>give basically no chance to the explanation CEOs give (collocation leads to a more productive organization). Well no, there have been years of chances for tho

>give basically no chance to the explanation CEOs give (collocation leads to a more productive organization). Well no, there have been years of chances for those CEOs demonstrate their position. That's precisely why no one believes them anymore. The problem for them is that there has been zero evidence for what they're saying. No one has been able to actually demonstrate these supposed benefits (or, more precisely, the supposed harms to productivity that WFH brings). You can see this in how their claims shifted over time: in the early days of the pandemic WFH shift they offered the productivity claims you note, but it soon became clear that there wasn't any evidence for that. Then the claims shifted to vaguer, non-measurable ones about office culture and exchanges of ideas. When that didn't really convince anyone it finally shifted to "you have to because we said so". So you're getting it precisely backwards: it's the proponents of returning to the office that now offer theories of conspiracies and secret data that totally support these moves but somehow can't be shown to anyone.