Remote work: killing or redefining company culture?

Hot Take: If your company still treats remote work like a privilege, you’re already behind. It’s not a perk anymore it’s the bare minimum. Since 2020, the world of work has changed, permanently. 📊 87% of employees say flexibility is a top priority when picking a job. 📈 Studies show remote teams are just as productive sometimes more when systems are well designed. Yet, some companies still think “come back to the office” is culture. It’s not. It’s control. Culture isn’t built by sitting beside each other. It’s built by trust, shared values, and consistent communication. And the irony? The most remote teams often have stronger culture than those dragging people in three times a week. Remote work isn’t the future. It’s the present. The question is how many leaders are still stuck in 2019? What’s your honest take is remote work truly sustainable long-term, or are we all pretending it’s the new normal? #FutureOfWork #RemoteWork #Leadership #Productivity #Culture

The Culture Myth: Remote Work vs. Leadership Many believe remote work kills company culture. This is a damaging myth that we must challenge. As someone who has worked with various teams, I've seen this firsthand. I’ve observed fully remote teams that are thriving in their culture. Conversely, I’ve also witnessed in-person teams struggle due to poor leadership. The truth is, culture is not tied to a physical location. It’s about how we lead and how we treat one another. Strong cultures emerge from trust, communication, and consistent empathy. Here’s what truly builds culture in remote settings: - **Trust**: Establish trust as the foundation of your team interactions. - **Empathy**: Train leaders to understand and support team members. - **Clear Expectations**: Communicate roles and responsibilities to eliminate ambiguity. - **Consistent Feedback**: Foster a two-way communication channel for continuous improvement. - **Connection**: Create opportunities for team bonding, no matter the format. What kills culture is not remote work itself, but poor leadership and lack of clarity. Instead of forcing in-office days, prioritize creating systems that enhance connection and clarity. It’s time to retire the myth that remote work undermines culture. Let’s foster strong cultures, regardless of where our teams are located. I invite you to share your thoughts. How has your experience shaped your perspective on culture in remote teams? #hr #remotework #humanresources

In today's remote work landscape, human connection is more essential than ever. While remote work offers flexibility and convenience, it can also risk isolating employees, impacting engagement, well-being, and productivity. According to MIT Sloan Review, fostering “referent power” — the kind of influence born from genuine human engagement — can drive individual and team success beyond traditional positional authority. Leaders must be intentional about creating opportunities for social interaction, balancing work and home life, and supporting mental health to combat feelings of isolation. Remote environments challenge us to build deeper, more transparent relationships through virtual means, which is critical for sustaining motivation and discretionary effort. As we continue to embrace hybrid and remote models, let’s prioritize human connection as a core component of workplace culture — because connection drives commitment, creativity, and performance. What strategies have you found effective in nurturing human bonds within your remote teams? Share your insights! #RemoteWork #HumanConnection #EmployeeEngagement #Leadership #WorkplaceCulture #HybridWork #MentalHealth #TeamSuccess (Source: MIT Sloan Review, Workhuman)

A very interesting article in Forbes about the mistrust around hard work and productivity. Could lingering distrust around remote work undermine its potential, with many leaders defaulting to presenteeism rather than outcomes? Journalist Barnaby Lashbrooke outlines this mistrust can be countered through transparent measurement, trust-based management, and shifting focus from hours logged to real impact. Ultimately, the article calls for a mindset shift: remote work isn’t a productivity problem — it’s a trust and leadership challenge. WinWin4WorkLife’s Employer survey studies the employers’ sentiment towards many aspects of remote work, including productivity. Early results indicate that employers who don’t allow remote work often believe it harms productivity, while those who permit it generally experience productivity gains. #ww4wl #EUHorizon https://lnkd.in/gR5cFAqa

