The Future of Physical Offices

George Waggott, founder, and Roberto Fonseca-Velazquez, summer law student

George Waggott Law

In a recent interview published in the Harvard Business Review, workspace researcher Jennifer Magnolfi Astill discussed how remote and hybrid work in the aftermath of the COVID pandemic have reshaped our understanding of offices. Initially, the pandemic accelerated the adoption of digital and remote work tools like Zoom, re-defining what constitutes a “workspace” and indeed a workplace. Once limited to technology and younger workers, the idea that work could happen anywhere became mainstream. This shift represented a structural and cultural transformation, not just a temporary adaptation.

However, two major outcomes were unexpected. First, people began reassessing how they valued their work and time. Second, social isolation—already a growing issue among younger people — deepened across generations, exacerbated by screen-dominated interactions. The U.S. Surgeon General declared this loneliness a public health crisis by 2023, which is ongoing and likely getting worse. These developments highlighted that the workplace is more than a physical location or digital interface; it's a social system built on trust, productivity, and social capital.

Astill argues that while remote work brought undeniable benefits, it also strained social cohesion. Effective collaboration, complex problem-solving, mentoring, and innovation often require in-person interaction. Teams tend to gather physically during critical phases of projects to synthesize diverse perspectives and collaboratively develop solutions. These face-to-face experiences foster a shared mental model and team solidarity that digital communication struggles to replicate.

In the current return-to-office (RTO) debate, many leaders emphasize the importance of in-person work but fail to provide a compelling reason for it beyond tradition. Offices, which once symbolized opportunity, now feel transactional unless workers are engaged in meaningful, socially connected work. Historical strategies to optimize office spaces for innovation—like perks and iconic designs—are insufficient if employees do not see a higher purpose or shared goal.

To rebuild organizational culture, Astill suggests rethinking the role of physical space. Rather than mandating arbitrary days in-office, she recommends aligning in-person work with specific project phases or team goals. For example, teams could gather in the office for four to six weeks during the early planning or final testing stages of a project, while working remotely during other phases. This project-based approach creates a predictable rhythm and supports deeper engagement.

Additionally, organizations should prioritize in-person work for functions that foster connection and learning—particularly complex problem-solving and cross-generational mentoring. These interactions benefit from physical presence due to richer communication cues and knowledge exchange. Physical environments like “war rooms” or “campfire huddles” have historically supported breakthrough collaboration, and similar spaces are still vital today.

Astill concludes by reaffirming the importance of physical offices—not as productivity machines, but as spaces that enable relational and experiential learning. As human beings, our understanding of abstract concepts is enriched when we can connect them to concrete, real world, experiences. We discover aspects of ourselves in relation to others, and we learn to make sense of abstract concepts from our experiences of interacting in the world with others. As organizations increasingly integrate human and machine work, sustaining culture, connection, and meaning will depend on strategically leveraging both technology and the physical workplace. The office, then, becomes a tool for rebuilding the social fabric and preparing future leaders—not simply a place to complete tasks.

  For more information about George Waggott Law, please see: www.georgewaggott.com, or contact: george@georgewaggott.com