When did the simple request of asking people to come to the office everyday and on-time became an insult ?
As a CTO, I feel very frustrated to have to justify my reasoning to my team, while I see in-office interaction as being such a compelling experience, and a big advantage when working on common projects.<p>Note: in these conditions, the occasional day of working from home would still be accepted.
Simple explanation - you are asking for something selfishly. If you have a GOOD reason why they need to be in the office then they will join you.<p>Your reason (compelling, common, shared something) cannot be objectively substantiated. It is not helping your company's mission, your team's productivity, or your people to do a better job. However, the time they will need to spend commuting and the amount of time it will take away from doing a good work (from all the bullshit that takes place in office) can and has been substantiated. By asking for this you are really not looking out for the best interests of the company since you will increase attrition from the top talent who do not need to work in an office any more.<p>If you want them to come into the office, try writing down the actual lift it will create in anything that you can prove, and share it. My guess is that you'll have a hard time because competent people prefer autonomy, but give it a roll... who knows?
IMO it depends on what WFH was originally sold as in your company.<p>If you sold it as "we have to do it because local Covid regulations", then you should be able to call them back to the office and fire/fine those who don't comply.<p>If WFH was "flexibility/improved productivity", then to rescind it you need to be able to show that it isn't delivering on that, which you should be able to do.<p>I can't speak for tech, in finance it was basically only ever COVID related so almost no one that I know had any issue coming back, and there were some very costly incidents at multiple banks that would never happen in office.<p><a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/03/flash-crash-europes-stock-market-fall-triggered-by-citi-trader-error.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/03/flash-crash-europes-stock-ma...</a> - This was because a trader fat fingered a trade on WFH setup.
I worked full-time remote from 2014-2019 before leaving the workforce. I made good investments and I have spent my days doing as I please, working on open-source projects.<p>While I do have an interest in working (know of any place that does stuff with Haiku OS, C++ and 3D graphics APIs?), I simply won't consider software engineering jobs that require me to be on-site.<p>I strongly suspect that engineering-driven companies that fully embrace remote work will out-compete the laggards. The people that write the code that AIs can't are not going to roll over and put up with the way things used to be. There is no going back.<p>If you are fence-sitting on this issue because you're worried about having enough money, consider that the entire workforce benefits when you stick up for yourself. Labor is a market like any other, and every shitty job you refuse to do only puts more pressure on the corrupt management class. <3
<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35374007" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35374007</a><p><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/glebtsipursky/2023/03/24/the-collapse-of-credit-suisse-a-cautionary-tale-of-returning-to-the-office/?sh=650a63444d8f" rel="nofollow">https://www.forbes.com/sites/glebtsipursky/2023/03/24/the-co...</a><p>"The world watched in shock as Credit Suisse, one of the most established global banking and financial services institutions, collapsed and was eventually acquired by UBS. A significant factor in Credit Suisse's downfall was its rigid stance on forcing staff to return to the office…"
Bluntly, we don't care what you "see". You have to make <i>us</i> see it, or we think you're just trying to make us do what makes life easier for <i>you</i>.<p>So, yes, you have to justify your reasoning to the team. You didn't hire robots; you hired humans who can think for themselves (and sometimes do), and who can make their own decisions. And one of their decisions may be that the CTO is an insensitive jerk on a power trip, and therefore that they should look for work elsewhere. If you don't want them to reach that conclusion, don't give them evidence that points toward it.
No offense meant, but maybe you "see in-office interaction as being such a compelling experience" because you enjoy wielding power over people?<p>Well, many people don't enjoy being on the other side of this interaction, and prefer their work to remain just work.
If you have to ask people to come in and they don't want to, that's a signal that your office amenities and culture are failing to meet the expectations of the modern workforce.<p>People voluntarily go into iconic offices like those of Apple and Google, because those businesses have determined they have a legitimate need to have people in the office, those businesses have assessed the market demand for office perks and compensation levels required to attract people to the office, and have fulfilled those expectations.<p>Want people to come in? Fix your perks, fix your compensation, or fix your irrational market-defying expectations.<p>Don't have the power? Explain the problem to CEO / board. If the business wants to fix it, they will. If the business wants to stubbornly refuse to adapt to market changes, it'll die just like capitalism intended.<p>As a CTO, you should have a pretty good idea of whether the business wants to live or die before you even accept the job, and factor that risk into your consideration for the position.<p>Business is fundamentally about voluntary economic cooperation in pursuit of profit in a dynamic, constantly changing market. If the business isn't engaged in voluntary economic cooperation, or fails to adapt to the changing market, it can give up all rational hopes of profit.<p>Best of luck to you.