How AI could kill the return to office

From Silicon Valley to Wall Street, many executives think that bringing employees back to the office is the secret to restoring productivity. But they’re wrong. That’s not what’s happening in those newly populated offices.

Instead, your employees are more likely to be joining video calls from company desks and wearing noise-canceling headphones while doing work they could have done at home. Only now they’re paying $20 to commute and eating sad desk salads to get through the day. 

The timing couldn’t be more ironic. A new wave of return-to-office (RTO) mandates arrive just as companies pour millions into AI initiatives designed to automate work, eliminate roles, and drive bottom-line efficiency. 

Leaders advocate for AI as the engine of the future, one that can streamline and modernize how work gets done. So, why are they forcing people back into offices designed for workflows that AI is actively making obsolete? 

Recent research shows what many employees have known all along: RTO mandates don’t improve productivity, innovation, or team connection. But they do weaken morale and accelerate attrition. 

If companies want better long-term performance, they might consider paying attention to the employee experience instead of treating it as a footnote to investor expectations. And they should also recognize that unpopular RTO policies reflect a deeper tension—one that AI is making increasingly clear.

The Quiet Part Out Loud

RTO mandates aren’t failing because the concept of in-person collaboration is flawed. They’re failing because the justifications are. 

Executives keep saying they want to “rebuild culture,” but the real motives often tell a different story: investor pressure, management’s discomfort with remote autonomy, or the convenient use of office mandates as a cover for workforce reduction. 

At a time when AI is openly positioned as a way to reduce labor costs, some companies appear to be using RTO as a secondary mechanism to achieve this, nudging employees to quit so severance costs stay low. It’s a cost-saving strategy dressed up as culture building. When employees become line items, distrust becomes the default operating model.

Other companies are stuck in the past, clinging to the office as a symbol of managerial control. But if an employee underperforms remotely, geography isn’t the issue. Leadership is.

At its core, the return-to-office push reflects a deeper tension: companies urgently investing in technologies that decentralize and automate work, while simultaneously doubling down on physical presence as proof of productivity. It’s a contradiction that exposes a lack of coherent strategy for the future of work.

Two Transitions Collide: AI and the Office

As AI reshapes job responsibilities and absorbs repetitive tasks, two seismic organizational transitions are happening at once: shrinking the demand for human labor and shrinking the relevance of the physical office. It’s not hard to see how these forces collide.

Some leaders seem to be using office presence to manage this uncertainty, both to subtly reduce headcount and to maintain control during a period when technology threatens traditional hierarchies. 

But proximity isn’t a proxy for performance and visibility won’t stop AI from transforming work. If anything, it simply delays the hard strategic conversations leaders need to have.

What Actually Works

A more effective approach asks deeper questions about the work itself. Which activities genuinely benefit from real-time, in-person creativity? Which roles depend on deep focus? Where does mentorship thrive? And crucially, what does our data (not nostalgia) tell us?

At my firm, Orgvue, we took the time to analyze our own workflows end-to-end before deciding on an office working policy. And we found that our product teams saw real value from whiteboarding sessions in a physical space, while our customer success teams performed better with the flexibility to work from wherever made sense for their client base. A one-size-fits-all approach would have failed both groups.

To enhance these in-office interactions, we redesigned our workspaces to introduce collaboration hubs for teamwork, quiet areas for deep work, and a podcast studio—because modern work demands modern tools. People come into the office when it makes sense, not because a memo told them to.

The Trust Test

When companies issue blanket RTO mandates, they send a very clear signal: “We don’t trust you.” That’s a dangerous message at a time when competitors are winning talent with flexibility and autonomy.

So, before you mandate a return to the office, it might be helpful to ask yourself the following questions:

• Can we prove with data that office presence improves productivity for specific teams?
• Have we designed an office people actually want to come to?
• Are we solving productivity challenges or satisfying executive preference?

Skip these questions, and you may learn an expensive lesson: your best people have options, and they’re not afraid to use them.

The Bottom Line

U.S. businesses are at a crossroads. Those that demand five days in the office will be competing against those offering more flexible work arrangements. And when it comes to technology investment, the irony is clear. While companies invest heavily in AI to improve efficiency, agility, and independence, they’re simultaneously enforcing policies that undermine all three.

In short, the organizations that succeed will be the ones that align their work models with their technology strategies. That means embracing autonomy and data-driven insight rather than badge swipes.

Want higher productivity? Fix your management practices. Want better collaboration? Design better systems. Want more engaged employees? Trust them to do their jobs. Because if you need to see someone to believe they’re working, the problem isn’t remote work, and AI is about to make that painfully obvious.