1. Introduction
Since 2021, a number of companies have implemented an RTO policy that requires employees to return to office jobs from remote working. How the RTO policy impacts employee motivation is important for a company seeking to develop better management strategies [1]. Among global technology giants, Apple stands out for its rather unique corporate culture and style in implementing RTO policies. Although the literature has addressed the issue of how remote work has altered employee motivation, there is little research on RTO policies implemented by large technology companies [2]. Therefore, this study will attempt to fill this gap, focusing on the zeroing effect of Apple's RTO policy on employee motivation, while evaluating its impact on work efficiency, job satisfaction, and retention. Specifically, employee surveys, interviews, and publicly available internal documents will be analyzed, ultimately providing a reference for other companies to formulate RTO policies and providing data and theoretical foundations for future related research.
2. Overview of Apple's RTO Policy
2.1. Background of Apple's Work Policies
As one of the world’s top technology companies, Apple’s work culture is becoming more innovative and collaborative. Before 2020, most of Apple’s work was done on-site to allow for better collaboration and instant communication between employees. However, after 2020, in order to ensure the health and safety of employees, companies such as Apple immediately turned to remote work and introduced a company-wide remote work policy in a short period of time, while using advanced technology to maintain productivity and business continuity. After the global situation gradually recovered, Apple began to consider the enforcement of an RTO policy in order to restore employees to their original innovative atmosphere and corporate culture [3]. The RTO policy was formulated after a deep understanding of the long-term impact of remote work on employee mental health, team collaboration efficiency, and the company’s overall innovation capabilities. For this reason, Apple intends to balance out the pros of distance working and on-site work with proper return-to-work arrangements so as to fully improve employee motivation all for maximum benefits for the company [4]. Apple's CEO Tim Cook has recounted severally in public that face-to-face collaboration drives the innovative machinery required at the company, particularly for physical product development. He stated, 'We make products, you need to touch products. We believe in the synergy of one plus one being greater than three' [5]. Despite this, Apple still offers some flexibility, not requiring employees to work in the office five days a week but allowing a balance between home and onsite work through flexible arrangements.
2.2. Current RTO Policy
2.2.1. Specific Policy Content and Implementation Steps
Apple’s RTO policy has undergone several adjustments to adapt to the new changes of employees after 2021 and to maximize the advantages of remote and on-site work. Initially, Apple implemented a one-day on-site work requirement, which was gradually expanded to two days. Since September 2022, Apple has required employees to work in the office at least three days a week [6]. To ensure policy implementation, Apple has taken several specific steps. First, the company communicated the specific requirements and timeline of the RTO policy through internal communication channels such as emails and the company intranet. Second, the company introduced an access control system to monitor employee attendance. Employees need to swipe their work badges to enter the office, and the system automatically records each employee's attendance days [6]. To this end, Apple implemented flexible measures, allowing employees to negotiate specific working hours with their direct supervisors [7]. Employees who fail to meet attendance standards will receive escalating warning notices, including potential consequences for continued non-compliance, such as possible dismissal.
2.2.2. Policy Objectives and Expected Outcomes
Apple's RTO policy aims to enhance innovation capability and team collaboration efficiency by increasing face-to-face cooperation opportunities. Apple's management believes that, though working from home did its bit to a large extent in 2020, in-person communication is also necessary for product development and corporate culture. Apple hopes to work out restoration in social interaction and instant communication at work by asking employees to go back to work at least three days a week to improve overall productivity and innovation capability [7]. Some of the expected benefits of this RTO policy include that workers will build cooperation, foster closer teamwork, and be capable of producing better quality work as a result of direct product contact. In addition, frequent face-to-face office hours will help increase employees’ connection and identification with the company, which would contribute to minimizing turnover rates [8]. Simultaneously, negotiating office hours directly with managers can eliminate part of the hassle and resentment related to the daily long commute.
