By David Van Dijcke, Florian Gunsilius and Austin Lee Wright Paper cited by Enrique Dans in his blog (link in first comment). The paper research tenure after mandate of return to office in three large IT companies in USA (Microsoft, SpaceX and Apple) Just before the conclusion authors write: "Taken together, this large body of literature implies that increased attrition of senior employees can substantially impede firm output, productivity, innovation, and competitiveness. This provides an important perspective on the implications of the return to office for the broader functioning of a company." In the conclusion we can read: "In particular, we provide causal evidence that three of the largest US tech companies – Microsoft, SpaceX, and Apple – faced a significant outflow of employees after implementing an RTO mandate, with more senior employees leaving at higher rates." "Moreover, we provide both descriptive and causal evidence that these senior employees left for larger companies at higher rates than usual. Taken together, our findings imply that return to office mandates can imply significant human capital costs in terms of output, productivity, innovation, and competitiveness for the companies that implement them" https://lnkd.in/dMBNpn9W
Eduardo Hinojosa的动态
最相关的动态
-
Managing Director, Org Effectiveness at changeforce | Fractional Chief of Staff at *Your Company*
File this under O for obvious. "Taken together, our findings imply that return to office mandates can imply significant human capital costs in terms of output, productivity, innovation, and competitiveness for the companies that implement them," the report reads. Thanks Clay Parker Jones for sharing.
Apple, SpaceX, Microsoft return-to-office mandates drove senior talent away
arstechnica.com
-
Growing our capability to innovate and bringing new technology to the health system faster.
Turns out Return to Office (RTO) policies need a rethink if you value senior staff and length of service/tenure. The three companies analysed lost these types of staff trying to bring them back into the office with most heading to competitors. A bit different to the predominant narrative.
Apple, SpaceX, Microsoft return-to-office mandates drove senior talent away
arstechnica.com
-
Strategic Business Leader | Digital Transformation & Innovation | Driving Growth, Organizational Effectiveness & Large-Scale Change
Could this (finally) be the nail in the coffin in the debate around return-to-office (RTO) policies? New research (link below) reveals a troubling, but unsurprising, trend: RTO mandates at tech giants like Microsoft, SpaceX, and Apple are leading to a brain drain of senior talent. Using a remarkable dataset of 260 million resumes matched to company data, the researchers found that post-RTO: ?? Employee tenure declined significantly, especially among those with longer tenures. ?? The distribution of seniority levels shifted leftward, with fewer employees in senior roles. ?? Senior employees were more likely to depart for larger, competing firms. Why does this matter? Senior employees possess invaluable institutional knowledge, diverse internal networks, and leadership experience - assets that are extremely costly to replace. Even more intriguing, the data suggests that their departure risks undermining productivity, innovation, and long-term competitiveness! The findings were consistent across Microsoft, SpaceX, and Apple, suggesting common underlying dynamics driven by RTO policies. As jobs continue to change, skill shifts accelerate, and the war for talent intensifies, leaders must give honest, informed thought to what is truly driving their RTO decisions. My position remains the same - The future of work is one characterized by flexibility and work-life balance, not rigid mandates as to where work actually gets done. Yes, this will require new ways to think about talent management, it will require new tools and techniques. Mandating a return to an office seems, simply, a lazy way out of doing the hard work of developing the skills and knowledge necessary to be a successful leader in the competitive environment of today. Curious to hear your thoughts! #futureofwork #remotework #rto #talentmanagement https://lnkd.in/eCWRWZBB
wright-return-to-office.pdf
harris.uchicago.edu
-
Stanford Professor | LinkedIn Top Voice In Remote Work | Co-Founder wfhresearch.com | Speaker on work from home
Three papers analyzed 1200+ US Return to Office policies, all presented at the Stanford conference this week. Summary findings: A) RTOs have no impact on *future* profits or stock returns B) RTOs are more likely after poor *historic* profits and stock returns C) RTOs are more likely in companies with older, male CEOs D) RTOs are more likely for companies in large cities with cheap office space E) RTOs lead to the exit of employees, particularly more tenured employees F) RTOs lead to reductions in employee sentiment (e.g. on Glassdoor) Collectively, they appear to be some mix of: 1) Driven by CEO personal views - CEO age and gender matter a lot 2) Policies to reverse/bury bad news - they happen after results turn bad 3) Headcount reductions/delayering - employees quit, particularly managers Source papers: - "Determinants and Consequences of Return to Office Policies" by Sean F., Andra Ghent and Vasudha Nair, 2024 Cornell and Utah research paper - "Return to Office Mandates" by Mark Ma, 2024, Pittsburgh research paper - "Return to office and tenure distribution" by David Van Dijcke, Florian Gunsilius and Austin L. Wright 2024 Chicago, Emory and Michigan research paper Thanks to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Hoover Institution, Stanford University for hosting
