Ttdfjt

I wouldn't advise doing that. It breaks the immersion in my opinion. From what I have seen, writers usually do that when talking about different times. You can't easily explain twenty years ago.

You could set up the scene by doing something like this:

John responded to his boss's email and connected the laptop to the charger. It was almost lunchtime and his colleagues might knock at his office's door any moment now....

I think that's enough for setting the scene, you don't need to give a detailed explanation about the office unless it serves the story.

EDIT: Now, after getting a glimpse of the writing, I also have to wonder how the narrative works. The character is either omniscient to know what happens in places they're not in, or they are recounting events that happened simultaneously in other places. In both cases, one should inquire how these things would have been told in-person. If you were telling me this story while sitting for a coffee together, how would I react? would I be confused by the way you recount your story?

In my point of view, I would have interrupted you and asked: "Wait, how did you know that was happening?"
You should consider that in your writing and come up with an answer as soon as that question pops up in my mind - because if you can't answer it, you lose credibility in the eyes of the reader.

A solution you can use is something like this:

Back in the office, as I discovered later, Richard and Dr. Zhang had a successful undertaking to procure funds. This meant that now some of the funds were allocated to me for pure re-search. For the most effective and life-like implementation of gaming systems, I con-sulted experts in the fields of Psychology, Business Management, Sociology, Mathe-matics, and Computer Science.

This simple change transforms your "change of scene" to a memory or self-reflection. Something that pops up in the character's mind during a scene. That's perfectly ok to do, because as human beings our minds can wander.

It's always a good idea to give your readers some indication that the setting (whether time or place) has changed. You could do something like

... and she flopped onto the sofa, clutching the picture to her chest. Tears rolled down Alice's cheeks as she thought of her wife.

---

Shanti leaned back in the plush leather chair. Alice was probably waiting for her at home, even though she'd texted her. But she had too much to do.

This works if you've already established that Shanti and Alice are in different places. A line break usually signals a change in setting and/or POV character.

You can have a sentence at the beginning indicating a different place, but it has to be done well. "Back at the offfice" sounds very colloquial, as though someone is narrating. This could work in some kind of first person narrated-after-the-fact story

... And so my sister sobbed her heart out for her wife,all the while never doubting that their love would overcome even this.

Meanwhile, at the office, Shanti was busy trying to get her secretary to go out with her for drinks. Hey, you only live once, and in this case, not even for very long. I don't know that I wouldn't do the same in her place.

In this case, the kind of abrupt scene change is a part of the narrator's voice, and has a comic effect. You can also do the thing they do in spy movies

London, 1954

A spectre is haunting London...

Here, you've gotten the setting and time right away. This format is generally common in thriller/mystery/spy novels, afaik.

Also, check this out

Many books do scene changes primarily at the ends of chapters, and ones that change scenes more frequently typically handle it with a section break, which alerts the reader to expect a disconnect in time or place. If you do also need some bridging words, however, I don't see anything wrong with that. You might consider, however, that maybe you're jumping from place to place too abruptly from a narrative standpoint. Transitional scenes can be important and valuable locations. A lot of things can happen between point A and point B. I remember reading that ST:TNG built a lift into their set just so the writers would have a setting for little transitional conversations, while The Big Bang Theory used a stairwell for the same purpose. Try this instead:

...On the entire drive back to the office, I couldn't stop obsessing over what Aakash had said. This was going to change our whole lives. I was so distracted I almost ran a stop sign.

I put all of that out of my mind, however, when Richard and Dr. Zhang met me with the amazing news that...

It's worth remembering that multiple quick cuts between scenes is really a cinematic technique, where all the necessary information is handled visually and instantly. In a book, where you have to manually move the reader from one setting to another, it's more intrusive and less effective.

Don't be hamfisted. If you provide enough good hints of the location, that's sufficient. The location should be established, but telling it directly like that is a rather rarely used stylistic tool that makes your story resemble a report. Which is rarely advisable, unless it's your purpose, e.g. this being a crime or military novel written in the report-like style.

It's usually best to give a bit of description that sets the place better than 'the office'. Give the mood of the scene, the ambience, the environment, the dynamics.

"Hey, Mark!" Joe waved frantically, shouting through the din of the office, pushing past a group of interns busy slacking off by the water cooler, and dodging a cart ladden with xerox paper. "Mark! I've got it!"

Show, don't Tell

This situation might be a type of show, don't tell.

Saying "Back at the ranch…" is 1-line exposition. Readers often tune out, they drop words and phrases, even entire paragraphs as their mind wanders. If it's crucial to the story that a character has a specific realization at home and another one at work you might need more story cues and support characters to make this obvious. Show us when they are at home or at the office, don't just tell us.

Unlike a screenplay, novels and shortstories don't need to explain every action and realization happening at a specific place and time. "Scenes" in literature are much less specific. A character's turn in a novel (presumably the whole reason for the scene) may not happen all at once, or not be tied to a specific moment like in a screenplay.

If it's not important enough to show through the narrative, it may not be important enough to worry that a percentage of readers will miss it when you tell.

It depends on your novel. The majority of published, bestselling works do not do this; but a portion of them do. The ones that do it, do it for ambiance. Spy thrillers or tech-opras where that short to the point information is a cue to readers and sets the tone.

The default should be to not use it unless you have a very good reason. If every scene is jumping and the reader can't follow without these cues it may be an indicator that you're not transitioning well, have too many scenes, or too many characters. If all of this sounds familiar, maybe you're the person who knows the rules well enough to break them; but, that's unlikely because you only get to break a few rules per book and this one isn't all that exciting.

One of the major uses of chapter-changes and section-changes is to signal a change of scene (or similar, e.g. passing of time). The show-don't-tell advice in other answers is sound--and with a section break, the reader knows a scene change may have happened, so you don't need to do much 'showing'. This is important, because too much 'showing' just to tell the reader we've moved location can be a weakness.