Covid-19 sparked a radical shift by introducing remote work. More people than ever before are now working from home and are hesitant to return to the workplace, even as companies across the country are calling for a return to the office. The adoption of remote work, facilitated by technological advances that enable seamless collaboration from different locations, has become a defining feature of this new era.

But just because we can work from home, does that mean we should? The benefits of remote work are clear, including better access to talent, more flexibility for family, and less commuting. But it’s important to also address the disadvantages. Several recent studies have shown that working from home is actually less efficient than working in the office. And we are
We are only beginning to understand the impact of social isolation on individuals and communities as more people work from home.

There are obvious negative impacts on company culture and personal professional development. And importantly, we also need to examine the impact of a remote workforce on our cities. More people working from home means less activity in city centers, impacts public transport, and hurts small and large businesses alike.

Perceived benefits vs. social impacts

Proponents praise remote work for its autonomy, flexibility, and productivity, but it’s important to recognize that these benefits are often based on personal comfort and privilege, raising concerns about the broader societal impacts. The psychological impact of working from home is not just an individual burden. Researchers have pointed out that the lack of face-to-face interaction in our daily lives undermines social cohesion and hinders the development of meaningful relationships and community bonds. While convenient, digital communication can never fully replace face-to-face contact and impairs our collective ability to communicate effectively and build trust.

Psychological effects

Working from home can contribute to loneliness, depression and social isolation, affecting individual mental health and undermining collective social cohesion. The lack of face-to-face interactions hinders meaningful relationships and community bonds.

The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated feelings of loneliness that were already on the rise in our society. A 2020 study by Cigna found that 61% of respondents from all industries and backgrounds reported feeling lonely. Additionally, there is a growing body of research on the need to separate personal life from work life. Another 2020 survey found that 70% of people felt that mixing work and personal life at home was a source of stress.

Impact on democracy and extremism

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

Impact on the workplace and the community

Remote work reduces social cohesion in the workplace, limiting chance encounters, mentoring opportunities, and personal professional development. This decline in social interaction also impacts the community, damaging the vibrancy of neighborhoods and impacting local businesses.

When we work remotely, traditional opportunities for mentoring diminish, hindering professional development and blocking knowledge transfer. Remote workers may also feel less engaged in their workplace, leading to a decrease in loyalty to the company. Mentoring can happen in small moments at the water cooler or simply by starting a conversation as you walk past people’s desks. Informal mentoring decreases significantly when working from home.

Health of cities and urban life

The increasing prevalence of teleworking is hindering the revitalization of urban life and causing population migration from inner cities. The decline in daily activities is negatively affecting small businesses, public transport and the overall health of the city, highlighting the need to reassess the course towards a regenerative future.

The decline in social cohesion in the workplace also impacts the communities in which our offices are located, affecting the vibrancy of neighbourhoods. Fewer people coming into the office means fewer patrons at nearby cafes, lunch spots and after-work drinks and leisure activities. It also means less attention on the street and fewer services, which can lead to growing safety concerns.

Ultimately, telecommuting undermines the great progress we have made over the past 30 years in developing our city centers. Today, cities across the country are seeing a decline in daily activity, reflected in reduced use of small shops and restaurants in city cores and reduced use of public transit. In theory, the reduction in daily commuting due to telecommuting means a reduction in carbon emissions, but the decline in regular commuting actually does the most harm to our public transit systems, which must thrive if we are to reduce our carbon footprint in the long term. The decline in public transit also disproportionately impacts lower and middle class individuals who rely on it most, thus deepening the socioeconomic divide. For our public transit networks to survive and our cities to thrive, we need critical mass in city cores during the workweek.

Important call to action

I propose a reassessment of the current approach to remote working that recognises that we need critical mass in our cities and workplaces. I believe this can only be achieved if workers return to the office at least four days a week and, for many, full-time, but perhaps with more flexibility. If we continue to embrace remote working across the board and without restriction, we will see damaging social and environmental consequences that will be difficult to reverse.

A model where employees are in the workplace four days a week and can also work from home if necessary allows more personal flexibility without losing the benefits of physical presence. When employees work from home, we can encourage them to work outside their homes where possible, basing themselves in cafes, work hotels, etc. Balancing the benefits of remote working with the benefits of working in person is key to a sustainable future.

The stakes are high – it’s more than just a question of personal preference and individual comfort. I am convinced that if we continue to embrace remote working without reservations and without reservations, we will see damaging social consequences that will be hard to reverse. These include deepening class divides, a decline in urban activity, a downward spiral in individual mental health and loneliness, and stunted professional growth for younger generations. Even more frightening is the possibility that social isolation will deepen existing prejudices and biases against minority groups and increase political extremism. It’s about more than just work – it’s about our social cohesion and the kind of future we want to build together.

Even as technology evolves and working from home is likely to become easier and smoother, the impact of remote working on people, society and cities must be taken seriously. It is up to us to look holistically at the impact of working from home and decide whether it leads to a future we want to live.

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 rigorous green building program in the world.