The lease comes up for renewal, and the math doesn’t quite add up anymore. Not just the rent itself, but the build-out, the parking, the utilities, the commute your team is absorbing, the energy spent keeping a physical space functional. And somewhere in that calculation, a growing number of interior design firm principals are asking a question their predecessors rarely had reason to ask: does this space actually make the work better?
For many of them, the answer has turned out to be no. The decision to go remote, not as a cost-cutting measure but as a deliberate operations and project management choice, has changed how their firms work, whom they hire, and what their overhead structure looks like.
Interior Design Community put the question to its members: how do you manage a remote team? What tools do you use, how do you stay connected, and what have you learned along the way? The answers came from firms of different sizes and markets, at different stages of the transition. Together they paint a picture of a profession rethinking one of its most basic assumptions about how design work gets done.
Why This Shift Is Happening Now, Not Just Surviving It
The remote model is not new to interior design firms that have been running distributed teams for years. But the conversation has reached a different level of seriousness in the profession. What was once a workaround, a way to keep going through a difficult period, has become a considered operational choice for firms doing the math on overhead and productivity and arriving at conclusions that differ from the industry’s historical assumptions.
The economics are part of it. A commercial lease in most markets represents one of the highest fixed costs a design firm carries, and unlike payroll or procurement, it does not flex with project volume. When projects slow, the overhead stays the same. A remote model replaces that fixed cost with a variable one, scaling with the actual volume of work rather than the square footage of space you committed to three years ago.
But the economics alone do not explain why experienced principals who have run successful in-studio operations are choosing to restructure rather than simply renew. The other driver is systems. Running a remote team requires an explicit, documented, and consistently executed workflow infrastructure. Firms that make the shift and invest in those systems often find that the systems themselves make operations run better, regardless of where people are sitting. That kind of infrastructure work is what separates firms that survive the transition from firms that struggle with it. For designers rethinking their own firm operations and overhead structure, the remote conversation is really a broader one about how deliberately a business is built.
The conversation happening inside the IDC community reflects firms at multiple stages of this shift. Some went remote years ago and have extensively refined the model. Others are mid-transition, figuring out what the new configuration looks like for their particular team and client base. All of them have something concrete to offer on what works.
What Happens When You Strip the Overhead and Build the Systems
Switching from a traditional in-office structure to a remote team is not a one-step decision. It is a structural redesign. The firms that have made it work describe a clear before-and-after, not just in their cost structure but in how their teams function day-to-day.
“I went from 6 employees in house to a remote team of 6 and one part time in house. Would never go back! No in office drama, set job scope, work hours and much more productive”
@thymeandplacedesign
The phrase “set job scope” is doing a significant amount of work here. In a traditional studio, roles blur over time. Someone becomes the de facto person handling vendor calls even though that was never their job. Expectations shift without being renegotiated. Accountability becomes diffuse. When you move to a remote model, the informal systems that patch over those gaps stop working, and you are forced to replace them with explicit ones.
That pressure to define roles and deliverables with precision is uncomfortable during the transition and genuinely valuable on the other side. Firms that have gone through the redesign tend to produce teams that are clearer about what they are responsible for and better equipped to execute independently. The reduction in in-office friction, what this designer calls “in-office drama,” is a byproduct of the same structural clarity. When people are working within a defined scope and documented expectations, there is less ambiguity for conflict to grow.
The Tools That Hold Remote Teams Together
Ask a remote design firm principal what is in their operational stack, and you will hear a consistent shortlist: a project management platform, a real-time communication channel, and increasingly, AI-assisted workflow automation layered on top.
“Yes!!! I decided to do all remote team members about a year and half ago instead of having in house employees. Asana helps with work flow and I have automated some of my workflows using AI. I am not renewing my lease in December and plan to do a more flexible Co-working office instead for meetings. After years of having all that overhead I am looking forward to a more flexible model all around.”
@megcorleyinteriors
The move from a fixed lease to a co-working model for client meetings is worth noting as a practical architecture. The firm keeps professional space available for client-facing work without carrying the daily fixed cost. It separates client presentation infrastructure from team operations infrastructure and treats each differently, which is a more honest accounting of what the space is actually for.
Asana and ClickUp are the two project management tools that came up most consistently in this conversation. Both serve the same essential function: making invisible work visible. When a task is updated, a deliverable is completed, or a blocker is flagged, the team sees it without a status call or a check-in email. For project-based work, that visibility replaces the passive awareness that proximity once provided.
“Yes, also local. We stay connected all day via what’s app and email and click-up. They don’t run independent projects so there is a lot of management involved. One comes to site and is in person/office when needed as well which is great.”
