[htss2013]

>and because return to office in their minds is a good way to make the org more productive over the long term.

If WFH destroys long term value creation, then why didn't the stock market punish every tech company when they all announced permanent WFH?

[dougweltman]

1. Because beliefs around WFH have changed. 2. Investors aren’t thinking about tactical stuff like office amenities, free lunches and WFH.

None of it makes a dent on the valuation in the way that better focus and execution do, and investors expect the managers to set up the culture to do that without having to make a determination about the specifics of WFH in Amazons particular circumstances.

That is exactly what Amazon thinks it’s doing. Yes, costs are getting cut, but by far the more significant impact would be 5 or 10% better execution on stuff that really moves the needle than a 2% cost reduction.

When margins are high the returns to growing revenue are much greater than cutting costs.

[htss2013]

Beliefs around WFH didn't change. Economic circumstances did. If it reverts to difficulty hiring and retaining people, WFH will change back. Productivity is an excuse after the fact.

>When margins are high the returns to growing revenue are much greater than cutting costs.

Margins aren't necessarily high and growing revenue isn't always an option. Certain products/services just aren't in demand, no matter how well you execute.

AWS is high margin but retail isn't. For better or worse the two businesses are merged and considered together by Wall St. which means management also has to look at it that way.