Remote Work, Office Mandates & the Visibility Dilemma: A Generational Mindset Gap

May 23

The debate around returning to the office versus continuing remote work is more than just a logistical issue, it's a clash of generational values, beliefs, and brain wiring.

For many Gen Z professionals, remote work offers protection: from burnout, overstimulation, microaggressions, or simply the mental toll of today’s hyper-competitive world. For many leaders, especially from older generations, it represents a loss of control, collaboration, and cohesion.

So who's right?

Maybe that’s not the right question.

Why Going Back Feels Like a Threat (Literally)

According to neuroscientist Dr. David Rock’s SCARF Model, the brain responds to perceived threats to status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness, and fairness as if they were physical danger. A top-down mandate like “everyone back to the office” can activate this threat response in younger employees, leading to anxiety, disengagement, and burnout. It’s not about entitlement or resistance: it’s biology.

Even short-term stress responses can impair executive function: the brain's ability to plan, regulate emotions, and make sound decisions (Casey et al., 2008). These functions are still developing in young adults until about age 25, making Gen Z particularly vulnerable to environments that feel chaotic or overly rigid.

But Here’s the Flip Side: How Will You Stand Out?

While protecting mental wellbeing is critical, visibility still matters, especially in the early stages of a career.

Workplace learning, trust-building, and advancement don’t just happen on performance reviews. They often unfold in informal spaces: impromptu conversations, hallway feedback, and coffee chats. These social cues and cultural norms are hard to pick up through a screen. And when everyone’s résumé looks the same (top schools, internships, side projects), how will your potential be noticed if you're never seen?

According to Dr. Tara Swart (The Source, 2019), face-to-face interactions increase oxytocin and dopamine, the “trust” and “reward” chemicals. This isn’t just good for connection, it’s essential for creating psychological safety, which fuels learning and growth.

Why Leaders Push for Office Return (Hint: It’s Not Just Trust)

Many assume leaders enforce office mandates because they don't trust remote workers. But it runs deeper.

Here's what’s often unspoken:

Legacy thinking: For many senior leaders, showing up physically has always been tied to commitment and credibility.
Cognitive bias: We naturally favor what’s visible. Employees who are physically present are simply more top-of-mind.
Fear of cultural loss: Leaders worry that hybrid setups erode team spirit, mentoring opportunities, and the kind of learning you can’t formalize in a playbook.
Brain-based resistance to change: Even experienced leaders are human, uncertainty activates the same stress triggers as it does in their teams.

A Mindset Shift for Both Sides

The future of work isn’t binary. It’s not remote or office, it’s about intentional presence and agile mindset. Gen Z must learn how to play the “grown-ups’ game” enough to gain influence, while leaders must evolve their definitions of productivity, presence, and potential.

For Gen Z:

Visibility is a career skill. Learn to show up strategically.
Don’t mistake flexibility for invisibility. You need both.

For Leaders:

Productivity doesn’t always wear a lanyard.
Rewire outdated beliefs about control and presence.
Redefine leadership for a hybrid, high-agency workforce.

Final Thought: Rethink the Real Question

Instead of asking, “Should we go back to the office?”
Let’s ask: How do we create environments where trust, visibility, and growth can thrive anywhere?

Jocelyne Lee

Founder & Coach | Specialist in Gen Z Mindset & Growth

References:

Rock, D. (2008). SCARF: A Brain-Based Model for Collaborating with and Influencing Others. NeuroLeadership Journal.
Swart, T. (2019). The Source: Open Your Mind, Change Your Life.
Casey, B.J., Jones, R.M., & Hare, T.A. (2008). The Adolescent Brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.