Lately, more and more large companies even here in the Netherlands, are asking employees to return to the office more regularly. That decision is triggering plenty of debate, especially in the human resources and real estate world. The conversation often centers on how many days people should be in the office.
But that misses the point. It's not about being present - it's about what that presence actually brings.
Rather than focusing on visibility, the real question should be: does the office contribute to better collaboration, increased (speed of) innovation, and stronger results? Now that hybrid working is the standard, we need to rethink the role of the office. Not as a tool to monitor people, but as a space with a clear purpose. A place to strengthen culture, connect colleagues, and make collaboration easier.
Is the focus on control, or on impact?
Being in the office only has value if it connects to a clear idea of how we want to work together. A return-to-office policy reveals a lot about how an organization sees itself. Is the goal to manage people or to empower them? If you're only steering on presence, you risk missing a chance to actively shape your culture and how people work together. The office shouldn't be where people go to be seen. It should be where people come together to build something meaningful.
The role of informal networks
Organizations don't run on org charts alone. What really drives things forward are the informal networks: who talks to whom, who shares ideas, who help each other. That's where the real work happens. Hybrid work doesn't break these networks. What does, is ignoring them. So instead of asking how often someone is in the office, ask: what is happening in the office, who connects with whom, and how are we supporting that?
Rethinking how we use office space
That also means rethinking how we approach real estate. What if we stopped seeing offices as rows of desks, and instead designed them to truly support connection and collaboration? Through furniture types, furniture placement, zoning and active programming. Smart spatial design, with areas that encourage spontaneous chats or lower the threshold for hybrid meetings, can really make a difference. Especially in organizations with lots of different departments or silos.
From this perspective, real estate becomes a tool, not a goal. The real challenge is to redesign collaboration itself. Hybrid work requires deliberate choices: when, how, and with whom do we work? Those decisions should be based on business, culture, behavior, and actual data. Not on gut feeling or top-down rules.
Let data guide your choices
With the right data, for instance, insights into space usage or tools like Organizational Network Analysis, you can identify where collaboration is strong, where it's stuck, and where new connections are needed. Those insights should guide how we shape our work environments. Not the other way around.
So no, the office debate isn't pointless. But it often misses the deeper questions.
It shouldn't be about getting people back to the office. It should be about how we use space, time, and insight to strengthen social networks - and with them, the strength of our organizations. It's not about being present. It's about what that presence makes possible.
The office isn't the purpose. It's only valuable when it serves one.