The issue is that the people who perform poorly when working remote are often the most likely to select WFH if given the choice. WFH has become somewhat of a refuge for people trying to avoid interaction and work, which is the root problem driving other teams to want them back in the office.
In a perfect world we’d have a way to accurately evaluate everyone’s remote work and painlessly dismiss those who can’t handle it. In the real world, it’s not so easy at scale.
I personally work remote and on remote teams, but the successful ones were all hired and built as remote from the start. Whenever I’ve been on a team that started in-office and then tried to switch to remote, a significant fraction of the company ends up failing to adapt, avoiding work, failing to respond in a timely manner (e.g. replying 1-2 days later to simple requests), or otherwise just abused the situation. This quickly ruins remote work for everyone.
In a perfect world we’d have a way to accurately evaluate everyone’s remote work and painlessly dismiss those who can’t handle it. In the real world, it’s not so easy at scale.
I personally work remote and on remote teams, but the successful ones were all hired and built as remote from the start. Whenever I’ve been on a team that started in-office and then tried to switch to remote, a significant fraction of the company ends up failing to adapt, avoiding work, failing to respond in a timely manner (e.g. replying 1-2 days later to simple requests), or otherwise just abused the situation. This quickly ruins remote work for everyone.