Perfecting the RTO

“Sure, I’ll do this to keep my job — but only until I find something better.”

That’s what many top performers may say if employers push for a full-time return to the office, according to Jelena Zikic, associate professor at the School of Human Resource Management at York University.

Past and present cases have shown that mandatory returns can “backfire” by resulting in unwanted turnover, she says.

“There is already some evidence that the people who are most likely to resist and leave the organization as a result of imposed mandates are often the best performers. And that translates into them having options in other places as well. They see the return as being a temporary decision.”

That warning captures a central tension as employers push harder on return‑to‑office (RTO) mandates: how to bring people back without eroding trust, losing top performers or undermining culture.

With provincial employers such as Ontario and Alberta mandating five-day weeks at the office, we talked to the experts to find out the biggest missteps made by HR and employers with this kind of move — and, more importantly, the best ways to ensure a more successful return.

Communication, communication, communication

“Not giving enough time is a huge mistake.”

So says John Oesch, associate professor, teaching stream, organizational behaviour and human resource management at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, in advocating for plenty of warning when the office schedule moves from two or three days per week to four or five.

“The worst thing you can do is to make an announcement on, for example, Dec. 20, saying ‘January 5th, we will all be returning to the office five days a week,’” he says. “It's like a ruling has been made from on high: ‘You have no voice here. Just show up or else.’”

By comparison, Oesch says “the really good returns to office” start much earlier, with leaders talking about the change months before any sort of return date is announced. That early engagement gives employees time to consider what RTO will mean “for their work, for their family,” he says, and how to maintain both their job performance and now‑ingrained home and community routines.

“Because you know who’s going to leave? The people who have options — and they tend to be your best people.”

Change leadership vs. change management

Oesch also advocates for a focus on change leadership instead of just change management, which involves a process, not an event.

“You have to get people to start thinking about it — think about what it might be, think about what it could be, think about what it would mean for their work, for their family,” he says.

Having an invitation from leadership to discuss the RTO is not just practical but symbolic, says Oesch, in sending the message that “What you have to say is important and you have an instrumental voice in deciding how we do this… the how is something you are involved in.”

Change leadership is about planning, organizing, measuring, monitoring and upholding the rules, he says.
“Change leadership involves being a role model by inviting people in, showing them the benefits, answering their questions, and helping them understand ‘What is this change about? Why are we doing it? What are the potential benefits?’”

“You've got to take care of your people first. And then you can plan and organize and set up systems and stuff.”

Making employees part of discussion

Zikic agrees that having employees be part of the discussion around the return to the office is key.

“As humans, we don't like not to be part of that discussion and not to have our say… if you are really concerned about keeping your workforce and going back to the office at the same time, it ought to be a mutual decision.”

Telling the workforce “Here’s a mandate we all have to obey” is probably the worst strategy, she says, “and it does communicate a lot of… negativity to the employees and also communicates a lack of trust in many ways.”

Oesch agrees that having people understand the change is important before they commit to it, which means showing the research and projections — but also outlining expectations on what it means for each employee.

“And then you have to shut up and listen to them because they may have some really good ideas that would make this even better…. Once they know that their voice is being listened to, commitment comes soon after.”

Taking a tailored approach to RTO

While it’s been proven that work from home (WFH) doesn’t have a negative impact on productivity, Zikic agrees that there are areas that have suffered, such as social connections, networking and collaboration.

So, bringing people back to the office can mean improvements in terms of having people connect with each other and a better organizational culture — especially among more junior workers, she says.

But, one of the biggest mistakes made by employers is taking a one-size-fits-all approach, says Zikic.

“There are some examples of organizations that have done this well, but in all cases that I’ve read about, the return was tailored to the workforce,” she says. “So, there was a lot of preparation, collaboration, a lot of resources really, on both sides, employer and employee, in figuring out the strategy of returning to the office.”

That means connecting the RTO to the type of business or employer involved, such as productivity and key outcomes that are affected by people being together at the office.

“If it is a mandated, basic statement of ‘We ought to be back in the office,’ there is a lot of resistance,” she says. “It's not just [about] the way we work, it's the way we live that we are now changing or kind of threatening to change.”

And those decisions can be made down at the team level, says Zikic, because those are the people who best understand employees’ needs and preferences. It’s about a willingness to engage in this conversation, she says, and to admit, “Yes,
it may not work the same way in every department of our organization, but we're going to work with our employees on this.”

Changing environment to appeal to workers

At 407ETR, employees have been back at the office for quite some time, with some flexibility, according to Lydia Iacovou, vice-president of human resources. But the company is moving towards having people spend more days in the office per week.

“Our primary engagement at 407ETR tends to happen in the office,” she says.

“Do I see us coming back five days and offering absolutely zero flexibility? I don’t know that we can do that, the world around us has changed,” she says, citing the need to still offer flexibility when needs arise.

Iacovou admits there are employees who are not too excited about the change, so there are “some challenges,” but it’s hoped that making the office environment more appealing will help.

“We have a very traditional office and so we want to make sure that we have the ‘right to light ‘for most of our employees. So, we're going to be doing some construction, some renovations so that when we ask people to come back to the office five days, we've enabled them to work optimally.”

Zikic agrees that the physicality of the office is important, such as providing enough privacy and quiet space for people to work comfortably.

“Does the space fit the type of work?” is really the important question, she says, and what may work for some organizations may not work for others, so it’s “hard to generalize.”

Many people are still familiar with classic office spaces where everybody has their own cubicle, even if it's in an open space, says Zikic, so will that still be offered when people go back to the office full-time?

Oesch agrees that having the right environment is very important for productivity and collaboration.

“[With] true collaboration, you have people actually solving problems together and having good discussions in a psychologically safe space, usually behind a closed door where they can tell the truth and really get to their root of the problem.”

Physical space is “extremely important,” he says, and people don’t want to come to an office that is “cold, uncomfortable, impersonal,” so asking for their input early on can make a big difference.

Enforcement and fairness with RTO

Once the decision has been made to bring employees back, figuring out how to enforce the mandate is a challenge, says Zikic, citing a colleague who said she constantly has employees finding excuses to avoid coming in.

 “[It’s] a really hard part of this whole puzzle that often falls on the HR department, probably more so than the immediate supervisor, managerial staff to really monitor,” she says. “Is it about punishing people? And how do we do that?”

Oesch agrees that fairness is extremely important, because people don't just pay attention to how they're treated — they pay attention to how everybody else is treated, he says.

“And if they see… what to them looks like an advantageous inequality when they compare themselves with them, it's not fun — it’s demotivating. It's like ‘What the hell is going on at this place? Is this place not a fair place to work?’”

That’s why it’s advisable to roll out the RTO mandate slowly, to make tweaks and check back after a few weeks to see where improvements are needed, according to Oesch.

“At the end of those six weeks, if you've got somebody who's really taking advantage and who's not compliant and they're indicating to you that they're not going to do this, then maybe they do need to find another place to work — but you've got to give them a chance.”

Role models needed: leadership

And that need for fairness matters even more when it comes to the management level.

In pushing for a successful RTO, leadership plays a key role because they are role models, says Zikic. And employees may resent the new rules even more if they see their managers still working from home.

“If you're still allowing people at the higher level in your organization to have more freedom, then I think you're making even worse consequences for the culture and the relationships. So, that inequality is just going to be even more pronounced.”

To that end, it’s important to have management involved and onside with the RTO well in advance. Many big projects fail because middle managers are “saddled with tons of extra work and they start doubting whether this change is necessary,” says Oesch.

“They're supposed to be showing their employees, ‘Hey, this is great, isn't this wonderful?’ But it's really hard to fake that… and they don’t feel like they’ve been consulted enough either. That’s one of the major factors for change failure.”