Sign in to cast your position.
Remote-first companies hire from a far larger talent pool, because they aren't limited to people within commuting distance of one office. A Stanford randomised trial at Trip.com found hybrid work cut resignations by a third with no loss in performance or promotion. Remote-first firms also save heavily on real estate, which can be reinvested in people. Outperformance comes from better hiring, better retention and lower fixed costs together.
The Trip.com study my opponent cites is about hybrid work, not remote-first, so it supports the office having a role. The strongest evidence on fully remote work points the other way for learning: a study of software engineers found that sitting near teammates sharply increased the feedback junior engineers received. Because companies outperform over years, not quarters, weaker mentoring of juniors becomes a real cost. A larger talent pool helps only if new hires grow into strong performers.
Honestly, this is the kind of thing people say when they've never actually run a remote team. Office-first managers just want to watch people at desks, and everyone knows it. The world has moved on and this argument belongs in 2019. Come back when you have managed someone outside your own building.