Keeping in line with the ‘unfiltered’ nature of this journal - I’ll be direct and say the things many seem unwilling to discuss. 

If you’re a fully remote Executive Assistant, you are at major risk. Not hypothetically and not in some distant future. Right now, and it’s only going to get worse. 

I’ll explain… 

You’re not actually in the room. 

This is the biggest problem, and one many don’t want to hear or wish to fight against. 

When you’re not physically near your principal, you miss pretty much everything that isn’t said directly to you. The body language after a difficult meeting, the shift in tone when a deal is going sideways, or the five-second window where your principal needs something handled before they even know they need it. 

This stuff doesn’t come through on Slack, email, or Whatsapp - nor does it come through on a Zoom catchup. It comes from proximity - being physically there in the room. 

When you’re remote, you’re missing the majority of this. 

Although it’s worth noting: physical presence amplifies capability - it doesn’t create it.

A weak EA in the office is still a weak EA. 

You require input to produce output. 

Sure, you can see the inbox, the calendar, or the agenda - but for the most part, you’re reactive by design. Your principal has to tell you what they need. Whether it’s a message, a call, a text - they have to brief you or loop you in. Every interaction requires their time and attention, which is the exact thing you’re supposed to be saving them. 

This isn’t to say they still don’t have to loop you in or brief you in person - but it’s done much faster when it’s just said in passing. Rather than typing a whole message up. 

When you’re on-site or hybrid, you absorb context passively. You’ll overhear things, you’ll see your principal running behind in real-time, and you’ll know what you can do immediately to help alleviate some of the pressure/stress relating to arising problems. Without your principal having to loop you in on anything. 

When you’re remote, you’re waiting for a ping. This is honestly a slower, less valuable version of the role and people are starting to notice. 

Not to mention, many Executives just like their right-hand to be ‘in the boat with them’ sometimes - it’s as simple as this. 

AI is eating the transactional layer of the profession. 

Let’s be honest about what a lot of fully-remote EA work actually looks like day-to-day. Calendar management, inbox triage, expense processing, booking travel, or formatting documents. Transactional tasks which are increasingly being handled, faster and cheaper, by AI tools. 

I’m not saying AI replaces a great EA. It doesn’t. But it absolutely replaces the transactional one who doesn’t adapt. If the transactional side of the role makes up 80% of what you do, you need to be thinking ahead. Your firm might not be adopting AI right now, but I promise you it’ll be something they’re thinking about. 

Offshore is coming for remote Executive Assistants too. 

This one stings, but needs saying. As AI tools evolve, so do the language skills and capabilities of offshore Executive Assistants. If both an offshore and fully-remote UK/US-based EA are handling similar tasks, with similar language capabilities, and one operates at a fraction of the cost of the other, what exactly is the differentiator? Proximity and being a ‘business partner’ to your Executive used to be the answer. If you've given that up voluntarily, you've removed your own moat.

Fully remote Assistants can become line items. 

When you’re fully remote, it’s easy to become abstract. A name on a spreadsheet and a monthly cost. When someone in finance or ops is running a cost analysis, comparing your salary against a combination of AI tools and offshore support - it’s your job in the firing line. 

If you have no presence in the office, no visible impact, no strategic value-add, and no relationship ‘capital’ being spent on your behalf - what can you expect?

When you’re in the building, people see your value. They see you handling things in real time, far exceeding the transactional responsibilities. They see the principal relying on you. That visibility is what protects you. When you’re fully remote, you’ve stripped this away. 

This might not even look like a layoff. It might just be your employer announcing a return-to-work mandate as an indirect way to reduce headcount without the financial and reputational cost of layoffs. This is already happening. 

All of this compounds. 

Any one of these risks on its own is manageable. But stack them together; not being in the room, reactive by default, transactional work being automated, offshore competition increasing, and being looked at as a line-item on the P&L… You’re looking at a role that is under serious risk, either now or within the next two to three years. 

The EAs who come out the other side of this will be the ones in close proximity to their principals. Hybrid at minimum, ideally on-site. They'll be the ones who go beyond calendar and inbox. Who catch nuance on behalf of their principal. Who connect dots across the business. Who analyse information before being asked. Who leverage relationships across the firm to get things done in ways no tool or offshore assistant ever could.

The most important takeaway is this - you need to be a proactive value-add to your principal, physically working alongside them as much as possible. The fully-remote ‘task-taking’ assistants will be let go, whether it’s this year or the next. 

A final heads-up. 

If you're actively seeking fully remote opportunities right now, take a step back and look at the market you're operating in. Most employers are running hybrid at best. Many are back five days a week. You're fighting against the tide in what is already a buyer's market.

Now layer the AI and offshoring risk on top. You're not just fighting an uphill battle for the role you want. You're fighting for a version of the role that the market is actively moving away from.

I understand many EAs want fully-remote work - but doing so is a career risk.