3. The Impact of Apple's RTO Policy on Employee Motivation
3.1. Employee Reactions to the RTO Policy
The employees in Apple reacted diversely to the RTO policy. A majority of the employees were less satisfied with the RTO policy. This was majorly because they lost flexibility related to working from home and attained a proper balance between work and life. Some employees who shared their views through internal surveys and open letters to the company indicated that return-to-office mandates are not flexible and did not accord personal and family needs enough attention [7]. Furthermore, it also slightly damaged employee trust in the company: some employees felt that the company did not involve them enough regarding their feedback and needs within the decision-making process. All these grievances finally caused the loss of some highly talented employees, hence impacting team stability and innovation capability further [9].
3.2. Specific Impacts on Employee Motivation
The different effects that Apple's RTO policy has had on employee motivation have been related mainly to work efficiency, job satisfaction, and retention rate. First of all, although it is believed that face-to-face communication and collaboration increase innovation ability and teamwork, the lack of remote work flexibility may decrease work efficiency for some employees [8]. There is a dissatisfaction relevant to job satisfaction: some employees are very dissatisfied about losing the flexibility of remote work, as they believe that the return-to-office policy is not flexible and does not balance work and life well [7]. This dissatisfaction may influence a drop in motivation and general satisfaction of employees. Finally, this return-to-office policy has greatly impacted employee retention rates. It is said that this will make high-potential talents among the employees dissatisfied and eventually leave the company, which will have a negative impact on the long-term development of the company. For instance, reports indicated that the return-to-office policy at Apple made several workers threaten to quit in protest, especially those relying much on remote work [10].
4. Evaluation and Suggestions for Apple's RTO Policy
4.1. Comprehensive Evaluation of Apple's RTO Policy
4.1.1. Advantages
Face-to-face communication and onsite collaboration brought about by the RTO policy can dramatically improve team cooperation efficiency and innovation ability. Working in the same place, teammates can easily join in for instant communication and collaboration, promoting more effective work results and closer team cohesion. Face-to-face communication can accelerate the transmission speed of information and reduce misunderstandings and delays caused by remote communication, thereby improving decision speed and accuracy. Moreover, direct contact with the product can facilitate higher quality work since the worker has an excellent opportunity to learn from particular problems with the product and recommend and adopt effective solution measures. In most instances, the policy that had been at RTO will foster better relationships among colleagues - closer trust, which is a basic principle of long-term career growth [11]. Daily direct contact strengthens familiarity and rapport among the workshop participants and hence good working atmosphere and cooperation spirit. To a great extent, in such an environment, the employees would uphold work enthusiasm and motivation and contribute more to the long-term development of the company.
4.1.2. Disadvantages
The disadvantages of the remote work policy are also obvious. Many employees have expressed great dissatisfaction with the loss of flexibility in remote work. They believe that the remote work policy is inflexible and cannot balance work and life. This job dissatisfaction has led to the resignation of some highly skilled employees, reducing the stability of the team and the company's innovation capabilities. In addition, the forced return to work has increased the time and money employees spend on the job, further reducing their job satisfaction and work efficiency [12]. One of the reasons for employee fatigue is long and tiring commutes. This will increase their stress levels, which will affect work performance and health. For some employees who live far away from their workplace or other places, this commuting burden is unacceptable. In a word, while there are advantages to the RTO policy, the obvious disadvantages will definitely bring negative effects on employee satisfaction, productivity, team stability and innovative capability of the company [13].
4.2. Improvement Suggestions
One may find it more appropriate to adjust or suspend Apple's mandatory RTO policy in order to enhance motivation and satisfaction among its employees. First and foremost, providing employees with the freedom to decide on remote work would increase job satisfaction and work efficiency to a great extent. If Apple does not prefer to stop its RTO policy, then it should provide more benefits and other support measures that would mitigate employees' stress in returning to office work [14]. For example, commuting subsidies, flexible working hours, and mental health support services can greatly help employees better cope with changes in the working environment, thereby better adapting, improving happiness, and cultivating corporate loyalty. Such support can greatly reduce the stress of employees and improve their job satisfaction and motivation [15-17].
