Working in the office 5 days/week to build company culture is a myth: PwC report
A PwC report claiming that five days a week in the office are not necessary to build company culture has reignited debate over remote, hybrid, and in‑office work. Commenters trade anecdotes about productivity and “abuse” of work-from-home arrangements, with many arguing that weak management and bad incentives—not location—drive underperformance, while others say in‑person visibility and social pressure remain crucial in some organizations. Broader themes include whether companies are acting rationally in forcing returns to office, the role of consultancies and executive ego in shaping policy, and how remote work affects social bonding, health, and long‑term career dynamics.
Productivity, “Abuse,” and Management Quality
- Many argue WFH does not create new abuse; people who shirked in-office also shirk remotely.
- Others report clear WFH abuse: padded estimates, multiple jobs, long non-work activities during supposed work hours.
- Several emphasize this is fundamentally a hiring and management problem, not a location problem. Good leaders set expectations, track outcomes, and address underperformance in any mode.
- Some claim their teams became dramatically less productive when remote; others report equal or higher productivity and fewer time-wasting office rituals.
RTO Motives and Hybrid Models
- Strong suspicion that RTO is often about soft layoffs, discrimination against older/parent workers, executive ego, or preserving downtown real estate, not productivity.
- Counterpoint: some believe most companies genuinely seek better collaboration and performance, though they may measure it poorly.
- Hybrid is seen by some as “worst of both worlds” (office costs plus commuting) and by others as a practical balance that still cuts commuting and supports in-person bonding.
Culture, Bonding, and Social Needs
- Deep split:
- One camp values close in-person relationships, informal hallway/lunch chats, whiteboarding, and believes hybrid/on-site makes onboarding, trust, and collaboration easier.
- Another camp sees coworkers primarily as transactional, prefers to invest socially outside work, and finds remote perfectly sufficient (or superior) for relationships using chat/video plus occasional meetups.
- Several note that remote vs in-person needs vary by individual, role, company culture, and stage (e.g., early-stage startups vs mature firms).
PwC and Consulting Skepticism
- Many distrust PwC’s research, seeing Big 4 reports as marketing or as tools to justify decisions executives already want (including RTO).
- Others clarify that some such studies are internally funded “eminence” pieces, not client-paid hatchet jobs, but still often lack rigorous methodology.
Health, Commuting, and Externalities
- Some highlight constant illness from hybrid offices and schools, contrasted with fewer infections and vaccines as mitigation.
- Environmental and time costs of commuting and underused office real estate are cited as strong arguments for WFH.
Meta-Consensus
- Thread converges on: there is no one-size-fits-all answer. Effectiveness depends more on management, incentives, and employee preference than on location alone.