-
-
Happy Workplaces, Productive Teams | Cultural Anthropologist & Company Culture Expert | Helping Leaders Build Strong Cultures Where Employees & Businesses Thrive | Speaker | CEO @ Culture Grove
Again, the data show RTO mandates are not the best way forward. If you are looking for ways for your team to be more collaborative and innovative, don’t rely on old methods. Be creative and supportive of the people who you want to innovate.
Stanford Professor | LinkedIn Top Voice In Remote Work | Co-Founder wfhresearch.com | Speaker on work from home
Three papers analyzed 1200+ US Return to Office policies, all presented at the Stanford conference this week. Summary findings: A) RTOs have no impact on *future* profits or stock returns B) RTOs are more likely after poor *historic* profits and stock returns C) RTOs are more likely in companies with older, male CEOs D) RTOs are more likely for companies in large cities with cheap office space E) RTOs lead to the exit of employees, particularly more tenured employees F) RTOs lead to reductions in employee sentiment (e.g. on Glassdoor) Collectively, they appear to be some mix of: 1) Driven by CEO personal views - CEO age and gender matter a lot 2) Policies to reverse/bury bad news - they happen after results turn bad 3) Headcount reductions/delayering - employees quit, particularly managers Source papers: - "Determinants and Consequences of Return to Office Policies" by Sean F., Andra Ghent and Vasudha Nair, 2024 Cornell and Utah research paper - "Return to Office Mandates" by Mark Ma, 2024, Pittsburgh research paper - "Return to office and tenure distribution" by David Van Dijcke, Florian Gunsilius and Austin L. Wright 2024 Chicago, Emory and Michigan research paper Thanks to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Hoover Institution, Stanford University for hosting
-
-
Founder | Global Headliner Speaker | Seasoned Futurist | Leadership & Systems Theorist & Practitioner | 10,000x Leaders, 1000x Talks, 100x Innovation Programs, 6x Books, 3x TV Shows | Engaged Dad
***Return To Office Warning*** What I sensed intuitively has been born out by a number of studies, summarized brilliantly by Nick Bloom: Return To Office mandates are primarily a reaction to poor performance and the assumptions by older, maler, and I’d speculate whiter senior leaders who assume: Profitability = visible “hard” work = presenteism. As opposed to, in the VUCA reality: Profitability = great strategy + innovation + great leadership for energized execution. And the impact of RTO mandates on employee loyalty, psychological safety, and, I’d wager, attracting the most innovative talent is major. My speculation, given how many senior leaders and middle managers we develop and coach, is that those that care most about their families, about balance, about being respected and trusted… are also the most likely to be high-impact transformational leaders and so the most likely to quit with poorly framed, reactive RTO mandates. Wrong side of history. #leadership #transformationalleadership #innovation #RTO #futureofwork
Stanford Professor | LinkedIn Top Voice In Remote Work | Co-Founder wfhresearch.com | Speaker on work from home
Three papers analyzed 1200+ US Return to Office policies, all presented at the Stanford conference this week. Summary findings: A) RTOs have no impact on *future* profits or stock returns B) RTOs are more likely after poor *historic* profits and stock returns C) RTOs are more likely in companies with older, male CEOs D) RTOs are more likely for companies in large cities with cheap office space E) RTOs lead to the exit of employees, particularly more tenured employees F) RTOs lead to reductions in employee sentiment (e.g. on Glassdoor) Collectively, they appear to be some mix of: 1) Driven by CEO personal views - CEO age and gender matter a lot 2) Policies to reverse/bury bad news - they happen after results turn bad 3) Headcount reductions/delayering - employees quit, particularly managers Source papers: - "Determinants and Consequences of Return to Office Policies" by Sean F., Andra Ghent and Vasudha Nair, 2024 Cornell and Utah research paper - "Return to Office Mandates" by Mark Ma, 2024, Pittsburgh research paper - "Return to office and tenure distribution" by David Van Dijcke, Florian Gunsilius and Austin L. Wright 2024 Chicago, Emory and Michigan research paper Thanks to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Hoover Institution, Stanford University for hosting
-
-
Consultant | NE Director | Leadership | Strategy | Culture | People | Process | Kindness | ????? | ??
