> But arguing around $1B saved won't be easy.

That’s about 0.6% of revenue for Google. Number sounds big until you put it in perspective and realize it’s just noise.

If people were even 1% less productive (in terms of producing revenue) then even that $1B saved isn’t profitable.

That said, there could be other arguments for expanding WFH but saving less than 1% of expenses is not one of them. It’s likely that the savings are largely due to COVID preventing typical travel anyway, which had nothing to do with WFH.

The $1B is investment. It's not bloat or inefficiency. In theory, that $1B that they were not able to invest this past year has a return greater than a billion dollars.

And what are they going to do with that $1B? FAANG has so much cash they don't know how to spend it.

In all disciplines? No. Take someone who works in branding and is a part of a 20 member team. How long does it really take to come up with a new copy? 20 minutes? 2 hours? 20 hours? And is it really better to incentivize people to spend only 20 mins, or is there value in giving them 20 hours? Finally, how would you measure which option is better when most copy is not A/B tested. I am just using one random example, there are so many out there where performance evaluation is as much about your day to day observations as it is about measurable output.

You can't rule confounders out. Is this team performing worse because they work from home, or because pandemic affected their mental well-being? Or maybe their clients aren't willing to spend much, leading to low sales?