To be, or not to be — RTO

5 min readOct 4, 2024

To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them.

You are a CXO leading your function, you are a GM/VP leading your business figuring out what mandate to issue regarding RTO. Or you are a leader, or an IC trying to make sense of the mandates that that got issued around RTO.

We are all on the edge on how to play this out. There is a lot of misinformation and trepidation around the intent and the course of action to get to the outcomes. In engineering, unlike math, there are no right answers but definitely there are wrong answers. All answers/proposals/designs/decisions have cons and have a shelf life and hence we approach them accordingly.

How we got here

We were used to going to an office to work, the big debate was around should there an open floor plan or offices ( remember that :-) ). Then COVID hit, we all expected a good portion of economy to be wiped out but govt (zirp) and businesses figured out how to consume more, that led to more demand of consumer goods, business services and others. We all saw a spike in demand that led to more hiring and over 3–4 quarters that became the norm. We hoped that this demand will never wane. And of course we were wrong, so we were hit with layoffs because the topline is not growing and AI may disrupt and we have too many people on staff.

Now, things are getting more stable but revenue/user has taken a hit. Some of companies have tried AI and other means to improve the throughput hoping that will solve the revenue problem. We all know it is not a supply issue, it is a demand problem. We are going back to pre-covid demand and spending money how we used to.

I hope this brings clarity around why the layoffs. Now the burning question around RTO — why are some companies enforcing RTOs.

There are few foundational belifs that a lot of us have, I will write them down so we can agree on the premise —

— Smaller ( two pizza) teams are more productive

— As you grow, the communication overhead grows exponentially while the labor lift is linear. That is why when building a team

<for illustrative purposes only>
1 = .8 ( a lot of context switching and needs to know about a lot of things)
1+1 == 1.6 ( context switching goes down, domains get divided, comms is still low overhead)
1+1+1 == 2.8( you get more productivity as you get more focus time, comms still not a challenge).
… keep going to 10 members 1+1…(10times) == 7

— Building software is a team sport and winning teams have high trust.

Respect is a prereq for trust, one must respect your craft first before they trust you.
For one to build trust, one needs to understand how you act, react, express and think.
It requires us to push each other boundaries, help us see the other side and we grow together. It creates mutual respect and boundaries get established ( storming phase)

A high performing team can outrun 10 teams working on the same thing ( 10x productivity)

10x productivity is not a myth, it does not mean one produces 10x amount of code but exemplifies the focus on hard things like architecture, design, MVP, experience and integration.
We all know good architecture, design, MVP, experience and integration reduces work at each step thereby producing better software faster.

Tech evolves fast and needs a refresh ( techstack, process, skills) ever 3–5years.

If you are experiencing growth then your people structure, roles, business model, strategy, architecture, ways of working will keep evolving.
Driving change is harder and probability of failure is higher when there is no physical proximity.

First 90 days are the most crucial at every level

first impression has a lasting impact. It sets the cadence, the intensity and the intent.
Partnerships/relationships established in the first 90 days are the most impactful.
Everyone leans in to help for the first 90 days and then they expect results from their investment.
Learning requires multiple modalities, the more the better.

Reasons to rethink your work location

You are not happy with the talent on the teams.
You are noticing a precipitous drop in productivity ( critical for one to define it orthogonal to macro so it is not biased)
You are seeing constant disconnect between the action/delivery and the strategy.
A lot of finger pointing but no clear solution.
Everything seems stuck/hard. Lots of meetings but no results.
A common pitfall is getting swayed by high engagement, high retention but no clear measure for the impact.
Most of the leaders are trained and grew up in an office first world.

Here is how I think about work location.

Go Remote if

The business in in BAU mode.
Most of the people are proficient in what they do and not need input/engagement from others.
The team consists mostly of tenured professionals.
The team structure/strength does not change much.
A good benefit if one has trouble attracting talent or looking for a niche skill.

Go Hybrid if

hiring activity is low, you don’t expect to bring a lot of new people in the org.
team structure is stable
Focus is on productivity and shipping things

Go RTO if

hiring activity is high
a lot of new people onboarded in last 2 years ( more than 50%)
experiencing high growth and the business model is evolving fast.
You are the underdog going after an incumbent and the margin of error is thin
You are the incumbent and competition is catching up fast.