WFH evidence is in - staff being 5dpw in the office is *not* optimal for organisations. Are you in the debate right now? Here's the evidence you need to argue the the hybrid / remote case.
Stanford Professor | LinkedIn Top Voice In Remote Work | Co-Founder wfhresearch.com | Speaker on work from home
Three papers analyzed 1200+ US Return to Office policies, all presented at the Stanford conference this week. Summary findings: A) RTOs have no impact on *future* profits or stock returns B) RTOs are more likely after poor *historic* profits and stock returns C) RTOs are more likely in companies with older, male CEOs D) RTOs are more likely for companies in large cities with cheap office space E) RTOs lead to the exit of employees, particularly more tenured employees F) RTOs lead to reductions in employee sentiment (e.g. on Glassdoor) Collectively, they appear to be some mix of: 1) Driven by CEO personal views - CEO age and gender matter a lot 2) Policies to reverse/bury bad news - they happen after results turn bad 3) Headcount reductions/delayering - employees quit, particularly managers Source papers: - "Determinants and Consequences of Return to Office Policies" by Sean F., Andra Ghent and Vasudha Nair, 2024 Cornell and Utah research paper - "Return to Office Mandates" by Mark Ma, 2024, Pittsburgh research paper - "Return to office and tenure distribution" by David Van Dijcke, Florian Gunsilius and Austin L. Wright 2024 Chicago, Emory and Michigan research paper Thanks to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Hoover Institution, Stanford University for hosting
-
-
A really interesting big n analysis of return to work policies in the US. I am not really surprised by the findings.
Stanford Professor | LinkedIn Top Voice In Remote Work | Co-Founder wfhresearch.com | Speaker on work from home
Three papers analyzed 1200+ US Return to Office policies, all presented at the Stanford conference this week. Summary findings: A) RTOs have no impact on *future* profits or stock returns B) RTOs are more likely after poor *historic* profits and stock returns C) RTOs are more likely in companies with older, male CEOs D) RTOs are more likely for companies in large cities with cheap office space E) RTOs lead to the exit of employees, particularly more tenured employees F) RTOs lead to reductions in employee sentiment (e.g. on Glassdoor) Collectively, they appear to be some mix of: 1) Driven by CEO personal views - CEO age and gender matter a lot 2) Policies to reverse/bury bad news - they happen after results turn bad 3) Headcount reductions/delayering - employees quit, particularly managers Source papers: - "Determinants and Consequences of Return to Office Policies" by Sean F., Andra Ghent and Vasudha Nair, 2024 Cornell and Utah research paper - "Return to Office Mandates" by Mark Ma, 2024, Pittsburgh research paper - "Return to office and tenure distribution" by David Van Dijcke, Florian Gunsilius and Austin L. Wright 2024 Chicago, Emory and Michigan research paper Thanks to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Hoover Institution, Stanford University for hosting
-
-
Chief People Officer | DRH | 15 ans+ dans la Tech | International Stratégie RH | Organisation | Leadership | Talent | Transformation | RSE | Acquisition | Marketplace | eCommerce | SaaS | Travel | Mobilité | Cloud
??Super interesting summary of quantitative research for those interested in better understanding the real reasons behind Return To the Office policies and the impacts it has…or not ! ??Links to the research papers in Nick’s first comment I know some who won’t be able to hide anymore ?? #RTO #remote
Stanford Professor | LinkedIn Top Voice In Remote Work | Co-Founder wfhresearch.com | Speaker on work from home
