The paper [1] cited here is a joke. Here's how they collected their dataset: > We collect RTO information for S&P 500 firms through manual news searches on Goo

The paper [1] cited here is a joke. Here's how they collected their dataset: > We collect RTO information for S&P 500 firms through manual news searches on Google and Factiva. Specifically, for each firm, we search by using the company’s name and the following keywords: ‘Work from Home’, ‘return to office’, and ‘days required working in the office’. We focus on S&P 500 firms because these large firms are closely followed by media, thus mitigating concerns about media coverage bias. Among the S&P 500 firms, 137 publicly announce their RTO policy and are classified as RTO firms in this study. These 137 firms become our treatment firms They then correlate this with other (ahem) high quality datasets...like Glassdoor reviews. Their "determinant model" takes into account CEO gender and politics and an (arbitrary) measurement of "CEO power" [2], but doesn't take into account even basic things like industry, other than if the company is "high tech" or not. If you bother even skimming the thing, you can see that it isn't serious -- there's a weird editorial quote at the top of page two, from a PR firm, which calls RTO "eyewash for investors". Real academic papers don't do this kind of thing. This is like a bad undergrad term paper. [1] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4675401 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4675401 [2] "CEO relative power, calculated as CEO’s total compensation divided by the average total compensations paid to the four highest-paid executives in the firm" (p. 40)