Published on: July 16, 2026 at 1:45 pm
One of the newest and biggest divisions between corporate leaders and workers is the return-to-office demands after years of supporting remote work from home. An increasing number of companies are demanding that their employees come back to the office and, in many cases, five days a week.
Academy of Management Scholar Adam Galinsky of Columbia Business School notes that employees accept the need to be in the office two or three days a week. But they despise inflexible requirements that summarily demand being in the office every day. With many executives taking a hard line with draconian mandates, a fault line between management and employees is deepening.
“Most organizations are issuing demands, ‘I want people in the office more, no ifs, ands or buts,’ but they are not explaining why it’s going to benefit their employees in their productivity or in their careers,” Galinsky said. “It just comes across as a form of control.
“As a result, people push back and try to reestablish their own control,” he said. “People start to game the system; for example, some people come into the office just to use the gym and then go home.”
Galinsky argued that if leaders believe there are benefits from in-person coordination and mentoring, then they must explain how their return-to-office mandates are producing these benefits. And they need to explain why those benefits can’t be achieved through a hybrid schedule that offers flexibility. It requires more than simply ordering people back to the office five days a week with a “because I said so.” Leaders need to not only specify the rationale but also demonstrate its validity.
“I worked with one company to create a system where new and more junior employees came in five days a week, but then as they developed necessary skills, they could come in four days a week,” Galinsky said. “At the same time, more senior people could come in two-to-three days a week, but those in-person days had to be focused solely on mentorship and collaboration.
“They couldn’t just come in and go into their office and close the door,” he said. “They could be in the office less if they took on the obligations of leadership and mentorship seriously while in the office.”
