What has the return‑to‑office movement taught us? People, not technology, help companies get ahead

The lessons learned from the return-to-office movement reveal that people, not technology, are key to a company's success. Despite the belief that digitizing a company can solve problems, it is the individuals within that organization that truly drive change. CEOs and CFOs often discover this reality through corporate restructuring, as they realize that merely altering an organizational chart does not guarantee progress.

During the recent return-to-office trend, many large employers mandated that employees return to the office full-time or in a hybrid format. However, the results have been mixed. Companies like Amazon, JPMorgan Chase, and Dell saw reduced attendance and even talent loss as employees remained disengaged. This disconnect between mandated presence and genuine commitment highlights a fundamental truth: people are creatures of habit and often resist change.

Management's focus on improving systems and chasing results frequently overlooks the fact that individuals maintain their pre-existing thought patterns. A company's forward momentum hinges on its employees making personal transitions first. So, what truly motivates a person? History has shown that love, power, and money are the three forces that drive human behavior. Often, one or two of these forces are dominant, while others may play a lesser role.

Leaders sometimes assume that all employees are motivated by the same factors, but this assumption can lead to misjudgments. The example of Daimler-Benz demonstrates this point. Under Edzard Reuter, the company embraced a diversified approach to expand its influence, but this strategy ultimately weakened the core business. His successor, Jürgen Schrempp, reversed this course through restructuring, only to pursue his own vision of building a global automotive empire through acquisitions.

Both leaders' decisions were driven by their desire for power and personal ambition, often at the expense of the company's well-being.

The success of a restructuring effort relies heavily on the quality of the people leading it. Picking the wrong individuals can lower the odds of a successful transition, and nepotism in particular can be detrimental to both the company and society. A study examining the correlation between perceived corruption and GDP per capita over 20 years revealed that low-corruption countries tend to fare better economically.

To effectively manage personnel decisions, a simple grid-based tool called the 4L-Matrix can be used. This tool assesses employees based on their competence and potential for current and future roles. By classifying employees into categories and tailoring management approaches accordingly, organizations can build stronger teams and increase the likelihood of long-term success.

Effective communication during periods of change is crucial. Announcing a decision once and expecting immediate alignment is unrealistic. People go through various stages of reaction, from shock to denial, frustration, and ultimately acceptance. Leaders must be patient, persistent, and mindful of the communication approach they take during each phase.

Personalized and empathetic messages can help employees navigate through the denial and anger stages, while taking the time to address their concerns directly. Outsourcing this critical task to consultants may further erode trust and hinder the recovery process.

Ultimately, the return-to-office movement serves as a reminder that putting people at the center of organizational change is essential. When companies prioritize the needs and motivations of their employees, they pave the way for sustainable growth and success.