Return-to-office reruns are all too common. In 2024, 38% of employees had been through multiple RTOs and 6% had endured more than five. Often, these reboots reflect failures of the initial policy; when attendance falls short, companies double down by mandating more in-office days.
A large retail firm we work with did exactly this. First, it mandated three days for corporate employees, but got only two. Then it mandated four days in the office in the hopes of securing the desired three. The reboot succeeded in getting people into the building an average of three days a week, but at the cost of alienating the rule-followers who obeyed every mandate. Many of these rule-followers left the company, losing exactly the kind of workers the company most wanted to keep.
To avoid these sorts of botched reboots, companies need to get the policy right—and enforce it. When people reliably show up, the office becomes more valuable, which acts as a pull and reduces the need to push people there. Getting the launch right means implementing the following five pillars.
Pillar 1: Build Stakeholder Buy-In Around Reasons for Returning
Both managers and executives must see the same need and the same potential in a return to the office. If managers roll their eyes while explaining the policy to their teams, the policy is undermined before it begins. If, instead, managers emphasize the potential gains from being together and convey a clear sense of purpose, resistance is less likely to harden into mutiny. That is why it’s essential to be explicit about why the work or workforce calls for a return to the office.
Pillar 2: Understand why people are resisting
The reasons to return matter, but so do people’s reasons for resisting. Some advocates for remote work argue that flexibility helps them juggle work with caregiving responsibilities. Others argue maintain that they can complete more of their solo tasks at home. Faced with these reasons for resistance, company leaders should consider focusing the RTO on a set of core hours.
Suppose most meetings happen between 9:30 a.m. and 3 p.m. Limiting in-office requirements to this window can preserve in-person collaboration, while retaining valuable flexibility. Caregivers can do more school pickups and drop-offs, be home for dinnertime routines, and squeeze in afternoon visits to the pediatrician. For those who do their best work at home, early birds can clock in before heading into the office, while night owls can log back on after hours. Tailoring the policy to employees’ specific reasons for wanting remote work can ease pain points, reinforce empathy, and dodge alienation in its announcement.
Pillar 3: Time It Right
At one major financial services firm we work with, a five-day in-office mandate set to start the day after Labor Day led to near mutiny. The reason? Early September is a period when family routines are particularly fragile. Day care centers often have two-week ramp-up periods to help acclimate the youngest children. For older children, after-school programs often start weeks after school begins. Many parents scramble to cover these gaps in care.
Predictably, many midlevel employees had to burn vacation days just to get through the transition, leading to abysmal attendance and ample anger. They wondered why they were going into the office when many of their colleagues were not. By November, in-office attendance had settled at three days a week rather than the five that were required.
As with most policy rollouts, the devil is in the details. The crucial detail here is timing. Timing an RTO for when there are fewer obligations at home is critical. If this company had delayed its RTO to the end of September or into early October, the policy would have had a greater chance of success.
Pillar 4: Make Enforcement Predictable, Transparent, and Timely
For enforcement to work, consequences for noncompliance must be clear and consistently applied. A sweeping threat like “You could be fired for poor attendance” does little if it is never acted upon. By contrast, a modest but reliable consequence, such as a small bonus reduction for each month of noncompliance, is far more effective. Research shows that people respond best to enforcement that is predictable, not to dramatic warnings that are rarely carried out.
Transparency can also be a powerful tool. Some organizations make attendance patterns visible to help teams coordinate and set shared expectations. At Bloomberg, for example, employees can see when colleagues last badged into the office, making it easier to notice absences and gently check in to ensure everything is okay. While the specifics differ, the aim is the same: to use transparency to encourage people to tell their teammates the typically good reason why they have been out of the office. When people understand this “why,” they are more likely to feel that flexibility is fair rather than arbitrary.
Monitoring is far more effective when it happens early. Forming new habits takes time: between two and five months, to be exact. As a result, the initial phase of an RTO is especially important. Early enforcement helps create a self-fulfilling cycle. People are more willing to come in when they know others will be there. By contrast, enforcing the policy only after a delay means fighting against employees’ tendency to stay home precisely because they assume their colleagues will do so too.
Pillar 5: Respond to Feedback
As employees adjust to the new policy, there will no doubt be lots of commentary. Parking is a zoo, some complain. Too many people want to use the conference room at once, others grumble. Much of this feedback is actionable. The company could introduce shuttle buses from central pickup points or issue vouchers for public transit. Room-booking software could be integrated into the company calendar. Responding to employees’ feedback is essential for communicating that the policy is meant to support work, rather than torture employees or encourage attrition. Failure to elicit and respond to this feedback can lead to more backlash and vitriol than is necessary.
Excerpted from IN PERSON by Natalia Emanuel, PhD and Emma Harrington, PhD. Copyright © 2026 by Natalia Emanuel and Emma Harrington. Published in the United States by Crown Currency, an imprint of the Crown Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House LLC.
