New research has indicated that almost two-thirds of CEOs want to kill hybrid work within three years.
KPMG's latest CEO Outlook survey, which canvassed 1,325 CEOs of businesses with revenues over $500 million, found that 64 percent of CEOs are planning on a return to the pre-pandemic, fully on-premises way of working within the next three years.
"Notably, global CEOs are steadfast in signalling their support of pre-pandemic ways of working, with a majority (64 percent) anticipating a full return to office is only three years away," KPMG's report wrote.
This sentiment underscores the persistence of traditional office-centric thinking among CEOs. It comes against a backdrop of the debate surrounding hybrid working, which has had a largely positive impact on productivity over the past three years and has strong employee support, particularly among the younger generation of workers."
87 percent of CEOs intend to fulfil this ambition by affiliating financial incentives and promotion opportunities to on-premises attendance.
Is a Return to Pre-Pandemic In-Office Mandates Feasible?
While financial gain and career prospects are attractive carrots for encouraging employees back into the office, it isn't easy to see the genie being placed back into the bottle now many workers have experienced being more productive, healthier and happier in hybrid working environments.
Every employee is different, and some might welcome a total return to the office, but data supports the idea that a permanent cultural shift has taken place since hybrid working has become the new normal.
A recent BSG survey of 1,500 global office-based workers found that roughly nine in 10 surveyants consider flexible work options important when looking for a job. Additionally, employees disillusioned with their company's work model are two-and-a-half times more likely to consider leaving their business over the next year than those who are satisfied.
Returning to traditional on-premises rules might afford CEOs greater control over their business and the visibility of employees, but it potentially would have a negative impact on recruitment, retention and employee morale and wellbeing.
