Are RTO Mandates Helping or Hurting Business Performance?
For many organisations, RTO mandates have become the default answer to questions about collaboration, culture, and performance. But as more companies push for greater in-office presence, employees are questioning what is gained, what is lost, and when flexibility is reduced.
Our latest guide From Hybrid to HQ: The Impact of Return to Office on Financial Services Worldwide looks at how employees are responding to return-to-office expectations across Financial Services.
The findings suggest that while the office still plays an important role, rigid attendance rules may be creating new pressures around productivity, retention, inclusion, and wellbeing.
Why Are Companies Still Using RTO Mandates?
A clear reason leaders continue to value the office is that in-person work can support collaboration, strengthen team culture, and create opportunities for mentoring that are harder to replicate fully online.
That social and strategic value has not disappeared, as made clear from our survey data shared below:
Employees see a clear benefit to office work, with 57% citing enhanced collaboration as the primary benefit, followed by culture-building (35%) and mentorship opportunities (34%).
The challenge is that the office is no longer being seen as the automatic answer for every kind of work. Employees may still value face-to-face interaction, but that does not necessarily mean they see mandatory attendance as the best way to achieve results.
The question is not whether the office has value, but whether mandates are the most effective way to realise it.
What is the Impact of RTO Mandates on Employees?
One of the clearest pressures linked to increased office time is commuting. What may look like a simple return to routine from the employer’s side can feel very different to employees, particularly when travel adds cost, time, and stress to the workday.
In our survey, 60% of employees said they need higher pay to cover commuting costs. Moreover, 63% of employees report higher levels of stress or burnout from increased in-office time.
That is a strong signal that return-to-office expectations are not being experienced as neutral policy changes, but as real changes to employees’ day-to-day lives.
Do RTO Mandates Increase the Risk of Attrition?
For organisations focused on retention, this is where the issue becomes more serious. If office requirements begin to feel inflexible or disconnected from how people actually work, they can create disengagement rather than commitment.
Our report found that 54% of employees reported an increased desire to leave due to in-office expectations. On the employer side, 28% noted ‘increased resignations’ as a drawback of implementing in-office working.
That does not mean every employee will resign, but it does show that RTO mandates are capable of influencing how people think about their future with an employer. In a competitive talent market, even a subtle rise in dissatisfaction can have long-term consequences.
Are RTO Mandates Affecting Women and Caregivers Differently?
The impact of return-to-office policies is not evenly shared. For some employees, especially women and caregivers, stricter in-office expectations can intensify the pressure of balancing work and personal responsibilities.
Our findings show that 49% of women were satisfied with current in-office expectations, versus 58% of men. 71% of women reported increased stress or burnout from higher in-office time, versus 55% of men.
That matters because policy decisions that appear operational on the surface can have uneven effects across the workforce. A mandate that seems straightforward to one group may create a much heavier burden for another.
Are RTO Mandates Really Improving Productivity?
This is one of the most important questions in the debate, and one of the hardest to answer with assumptions alone. Many leaders associate office presence with productivity, but employees do not always experience it that way.
The office may be useful for collaboration, but data shows that it’s less supportive of the kind of deep work many roles require.
In our survey, 51% of employees reported lower productivity in the office. What they did see as benefits were enhanced collaboration (57%) and mentorship opportunities (34%).
It suggests that leaders should be careful about equating office presence with output. If the office is best suited to collaboration and connection, then it may be more effective as a strategic workspace than as a universal default.
Is There a Better Middle Ground Than a Full RTO Mandate?
The most practical answer may not be to go fully remote or implement a full return, but a more intentional hybrid approach. That allows organisations to preserve the benefits of face-to-face time while reducing some of the costs employees associate with rigid office policies.
Even so, there is no one-size-fits-all formula. The best way would be to design a hybrid approach that’s tailored to team needs, job types, and employee preferences.
To reach this, the question employers must ask is not how many days people spend in the office, but what those days are meant to achieve.
RTO Mandates: A More Balanced Approach
RTO mandates can still play a role in workplace strategy, but they work best when they are tied to clear goals rather than used as a blanket solution. Employees appear more receptive to office time when it has a clear purpose, whether that is collaboration, coaching, or culture-building.
Our latest report explores how employees and employers are responding to RTO mandates, and what that means for retention, productivity, and workplace strategy. The broader lesson from the report is that leaders should treat office policy as a strategic decision, not an automatic attendance policy decision.
If you are rethinking workplace policy in 2026, the question is no longer whether the office matters. It is whether RTO mandates are creating enough value to justify the trade-offs.
Want to learn what employees really think about office mandates? Download our new report – or speak to one of our consultants about your hiring.
