4 ms·
The economics of it make sense on both sides It's mostly about inflating commercial real estate valuations (many companies heavily invested) and exerting contr
by staplers 3y ago
The economics of it make sense on both sides
It's mostly about inflating commercial real estate valuations (many companies heavily invested) and exerting control over the workforce.
Smart companies don't care about either but many (usually larger) corps have vested interest in both.
- WheatMillington 3y agoManagers don't care about commercial property values, I don't understand why this asinine argument keeps being made.
- colinmorelli 3y agoBeyond the fact that mangers don't care, there are many, many businesses with zero commercial real estate holdings outside of a fairly short term lease (which is a sunk cost regardless) who also promote RTO. The argument that all these businesses care less about their core business than they do about their (often non-existent) commercial real estate holdings seems tenuous at best. Feels like we keep trying to look for a conspiracy when in reality that answer might just be that leaders believe their teams to be more productive in office (Note: I'm not saying I believe this to be true, that there's evidence for this, that it's right, or anything else along those lines. Just that the most plausible explanation is that people asking for RTO believe it's going to make the company more valuable, not their commercial real estate holdings.)
- staplers 3y agopeople asking for RTO believe it's going to make the company more valuable Does leadership value investor approval? I wonder if investors could possibly be invested in more than one avenue than just tech companies.