Amazon now requires employees to work in the office five days a week. That policy will cost it dearly

Amazon’s recent decision to require corporate employees to return to the office five days a week is generating significant controversy.
In a memo to employees, CEO Andy Jassy emphasized the benefits of in-person work, such as increased collaboration, innovation and cultural connection. Yet this stance flies in the face of a growing body of research that demonstrates the advantages of hybrid work models — not full-time office work — for productivity, employee performance and retention. Moreover, many organizations have been tired of fighting return-to-office battles and have moved on to more important priorities, allowing their employees more flexibility: thus, Amazon’s top-down policy stands out as a regressive approach likely to backfire.
For example, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported a year-over-year increase in the number of employees working from home, either some of the time or all the time, rising from 19.5 per cent in August 2023 to 22.8 per cent in August 2024. Among hybrid workers — those who work remotely only some of the time — the share climbed from 9.2 per cent to 11.7 per cent over the same period; those who worked remotely all the time increased to 11.1 per cent, up from 10.3 per cent.
Government data, representing the best kind of evidence available, suggests that the large majority of employers, unlike Amazon, are moving away from rigid in-office requirements and embracing flexibility.
In large part, that’s because senior leaders across various industries have started to realize that the effort to monitor and enforce strict in-office attendance is often more trouble than it’s worth. Instead of fostering collaboration and creativity, these mandates frequently lead to resentment and disengagement, as the opposition to heavy-handed in-office mandates has not subsided, leading companies to move on to more important priorities. Some organizations are even experiencing a ”hushed hybrid” trend, where managers quietly agree with their teams to reduce in-office days, acknowledging the impracticality and inefficiency of enforcing stringent rules. 
Amazon’s return-to-office mandate, as outlined by Jassy, is built on the premise that proximity fosters productivity. Jassy argues that being physically present in the office enhances collaboration, brainstorming and invention while reinforcing the company’s culture. This rationale is not unique; it echoes a broader, albeit increasingly outdated, belief among some executives that in-person work inherently drives better outcomes.
However, evidence suggests otherwise. Research increasingly points to hybrid work as the optimal balance for maximizing productivity and job satisfaction. A variety of studies, including one in Nature, one of the two most prominent scientific journals, have shown that hybrid work models lead to higher levels of employee performance and engagement. For instance, scholars find employees working in a hybrid model often experience fewer distractions and take fewer sick days than their fully in-office counterparts, leading to higher productivity. This approach also offers flexibility that helps attract and retain top talent — a significant factor for tech companies like Amazon.
While Amazon’s leadership might envision bustling offices filled with spontaneous brainstorming sessions and serendipitous encounters, the reality of office-based work often looks quite different. Much of the work carried out by Amazon’s corporate employees — such as programming, research, data analysis, responding to emails, and participating in video conferences and phone calls — does not require in-person interaction. In fact, these tasks are often more effectively and efficiently performed in a remote setting, free from the distractions and time costs associated with commuting and navigating office politics. By forcing employees back into a one-size-fits-all model, Amazon risks reducing overall productivity rather than enhancing it.
Amazon’s decision to enforce a five-day in-office policy comes at a time when many companies are moving in the opposite direction, recognizing the importance of flexibility in today’s work environment. The company risks creating a significant disconnect between its leadership’s expectations and its employees’ preferences. This gap will lead to increased turnover, lower morale and a potential loss of top talent who are drawn to more progressive companies that offer flexible work arrangements.