The In-Office Plan Where You Can Live Anywhere

While the frequency and urgency of the “how does your company do in-office vs remote?” conversation has diminished, it remains a popular topic of interest among entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs are enthusiastic about sharing ideas and learning from one another, and this has kept the future of work debate top-of-mind. Even after years of experimentation, many entrepreneurs remain eager to explore new ideas.

Most software entrepreneurs I know have fully embraced remote work environments, allowing their teams to operate from various locations and convene in person regularly—typically, once a quarter for departmental gatherings and a couple of times per year for company-wide meetings. In contrast, many traditional business entrepreneurs I know have opted for a hybrid approach, requiring employees to be in the office 2-3 days a week while maintaining a workforce that is predominantly geographically centered around physical offices.

Last week, I read an interesting variation in a Wall Street Journal article titled “This Company Created a Return-to-Office Plan That Employees Actually Like.” J.M. Smucker, the company renowned for its eponymous jam, employs over 1,000 individuals primarily based at their headquarters in Ohio. After navigating the challenges posed by Covid-19, including work-from-home and in-office work arrangements, they realized that they could attract superior talent without the constraints of geographic specificity. However, they still valued face-to-face interactions. The solution they devised allowed employees to reside wherever they pleased but mandated in-office attendance on Tuesdays through Thursdays every alternate week, totaling six days per month, with exceptions of three days in July and December—all scheduled a year in advance.

With this schedule in place, all critical activities such as strategy sessions, training sessions, and other in-person work took place exclusively at the headquarters. This approach ensured that everyone knew well in advance when and where they were expected to be, enhancing the success of both crucial meetings and spontaneous water cooler conversations.

Naturally, there were specific rules and regulations associated with this arrangement. The most significant requirement was that employees were responsible for covering their own travel and lodging expenses. In essence, individuals had the freedom to live anywhere they desired, but the cost of travel was not subsidized by the company. This eliminated any debates about proximity to the office, as the financial burden for commuting was shifted to the employees themselves.

For entrepreneurs who firmly believe in the value of frequent face-to-face interactions and aspire to attract talent from all over, this innovative in-office plan, allowing employees to reside anywhere, merits consideration.