Leaders Clinging to a Bygone Era

Andy Jassy’s 5-day in-office mandate drags Amazon back to the male-dominated workplace models of the past that no longer fit today's reality.

By Grishma Jashapara, Managing Partner at Fusion Associates.

Amazon's CEO, Andy Jassy, recently announced that employees are required to return to the office five days a week. The fallout: 91% of 2,585 Amazon employees surveyed are unhappy with the return-to-office policy, with 73% considering job searches and many candidates reportedly withdrawing applications.

Leaders like Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase and Elon Musk of Tesla have made similar mandates, highlighting the gap between traditional leadership models and the changing expectations of employees.

The workplace has reached a critical juncture, where traditional structures no longer align with the demands of the current workforce. Many companies remain tethered to practices that were designed for a society over a century ago, when men dominated the workforce and women stayed home. These outdated systems have ceased to accommodate the realities of today’s employees, particularly women and caregivers.

Historically, companies have prioritised profit maximisation over employee welfare. However, with societal values shifting, there is a growing emphasis on the rights and well-being of workers. Employees are not content any more to be treated as expendable resources; they expect respect, balance, and meaningful engagement in their work. Leaders who don’t adapt, risk declining morale, increased attrition, and damage to their company’s reputation. While profit generation remains essential, neglecting employee well-being ultimately threatens productivity and long-term success, as creativity, loyalty, and engagement are deeply tied to job satisfaction. Failing to meet employee needs can result in absenteeism, disengagement, and higher recruitment costs.

Having experienced the flexibility and autonomy of remote work, employees are now less willing to sacrifice those benefits for a rigid office-based schedule. They are not advocating for fully remote work, however they do seek a balanced hybrid approach, typically with 2-3 days in the office. Employees recognise the value of in-person collaboration, but understand that it can be strategically planned rather than required daily.

Psychological Profile of Leaders Pushing for a Full Return to the Office

Rigid return-to-office mandates are not just about numbers; they stem from a psychological adherence to hierarchical control, reflecting a lack of trust in employees' professionalism. By equating physical presence with productivity, such leaders disregard the progress and tools that have proven remote work can be equally, if not more, effective.

Many of these leaders, predominantly from privileged backgrounds, often white and male, may struggle to fully grasp the challenges faced by a more diverse workforce. Their experiences within systems that traditionally benefited them can limit their empathy and understanding of the varied needs of women, caregivers, and underrepresented groups. Their preference for familiar, hierarchical management structures reflects a hesitation to embrace new working models that emphasise flexibility and trust. In doing so, they risk alienating their workforce, undermining innovation, and hampering their organisations’ potential for long-term success.

What Research Says About Hybrid Productivity

Leaders often cite productivity as a key reason for return-to-office mandates, but as research continues to disprove this claim, such justifications seem increasingly disingenuous. While certain industries or functions may require more frequent in-office presence, a growing body of evidence shows that many professional roles can thrive in a hybrid or remote model without sacrificing productivity:

A June 2024 study by the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR), one of the largest controlled trials on hybrid work, found no negative impact on productivity or promotions in hybrid models.

Key findings include:

• Productivity and promotions were unaffected by hybrid work.

• Resignations dropped by 33%, especially among women, non-managers, and long commuters.

• Hybrid workers saved the company millions in attrition costs​.

A 2024 PwC survey revealed that organisations with hybrid or remote work models reported improved performance and productivity. However, the report noted that maintaining trust and engagement remained a challenge as companies worked to balance flexibility with in-office collaboration​.

The 2023 Owl Labs Report found that 60% of hybrid workers felt more productive working from home, with over 85% of companies promoting hybrid work due to its positive effects on employee satisfaction and output​.

The 2023 Microsoft Work Trend Index further supports these findings, revealing that 85% of leaders still express concerns about productivity in hybrid settings, despite tangible increases in activity metrics.

Even though flexibility has clear proven benefits, some leaders continue to equate physical presence with productivity. This belief is often rooted in "productivity paranoia," where a lack of trust in employees' ability to work unsupervised drives these mandates.

Together, these studies paint a compelling picture: hybrid work not only maintains productivity but enhances employee retention and satisfaction, proving that flexibility should be seen not as a concession but as an opportunity.

The Hypocrisy of DEI and Sustainability in Office Mandates

5-day return-to-office mandates reveal a troubling inconsistency in companies’ stated commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Remote work has been vital for women and underrepresented groups, enabling them to balance professional and caregiving duties. Mandating a full return ignores these realities and raises doubts about the authenticity of DEI commitments.

The environmental sustainability commitments of these companies also come into question. Remote work significantly reduces carbon emissions by cutting out daily commutes, contributing to a more sustainable future. Leaders who insist on daily office attendance demonstrate a clear prioritisation of entrenched behaviours over genuine environmental responsibility.

David vs. Goliath - Who Will Shape Tomorrow's Workplace?

Despite the push for a full return to the office by corporate giants like Amazon, JPMorgan Chase, and Tesla, the outcome of this tug-of-war remains uncertain. While only a few behemoths are enforcing rigid policies, their sheer size and influence make this a David vs. Goliath battle for the future of work. These companies wield substantial power and can set precedents for other organisations, but they face growing resistance from employees and even smaller companies, who are pushing for flexibility. The stakes are high – not only for employee well-being and corporate culture but for the very future of how and where we work. The battle is far from settled, and the question remains: Will companies adapt to the changing expectations of their workforce, or will they force a return to antiquated ways of working, risking long-term success?

Adding to this uncertainty is the question of how a new generation of Gen Z leaders will shape the future of work. Gen Z has grown up in a digital-first world, and many of them experienced remote work as the default during their formative professional years. This generation values flexibility, autonomy, and a purpose-driven approach to work. As they begin to ascend into leadership roles, they may be more inclined to embrace hybrid or remote work models and build cultures that prioritise work-life balance, inclusivity, and technological innovation. Gen Z leaders are likely to see rigid office mandates as relics of the past, choosing instead to leverage the benefits of remote work while also creating collaborative, inclusive environments. The question then becomes: Will these emerging leaders tip the balance in favour of a more flexible, modern workplace, or will they be forced to conform to the traditional structures imposed by their predecessors?

From Tradition to Innovation

Ethical leadership involves recognising the interconnectedness between employee well-being and a company’s success. Companies that invest in their employees, respect their personal circumstances, and align policies with broader social and environmental goals will enhance their ethical standing, drive innovation and secure sustainable success in a competitive market. Leaders who resist change risk becoming relics of a bygone era.

---

About Fusion Associates

Since 1998, Fusion Associates has been placing experienced professionals across the globe within consumer markets including consumer goods, fashion, sporting goods, healthy living and luxury.

Environmental, humanitarian, social and political concerns are close to the Partners both in and out of the business. We pride ourselves in partnering with industry leaders who wish to contribute to a better, more sustainable future. Working with global companies that are at the forefront of innovating and integrating sustainability into the heart of their business, we have helped build purpose-led teams from leadership to subject experts in biodiversity and animal welfare.