WFO-5DAW

Is remote work dead? Adaptation or Regression?

In addition to this newsletter, I recommend some other great ones. All free. Check them out here.

Friends,

The debate over returning to the office has surged back into the spotlight as companies strive to balance productivity with employee desires for flexibility. 90% of employers plan to implement some degree of a return-to-office (RTO) policy by the end of 2024. This tug-of-war reflects the broader uncertainties lingering in the post-pandemic landscape. And Amazon has just thrown down the gauntlet, forcing everyone back to work [Work From Office 5 Days a Week].

Remember when WFH became the new normal? I’ve experienced the full gamut. WFH, Hybrid, WFO, FWFH (Friday, work from home - where it kind of started)

On one hand, we have compelling evidence that in-person work fosters collaboration and a sense of community. Companies that prioritise physical spaces often cite improved communication and a shared culture as key drivers for a successful business. They believe that being together, exchanging ideas face-to-face, and engaging in spontaneous conversations are irreplaceable aspects of company life. This is known as the water cooler moment. It makes sense—people crave connection, and shared spaces can spark creativity and innovation.

On the other hand, we cannot ignore the equally powerful motivations behind remote work. Employees have adapted to a level of work-life balance that allows for personal autonomy. With 71% of workers expressing they feel more productive at home, it’s clear there’s a robust argument for maintaining flexibility. The shift to remote and hybrid settings has not only transformed job expectations but has also introduced new challenges—toxicity in the workplace, burnout, and the infamous “Zoom fatigue.”

This backdrop suggests that the way forward isn’t about reverting to rigid five-day office mandates. Instead, companies should embrace hybrid models that respect employees' demands for flexibility while also harnessing the benefits of in-person interactions.

Understanding what stops people from returning to the office can inform these hybrid strategies. Concerns over long commutes, expensive parking, and unsuitable office setups frequently deter employees from showing up in person. The classic nine-to-five routine appears to be fading as people prioritise their time differently. In these circumstances, enticing employees back often requires more than just a desk—offering commuter benefits or creating appealing office environments can act as essential incentives. What’s it worth to be in the office? Or to take a job in an office?

Companies report that costs associated with commuting can be a significant barrier to attendance. Employees indicate they might need compensation ranging from $50 or £50 to $75 or £75 to make the commute into work more appealing. Companies are continuing to respond by trialing perks like childcare support and catered lunches or Uber Eats to enhance the in-office experience. But this raises an important question: is it sustainable to lure employees back with perks, or should the focus shift toward creating genuinely engaging workplaces?

Perhaps the most crucial aspect of returning to the office is fostering a culture that values the time spent together. People are more inclined to come in if they know their colleagues will be there as well. It’s about creating a sense of belonging rather than simply mandating attendance. Companies can optimise their approach by prioritising collaborative activities and crafting office environments conducive to both focused work and interactions. What type of meetings and activities are best done in person? For example, I hate Figma brainstorming - but love the physical whiteboard bouncing ideas between colleagues and building on others’ thoughts. But this doesn’t work in a hybrid mode.

The narrative isn’t straightforward. The landscape of work has forever changed, and while many firms push for more in-person days, substantial resistance remains. Employees aren’t simply rejecting the office; they are advocating for work environments that reflect their needs and values. The balance lies in recognising these desires alongside strategic business objectives.

The goal should be to adapt to the evolving workplace rather than force it back to its previous state. Flexibility is not just a temporary measure; it’s the new norm. The companies that will thrive will be those able to blend personal choice with organisational goals, creating a holistic work experience that resonates with their employees.

This backdrop continues as we start to hear about AI actually removing the jobs we thought were safe. Notably, Salesforce’s New AI Strategy Acknowledges That AI Will Take Jobs. Tumultuous times.

Ultimately, the return to the office is less about the number of days people spend in physical spaces and more about the quality of those experiences. By focusing on meaningful engagement, companies can foster environments where employees want to come together, not just because they have to, but because they choose to. The future of work isn’t a binary choice between remote and office; it’s about forging paths that accommodate the best of both worlds.

Stay Curious - and don’t forget to be amazing,

Rahim

Here are my recommendations for this week:

One of the best tools to provide excellent reading and articles for your week is Refind. It’s a great tool for keeping ahead with “brain food” relevant to you and providing serendipity for some excellent articles that you may have missed. You can dip in and sign up for weekly, daily or something in between -what’s guaranteed is that algorithm sends you only get the best articles in your area of choosing. It’s also free. Highly recommended Sign up.

