• coyotino [he/him]@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    I truly think it’s just the corporate real estate thing. Those 80% that regret return to office are CEOs that weighed the loss from real estate contracts against the blowback from forcing employees back to office, and they are saying that they feel they made the wrong decision.

    I might argue this statistic also shows that 80% of CEOs underestimate the value of their employees. Not exactly a hot take in 2023, but it’s fun to put a number to it.

    • dom@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I dont understand this real estate thing. Cancelling contracts or having empty space is still cheaper than everyone back in the office.

      More people in the office means more maintenance, more snacks, more hvac needs, etc.

      • ricecake@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you have an unutilized asset, there’s pressure to get rid of it for the cost savings.
        If you sell your asset at a loss, it looks bad for you and the company. Same for paying cancelation fees.

        If you legitimately think that you’re going to need that space in the future, for example because you think that we’ll find an equilibrium between “everyone work from office” and where we are now, and that we’re trending towards an organic level of office need/desire higher than we’re at now, you might see selling now as the first step to needing to buy again later, likely for higher than you sold for. So you try to “mandate” the equilibrium that you expect so you’re not in a position to have to explain why you’re holding onto a dead and losing value property.

        Executives spend a lot of time talking to people and having meetings. The job selects for people who thrive on and value face to face communication. Naturally, they overestimate how much that social aspect of the job is true for everyone else, so they estimate that the equilibrium will have a lot more office time than other people would.
        To make it worse, the more power you have to influence that decision, the more likely you are to have a similar bias.

        This isn’t an excuse of course, since you can overcome that bias simply by telling teams to discuss what their ideal working arrangement would be, and then running a survey. Now you have data, and you can use it to try to scale offices to what you actually want.