So... a few anecdotes packed together is the new journalism?
Fact of the matter is, an office is an outdated method of working with today's technology. It just took a pandemic for the general public to realise this. You pay for a commute that's not necessary, you pay with your time (that you're not paid for) to get there (time that you could be spending on family, or something else), and depending on where you work, you're probably smelling 100s of people's sweat every day, and taking in, and contributing to, a whole lot pollution.
The problem is that managers want to see people working and an office environment is perfect for this purpose. I would be surprised if anything really changes in this regard long-term, other than in a few outlying cases.
That's the problem with looking at a limited number of opinions, I've seen a different consensus in people I've spoken to. Only 1 person (out of around 30) expressed a desire to remain completely remote and never go back to the office, while the rest favoured a hybrid approach. None of those I talked to (including a couple in the C-suite) expressed a desire to return to the office full-time.
There is no wish to come in.
What you're ending up with is that neither the people who want to be remote nor the people who were OK with going in specifically for pre-pandemic office are interested in going in. I'm not sure how well hybrid works and there will probably be some shifting around as a result.
One challenge is that this means that in-office people that were used to everyone being physically present will largely have to adapt for many meetings (for example) to operate as if everyone were remote.
But that is mainly because my family figured out I work from home and because I work from home they think they can just drop by anytime they like and demand my attention. I have asked a number of them "If I worked at an office would you drop my workplace unannounced because your son has broken his xbox controller (for the third time?)", the answer has been pretty much "ofcause not", so why do you think its acceptable.
I did ponder renting some office space near to home but it's cheaper to be a bit of an arsehole, tell the family "I've rented an office to prevent interruptions during my work day" and just ignore the door then it was to rent space :-P
However I don't have kids which would be more difficult to ignore while working from home. I just have to put up with the neighbourhood cats (including my own) interrupting me now and then, the cat from 2 doors up the street just jumped though the top window of my office to pinch some leftovers and is now raiding my cats toy box for a catnip toy.
But I have the benefit of a) having spare space in my home for a home office b) very little interrupts while at home c) great neighbours d) very good internet connectivity where I live (not excellent as I'm still waiting for 5G and FTTP, but I do have good 4G as a backup connection when needed). If any one of those were missing I would be seeking to either move or acquire office space to fullfill those needs.
From the people I talked to it is mixed with the majority wanting no more than 3 days, with most going for 2 days at home the rest in the office. The Hybrid model...
The amount of decisions, and knowledge that is passed around in a given office with just idle in person chats in the hallways or inpromptu meetings pretty large in many organizations, this everyday knowledge transfer does not happen in WFH, or happens less often, this can lead to things being missed, people being left out of the loop, etc.
Also it really depends on if a person a location in their home that can dedicate to an Office, that can be door closed off for meetings, and have no / limited interruptions.
I know a few people that do not have a spare room or other space to dedicate to that, so WFH for them is using the Kitchen table, or a desk in the living room that is not ideal... People like this generally prefer to be in the office.
hmm I experience it every day, where I over hear something in the hallway that another team it working on, that impacts my team.
This is especially true for IT depts who are often the last to know about something when they should be included from the Jump...
but sure just deny my 20+ years experience and insert yours as more valid that mine...
I am sure what you experience is true for you, and I am sure as I said in my original comment my experience my not be true for a company that has been WFH as primary for years, or from their formation.
However if you work for a 60+ year old company that until 2020 never had any WFH then just try to graft on WFH, that is going to be an issue
If this is how you are finding out about things that impact your team, then your company’s communication and planning is broken and work from office is a bandaid enabling that. Wfh forces good process as it’s not sustainable without it.
Extremely large quantities of money have been removed from the business models of traditional, worker-employing journalism and redirected to Google, Facebook etc. to the point where I don't understand how any of the traditional old school businesses remain functioning at all. Hell, Craigslist struggles, and Craigslist was an early wave of the internet hurting what newspapers do.
"Yep. All ad money went to zuck, brin, and page" is glib, but does not deserve this degree of downvoting. In important ways, it's the truth.
I'm sure that ad spending has shifted online, but traditional media companies have been losing audience before Google launched News and Facebook started to dominate. There's plenty to blame, and the web as a whole probably played a part, but I'm not sure it's the primary driver. Before there were online alternatives, there was TV or just not getting "the news" at all. Relying on not having competition feels like a bad idea with regards to being a sustainable business.
This is a breath of fresh air, finally some cost-benefit analysis is being done on what was a very hasty set of decisions.