The data hit me like a cold wave: 68% of remote employees are working longer hours than ever, not because they have more work, but because they're afraid of being seen as unproductive. This isn't about work-life balance anymore. It's about a deeper crisis brewing in our hybrid workplaces - what I call 'performance anxiety pandemic.' Here's what I'm seeing across organizations: Employees are staying online late into the evening, not to finish tasks, but to 'show presence' Managers are equating response time with commitment, creating a culture of digital urgency Teams are burning out from performing productivity rather than being productive The organizations getting this right have made a fundamental shift. They've stopped asking 'Are my people working?' and started asking 'Are we achieving what matters?' They measure outcomes, not activity. They set clear expectations upfront, then trust their people to deliver. They've learned that micromanaging remote work doesn't create accountability - it destroys the very autonomy that makes remote work effective. The future belongs to leaders who understand this truth: When you trust people with how they work, they'll give you their best work. What's your experience? Are your remote teams performing productivity or actually being productive? #RemoteWork #Leadership #EmployeeWellbeing #HybridWorkplace #TrustBasedManagement #FutureOfWork

Everyone’s saying remote work failed. But let’s be honest: it wasn’t remote work that failed. It was leadership. The companies blaming remote work are the same ones that: ✖️ Never learned to measure outcomes, only hours ✖️ Never trained managers to lead without walking the halls ✖️ Never built async systems that actually support focus ✖️ Confused “team culture” with pizza and ping-pong Remote work didn’t kill productivity. It exposed weak leadership that depended on control instead of trust. The best teams didn’t “go back.” ✅ They evolved. ✅ They measure impact, not time. ✅ They lead with clarity, not surveillance. ✅ They build culture through outcomes, not office perks. True leaders don’t fear flexibility. They master it. And the talent they attract? They’re not coming back to 2019. Do you prefer working for a company that trusts you?

“Remote work isn’t a perk — it’s a proof of trust.” You either trust your people or you don’t. There’s no middle ground. The best organizations understand this: Remote work isn’t about convenience. It’s about confidence — in your team, in your culture, and in your leadership. 🌿 If you still think people only work hard when someone’s watching, you’re missing the point. True engagement comes from freedom, not surveillance. Yes, an office can build community. But flexibility builds commitment. So what separates thriving remote teams from the ones that struggle? 👇 1️⃣ Clarity of Purpose → Everyone knows where the team is heading — and why it matters. 2️⃣ Intentional Communication → Conversations that move work forward, not endless check-ins. 3️⃣ Autonomy That Empowers → Adults don’t need managing; they need space to deliver. 4️⃣ Trust Over Control → Measure by outcomes, not online hours. 5️⃣ Collaboration Without Burnout → Work should adapt to life, not the other way around. When people feel trusted → they take ownership. When communication has purpose → teams stay aligned. When flexibility is real → performance follows. Remote work isn’t the future — it’s the present of modern leadership. 💬 What’s one thing that’s helped your remote team thrive? I’d love to hear your insights below.

One of the best articles I’ve read in a while. FORBES: Why Leaders Need To Rethink The Work-From-Home Debate By Jane Sparrow https://lnkd.in/ejN5Q57w Some highlights… “At their best, offices aren’t about attendance - they’re about energy.” “A Harvard Business School study found that remote workers completed more tasks but achieved fewer creative breakthroughs. Productivity can hold in the short term, but over time, innovation and growth suffer.” “Few studies claim that remote work strengthens culture. Many warn instead of cultural drift, diluted values and social disconnection. Some organizations manage to offset this with intent and strong digital processes, but if it takes significant structure to recreate what used to happen naturally, it raises the question of overall value.” “Perhaps the biggest issue isn’t about process, but mindset. Remote working has accelerated what I call “I-thinking” - the belief that “I’m happier and more productive at home,” without considering the wider “we.” “Every organization has two groups: those who are thriving and clear on their role, and those who are new, learning or struggling.” “That’s why many companies are building in structured, intentional in-person moments. Not to control, but to connect. These are opportunities to re-establish shared purpose, exchange energy, and align priorities in ways digital tools alone can’t.” “…dispersed teams struggle to innovate at scale.” “Leaders now have to navigate this with empathy, not edict.” “…the value of office time lies in purposeful presence, not simply physical attendance.” “This was never just a debate about where people sit. It’s a question of how culture lives.” Thanks to my HOK colleague Catherine Yatrakis, AIA, LEED AP for sharing.

