The Disconnect Between Remote Workers and Their Companies Is Getting Bigger
More people who work from home say they don’t feel a connection to the mission of their employers
More people who work from home say they don’t feel a connection to the mission of their employers
People who work from home are feeling more disconnected from the larger mission of their employers.
In a new Gallup survey, the share of remote workers who said they felt a connection to the purpose of their organisations fell to 28% from 32% in 2022—the lowest level since before the pandemic. The findings are from a survey this spring and summer of nearly 9,000 U.S. workers whose jobs can be done remotely.
By contrast, a third of full-time office workers reported a similar sense of connection, nearly the same as last year. Hybrid workers clocked in highest, with 35% saying their companies’ mission made them feel their jobs were important.
The findings have broader implications for businesses worried about remote work’s effects on employee loyalty and team productivity. For now, many workers say remote work affords them the ability to focus on their essential duties and avoid some of the extracurriculars of office life. This leaves it to companies to try to foster that sense of connection.
In short, more remote workers appear to be approaching their jobs with “a gig-worker mentality,” fulfilling the basic responsibilities of the role rather than anticipating the broader needs of their team or company, said Jim Harter, chief workplace scientist at Gallup, which has tracked worker engagement since 2000. Most professional roles, he points out, tacitly include expectations that go beyond the actual work, such as mentoring others or spurring innovation.
“That’s much more likely to happen if they feel they’re part of something significant,” he said.
Despite the lack of connection, the Gallup survey showed 38% of people who work remotely full- or part-time are engaged, or enthused about their work, compared with 34% of in-office workers.
The conflicting metrics show bosses don’t have any easy answers as they try to provide flexible working arrangements yet fret about worker productivity. Nearly 30% of U.S. workers in remote-capable jobs work exclusively at home, according to Gallup, a share that hasn’t wavered much in the past year. One reason they score higher in Gallup’s engagement metrics than their office peers is that they say they have a clear idea of what’s expected of them.
Many managers are unsatisfied with the current setup. In a Federal Reserve Bank of New York survey of business leaders released this month, the majority said remote work helped in recruiting employees yet worsened workplace culture, team cohesion and mentorship.
“People are a little bit more prone to drift to other employment, feeling less attached to the workplace,” said Howard Liu, chair of the psychiatry department at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, where clinicians can work several days each week from home and see patients virtually.
There’s also a risk that senior faculty may not think to include junior colleagues on presentations or projects if they don’t run into them in person, Liu said. His department now plans large outdoor events each quarter and recently rolled out smaller-group meals, where about 10 colleagues—from clinicians to receptionists—sign up to eat together. The department foots the bill.
Companies are fine-tuning how they manage their remote workforces, adding more virtual check-ins and team-building activities. Some are also bringing them together physically at more critical moments in their work with their teams.
Mr. Cooper, a Dallas-based mortgage lender and servicer, introduced a “home-centric” work model last year, letting staff still mostly work at home while having them come into the office occasionally. But as mortgage rates climbed and business got tougher, the lender’s sales managers asked their teams to come in one to three days a week, said Kelly Ann Doherty, its chief administrative officer.
The managers felt on-site work would help team members learn more from each other, improve individual performance and feel more invested in the organization, she said. It’s paid off: Productivity has improved, and the teams have closed more deals since, she said.
At Microsoft, just over a quarter of teams work together in the same location, compared with 61% of them pre pandemic. The company is now using data from internal research on in-person work and employee surveys to guide managers on when it’s most effective to work face-to-face.
One early finding is that new hires who meet their manager in person in the first 90 days are more likely to ask colleagues for feedback and say they are comfortable discussing problems with managers. These workers are also more likely to say that their teammates ask them for input to inform decisions or solve problems, Microsoft said.
“Think about social connection as a battery—you need to charge that battery every once in a while,” said Dawn Klinghoffer, vice president for human-resources business insights.
