Attendance Policy

Stop Mandating. Start Prototyping.

The return-to-office debate has become strangely binary.

One side argues that culture, mentorship, and collaboration require employees to be in the office five days per week.

The other argues that professionals have proven they can be productive from anywhere.

Both sides are partially right.

And both sides may be asking the wrong question.

The question is not:

"Should everyone be in the office?"

The question is:

"Which work requires people to be together, and which work requires people to be left alone?"

For an industry built around solving complex problems, architecture and interior design firms have been surprisingly quick to apply blanket policies to highly nuanced roles.

We Already Ran the Largest Workplace Experiment in History

During 2020 and 2021, many firms reported strong productivity and profitability despite widespread remote work.

Then, almost immediately afterward, many organizations announced return-to-office mandates accompanied by a familiar message:

"We're better together."

Maybe.

But the data suggested something more complicated.

Perhaps teams were better together.

Perhaps individuals were better apart.

Those are not the same thing.

Design work contains both collaborative and individual activities.

A project kickoff meeting benefits from in-person interaction.

A client workshop benefits from in-person interaction.

Mentoring a junior designer often benefits from in-person interaction.

But does developing a furniture specification package?

Does writing a workplace strategy report?

Does creating a test fit?

Does preparing a presentation deck?

Many of these tasks require uninterrupted concentration.

And one uncomfortable reality remains largely unaddressed:

Open offices are often terrible environments for deep focus work.

The modern workplace spent decades optimizing for interaction while unintentionally making concentration more difficult.

Many designers discovered during remote work that they were not necessarily more productive because they were home.

They were more productive because they had access to quiet.

What If We Stopped Treating Flexibility as a Perk?

Before COVID, hybrid arrangements often existed.

But they were typically handled as special accommodations.

An employee earned trust.
Demonstrated performance.
Built credibility.

The organization then extended flexibility.

The unspoken agreement was:

"We recognize your contributions. We trust your judgment. We understand you have responsibilities outside of work. We will give you flexibility because you have demonstrated accountability."

There was a social contract.

Somewhere along the way, the conversation shifted from trust to policy.

Now many firms are debating whether flexibility should exist at all.

A better question might be:

How should flexibility be structured?

Not Everyone Should Have the Same Attendance Requirements

The design industry often treats office attendance as though every role contributes value in the same way.

They do not.

A junior designer benefits tremendously from proximity.

They learn through observation.
They absorb standards.
They hear conversations.
They ask questions.

Likewise, project managers and department leaders often need to be physically present because part of their role is developing people.

Management is not simply directing work.

It is teaching.

It is coaching.

It is creating accountability.

If a manager is responsible for developing junior staff, there is a strong argument that manager presence matters.

But what about experienced individual contributors?

Senior designers.

Design directors.

Technical specialists.

Workplace strategists.

Principals.

Many of these professionals are at their most valuable when they are thinking deeply, solving problems, writing, designing, creating, and producing.

Their effectiveness is often tied more closely to concentration than visibility.

Forcing every role into the same attendance model ignores the realities of how those roles create value.

The Hidden Cost of Current Models

One of the biggest issues I observe in practice today is that mentoring responsibilities are often falling on the wrong people.

Firms say they want junior staff trained.

That is a worthwhile goal.

But who is actually doing the training?

In many cases, it is not managers.

It is mid-level and senior production staff.

The very people already carrying project deadlines.

The result is predictable.

They spend the day:

• teaching,

• answering questions,

• reviewing work,

• helping others solve problems.

Then they spend the evening:

• completing their own deliverables.

The industry often celebrates this as dedication.

It may actually be a structural flaw.

If mentoring is a priority, it should be treated as management work.

Managers should have the time, expectations, and accountability to develop staff.

Otherwise firms create a system where their strongest contributors are simultaneously expected to perform, teach, manage, and absorb the resulting overtime.

That is not sustainable.

What a Better Model Could Look Like

Instead of mandates, firms should prototype.

Treat workplace strategy the same way we treat design.

Test.
Measure.
Refine.

A possible framework:

• New hires spend their first 90 days primarily in office.

• Attendance expectations are reviewed based on performance and role.

• Junior staff maintain higher in-office presence.

• Managers maintain significant in-office presence because development is part of their responsibility.

• Experienced individual contributors receive greater autonomy.

• Policies are transparent and role-based.

• Expectations are clearly communicated.

• Performance is measured by outcomes, not attendance.

Most importantly, everyone understands why the policy exists.

Not because leadership prefers it.

Not because another firm is doing it.

Because the policy supports the work.

The Future Is Not About Remote Work

The future is about intentional work.

The firms that win the talent battle will not necessarily be the firms with the most flexibility.

Nor will they be the firms with the strictest attendance requirements.

They will be the firms that align workplace expectations with how value is actually created.

Design firms ask clients every day to create environments that support human performance.

Perhaps it is time to apply that same level of thoughtfulness to our own workplaces.