Big companies are making big calls about where work happens. WPP’s decision to require most employees to be in the office an average of four days a week has set off a predictable clash: leaders talk creativity and collaboration, while staff push back on flexibility and quality of life. The reality sits somewhere in the middle — and there are smart, immediate moves both sides can make to prevent good people from walking out the door. Financial Times

The facts, fast

In early January, WPP’s CEO Mark Read sent a memo saying that from the beginning of April most employees should spend an average of four days a week in the office, with at least two Fridays a month on site and one flexible remote day negotiated with managers. The company’s workforce spans roughly 110,000–114,000 people across dozens of agencies and markets. MediaPost

That memo landed alongside visible employee pushback — internal petitions and open letters have collected thousands of signatures and voices arguing the change risks undoing gains in wellbeing and retention. Recruiters and industry observers warn a hard mandate can become a talent tipping point for people who value remote flexibility. AdNews

Why leaders want more office days

Executives point to three things: mentoring early-career talent, spontaneous creative collisions, and the client-facing advantage of integrated teams. For a network of agencies where relationships and pitch-room chemistry matter, being together does simplify some things and can speed learning curves. Those are legitimate returns — but they’re not automatic. Financial Times

Why employees balk

People who thrived with hybrid schedules point to measurable benefits: less commute time transformed into focused work, improved work‑life balance, and the ability to serve clients across time zones without a daily commute penalty. When a mandate feels blunt — one-size-fits-all, with limited exception handling — it reads like a trust issue, not a productivity strategy. AdNews

Smart middle-ground moves (for leaders)

Immediate actions for employees

If you’re facing a mandate but value flexibility, be tactical and proactive. Propose a “works best” plan — show when remote deep work produces higher-quality outputs, and agree to in‑office blocks for mentorship and client-facing activity. If a formal exception fits your situation, document the impact and a clear communication cadence. If you’re considering leaving, update your network and make your move deliberate, not reactionary.

My take — what actually preserves productivity and people

Forcing bodies into desks will move utilization metrics, but it won’t necessarily sustain creativity or retention. The companies that win balance intentional in‑person rituals with meaningful remote autonomy. They make the office a catalyst for expensive things — mentoring, pitch rehearsals, integrated problem solving — and protect heads‑down time elsewhere. Leaders who can map which outcomes require proximity and which don’t will keep the best of both worlds.