Yes, they should do that, if only to learn why that isn't always as simple in practice as it looks in writing. If companies are willing to open remote offices

Yes, they should do that, if only to learn why that isn't always as simple in practice as it looks in writing. If companies are willing to open remote offices in Bangalore or Mumbai or Shenzhen, they should also be willing to open remote offices in Chicago, Denver, Austin, Atlanta, Boston, Toronto, London, or Berlin, or to just have remote employees that are not attached to any office building. And yet, many of them still want everyone on site in Silicon Valley. Those companies won't go anywhere. They want everyone to come to them. It doesn't matter to them if the talent is in Islamabad or Sacramento, if the talent can't (or won't) relocate. SV is by no means the only place where that happens, of course. Some companies have gone all in on a single corporate campus, even when there are no particular economies of scale to be had in doing so. It makes the org chart simpler. The problem is not in the workers, really. Most companies are completely incompetent at remote management and almost anti-competent at distributed management. Putting together a team that works well without physical proximity is a lot more difficult than periodically counting butts in seats and doing the "manager walk" behind everyone in your open-plan office, to make sure your direct reports at least look like they're working.