Three papers analyzed 1200+ US Return to Office policies, all presented at the Stanford conference this week. Summary findings: A) RTOs have no impact on *future* profits or stock returns B) RTOs are more likely after poor *historic* profits and stock returns C) RTOs are more likely in companies with older, male CEOs D) RTOs are more likely for companies in large cities with cheap office space E) RTOs lead to the exit of employees, particularly more tenured employees F) RTOs lead to reductions in employee sentiment (e.g. on Glassdoor) Collectively, they appear to be some mix of: 1) Driven by CEO personal views - CEO age and gender matter a lot 2) Policies to reverse/bury bad news - they happen after results turn bad 3) Headcount reductions/delayering - employees quit, particularly managers Source papers: - "Determinants and Consequences of Return to Office Policies" by Sean F., Andra Ghent and Vasudha Nair, 2024 Cornell and Utah research paper - "Return to Office Mandates" by Mark Ma, 2024, Pittsburgh research paper - "Return to office and tenure distribution" by David Van Dijcke, Florian Gunsilius and Austin L. Wright 2024 Chicago, Emory and Michigan research paper Thanks to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Hoover Institution, Stanford University for hosting
-
-
Steady, authentic leader with progressive experience. Passionate about activating potential through continuous learning and development.
Based on a growing body of evidence, RTOs seem paradoxical when organizations simultaneously tout data-driven decision making, so why is it trending when studies show negative, or at best unintended, consequences? It demonstrates a regression to top leader preference, intuition, or “gut feeling” especially when data is contraindicative. Why do leaders make decisions that seem counterintuitive, and when is it appropriate? Best practice is to make decisions that are supported by multiple reliable sources of data, whether quantitative or qualitative. Use sound judgment and tap into refined intuitive knowledge, of course, but never base decisions on intuition or preference alone, relying on sheer leader willpower to implement them. The results will never be beneficial.
Stanford Professor | LinkedIn Top Voice In Remote Work | Co-Founder wfhresearch.com | Speaker on work from home
Three papers analyzed 1200+ US Return to Office policies, all presented at the Stanford conference this week. Summary findings: A) RTOs have no impact on *future* profits or stock returns B) RTOs are more likely after poor *historic* profits and stock returns C) RTOs are more likely in companies with older, male CEOs D) RTOs are more likely for companies in large cities with cheap office space E) RTOs lead to the exit of employees, particularly more tenured employees F) RTOs lead to reductions in employee sentiment (e.g. on Glassdoor) Collectively, they appear to be some mix of: 1) Driven by CEO personal views - CEO age and gender matter a lot 2) Policies to reverse/bury bad news - they happen after results turn bad 3) Headcount reductions/delayering - employees quit, particularly managers Source papers: - "Determinants and Consequences of Return to Office Policies" by Sean F., Andra Ghent and Vasudha Nair, 2024 Cornell and Utah research paper - "Return to Office Mandates" by Mark Ma, 2024, Pittsburgh research paper - "Return to office and tenure distribution" by David Van Dijcke, Florian Gunsilius and Austin L. Wright 2024 Chicago, Emory and Michigan research paper Thanks to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Hoover Institution, Stanford University for hosting
-
SAP Consultant (SD/MM/Retail)
8 个月Link to the Enrique Dans 's blog (in spanish): https://www.enriquedans.com/2024/06/el-absurdo-retorno-a-la-oficina-y-la-obsesion-con-la-disponibilidad.html