SINGAPORE: In a growing trend among large corporations, some major companies have announced mandatory five-day office workweeks, prompting debate about the true motives and long-term impacts of such policies.
Observers suggest that these changes may go beyond improving collaboration and efficiency, serving as a strategic opportunity to streamline workforce management.
Tech giants Amazon and Grab have publicly committed to reinstating full-time in-office work.
Grab, a leading ride-hailing and food delivery service provider, will enforce the policy starting next month, while e-commerce heavyweight Amazon plans to implement it early next year.
Both companies assert that the shift will bolster communication, collaboration, and productivity among employees.
However, employee preferences tell a different story. A survey released by recruitment firm Robert Walters just a week ago revealed that 82% of employees favour flexible working arrangements over rigid office-based schedules.
Critics warn that forcing a return to office work could have adverse effects on talent retention.
Dr Issac Lim, founder and organizational sociologist at Anthro Insights, argued that stringent in-office policies could lead to an exodus of top talent. Speaking to CNA, he warned that rigid regulations might cause talented, high-performing employees to leave.
Dr Lim also noted that for some firms, particularly in the tech industry, the pandemic-era hiring boom has resulted in overstaffing.
He suggested that a full return to the office may be a way for companies to naturally downsize, making it easier to identify employees to lay off without overtly resorting to mass terminations.
Human resources expert Karen Teo offered a more nuanced perspective, emphasizing that an employee’s decision to stay or leave often depends on their relationship with their manager rather than a single policy.
She highlighted that while some employees thrive in office environments, others are more productive working remotely.
“You can’t clearly measure whether someone is more productive at home or in the office. What we need is a policy that is fair to everyone,” she explained to CNA.
Ms Teo also suggested that in the absence of a universally effective policy, some companies may find it simpler to mandate a full office return.
Dr Lim further critiqued the assumption that office work inherently enhances productivity, noting the potential inefficiencies introduced by workplace distractions.
Deep-thinking tasks can be more challenging in an office due to interruptions and chatter, he observed. He also highlighted that the time spent commuting could often be repurposed for more meaningful work.
On the other hand, Karen Teo, who recently joined a new company, acknowledged the benefits of in-person work for building closer relationships with colleagues.
However, she emphasized the importance of maintaining flexibility, cautioning against rigid policies, and asserting that a balanced approach is more valuable than a strict five-day office mandate.
Featured image by DepositPhotos