The debate over returning to the office is often framed as a simple choice between productivity and convenience. Critics argue that “back to office” mandates are dated, unnecessary interventions, suggesting that remote work is just as effective – if not better – for productivity. I agree: merely showing up in person won’t magically unlock creativity or collaboration. But it’s equally reductive to dismiss the potential value of shared, physical workspaces. There’s more at play here than a binary choice between office or remote work; by simplifying this discussion, we miss an opportunity to examine how culture, work design, and proximity interact in driving or stifling innovation.

It’s easy to point to colleagues sitting next to one another without collaborating and assume that office presence itself is pointless. But the lack of collaboration when people are in close quarters isn’t a failure of physical space; it’s a symptom of cultural or structural flaws. When people return to the office only to default to video calls, it’s not because they’re physically together – it’s because there’s a disconnect between their roles, the tools they’re given, and the work culture they inhabit. Being in the office is an opportunity, not a cure-all. If proximity doesn’t naturally lead to collaboration, it’s likely because the work culture hasn’t established that expectation, or the work design itself is misaligned with the benefits of being in-person.

Critics often highlight employees who commute only to spend the day in online meetings, seeing this as evidence that offices add no value. But this is ultimately an issue of planning and design. When team members are brought back without considering how to make the most of in-person time, then yes, the office becomes redundant. But this points to management’s role in shaping workflow. With intentional work design, office time can be structured to allow for genuine face-to-face interaction, problem-solving, and brainstorming sessions that can be hard to replicate online. There’s a reason some of the most innovative companies continue to prioritize face-to-face engagement: the spontaneous exchanges that happen in person often spark fresh perspectives and creative ideas that scheduled meetings alone can’t deliver.

What often goes unacknowledged is that human beings, by nature, thrive on connection. Yes, remote work enables focus and flexibility, but prolonged physical isolation can erode the sense of shared purpose that comes from working alongside others. The forced separation of the COVID-19 pandemic triggered a notable mental health crisis, partly due to the loss of everyday social connections. If we reduce socialization strictly to personal life and disregard its role in work, we risk overlooking the subtle ways that physical presence can foster belonging and morale.

I work in a hybrid model, which offers a pragmatic balance. When I go to the office, I do so with intention; my time there is purposeful and designed to take full advantage of the interactions and resources available. Engaging directly with colleagues has brought efficiencies that I wouldn’t have accessed from a distance, and I can’t ignore the productivity boost that comes from these moments. On the other hand, the flexibility to work from home has saved me time and energy that I can reinvest in both personal and professional priorities. Each setting serves a purpose, and each brings its own set of strengths that, when balanced, create a more holistic approach to productivity and collaboration.

To pit office mandates and remote work against each other is to oversimplify a nuanced conversation. The real value lies in a flexible framework where both settings support the same goals. Rather than fixating on where work happens, we should ask how we can make each environment conducive to genuine connection, creativity, and focus. Proximity does have a role, but it must be planned and managed with respect for the diverse ways people work and engage.

Instead of viewing work arrangements as a black-and-white issue, let’s approach it as a spectrum. The goal isn’t to favor proximity over flexibility or vice versa but to design a system that embraces both. In the end, collaboration, innovation, and creativity emerge not because of where we are but because of how well we’re supported, engaged, and connected to our work and one another. Let’s approach the question of “back to office” with this depth, acknowledging that it’s less about the mandate and more about the culture, design, and shared values that make the office – when used intentionally – an invaluable part of our professional landscape.