The 74-Minute Commute to a Zoom Call

The 74-Minute Commute to a Zoom Call

A modern paradox of presence and performance.

The Artificial Breath of the Office

The low hum is the first thing that hits you. Not the city noise from 14 floors below, but the building’s own artificial breath-a constant, sterile hum from the fluorescent lights that makes the hair on your arms feel like it’s standing at attention. My coffee, purchased for an absurd $4 from the lobby kiosk, is already lukewarm. My laptop is open on a hot desk that smells faintly of someone else’s disinfectant wipes. And my noise-canceling headphones are on. They’re on because my team’s daily stand-up call is starting in 4 minutes, and the other 34 people on this floor are also talking, typing, or staring into space with their own headphones on.

Sarah from marketing is 24 feet away from me, to my left. I can see the back of her head. On my screen, her face pops up in a neat little square, her background blurred into an abstract watercolor of the very office she is currently sitting in. “Morning, everyone,” she says, her voice a tinny, compressed whisper in my ears. The collaboration we were mandated to return for is happening: we are sitting in the same expensive, climate-controlled room, using thousands of dollars of technology to pretend we are somewhere else.

Max W.J. and the Illusion of Control

I’m not a Luddite. I don’t hate offices. I confess, for a long time, I was a believer in the magical osmosis of the shared workspace. I bought into the idea that genius strikes when two people bump into each other at the water cooler. But after a 74-minute commute that involved a stalled train and a man arguing with a pigeon, I am finding it difficult to locate the genius. The only thing I’m finding is the login for the guest Wi-Fi, which is, of course, different from the one I used last week.

After a 74-minute commute that involved a stalled train and a man arguing with a pigeon, I am finding it difficult to locate the genius.

This entire charade reminds me of my old driving instructor, Max W.J. Max was a man built of pure, unadulterated certainty. He believed the world could be perfected through the correct adjustment of mirrors and a healthy fear of the blind spot. His entire philosophy, drilled into my 16-year-old brain over 44 hours of lessons, was based on line of sight.

“If you can’t see it, you can’t control it,” he’d say, rapping his knuckles on the dashboard of his beige sedan that perpetually smelled of stale coffee. He wasn’t teaching me to drive, not really; he was teaching me to manage a 4,000-pound box through constant, anxious surveillance.

Max would have loved the modern open-plan office. He would have adored the glass-walled conference rooms and the low-profile cubicles. It’s a manager’s paradise built on his exact principle: if I can see my employees, they must be working.

The return-to-office mandate is not a business strategy. It is a management philosophy straight from Max W.J.’s 2004 playbook.

It’s an attempt to control the uncontrollable, to apply line-of-sight supervision to a type of work that happens almost entirely behind the eyes.

The Invisibility of Deep Work

Knowledge work is not assembling widgets on a factory line. The most productive moments of my day often look like I’m doing absolutely nothing. They happen when I’m staring at a line of code, or re-reading the same sentence in a contract for the fourth time, or closing my eyes to mentally walk through a user flow. To a manager like Max, this looks like idleness. It looks like wasted time. It looks like a problem that can be solved by making sure everyone is in their assigned seat, typing with performative intensity.

Looking Busy

Performative intensity, visible activity, counting heads.

Being Effective

Quiet, invisible work, deep focus, real impact.

The pressure to look busy becomes more important than the quiet, invisible work of being effective.

And I have to admit, I’ve been on the other side of this. I once managed a small team of 4, and I remember calling a mandatory in-person “ideation session” to solve a problem we were having with a client’s campaign. I booked a room, bought the expensive pastries, and made everyone spend 34 minutes writing ideas on sticky notes. We generated 144 notes. The result? We ended up using an idea that one of my junior members had quietly emailed to me two days prior. The meeting wasn’t for them; it was for me. It was a way for me to manage my own anxiety, to feel like I was steering the ship because I could see all the rowers. It was a complete failure of trust, disguised as collaborative leadership.

144

Sticky Notes

1

Idea Used

The Core Problem: A Lack of Trust

That’s the core of it, isn’t it? These mandates, the insistence on “synergy” and “culture,” are often just proxies for a fundamental lack of trust. The system is not designed to measure output, so it defaults to measuring input-in this case, physical presence. It’s easier to count heads in a building than it is to accurately assess the value of complex, non-linear work.

So we get memos about mandatory fun and the importance of face-to-face interaction, all while the company’s multi-million dollar commercial real estate lease breathes down the CFO’s neck.

The building itself demands a purpose, and we are its purpose. We are here to justify the rent.

This obsession with physical presence creates a bizarre form of operational blindness. Executives worry about people being at their desks, but what about the things that actually keep the business running? I was talking to a facilities manager who had to drive 44 miles in a storm because he got an alert that the temperature in the main server room was climbing. He was panicked, imagining a catastrophic failure. He needed to lay eyes on the problem. That’s a valid, tangible concern that has nothing to do with whether the marketing team is having a breakthrough at the kombucha tap.

Presence is not performance.

This is where the line-of-sight philosophy actually makes sense, but not for people. You can’t solve his problem with a return-to-office mandate. You solve it with better tools for remote oversight.

📸

A simple, well-placed poe camera would have shown him in 4 seconds that an exhaust fan was blocked by a fallen ceiling tile-an easy fix, but a potential disaster.

It provides certainty and actionable information from anywhere, which is infinitely more valuable than having 234 employees sitting under fluorescent lights to make a manager feel a sense of control. We’re applying surveillance to the wrong assets.

Asynchronous Flow and True Collaboration

The real work, the deep work, is asynchronous. It’s the thoughtful comment left on a shared document at 10 PM. It’s the focused 4-hour block of coding you can get at home without being interrupted by someone asking if you “have a second.” It’s the trust that allows a team distributed across 4 time zones to build something remarkable. This doesn’t happen because people share the same recycled air; it happens because they share a common goal and respect each other’s autonomy.

Goal

Trust

Autonomy

I’m not arguing for the total abolition of offices. They can be useful tools for specific purposes-a team kickoff, a complex workshop, a social gathering. But they should be a tool, not a default location. The mandate transforms them from a resource into a requirement, and in doing so, reveals that the company trusts its real estate investment more than it trusts its people.

My Zoom call is over. It took 24 minutes. I solved a problem with a developer who lives 1,444 miles away. Sarah, 24 feet away, gives me a little wave. I wave back. We have successfully collaborated.

Now I have a 74-minute commute to look forward to, during which I will think about the four hours of focused, productive work I could have been doing instead.

The problem isn’t the office. The problem is the assumption that my physical body is the most valuable asset I have to offer.