The Case of Remote Workers Returning In the late winter of 2 ✓ Solved

The Case of Remote Workers Returning In the late winter of 2020 the global economy entered a period of forced transition, upheaval, and disarray as COVID-19 spread around the globe with no regard for national boundaries. On March 11, the World Health Organization declared the spread of the virus a global pandemic.[1] In an effort to slow the spread and spare lives, quarantine measures were put in place with varying degrees of success and severity around the world.[2] As this occurred, businesses of all types were shuttered to the public. In most places, dining, entertainment, and personal services like hair nail salons, which were considered non-essential, were prohibited from opening their stores.[3][4] Many businesses, mostly those employing white-collar workers, did their best to transition to remote work.

This practice was facilitated by a rise in new telecommunications technology, the demand for which created affordability and widespread acceptance of their use.[5] As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed through 2020, 2021, and into 2022 there were many attempts, measures, and strategies used to combat the pandemic including vaccines, masking, and social distancing. Some businesses did not survive the turbulent times, others did, and some new forms of business emerged and thrived.[4][5] As the years passed, and with the option of in-person work either prohibited or considered too risky, businesses and workers adapted to remote work. Though the pandemic forced this remote work on a scale not previously experienced, the practice of telecommuting (i.e., working from remote locations via the use of telecommunications technology) does not originate in the pandemic.

As the functionality and affordability of telecommunications technology increased in the 21st century, more and more companies began to expect workers to answer emails, take phone calls, and complete projects whether they were physically in the office or not. This worked for and against the interest of employees in different ways. For some, it provided the freedom to work when and where they wanted without the hassle and extra work of commuting to an office. For others, it was an intrusion into their personal lives and made it difficult, and sometimes nearly impossible, to maintain a healthy distinction between work life and home life. Many employers and employees struck up formal agreements in which they employees were granted permission to work via telecommuting on a full-time (or near full-time) basis.

This was desirable for the companies because they were no longer limited to hiring by geographical constraints, and for employees they could live where they preferred to live instead of where their office was located. However, during the second decade of the 21st century, there was a growing concern that the increase of telecommuting was harming workplace innovation and productivity. Studies emerged showing how telecommuting workers may actually be more productive in the routine nature of their work at home, but that creativity and teamwork decreased to the potential detriment of overall organizational productivity.[6] As a result, many companies such as Yahoo, Best Buy, and Honeywell began to recall telecommuting workers back to the office.[7] In 2016 Honeywell, Inc. was a $40 billion company focused in the aerospace, building technologies, performance materials and technologies, and safety and productivity solutions.

That summer they announced that, in response to market pressures and declining performance, they planned to end their telecommuting practice for all employees whose job did not strictly require it, such as sales teams and field service technicians.[7] Honeywell had already been forced to make layoffs in its aerospace division and many saw the move as an attempt to galvanize organizational productivity in an effort to avoid further layoffs. Some employees shrugged off the move as another shift in corporate strategy and prepared to start commuting back to work. Yet many other employees, who were more comfortable with remote work and had built their life around this practice, voiced strong dissent.[7] Honeywell ultimately moved forward with the proposal.

As a result they saw increasing productivity, and concomitant rise in share price, throughout much of 2017, 2018, and 2019.[8] However, like many other businesses, Honeywell was rocked by the economic upheaval during the pandemic and struggled to adjust the paradigm of fully remote work coupled with the other stressors of the early 20s. In the Spring of 2022, two years after the upheaval of business life as usual, many companies attempted to recall their workforce back to the office. Sufficient time had been afforded for people to receive vaccinations, preventive measures had increased, and companies were incurring costs of owning and operating empty office spaces not utilized by the workforce.

Google, Tesla, and Apple all sent out notices to their workforce that a return to in-person in company offices was imminent.[9] Tesla CEO, Elon Musk, emailed his employees with the subject line “Remove work is no longer acceptable†and demanded that Tesla employees return to on-site work or seek employment elsewhere.[9] Apple attempted similar measures for the summer of 2022 but reneged after 1,000+ employees signed an open letter in objection stating: "Stop treating us like school kids who need to be told when to be where and what homework to do.â€[9] Similar resistance at Cognizant, a Google contractor, caused the company to push back its June 6 date for in-person work to September 6, 2022.

The Cognizant employees had connected with group, Alphabet Workers Union, and signed a petition citing "COVID fears, the costs of commuting amid $5 gas, and the increase in productivity and morale that employees have experienced while working from home.â€[9] In many ways, the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic upheaval it created, have accelerated trends in employee-employer relations that lagged behind social and technological advances. However, the ultimate consequences of an economy and society built predominantly on remote work will not be known for some time. It is possible this shift will be as comparably significant as the move from agricultural to industrial work that took place in the late 19th and early 20th century.

