The Great Resentment

Can you imagine dying at your desk and no one noticing for four days?

Sadly, that’s what happened to Denise Prudhomme, who worked at Wells Fargo in America.

Most of you have probably heard this story by now. And it raises a deep and uncomfortable question: Are we working for people who wouldn't notice - or worse, wouldn’t care - if something happened to us?

Right now, our newsfeeds are filled with headlines about layoffs and return-to-office mandates. Two topics that often spark thoughts about employers and the level of care they have for their employees.

Some worry this tragic story might be used to justify requiring people to return to offices. After all, Denise was found in a secluded part of the office, while most of her colleagues worked remotely.

But rather than using her story to justify micromanagement or mandated in-office work, it should remind us that employees are people, not just numbers. And when workers are treated well and given the right conditions to thrive, not only do they benefit but the business benefits too.

When do workers thrive?

In my work with leaders, I always come back to four critical elements for employees to feel good and function at their best:

• Competence – we all have a desire to build our knowledge and skills.
• Autonomy – we need flexibility and choice over our work.
• Relatedness – we crave feeling connected to others.
• Purpose – we want to feel as though our work is meaningful.

When these core needs are met, employees are not only more motivated, engaged, and productive, but also more resilient and have better wellbeing. Yet, these needs will look different for every worker and organisation.

So what happens when leaders remove autonomy?

Autonomy has become a major point of contention. Giving employees the flexibility to work remotely, only to take it away, brings up the psychological principle that the pain of losing something far outweighs the joy of gaining it.

Of course, autonomy doesn’t just mean hybrid or remote work. It can involve flexibility around start and end times, breaks (hello lunchtime spin classes), or even the type of work we do and with whom we do it.

While some roles - like sales assistants or front-line workers - must be in the office, others can absolutely be done well remotely. Studies and our own experiments over recent years have shown that many organisations have achieved better outcomes - not only in terms of productivity, but also wellbeing and satisfaction - through flexible work models.

What are these decisions based on?

If leaders are requiring employees to return to the office, are they basing these decisions on data - gathered from surveys, pulse checks, or conversations with their teams? Or is this what they have deemed the solution to their current performance challenges?

Some companies believe returning to the office will drive greater connection, productivity, innovation, and creativity. But it’s critical to avoid making blanket assumptions that could erode loyalty and trust. A ‘winning culture’ (the term some have used) can’t simply be about company performance; it must also prioritise the wellbeing of its people. A workplace where employees are disengaged, exhausted, and burning out because their needs are not met surely is not a winning one.

What happens next?

I’ll be closely watching over the next 12 months to see the outcomes from companies that have mandated office returns and those that have gone fully remote.

I’m concerned about the rise of ‘hushed hybrid’ workplaces - where managers quietly allow teams to work in ways that suit them, despite official policies. While this shows leaders understand the need for autonomy, it also risks fairness and transparency within teams.

My peer, Paul Matthews , has even coined this moment as ‘The Great Resentment.’ As autonomy and flexibility are restricted, we may see more people look for roles that offer what they need. Or, with the current economic climate, will most people stay put, feeling they have little choice?

So, how are you balancing the need for connection with the autonomy needed to thrive?