Personally speaking, I would happily go to the office if attendance were more like 80% instead of 30%. Right now I rarely go because the attendance is so poor.
So I would say that it’s not just people who want to go vs people who don’t. There is a third category that basically doesn’t see the point if the office is “just” a working environment and doesn’t have enough actual coworkers there, which I find myself in, and I suspect many others do too.
Yes, I don’t want to force anybody to come to the office, and it obviously doesn’t make sense for those 800km away.
To echo the sibling comment, long term, I think it would be good for teams to be separated based on office policy. One team for pure WFH, one for hybrid (which can mean many different things), one for mainly going to the office, etc.
In my case I see it as a prisoners dilemma kind of thing. I’m officially 3/2 hybrid with unenforced 3 day attendance, along with 80% of my team. I like that I can still choose to WFH on those 3 days and my team can do the same. But we have reached an equilibrium where there’s basically no point to go to the office on those days because nobody else would be there, even though we all had the option to go officially remote (so we were all ok with going to the office). I think in that case, for example, we need at least one “actually everybody should go to the office” day for the 80% that aren’t remote
So I would say that it’s not just people who want to go vs people who don’t. There is a third category that basically doesn’t see the point if the office is “just” a working environment and doesn’t have enough actual coworkers there, which I find myself in, and I suspect many others do too.