Now

1. The Collapse of Self-Worth in the Digital Age - Why are we letting algorithms rewrite the rules of art, work, and life? “The market is the only mechanism for a piece of art to reach a pair of loving eyes. Even at a museum or library, the market had a hand in homing the item there. I didn’t understand that seeking a reader for my story meant handing over my work in the same way I sold my car on Craigslist: it’s gone from me, fully, bodily, finally. Or, as Marx says, alienated. I hated that advice to keep writing, because if I wrote another book, I’d have to go through the cycle again: slap my self on the scale like a pair of pork chops again. Now, I realize the authors I met meant something else. Yes, sell this part of your inner life but then go back in there and reinflate what’s been emptied. It’s a renewable resource.” Related: TikTok argued against its U.S. ban in court . Here's what happened

2. The Moral Panic Over Ozempic Misses the Point The media has made the drugs about body politics and our obsession with thinness. That’s the wrong story. As long as we talk about these medications primarily as “weight-loss drugs” — as medications that have prompted “a renewed fixation on being thin” — insurance companies and policymakers will remain incentivized to treat them as a luxury good. We’ll never ask the questions that need to be asked: If such a large percentage of the country wants Ozempic, and if we now have good-quality evidence that it helps with a variety of serious conditions beyond diabetes, what is our cutoff for determining who truly needs it?

3. Fish out of Water - The Sardine Fast: I’m on a baby food diet, to try and get back to health (ongoing small violins playing, but this article was an interesting read - the sardine fast might not be for everyone - but has surprising results. I actually love sardines to the chagrin of my long suffering wife who gags at the smell - and can’t wait to get back to them. They’re good for you!

4. The Jackpot Generation - This one is for my wider family in Can-eh-da - Canada is in the midst of the greatest wealth transfer of all time, as some $1 trillion passes from boomers to their millennial kids. How an inheritance-based economy will transform the country.

5. Humanoid Robots Head to Homes: Meet the NEO Beta. Im not sure Im ready for humanoids. Related: Chipotle’s testing an avocado-peeling robot and an automated bowl assembly line

   Next

1. Big tech fails transparency test: What we should demand of AI - A team of researchers from MIT, Stanford, and Princeton rated the transparency of 10 AI companies; each one received a failing grade. AI expert Gary Marcus argues we need more transparency surrounding AI if we are to understand these systems and their effect on society. He recommends citizens demand transparency around several key factors, including their environmental impact, the data these systems are trained on, and how these algorithms work.

2. Scaling: The State of Play in AI - A brief intergenerational pause... - Unlike your computer, which can process in the background, LLMs can only “think” when they are producing words and tokens. We have long known that one of the most effective ways to improve the accuracy of a model is through having it follow a chain of thought (prompting it, for example: first, look up the data, then consider your options, then pick the best choice, finally write up the results) because it forces the AI to “think” in steps. What OpenAI did was get the o1 models to go through just this sort of “thinking” process, producing hidden thinking tokens before giving a final answer.

3. An injectable HIV-prevention drug is highly effective — but wildly expensive

   Lenacapavir, which is injected twice yearly, was highly effective in both gay men and women in clinical trials, HIV advocates worry it will prove too expensive for insurers.

4. "Golden Lettuce" genetically engineered to pack 30 times more vitamins: A team from the Research Institute for Plant Molecular and Cellular Biology (IBMCP) has now genetically engineered the humble lettuce to boost its nutrients. Specifically, they increased the levels of an antioxidant called beta-carotene, which your body uses to make vitamin A. This is important for healthy vision, immune function, and cell growth, and is thought to be protective against Alzheimer’s, heart disease and some kinds of cancer.

5. When will AI outthink humans? Logical post considering AI beating humans from a mathematical and power perspective. The concept of artificial intelligence has piqued our imaginations and challenged our sense of humanity since its conception over 70 years ago. For decades we have made predictions that intelligent machines will transform society. In some ways, they have. In others, they haven’t. Instead of considering whether AI will be “transformative”, a specific question is used: when will AI outthink humans — in terms of volume of thought? More specifically, the concept of “outthinking” in two orthogonal dimensions: the volume of tokens [and intelligence of tokens].

Free your newsletters from the inbox: Meco is a distraction-free space for reading newsletters outside the inbox. The app has features designed to supercharge your learnings from your favourite writers. Become a more productive reader and cut out the noise with Meco - try the app today

If you enjoyed this edition of Box of Amazing, please share and help me grow this group. If you share it on LinkedIn, please tag me so I can thank you.

If you are interested in advertising in this newsletter, please see this link