New study settles boardroom debate: Is WFH better than in-office?
PTC News Desk: The ongoing debate over remote work versus in-office work has been reignited by a new research study showing lower productivity for remote workers. Economists from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California, Los Angeles conducted the study, randomly assigning newly hired data entry workers in India to either work from home or the office. The results revealed that those working from home full-time were 18% less productive than their in-office counterparts.
Interestingly, even remote workers who preferred working from home were found to be less productive than those who would have preferred working in the office. The drop in productivity for remote workers was evident from the start, with two-thirds of the difference observed on the first day of work. The remaining gap appeared over time as in-office workers learned more quickly than fully remote workers.
The study adds to the ongoing debate in boardrooms and academic circles since the pandemic thrust remote work into the mainstream. Both sides can now cite research to support their views, whether it aligns with Jamie Dimon's skepticism about remote work or Brian Chesky's pro-flexibility stance.
Jose Maria Barrero, an economist and co-founder of WFH Research, notes that this study is consistent with others indicating that fully remote work is less productive than in-person or hybrid work arrangements. Nevertheless, the cost-saving benefits of remote work may still make it worthwhile for some companies.
However, productivity research faces challenges due to the unique circumstances of newly hired workers in the study. Results may differ for employees who transition to fully remote work after spending considerable time on-site.
The study doesn't offer definitive solutions for managers navigating the complexities of hybrid work, which remains the dominant model in the US. Consulting firm McKinsey & Co.'s large-scale analysis of its own workforce found that spending about 50 per cent of time on-site was optimal for hybrid work. Going beyond that compromised flexibility and focus time without improving performance. Other randomized control trial research showed that hybrid arrangements had no significant impact on productivity, but they did result in happier employees less likely to leave.
The nuances of hybrid work should be kept in mind when discussing the productivity of remote work. Many studies criticizing remote work mainly focus on fully remote arrangements, whereas for most people, hybrid work matters the most.
MIT's David Atkin also suggests that the future likely lies somewhere between full work-from-home and full in-office arrangements. The ongoing discussion revolves around finding the right balance on the work-from-home spectrum.
- With inputs from agencies