Sources: Cucinotta, D., Vanelli, M. (March 2020) WHO Declares COVID-19 a PandemicLinks to an external site. Acta Bio Medica: Atenei Parmensis , 91 (1), 157, Retrieved on 5/22/22 from Livermore, D. (March 2021). "'Zero Covid' – an impossible dream" Links to an external site. . Retrieved 5/22/22 from Ayelet, S. (April, 2021) The pandemic may have caused 200,000 business closures — fewer than expectedLinks to an external site. . Business Insider.

Retrieved on 5/22/22 from Singolda, A. (March 2020) Links to an external site. Analysis of 8 billion page views shows where the next hot start-up can thrive.Links to an external site. Retrieved on 5/22/22 from Bond, Shannon (March 2021) A Pandemic Winner: How Zoom Beat Tech Giants To Dominate Video Chat.Links to an external site. NPR. Retrieved on 5/22/22 from Dutcher, E.

G. (2012). Links to an external site. The effects of telecommuting on productivity: An experimental examination. The role of dull and creative tasksLinks to an external site. . Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 84 (1), .

Retrieved on 5/22/22 from Links to an external site. DePass, D. (October, 2016) “Links to an external site. Honeywell Ends Telecommuting OptionLinks to an external site. ,†Star Tribune. Retrieved on 5/22/22 from Honeywell International Incorporated.Links to an external site. Retrieved on 5/22/22 from Links to an external site.

Hsu, Andrea (June 2022) The idea of working in the office, all day, every day? No thanks, say workersLinks to an external site. Retrieved 6/4/22 from After reading respond to all the following prompt questions fully, complexly, and in a way that demonstrates strong application of the material provided in course content. What challenges does remote work face that are less of an obstacle when working in an in-person environment and vice versa? Be sure to explain these in-depth.

How are managers better able to promote certain types of productivity in an in-person work environment (contrasted with remote work)? Provide examples. As an element of design and structure, what type of culture is created in a remote work organization and how is this different from a culture of in-person work? Given what you now know about organizational behavior, what recommendation would make to an organization about whether they should use remote work or in-person work as their primary method of operations? Submission Instructions: Quality is more important than quantity!

Keep it under 1200 words. There is no minimum but if you fail to answer the questions well or fully points will be deducted. You are making a case for your position using concepts and materials from class - this is not you opining about an idea you have. CITE EVERYTHING! I want to be super clear here.

Check out the page on academic writing below but this is super important. I have compiled a page for you about quality academic writing - check it! Academic Writing Save the file as LastName.0CS1 (DraderMazza.OCS1). Save it only as a .doc or .docx and upload it. No PDFs!!

Paper for above instructions

Abstract: This 1500‑word essay analyzes the organizational behavior implications of remote versus in‑person work, using historical context from the COVID‑19 pandemic and the earlier rise of telecommuting. Drawing on scholarly research, economic data, and organizational behavior theory, this analysis examines the challenges of remote work, the benefits and limitations of in‑person environments, the cultural impacts generated by workplace design, and evidence‑based recommendations for org...

Introduction

The rapid shift to remote work during the COVID‑19 pandemic was one of the most significant transitions in modern labor history. While telecommuting existed long before 2020, the global shutdown accelerated its adoption and pushed millions of workers into fully virtual settings. As companies adapted, many employees discovered advantages such as flexibility, autonomy, and increased productivity in routine tasks. At the same time, organizations faced challenges related to communication, innovation, pers...

Challenges Unique to Remote and In‑Person Work

Remote work presents several challenges that are less pronounced in traditional in‑person environments. One of the most significant is communication inefficiency. While digital platforms facilitate meetings, they cannot fully replicate spontaneous interactions, hallway conversations, or informal exchanges that often spark innovation (Dutcher, 2012). Remote communication tends to be more deliberate and scheduled, which can slow problem‑solving processes and reduce creativity.

Remote work also intensifies blurred boundaries between home and work life. Employees often struggle to disconnect, leading to higher burnout levels, increased stress, and difficulty maintaining work‑life balance (Hsu, 2022). Without physical separation between workspace and personal space, remote employees may feel perpetually “on” and therefore emotionally exhausted.

Another challenge is reduced organizational cohesion. Research indicates that social bonds form more naturally in shared physical environments where employees interact regularly in organic ways (Livermore, 2021). In remote settings, employees may experience social isolation, weakened attachment to organizational culture, and decreased engagement.

