After the Trump Administration intensified its push for federal workers to return to the office, a new study highlights the potential downsides of this mandate.Conducted by Alessandra Fenizia and Tom Kirchmaier, researchers from the George Washington University and the London School of Economics, the study focuses on productivity impacts of work-from-home (WFH) arrangements for public sector jobs. They found that working from home boosts productivity by 12% compared to in-office work.
[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]The prevailing sentiment is that physical presence ensures better accountability and productivity. However, the study’s findings suggest that these arguments might be more rooted in perception than reality.
The study, which evaluated detailed administrative data from police staff alternating between home and office settings, indicates that employees working from home managed more cases per day, without any increase in errors or loss of quality. These findings held true even when researchers controlled for variables such as shift length and nature of tasks, ensuring that the results were not merely artifacts of different work schedules. Moreover, the productivity boost was amplified when tasks were assigned by supervisors rather than through automated systems, suggesting that the structure and management of remote work can play a critical role in maximizing its benefits.
One of the primary reasons for increased productivity was a reduction in workplace distractions. The study found that in the office, employees were more likely to be interrupted by conversations, coffee breaks, and other non-work-related interactions. By contrast, the relative isolation of remote work allowed for sustained focus, contributing to the higher case numbers logged from home. This challenges a common narrative promoted by some legislators, who argue that employees who work from home are more likely to slack off without the direct supervision afforded by office settings.
Rep. James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, for example, during the Jan. 15 2025 “Stay-at-Home Federal Workforce” hearing, blamed service backlogs on officials “coddling federal workers with a perk—telework—that allowed them to shirk their duties.” Similarly, House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana told reporters on Dec. 5 2024 that only “about 1 %” of federal employees are “actually working in the office,” adding that workers must “return to their desks and get back to the work they are supposed to be doing,” a claim that Politifact rated as “Pants on Fire.” However, Fenizia and Kirchmaier’s data showed no such shirking; instead, it demonstrated that remote work can enhance efficiency without sacrificing quality.
The study’s findings are nuanced. The researchers found that productivity gains were greatest when supervisors were actively involved in assigning tasks based on workers’ strengths, rather than relying on an automated system. This suggests that remote work, when coupled with good management practices, can unlock even greater productivity gains than those seen in a standard office environment. The benefits of telework, therefore, go beyond just flexibility—they can include better task alignment, reduced distractions, and greater efficiency.
Yet, despite this evidence, the push for a return to in-office work has been gaining momentum. Lawmakers argue that local economies, such as small businesses in downtown areas, suffer when federal offices remain empty. For instance, in the words of Rep. Lisa McClain, a Michigan Republican, stated in an April 30 2024 subcommittee hearing on commercial real-estate risks that “Even Mayor Bowser has told President Biden that his administration’s telework policies are killing Washington, D.C.’s local businesses.” However, the study suggests that a blanket return-to-office policy may be solving the wrong problem. If telework improves efficiency, the real question should be how to make remote work sustainable and secure, not how to force a return to the pre-pandemic status quo.
Ultimately, insistence on returning to the office could undermine federal efficiency and employee morale. The data paints a clear picture: remote and hybrid work, when thoughtfully implemented and managed, can be more than just a temporary fix. It’s a viable long-term strategy for boosting productivity, reducing costs, and creating a more satisfied workforce. Instead of focusing on filling desks, policymakers should prioritize performance outcomes and find ways to blend the benefits of remote and in-office work.