I read this article sadly could not agree with the views of the author. I can count on both hands the people who I am connected with who are neurodivergent and lost there jobs this week due to crippling office working. IT DOES NOT WORK... yes I am shouting, as no one is listening to the real needs of their employees. Jane Sparrow recent Forbes piece suggests that leaders must revisit remote work because proximity fuels creativity, mentoring, and cohesion. But this perspective risks romanticising office culture while ignoring the structural inequities and outdated assumptions that underpin it. 1. The “culture erosion” argument is flawed. Culture isn’t built by proximity, it’s built by trust, clarity, and shared purpose. If a team’s values dilute without physical presence, that’s a failure of leadership, not location. processes can sustain. Moreover, the idea that informal office moments are irreplaceable dismisses the intentionality and accessibility of remote-first models. 2. The “new starters need proximity” claim lacks nuance. Yes, onboarding and mentoring require support, but proximity doesn’t guarantee it. Many new employees feel isolated in offices too, especially in hierarchical or exclusionary environments. When remote models are designed well, they offer structured mentoring, clearer documentation, and more equitable access to leadership. Ultimately, the real issue is whether organisations invest in inclusive systems, not whether people share a postcode. 3. The “innovation suffers remotely” narrative is selective. Citing a Harvard study that remote workers complete more tasks but fewer breakthroughs ignores the diversity of innovation itself. Many breakthroughs come from deep work, collaboration often stifled in noisy, performative office spaces. Therefore, the assumption that creativity thrives only in physical proximity marginalises those who innovate differently, such as us Neurodiverse folk. 4. The “we-thinking vs I-thinking” dichotomy is reductive. Framing remote work as selfish overlooks its systemic benefits: reduced carbon footprint, broader talent pools, and improved wellbeing. It also dismisses the lived experience of disabled, neurodiverse, or caregiving employees for whom office mandates are exclusionary. Collective performance doesn’t require collective presence, it requires collective design. 5. The “hybrid done well” mantra still centres control. Even when framed as flexible, hybrid models often default to office-first norms. The “three days or out” approach isn’t nuance, it’s coercion. True flexibility means trusting people to choose how they work best, not what suits legacy leadership styles. And we must ask, who benefits financially from return-first models? Often, it’s those with commercial real estate interests, consultancy packages, or leadership visibility tied to physical presence. so I have to ask Is this about people, or about profit and filling empty office spaces?

The Psychology Behind the Onsite vs. Remote Work Few workplace debates are as emotionally charged as the one between onsite and remote work. But beneath the surface of “productivity” and “collaboration,” there’s something deeper happening, a clash of human psychology, trust, and identity. Before 2020, the office wasn’t just a workplace; it was a symbol of purpose. Arriving on time, sitting among colleagues, and being visible to leadership created a sense of belonging and validation. Psychologists call this “social proof of effort” when being seen working becomes a proxy for being valuable. Remote work disrupted that signal completely. Suddenly, the contribution became invisible. Managers lost their visual cues of engagement. Employees lost daily micro-interactions that reinforced status and connection. Yet, research tells an interesting story. A 2023 Stanford study found that hybrid and remote workers were 13% more productive on average, largely due to fewer interruptions and better focus. Meanwhile, the Harvard Business Review notes that teams with clear outcome-based performance systems experience higher engagement and trust in remote settings than those still relying on physical presence. So why the resistance? Because humans equate presence with control. For many leaders, seeing their teams in person restores a sense of certainty. And for many employees, going to the office fulfills a basic psychological need, relatedness, one of the three pillars of self-determination theory (along with autonomy and competence). But autonomy, the freedom to decide when and where to work, has now become equally vital to motivation. Take that away, and performance doesn’t just dip; intrinsic motivation erodes. So, what’s the real lesson here? It’s not that onsite or remote work is inherently better. It’s that organizations must learn to lead psychologically, not geographically to replace visibility with trust, supervision with clarity, and presence with purpose. The future of work isn’t about location. It’s about how deeply we understand what drives human behavior when no one is watching. #RemoteWork #HybridWork #Leadership #Psychology #FutureOfWork #Productivity #FaisalButt