to immature responses. People dig in their heels and start thinking, "No one should tell me what to do." It becomes a battle of wills.

We know of several companies that, intending to listen to their employees, sent our surveys about working practices. They then looked at the results and decided. This is not involvement. Employees weren’t genuinely involved in the decision, and it often resulted in still having a top-down rule that only suited the ‘average’ of the responses. Sending anonymous responses and then weeks later hearing a decision that doesn’t work for you, even when the company had good intentions, erodes trust. 

Rebuilding Trust

You might object, "We tried involving people, and it didn’t work." The truth is, that once trust has been broken, it takes time to heal. When people expect authoritarian decisions, regaining trust requires listening—lots of it. Perhaps even an apology. And certainly, patience.

But it’s worth it. Resolving this contentious issue in a respectful, adult-to-adult way could lay the foundation for a new level of collaboration that benefits both employees and the organization.

Hands-on ideas on how to involve people

Stop sending out surveys on topics that are really important to people!

The opportunity to debate the big questions, like how you work effectively and have people align on agreements, is also an opportunity to prove that their views count and they all have a say at the same time. Then, you don’t have to deal with the aftermath of complaints - people who feel fully involved and own a solution don’t complain. 

To arrange a meeting like that:

1. Gather as big a group of people as possible in your organisation. If you are a huge organisation, you need to have several group meetings. Choose a facilitator with developed listening skills. 

2. Pose the dilemma: We as an organisation face the problem of giving our people flexibility in where they work AND we want to build a strong, collaborative culture which requires meeting physically? How could we solve this so we achieve both things.

3. Then use the Liberating Structures tool 1-2-4: First, the facilitator gives everyone a couple of minutes for everyone to reflect individually. Then, people meet in pairs and discuss the dilemma to develop ideas and solutions. Then, the pairs meet another pair and elaborate. The facilitator then collects the group of four’s findings and summarises.

4. Facilitator: Are there enough thoughts on the board, or is anything missing? Could we come up with agreements on this in the room? If not, how would you prefer it to be decided?

With all employees in the company in the room, it is possible to agree on and formulate the policies and make decisions. If there are several groups, collect possible agreement from each group and let the group assign a representative from their group. Gather the representatives, summarise the suggestions and have them agree on the ones they prefer together.

Do not be afraid of the debate. Listen to it and ask follow-up questions.

If you think this is too time-consuming, consider the years we spent on this issue since the pandemic.

If there are negative tones of voice, unhelpful attitudes, and a climate of distrust and questioning, then you have another problem. Then, the culture of your company is not equipped to solve any big surface issues. The tendency then is to give up and let top management decide, which will make the culture even worse. Instead, start a strategic initiative to shift the culture to trust and openness. It is very profitable!