In-Person Vs. Remote – What Matters Most to the Bottom Line?

The debate over in-person versus remote work is not just about preference — it’s about performance, engagement, and ultimately, the bottom line. 

In recent years, companies have experimented with different work models, from fully remote to full-time, in-office, and every hybrid variation in between. Now leaders are asking a critical question: Which model leads to the best business outcome?

The findings from our recent National Study on Consistently High Achieving Teams (CHAT)®:  Exploring Behaviors, Mindsets, and Practices that Drive High-Impact Results for Leaders and Teams, provide a clear answer: Success isn’t determined by where people work. It’s determined by how they work.

Organizations that focus only on location — rather than the systems, behaviors, and leadership practices that drive performance — are asking the wrong question. The real issue isn’t remote versus in-office. The real issue is how to create an environment where employees produce their best work, collaborate effectively, and stay engaged. 

The Case for In-Person Work

Many leaders argue that being in the same physical space creates advantages that can’t be replicated virtually. In-person work can lead to faster decision-making, clearer communication, and stronger team dynamics. It allows for spontaneous conversations, quick problem-solving, and a natural flow of collaboration. When employees are physically present, it’s easier to provide real-time feedback, observe engagement levels, and ensure alignment.

But presence alone does not create impact. Many organizations bring employees back to the office, assuming productivity will improve, only to find that engagement declines. In-person work needs purposeful interaction, structured collaboration, and leadership that fosters alignment. Without those elements, proximity becomes irrelevant.

The Case for Remote Work

Remote work has proven to be effective for many organizations, particularly when employees have well-defined roles, clear goals, and strong accountability systems. It provides flexibility, reduces commuting time, and allows companies to recruit talent from a wider geographic area. Some employees work more efficiently at home, free from office distractions.

However, remote work can also create silos, slow down collaboration, and lead to disengagement if there isn’t a strong structure in place. The most successful remote teams are not just independent — they are highly structured, with intentional communication, clear expectations, and systems for visibility and feedback. Without those elements, remote employees can feel disconnected, which affects long-term performance.

What Actually Impacts the Bottom Line?

Instead of focusing on location, leaders should focus on what actually drives business success. The research highlights four key areas that determine whether an organization will thrive, regardless of where employees work.

1. Collaboration and Decision-Making – Some teams function best when they can collaborate in real time, while others perform well with structured, scheduled check-ins. The key is not where people are, but whether decisions are made efficiently, communication is clear, and employees feel included in the process.

2. Feedback and Development – One of the biggest challenges organizations face — regardless of work model — is providing consistent, actionable feedback. Many employees feel they don’t receive enough guidance or coaching, which slows their development. Leaders must create a culture where feedback is frequent, constructive, and leads to real improvement.

3. Productivity and Accountability – Findings from the study on Consistently High-Achieving Teams showed that 43 percent of workers experience a lack of accountabilitywithin their teams. Measuring productivity by hours spent in an office or logged online does not drive results. The most effective organizations define success by outcomes. Employees perform at their best when expectations are clear, accountability is strong, and results — not just activity — are the focus. 

4. Talent Retention and Business Costs – Employee turnover is one of the biggest hidden costs to organizations. If requiring in-office work leads to higher attrition, companies must weigh the cost of losing experienced employees against the benefits of having people physically present. On the other hand, if a fully remote model erodes company culture and engagement, that also comes with a cost. The most sustainable work models strike a balance between employee needs and business performance.

Which Model Delivers the Best Business Results?

The data shows that neither fully in-person nor fully remote is the universal solution. The best model depends on the nature of the work, the structure of the teams, and how well leadership supports collaboration and accountability.

For companies that rely on rapid innovation, frequent collaboration, and strong team dynamics, an in-office model may provide the greatest advantage. For organizations that prioritize flexibility, talent attraction, and efficiency, a structured remote or hybrid model may be more effective.

But what’s clear is this: Simply mandating in-office work or allowing remote work without structure will not improve performance. What drives results is clarity, accountability, and strong leadership — regardless of where employees are located.

The most successful organizations are not debating location. They are designing workplaces — whether in-person, remote, or hybrid — that enable employees to thrive, deliver results, and contribute to long-term business success.