5. Conclusion
This paper primarily explored the impact of Apple's RTO policy on employee motivation. The study found that although face-to-face communication and onsite collaboration help enhance team cooperation efficiency and innovation capability, the loss of remote work flexibility led to a decline in job satisfaction for some employees, even triggering the departure of highly skilled employees. This paper did not explore in depth how to find a better balance between RTO and remote work, nor did it use quantitative research methods to analyze the specific impact of the policy on employees in different departments. Future research can focus on how to optimize employee satisfaction and productivity through a hybrid office model, and the different responses of different employee groups to RTO policies.
References
[1]. Smith J.D. A. (2022). Apple Postpones Plans to Work in the Office Three Days a Week. www.shrm.org. Available at: https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/apple-postpones-plans-to-work-office-three-days-week.
[2]. Ding, Y., & Mark (Shuai) Ma. (2024). Return-to-Office Mandates. Social Science Research Network, N/A. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4675401
[3]. Lyons K. (2022). Apple CEO Tim Cook tells employees the return to offices will begin on April 11th. The Verge. Available at: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/4/22961592/apple-april-11-return-office-corporate-pandemic-tim-cook.
[4]. Clover J. (2022). Apple’s Corporate Employees Returning to Offices on Hybrid Schedule Starting Today.MacRumors. Available at: https://www.macrumors.com/2022/04/11/apple-employees-returning-to-offices/.
[5]. Turner J. (2022). Tim Cook Defends Apple’s Return to Office Mandate. Tech.co. Available at: https://tech.co/news/tim-cook-apple-return-office-mandate.
[6]. Vitak, J. and Zimmer, M. (2023). Surveillance and the future of work: exploring employees’ attitudes toward monitoring in a post-COVID workplace. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 28(4). doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmad007.
[7]. Wright, A. (2024). New Harris Research Finds that Return-to-Office Policies Drive Senior Employees Away and Reduce Innovation. The University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. Available at: https://harris.uchicago.edu/news-events/news/new-harris-research-finds-return-office-policies-drive-senior-employees-away-and.
[8]. Vroman S.R. and Danko T. (2023). Making Returning To Office (RTO) Work. California Management Review Insights 2023(1). Available at: https://cmr.berkeley.edu/2023/12/making-rto-work/.
[9]. Vijayamohan S. (n.d.). AppleTogether: Collecting Goodbye Messages From Former Apple Employees. AppleTogether. Available at: https://appletogether.org/goodbye-apple.html.
[10]. Hilliard W. (2023). Apple employees face reprisals possible termination over return to office policy. AppleInsider. Available at: https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/03/22/apple-employees-face-reprisals-possible-termination-over-return-to-office-policy.
[11]. Darby, M. L., Nikolaou, M., Jones, J., & Nicholson, D. (2011). RTO: An overview and assessment of current practice. Journal of Process Control, 21(6), 874–884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.2011.03.009
[12]. Câmara, M., Quelhas, A., & Pinto, J. (2016). Performance Evaluation of Real Industrial RTO Systems. Processes, 4(4), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr4040044
[13]. De Souza, G., Odloak, D., & Zanin, A. C. (2010). Real time optimization (RTO) with model predictive control (MPC). Computers & Chemical Engineering, 34(12), 1999–2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2010.07.001
[14]. Kavulla, T. (2019). PROBLEMS IN ELECTRICITY MARKET GOVERNANCE: AN ASSESSMENT. R Street Institute. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep30577
[15]. Quelhas, A. D., de Jesus, N. J. C., & Pinto, J. C. (2012). Common vulnerabilities of RTO implementations in real chemical processes. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 91(4), 652–668. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.21738
[16]. Gibson, C. B., Gilson, L. L., Griffith, T. L., & O’Neill, T. A. (2023). Should employees be required to return to the office? Organizational Dynamics, 52(2), 100981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2023.100981
[17]. Kotakorpi, K., Poutvaara, P., & Tervi�, M. (2017). Returns to Office in National and Local Politics: A Bootstrap Method and Evidence from Finland. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 33(3), 413–442. https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewx010
Cite this article
Li,T. (2024). The Impact of Apple's RTO Policy on Employee Motivation. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,125,67-71.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Economic Management and Green Development
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).