Records keep falling in 2025 as harbourfront, beachfront and blue-chip estates crowd the top of the market.
A divide has opened in the tech job market between those with artificial-intelligence skills and everyone else.
Investors normally don’t talk about the risks of a bubble forming in the asset that they’re buying to hedge against a different bubble, but gold’s extraordinary surge is starting to trigger uncomfortable conversations about the yellow metal’s bullish prospects.
Gold prices have gained more than 55% this year, blowing past the $3,000 an ounce mark in early spring and topping the $4,000 threshold for the first time on record last month. Gold was up another 3.3% to $4,108.60 in Monday trading, a new record high.
Myriad reasons have been cited for the surge, including the slumping U.S. dollar, soaring tech stocks that have concentrated broader market risks into a handful of megacap tech names, purchases by central banks seeking to diversify away from the dollar, and renewed inflation risks tied to ongoing tariff and trade disputes.
Central bank buying has also been significant, with China alone adding 39.2 tons to its overall holdings since it returned to the market in November of last year.
“Central banks’ appetite for gold is driven by concerns from countries about Russian-style sanctions on their foreign assets in the wake of decisions made by the U.S. and Europe to freeze Russian assets, as well as shifting strategies on currency reserves,” said ING commodities strategist Ewa Manthey.
“The pace of buying by central banks doubled following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.”
Gold-backed ETFs , meanwhile, are attracting billions in new investments, with overall additions likely to have topped 100 tons over the three months ending in September. That’s more than triple the quarterly average over the past eight years.
The combination of forces is likely to drive more gains for gold in the months ahead, according to Société Générale’s commodity research team, headed by Mike Haigh.
“Gold’s ascent to $5000 seems increasingly inevitable,” Haigh wrote in a note published Monday, citing both strong ETF flows and renewed central bank purchases.
Haigh also notes that ETF flows are tracking a rise in SocGen’s U.S. uncertainty index, which is now pegged at more than three times the level it reached over the five months before last year’s presidential election win for President Donald Trump.
“We cannot imagine a situation where we return to pre-Trump index uncertainty normalcy over our forecast horizon, so ETF flows are a key component to our price forecasting,” Haigh said. His $500o price target is pegged for the end of 2026.
Lisa Shalett, chief investment officer at Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, has a different take, tied in part to what she sees as a way for governments to “challenge the dollar’s stranglehold on global money movements.”
Gold holdings, Shalett argues, can “improve collateralisation of their fiat currencies and/or cryptocurrencies in a world where currency markets undefined may be remade by digital assets, cryptocurrencies, and stablecoins.”
The gold market’s mimicry of previous historic booms, however, has caught the attention of Bank of America analyst Paul Ciana, who cautioned in a note published last week that “prices have tended to pivot near round-number levels.”
Citing data showing “midway corrections” in long term bull markets for gold, Ciana sees the chances for a near-term pullback that “rhymes” with pullbacks of around 40% in the mid-1970s and 25% following the global financial crisis in 2008.
“This boom is about 10 years old, smaller in size than the 1970s and 2000s boom but nearly as old,” Ciana wrote. “This warrants caution into round number resistance at $4,000, or again later at $5,000.”
Gold isn’t likely a bubble. It’s hard for central banks to sell, and many of the countries encouraging its import, like China and India, also make it difficult for investors to move offshore.
But gold did lose around 60% of its value in the two decades that followed its 1970s boom, with bear markets following in 2008 and 2015.
This year’s really is still going strong, of course, but with gold’s advance tied to nearly all of the concerns currently gripping financial markets, maybe it’s worth asking if it’s being “all things to all people” is the best kind of hedge—or just another risky bet on rising prices.
An opulent Ryde home, packed with cinema, pool, sauna and more, is hitting the auction block with a $1 reserve.
With two waterfronts, bushland surrounds and a $35 million price tag, this Belongil Beach retreat could become Byron’s most expensive home ever.