The economics of remote work clearly favors that model for most white-collar jobs, but human psychology and institutional inertia slow the transition. The evidence is overwhelming yet ignored by many.
This month the Wall Street Journal summarized findings from research that consistently show:
- Workers value flexibility highly. Many are willing to accept a 10–25% pay cut for fully remote work.
- Productivity gains are measurable: hybrid and remote employees produce 4–10% higher results on average, especially in knowledge-based roles.
- Overhead savings (real estate, utilities, relocation costs, turnover) can increase profit margins by up to 30% per employee compared with fully in-office models.
Yet resistance persists. Why? Media reports this is mostly for behavioral and cultural reasons rather than financial gains:
- Status signaling – Many executives equate visible attendance with commitment and control.
- Legacy infrastructure – Companies with large property investments or hierarchical management structures resist change that would devalue those assets.
- Social identity & cohesion fears – Leaders fear erosion of corporate culture and mentoring pathways.
- Cognitive bias – Humans tend to overweight what is seen and familiar (“proximity bias”) and undervalue unseen work.
I find this topic of this executive behavior fascinating when top management is willing to deny and forego this substantial ‘free money’ to boost profitability in favor of personal beliefs and preferences.