ARTICLES

In 2023 and 2024, the return-to-office mandates from some of Australia’s largest employers made headlines. What rarely made headlines was the follow-up data: elevated turnover at many of those organisations, particularly among high performers who had more options than those who stayed. The mandate was enforced. The resentment was real.

For small and medium businesses navigating the same question — how many days in the office, if any — the stakes are different but the underlying dynamics are similar. Get this wrong and you don’t just manage compliance. You manage morale, trust, and your ability to retain the people you most want to keep.

There’s no universally correct answer to how much in-person work a business should require. But there are better and worse ways to make the decision, and they make a significant difference to how it lands.

 

Why the ‘How’ Matters as Much as the “What”

Employees don’t respond only to the content of decisions. They respond to the process by which decisions are made. Research on procedural justice — the perceived fairness of decision-making processes — consistently shows that people are more likely to accept outcomes they disagree with when they believe the process was fair and their input was considered.

An in-office requirement communicated suddenly, without clear rationale, and without any consultation is experienced as an exercise of control. The same requirement, arrived at through genuine dialogue about business needs and individual circumstances, with clear reasons and some flexibility built in, lands very differently — even if the outcome is identical.

 

What a Good Decision Process Looks Like

Start by being clear about what problem you’re trying to solve. Is in-person presence genuinely necessary for the work — for collaboration, client interaction, mentoring, or team cohesion? Or is the driver something less specific, like a preference for visibility, a concern about productivity that isn’t supported by data, or pressure from clients who expect to see staff in the office?

The answers shape what a proportionate response looks like. If collaboration is the genuine need, a structured approach to in-person days for collaboration purposes makes sense. A blanket five-day requirement for roles that don’t require it doesn’t.

Involve your team in designing the approach. This doesn’t mean a vote — you’re allowed to have a business position. But consultation means genuinely asking what’s working, what isn’t, and what would make in-person requirements feel reasonable and purposeful. People are far more likely to accept constraints they’ve had input into.

Be clear about the rationale and honest about what’s flexible and what isn’t. Ambiguity about whether the policy is firm creates constant low-level friction. Clarity, even when people disagree with it, lets people make decisions about whether this arrangement works for them.

And — critically — apply it consistently. Nothing erodes trust faster than a return-to-office requirement that applies to some roles and not others without clear reasoning.

 

Ready to build a better workplace? Book your free 30-minute consultation at Blue Kite HR Consulting