> Can anyone break down why these companies want/need people to come back to the office at all? If you rewind the technology job market back a few decades, out

> Can anyone break down why these companies want/need people to come back to the office at all? If you rewind the technology job market back a few decades, outsourcing was the big trend. Why have your software written by these expensive American programmers when you can hire 3x as many programmers in Eastern Europe or India or Mexico for the same cost? For whatever reason, this didn't work very well. It wasn't a complete failure, but the results were definitely worse. People wanting to understand why it didn't work came up with a bunch of guesses - one of the most popular was the idea that synchronous, face-to-face communication is vital. Being able to get around a whiteboard and have a discussion, things like that. Meetings where you can see people's faces and see if they're understanding you, instead of just talking at a bunch of people on mute with their cameras off. And of course, if you were a low- or mid-level American manager with a team of expensive American programmers, this idea was popular with you. You want everyone to be convinced your team is great value for money. So we have a load of managers who've spent the past few decades convincing one another that in-office workers are much more efficient than workers who can only be contacted over Skype.