References
[1]. Smith J.D. A. (2022). Apple Postpones Plans to Work in the Office Three Days a Week. www.shrm.org. Available at: https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/apple-postpones-plans-to-work-office-three-days-week.
[2]. Ding, Y., & Mark (Shuai) Ma. (2024). Return-to-Office Mandates. Social Science Research Network, N/A. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4675401
[3]. Lyons K. (2022). Apple CEO Tim Cook tells employees the return to offices will begin on April 11th. The Verge. Available at: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/4/22961592/apple-april-11-return-office-corporate-pandemic-tim-cook.
[4]. Clover J. (2022). Apple’s Corporate Employees Returning to Offices on Hybrid Schedule Starting Today.MacRumors. Available at: https://www.macrumors.com/2022/04/11/apple-employees-returning-to-offices/.
[5]. Turner J. (2022). Tim Cook Defends Apple’s Return to Office Mandate. Tech.co. Available at: https://tech.co/news/tim-cook-apple-return-office-mandate.
[6]. Vitak, J. and Zimmer, M. (2023). Surveillance and the future of work: exploring employees’ attitudes toward monitoring in a post-COVID workplace. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 28(4). doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmad007.
[7]. Wright, A. (2024). New Harris Research Finds that Return-to-Office Policies Drive Senior Employees Away and Reduce Innovation. The University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. Available at: https://harris.uchicago.edu/news-events/news/new-harris-research-finds-return-office-policies-drive-senior-employees-away-and.
[8]. Vroman S.R. and Danko T. (2023). Making Returning To Office (RTO) Work. California Management Review Insights 2023(1). Available at: https://cmr.berkeley.edu/2023/12/making-rto-work/.
[9]. Vijayamohan S. (n.d.). AppleTogether: Collecting Goodbye Messages From Former Apple Employees. AppleTogether. Available at: https://appletogether.org/goodbye-apple.html.
[10]. Hilliard W. (2023). Apple employees face reprisals possible termination over return to office policy. AppleInsider. Available at: https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/03/22/apple-employees-face-reprisals-possible-termination-over-return-to-office-policy.
[11]. Darby, M. L., Nikolaou, M., Jones, J., & Nicholson, D. (2011). RTO: An overview and assessment of current practice. Journal of Process Control, 21(6), 874–884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.2011.03.009
[12]. Câmara, M., Quelhas, A., & Pinto, J. (2016). Performance Evaluation of Real Industrial RTO Systems. Processes, 4(4), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr4040044
[13]. De Souza, G., Odloak, D., & Zanin, A. C. (2010). Real time optimization (RTO) with model predictive control (MPC). Computers & Chemical Engineering, 34(12), 1999–2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2010.07.001
[14]. Kavulla, T. (2019). PROBLEMS IN ELECTRICITY MARKET GOVERNANCE: AN ASSESSMENT. R Street Institute. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep30577
[15]. Quelhas, A. D., de Jesus, N. J. C., & Pinto, J. C. (2012). Common vulnerabilities of RTO implementations in real chemical processes. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 91(4), 652–668. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.21738
[16]. Gibson, C. B., Gilson, L. L., Griffith, T. L., & O’Neill, T. A. (2023). Should employees be required to return to the office? Organizational Dynamics, 52(2), 100981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2023.100981
[17]. Kotakorpi, K., Poutvaara, P., & Tervi�, M. (2017). Returns to Office in National and Local Politics: A Bootstrap Method and Evidence from Finland. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 33(3), 413–442. https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewx010