For years, the return-to-office debate has been framed as a tug of war between employers and employees. One side argues that people collaborate better when they work together physically. The other believes productivity has little to do with desks, office buildings or badge swipes.
As organisations continue revisiting attendance policies, the conversation has become far more nuanced. Behind every return-to-office mandate lies a different organisational reality. For some, it is about strengthening culture and collaboration. For others, it reflects operational realities that simply cannot be managed remotely. And then there are leaders who question whether mandates are necessary at all, arguing that trust, not supervision, is the real driver of performance.
Three HR leaders explain where they stand.
Rahul Gama, CHRO, CEAT
Neither. Productivity comes from trust, not location.
Every organisation has its own context, so it is difficult to generalise why companies ask employees to return. However, the goals often associated with return-to-office mandates, improving productivity, strengthening collaboration or delivering better business outcomes, can all be achieved without making office attendance the central solution.
Everything begins with trust.
If an organisation has communicated its values clearly and leaders genuinely operate on principles rather than control, employees understand what is expected of them. At CEAT, empowerment is a core value. That means trusting people to make the right decisions while remaining accountable for outcomes.
Organisations often underestimate employees. There is a tendency to believe people need to be monitored in order to perform. My experience has been exactly the opposite. Most employees understand what the business needs. When they are given ownership instead of oversight, they usually step up rather than step back.
Ultimately, productivity depends less on where people work and more on whether they feel trusted enough to deliver.
Takeaway: High performance is built on trust, ownership and accountability, not on where employees work.
Shantanu Chakraborty, Director – HR, People Experience and Technology, Amazon India
It’s about culture, not control.
Our biggest learning after COVID was not about productivity. It was about culture.
Business outcomes will always matter, but preserving who we are as an organisation matters just as much. At Amazon, we often talk about maintaining our ‘Day 1 culture’, remaining customer-obsessed, resourceful and entrepreneurial regardless of the company’s size.
Culture does not live in presentations or leadership messages. It develops through everyday interactions, shared problem-solving and spontaneous collaboration. Those moments are far easier to create when people spend more time together in person.
For us, return-to-office has never been about enforcing attendance for its own sake. It is about creating an environment where teams collaborate naturally, move faster and continue strengthening the culture that defines the organisation.
Managers are empowered to exercise common sense, while ensuring that culture remains strong. The objective is not control. It is sustained innovation through stronger human connection.
Takeaway: Return-to-office works best when it strengthens culture and collaboration rather than simply enforcing attendance.
Ralin Gomes, CHRO, Allied Blenders & Distillers
It depends on the business.
The return-to-office debate often assumes there is one answer for every organisation. In reality, there isn’t.
The first question any organisation should ask is simple: What business are we in?
If you operate in industries such as information technology, where work can genuinely be done from anywhere, flexible work arrangements make perfect sense. But many businesses do not have that option.
In our organisation, employees work in manufacturing facilities, on shop floors and in the market. Many critical activities simply cannot happen remotely. When physical presence is essential for a large part of the workforce, it becomes difficult to justify a completely different policy for employees at the corporate office.
Fairness also matters. If one group of employees is expected to be present because the business depends on it, workplace policies should reflect that reality consistently. Otherwise, employees may perceive the organisation as applying different standards to different groups.
This is not about deciding whether office work is better than remote work. It is about aligning workplace policies with operational realities.
Takeaway: Return-to-office policies should reflect business realities and operational needs rather than workplace trends.