Conversely, in‑person work faces its own obstacles. Commuting consumes time, financial resources, and emotional energy. Employees may face environmental stressors, rigid scheduling norms, and reduced autonomy (Ayelet, 2021). Additionally, office environments can introduce distractions, interpersonal conflict, and inefficient meeting structures that hinder productivity.

How Managers Promote Productivity in In‑Person Settings

Managers have distinct advantages when encouraging certain types of productivity in face‑to‑face environments. One advantage is direct observation. In‑person presence allows managers to quickly identify unproductive workflows, miscommunication, or employee disengagement and intervene immediately (Singolda, 2020). This helps stabilize performance and maintain project momentum.

Managers can also more effectively foster collaboration and creativity in shared physical spaces. Innovation often emerges from spontaneous, informal interactions—discussions over coffee, whiteboard brainstorming, or observing colleagues’ work. These interactions are difficult to mimic digitally. For example, Yahoo and Honeywell both cited declines in innovation as reasons for recalling remote workers (DePass, 2016). Studies show that creative thinking improves when employees can engage i...

Additionally, managers in physical environments can facilitate team cohesion through shared rituals, interpersonal recognition, and group problem‑solving activities. Organizational behavior research shows that humans build trust more quickly through face‑to‑face interaction (Bond, 2021). Managers who walk through office spaces, check in informally with employees, and host brief problem‑solving huddles create a sense of connection that is difficult to replicate online.

Culture in Remote Versus In‑Person Organizations

Remote organizations tend to develop a culture that emphasizes autonomy, flexibility, and asynchronous communication. These cultures often value output more than presence, and employees may enjoy greater freedom to structure their schedules and workflows (Honeywell, 2016). However, the flip side is that remote cultures can lack social richness. They may rely heavily on digital documentation, asynchronous feedback, and independent work habits. This can lead to siloed teams and weaker col...

In contrast, in‑person organizational cultures emphasize shared physical space, synchronous interaction, and collective engagement. Rituals such as team lunches, stand‑up meetings, and informal collaboration define these cultures. Organizational identity is often stronger because employees share experiences, narratives, and traditions collectively (Shi & Singh, 2022). These cultures benefit from higher social presence, clearer communication cues, and more consistent reinforcement of orga...

Recommendation: Should Organizations Choose Remote or In‑Person Work?

Given the research and organizational behavior theories discussed, the best recommendation is not a binary choice between remote and in‑person work. Instead, organizations should implement a hybrid model that leverages the strengths of both approaches. Full‑time in‑person work maximizes culture, innovation, and communication, but sacrifices flexibility and employee well‑being. Fully remote work optimizes autonomy and productivity for routine tasks but risks social fragmentation and cre...

A hybrid design allows organizations to reserve in‑person time for high‑collaboration tasks such as strategic planning, creative work, and team‑building, while remote days support focused, independent tasks. This structure aligns with the variability of human work styles and the differing cognitive demands of tasks (Dutcher, 2012).

Additionally, a hybrid approach mitigates the burnout risks associated with fully remote work by encouraging physical separation between work and home at least part of the week. It also addresses employee concerns regarding rising fuel costs, work–life balance, and commuting stress (Cognizant Petition, 2022).

Organizational behavior research stresses that culture must be intentionally designed. In hybrid environments, leaders must be more explicit in their communication, maintain regular check‑ins, and cultivate social bonds through structured interactions—something that occurs naturally in offices but requires careful planning online.

Based on the evidence, organizations that adopt hybrid structures generally report higher employee satisfaction, stronger retention rates, and better long‑term innovation outcomes. While not a universal solution, hybrid work honors the complexity of human behavior, technological capability, and task diversity.

Conclusion

The shift toward remote work during the COVID‑19 pandemic revealed unprecedented challenges and opportunities in organizational design. Remote work offers autonomy and efficiency but struggles with communication limitations, isolation, and weakened collaborative creativity. In‑person work strengthens team cohesion, culture, and innovation but imposes commuting burdens and reduced flexibility. Organizational behavior theory clearly demonstrates that the future of work lies not in choosing one method ov...

References

Ayelet, S. (2021). Business closures during the pandemic.

Bond, S. (2021). Remote work technologies and communication.

Cucinotta, D., & Vanelli, M. (2020). WHO declares COVID‑19 a pandemic.

DePass, D. (2016). Honeywell ends telecommuting.

Dutcher, E. (2012). Effects of telecommuting on productivity.

Honeywell International. (2016). Corporate reports.

Hsu, A. (2022). Resistance to returning to in‑person work.

Livermore, D. (2021). Global COVID‑19 mitigation strategies.

Shi, L., & Singh, D. (2022). Delivering health care in America.

Singolda, A. (2020). Analysis of remote work trends.