@delointeriors
The honest caveat here matters. When team members are executing in a support or coordination role rather than running their own workstreams, remote management requires more active involvement from the principal. The tool stack is not a substitute for management attention. It is infrastructure that makes that attention more efficient. If your team members are handling execution tasks rather than independently managing project decisions, build your communication rhythms around that reality and plan for more touchpoints than a fully autonomous team would require. If you’re still comparing options, this rundown of project management tools for interior designers breaks down which platforms fit which team structure.
Geographic Reach as a Structural Advantage
One of the less-discussed benefits of a remote model is how it affects your hiring geography. When the team does not need to be in the same room, the candidate pool expands to wherever the right people are.
“Yes, been a virtual company for over 15 years. All our employees work from their own home offices. We are in San Diego and we have two associates in Montana, one in Belize, one in Iran, two in the Philippines, and then a host of locals. But everyone is remote.”
@chadofall_chadillac
Fifteen years. That is not a pandemic adjustment. That is a foundational operational philosophy, and the geographic footprint it has enabled reflects what happens when proximity is no longer a job requirement. The firm is based in San Diego but draws on talent in Montana, Belize, Iran, and the Philippines. The work gets done.
For firms in high cost-of-living markets, this geographic flexibility is a meaningful lever. Hiring in markets with lower living costs allows a firm to pay competitive wages while spending less than it would for equivalent local talent. More importantly, it expands the pool of people who can effectively fill a role.
The practical requirement is a more deliberate onboarding process and clearer role documentation than most local hires demand. Those investments compound across every hire the firm makes. A firm that has documented its roles and workflows clearly enough to hire internationally has also built the infrastructure for every other dimension of scale.
The Part That Requires the Most Intentional Design: Training Across Distance
Remote teams run smoothly when team members are experienced, self-directed, and clear on their scope. The harder question is what happens when someone is earlier in their career, still developing professional judgment and instincts that experienced designers often absorbed by proximity.
“Anecdotally, I’d think remote would be hard for training young or new employees if there was not a strong occasional in-person component.”
@catherinemalcolminteriors
This is the friction point that experienced remote firm principals have had to solve on purpose. The informal knowledge transfer that happens in a studio, watching how a principal handles a difficult client call, absorbing the rhythm of a presentation review, developing vendor and procurement instincts by being in the room, does not replicate itself automatically in a remote environment.
The firms that develop junior talent well in a distributed setting tend to do a few things differently. They document knowledge that would otherwise be transferred informally. They schedule developmental check-ins that are separate from project status updates. And they invest in periodic in-person sessions where the learning that is hard to transmit over video can actually happen.
“Yes but they are local so we have in person meetings and work in office days. I used to have people out of state and that was a little challenging bc of time difference, etc.”
@elanadesignsllc
The time zone issue is real and tends to be downplayed until a firm has experienced it firsthand. A two-hour difference is navigable with clear communication norms. A ten- or twelve-hour spread requires designing the work to be asynchronous by default, meaning handoffs and deliverables replace real-time collaboration as the primary mode. That is workable, but it requires restructuring the way work is handed off and reviewed rather than simply adding a communication tool.
If you have someone early in their career on your remote team, structure more developmental touchpoints than you think you need. Weekly check-ins that are genuinely about their growth, not just project status, close much of the gap that distance creates. For a deeper look at getting a new team member up to speed without the informal osmosis of a shared office, see this guide to onboarding a new interior design team member.
What the Deliberate Hybrid Model Actually Looks Like
The picture that emerges from this conversation is not a single remote model. It is a range of deliberate configurations, each designed around the firm’s specific needs rather than defaulting to what the industry has historically done.
Some principals have gone fully distributed, with team members across time zones and countries, structured entirely around asynchronous work and periodic in-person sprints. Others run local remote teams that work from home most of the time and gather on-site when a project needs it. Others are mid-transition, letting their current lease expire and building a co-working-plus-remote structure that keeps client-facing capability without the fixed overhead.
What they share is the decision to treat the firm’s physical layout as a design problem. The same discipline that interior designers apply to a client’s space, assessing what it actually needs to accomplish and designing toward that outcome, applies to the design of the firm itself.
The operational questions worth asking before you make the shift are not primarily about which tools to use. They are about roles and systems. Is every team member’s scope documented clearly enough that they can execute without proximity? Are your training and development systems explicit enough to work across distance? Do you have a clear framework for which decisions require real-time collaboration and which can be handled asynchronously?
Get those questions answered and the tool selection follows naturally. The firms that have made remote work across very different configurations share one consistent thread. It is not the specific platform or the check-in cadence. It is the commitment to building systems first and treating proximity as optional until something specific about the work proves otherwise.
The lease comes up for renewal. The math points somewhere new. The firms in this conversation made the move. Most of them say they would not go back.
Find IDC content more easily in Google
Set Interior Design Community as a preferred source in your Google settings and we’ll show up more often when you search. It takes less than a minute.
Add IDC as a preferred source →
Instagram for Interior Designers: Does It Actually Bring in Clients?
Project Photography Rights: When Clients Want Veto Power
