Covid-19 sparked a seismic shift due to the adoption of remote work. More people than ever before are now working from home and are reluctant to go back to the workplace, even as companies across the country call for a return to the office. The adoption of remote work, facilitated by technological advancements allowing seamless collaboration from disparate locations, has become a defining feature of this new era.

But just because we can work from home, does that mean we should? While the benefits of remote work are evident, including broader access to talent, enhanced family flexibility, and reduced commuting, it is crucial to confront the drawbacks. Several recent studies have contended that working from home is in fact less efficient than working at the office, and we are
only beginning to understand the ramifications of social isolation on individuals and communities as more people work from home.

There are obvious negative impacts on company culture and personal professional growth, and importantly, we also need to examine the effects of a remote workforce on our cities. As more people work from home, this translates to less activity in urban cores, undermining public transportation, and hurting small and large businesses alike.

Perceived Benefits vs. Societal Impact

Proponents praise remote work for autonomy, flexibility, and productivity, but it’s essential to recognize that these benefits are often based on personal comfort and privilege, raising concerns about the broader societal implications. The psychological impacts of working from home are not just an individual burden to bear. Researchers have suggested that the lack of face-to-face interaction in our daily lives erodes social cohesion, hindering the development of meaningful relationships and community bonds. Digital communication, while convenient, can never fully substitute for in-person engagement, impacting our collective ability to communicate effectively and build trust.

Psychological Impacts

Working from home may contribute to loneliness, depression, and social isolation, affecting mental health individually and eroding social cohesion collectively. The lack of face-to-face interactions hinders meaningful relationships and community bonds.

The Covid-19 pandemic amplified feelings of loneliness that were already on the rise in our society, as a 2020 study conducted by Cigna revealed that 61% of respondents across industries and backgrounds reported feeling lonely. Additionally, there is growing research on the need for humans to separate home life from work life, with another 2020 poll showing that 70% of people felt that mixing work and life responsibilities at home was a source of stress.

Impact on Democracy and Extremism

Prolonged isolation may make individuals susceptible to echo chambers and radical ideologies, potentially contributing to the rise in political extremism and distrust for mainstream media, particularly in the United States. We know how important it is to engage with people from all walks of life to develop empathy, compassion, and social cohesion. Exposure to different cultures and people of different ethnic, social, and economic backgrounds is what builds tolerance and leads to acceptance on an individual and  ultimately a collective level. Working from home means we miss out on so many opportunities to learn from and connect with people who are different from us.

Effects on Workplace and Communities

Remote work diminishes workplace social cohesion, limiting chance encounters, mentorship opportunities, and personal professional development. This reduction in social interaction extends to communities, affecting the vibrancy of neighborhoods and impacting local businesses.

When we work remotely, the traditional opportunities for mentorship diminish, stunting professional development and blocking knowledge transfer. Remote employees may also feel less invested in their workplaces, leading to a decline in organizational loyalty. Mentorship can happen in small moments by the water cooler and merely by striking up conversations as you walk by people’s desks. Informal mentoring diminishes significantly in work from home paradigms.

Health of Cities and Urban Life

The prevalence of remote work is hindering the reactivation of urban life, leading to population shifts away from city centers. The decline in daily activity has negative effects on small businesses, public transportation, and overall city health, emphasizing the need to reevaluate the trajectory for a regenerative future.

The reduction in social cohesion within the workplace also extends to the communities where our offices reside, impacting the vibrancy of neighborhoods. Less people coming to the office translates to less patrons for nearby coffee shops, lunch spots, and after work drinks and leisure activities. It also translates to less eyes on the street and fewer services, which can lead to growing safety concerns.

Ultimately, remote work is eroding the major strides we have made in the last 30 years to develop our urban centers. Today, cities in all parts of the country are seeing a decrease in daily activity that translates to less patronage of small businesses and restaurants in urban cores, and less ridership on public transportation. While in theory, reduction in daily commutes due to remote work equals a reduction in carbon emissions, the decline in consistent commuting is actually hurting our public transit systems the most, which need to thrive if we are to lessen our carbon footprint in the long run. Suffering public transit also disproportionately impacts lower- and middle-class individuals who rely on it the most, thereby deepening the socio-economic divide. For our public transportation networks to survive and our cities to thrive, we need a critical mass in urban cores during the work week.

Key Call to Action

I am proposing a reevaluation of the current approach to remote work that acknowledges we need a critical mass in our cities and workplaces. I believe this can only happen with workers returning to the office a minimum of four days a week and full time for many but perhaps with increased flexibility. If we continue to embrace remote work wholesale and without qualification, we will see damaging social and environmental consequences that will be next to impossible to undo.

A model where individuals are in the workplace four days a week with the option to work remotely as needed allows for added personal flexibility, without sacrificing the benefits of physical presence. When individuals do engage in remote work, we can encourage them to work outside their homes if possible, setting up in coffee shops, work hotels, and the like. Balancing the benefits of remote work with the advantages of in-person work is key to a sustainable future.

The stakes are high — this is more than just a question of personal preference and individual comfort. It is my belief that if we continue to embrace remote work wholesale and without qualification, we will see damaging social consequences that will be next to impossible to undo. These include the deepening of class divisions, decreased urban activity, a downward spiral of individual mental health and loneliness, and stunted professional growth amongst younger generations. Even more frightening to consider are the potentials of social isolation to deepen existing prejudices and biases against minority groups and amplify political extremism. This is about more than just work — it is about our social cohesion and the type of future we want to build together.

While technology will continue to evolve, and working from home will likely become easier and more streamlined, the ramifications of remote work on people, society, and cities must be taken seriously. It is up to us to look holistically at the impacts of working from home and decide if it leads to a future we want to inhabit.

Jason F. McLennan is a designer, author, speaker, consultant, and environmentalist. He founded Bainbridge Island-based McLennan Design, and created the Living Building Challenge, considered the most stringent green building program in the world.