When Nationwide initially rolled out their "work from anywhere forever" policy, I immediately flagged it as a decision they'd regret - a classic case of putting personal preference over strategic planning. It seemed evident that those making this call were keen on working from home themselves. Now, watching them backtrack is a telling moment. This flip-flop serves as a cautionary tale about the pitfalls of decision-making driven more by individual desires than by a company's actual or projected needs. Had the decision been rooted in a cautionary approach, solid data and structured trials, rather than personal biases, might we be seeing a different scenario? It's worth pondering, especially considering that Nationwide faced no pressing need to commit to such a sweeping policy change. Abrupt policy shifts can significantly damage trust and disrupt workplace culture. Consistency isn't just a buzzword - it's a fundamental pillar for sustaining employee engagement and morale. This isn't rocket science; it's basic common sense. The effectiveness of remote work continues to be a hotly debated topic. Its advocates highlight its benefits, but skeptics question its long-term sustainability, especially in terms of team collaboration. Remember, the initial success of remote work was likely bolstered because these teams had pre-existing office relationships. I feel sorry for Nationwide employees who rearranged their lives (or even worse - joined the company!) based on the 'work from home forever' promise, only to feel betrayed by this abrupt change. It's a stark reminder of the real human impact behind corporate decisions. https://lnkd.in/d3R7qbcv