Goldman Sachs boss David Solomon has rejected remote working as a “new normal” and has labelled it an “aberration” instead.
Mr Solomon said the investment bank had operated throughout 2020 with “less than 10% of our people” in the office.
His eagerness for workers to return to the office is at odds with many other firms, who have suggested that working from home could become permanent.
Mr Solomon suggested that it does not suit the work culture at Goldman Sachs.
“I do think for a business like ours, which is an innovative, collaborative apprenticeship culture, this is not ideal for us. And it’s not a new normal. It’s an aberration that we’re going to correct as soon as possible,” he told a conference on Wednesday.
In particular he was worried about an incoming “class” of about 3,000 new recruits, who wouldn’t get the “direct mentorship” they need.
“I am very focused on the fact that I don’t want another class of young people arriving at Goldman Sachs in the summer remotely,” he said.
Although he thought the Covid-19 pandemic had helped push the adoption of digital technologies and created ways for the investment bank to run more efficiently, Mr Solomon thought it would not lead to huge changes over the longer term.
“I don’t think as we get out of the pandemic the overall operating mode of the way a business like ours operates will be vastly different,” he said.
Within the finance sector, it appears Mr Solomon is not alone.
In September, JP Morgan’s chief executive Jamie Dimon said that working from home has had a negative effect on productivity.
Barclays boss Jes Staley also expressed hope recently that the vaccine would allow employees to return to the office.
Permanent work from home?
Tech companies, by contrast, appear to be more enthusiastic about work from home arrangements.
Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter have all said staff would have the option to work from home permanently.
Facebook has also suggested that up to half of its staff could work remotely within five to ten years.
The social media giant has also suggested remote workers might receive lower pay, as their expenses would be less away from San Francisco and Silicon Valley.