August 2025
Dr Sepideh Yekani
In recent years, the office has found itself under examination, its role questioned, its relevance doubted. Much of this stems from comparisons with home working, which has delivered undeniable benefits, particularly for focused work and privacy.
Since the early days of the pandemic, our data has consistently shown that the average home supports the average employee better than the average office. But the narrative is more complex than a simple home-versus-office debate. While remote work has brought clear benefits such as greater flexibility, reduced commute stress, and high support for individual productivity, we must ask what might be lost in the process.
That said, this article isn’t meant to be more fuel to the home-versus-office debate. It’s an invitation to think differently; an opportunity to raise the bar. If an office is truly high performing, which could be defined as being designed around the genuine needs of employees, both professional and personal, rather than just a beautiful office, could it actually surpass the average home for the average employee, offering far more opportunities for growth, connection, and development?
The goal should not be to compensate for the shortcomings of traditional office spaces by defaulting to home working, but to reimagine what the office can be and embrace home as a valuable complement, not a replacement.
In this article, we draw on our post-pandemic Leesman data (Q1 2022 – Q1 2025)* to explore how home and office environments support employees in their daily activities. We focus on Leesman+ buildings, those that meet a defined set of criteria, including a Leesman workplace experience score (Lmi) of 70.0 or above.
By spotlighting these top-performing spaces, we aim to challenge assumptions and show that when organisations invest based on the actual needs of employees, the office can deliver an exceptional experience; one that employees genuinely want to be part of.
As part of our survey, we ask respondents to select from 21 workplace activities, identifying which are important to them and how well their work environment supports each. Despite common perceptions, even average offices outperform home settings in supporting several key activities (We only highlight gaps of 10 percentage points (pp) or more).
The results reveal notable advantages for supporting activities when working from office: hosting visitors (43 pp), informal social interaction (32 pp), learning from others (12 pp), and larger group meetings or presentations (10 pp) (See Figure 1). These are not marginal differences. They reflect core pillars of organisational culture, and collaboration: the very elements that help teams grow, adapt, and thrive.
The gap becomes even more compelling in high-performing offices, when comparing Leesman+ workplaces with home. In Leesman+ workplaces, support levels rise significantly: 56 pp for hosting visitors, 40 pp for informal social interaction, 20 pp for learning from others, 22 pp for larger group meetings, and a notable 14 pp for collaborating on creative work.
Among these activities, informal interaction and learning from others stand out as especially critical. Yet they are often overlooked, largely because their impact is difficult to measure in the short term. But when these elements are missing; particularly in remote-dominant models, their absence can quietly erode team connection, spontaneous exchange, and the flow of knowledge. Leesman+ data highlights just how much more a high-performing office can offer, reinforcing a clear message:
Of course, the home remains a stronghold for certain tasks, particularly those that require privacy and quiet concentration. On average, employees rate home environments higher than the office for activities such as private conversations (33 pp), business confidential discussions (29 pp), telephone conversations (25 pp), reading (25 pp), thinking or creative thinking (21 pp), and relaxing or taking breaks (19 pp). These are just a few examples (see Figure 2 for the full list of activities that are being supported better at home by at least 10 pp). These advantages underline the important, complementary role the home can play in a well-balanced work ecosystem.
These strengths help explain why hybrid working has become the norm, with 88% of our post-pandemic respondents working in a hybrid model, and why it has been widely embraced by organisations.
Finally, there are several activities where support levels are nearly equal between the average office and home, with gaps of less than 10 percentage points. These include:
• Using technical or specialist equipment
• Collaborating on creative work
• Collaborating on focused work
• Spreading out paper or materials
• Informal, unplanned meetings
• Individual routine tasks
• Planned meetings
This overlap reflects a shared baseline of functionality across both settings, suggesting that for these certain tasks, employees have found workable solutions whether they are at home or in the office. This also signals an opportunity for organisations to focus on elevating support for these tasks through targeted improvements, rather than assuming one setting inherently performs better or that simply being on par with the home environment is enough.
Home offers comfort, and privacy. The office, when thoughtfully designed, becomes a catalyst for learning, connection, and cultural cohesion. The data is clear: when we elevate the office, we elevate performance.
In average offices, home outperforms in ten core activities by 10 percentage points or more. In Leesman+ workplaces, that number drops to just four activities. This sharp narrowing highlights the transformative impact of investing in the physical work environment. When workplaces are purposefully designed around employee needs, they can deliver superior support. With the right investment, the office doesn’t merely catch up, it sets a new standard for exceptional workplace experience.
It is not that the home becomes less effective; it is that the office begins to fulfil its potential. A high-performing workplace is not a fallback to remote work, but a strategic asset that brings people together in ways that matter most.
*Leesman Office (Q1 2022 – Q1 2025), N=568,702; Leesman+ (Q1 2022 – Q1 2025), N=80,083; Leesman Home (Q1 2022 – Q1 2025), N=284,700
