Three hybrid work assumptions to dispel and overcome

Hybrid work norm demands smart operationalization. Balance new work ways with strategy for talent retention, culture, and productivity.

In brief

• Emerging data confirms the hybrid workplace was not a one-time, pandemic-fueled phenomenon. Instead, it has become a norm that continues. 
• For hybrid models to succeed, businesses must go beyond simply implementing a hybrid environment. The right operationalization is essential.
• Businesses that strike the balance between providing new ways of working and enabling strategic interventions are better positioned to retain top talent, strengthen culture and boost productivity. 

All of this becomes even more important when you consider that none of the organizations surveyed reported their workforces as “eager” or “excited” to fully return to the office, with 12% even stating that employees are not at all inclined to return to office lightly. Common obstacles like difficult commutes and work-life balance challenges continue to plague return to office as employees’ top pain points.

What brings people back? Most organizations are shying away from stipends (at 4%) and rewards (only 2%) as a means of encouraging a return to the office. Companies are much more inclined to provide a range in the number of days employees must be in the office rather than just an inflexible set expectation. But even so, this remains an encouraged vs. enforced approach.

Only 30% of organizations surveyed have adopted a mandated attendance strategy. In the wake of these clashing contexts, operational challenges persist, with more than 40% of organizations reporting difficulties in measuring productivity in this new reality.

This complexity came out loud and clear in the survey data, where three primary assumptions emerged:

Assumption 1: The more time spent in the office, the lower the attrition rate.

False. Survey results show organizations are experiencing attrition rates comparable to pre-pandemic numbers. In fact, organizations that placed greater emphasis on time spent in the office saw higher attrition rates. More than two-thirds of organizations that cited occupancy greater than 75% indicated increased attrition levels.

What makes a difference to attrition rates when implementing return to office?

• 56% said they had modified their talent processes (compared to 49% of overall survey respondents) with talent acquisition and learning and development standing out as particularly impactful.
• We also saw a 25% improvement in attrition rates among organizations saying their return to office policies considered the unique needs of specific demographic segments, such as new parents and aging workers.

What’s the key takeaway? Revamping talent processes correlates to significantly lower employee attrition rates. Tailoring your return to office policies and revamping talent processes to meet employees’ unique needs can help improve attrition rates and keep top talent engaged. 

Assumption 2: Spending time in the office helps with culture. 

True. The survey results revealed organizations that reported improved culture were more than twice as likely to report occupancy rates over 50%.

What makes a difference with culture when implementing return to office?

• Nearly 70% of organizations with improved culture reported having clearly defined return to office policies, compared to only 40% of the total survey population that did not have well-defined policies.
• More than half of the organizations reporting an improved culture had modified talent processes. Performance management played a starring role in that evolution: 78% of organizations with improved culture had modified performance management programs, compared to just 39% in the overall survey.
• Organizations that consistently developed capable leaders and managers to maintain strong relationships and credibility with their teams were almost twice as likely to be able to translate those beneficial factors to return to office environments, thus continually improving culture.

What’s the key takeaway? To optimize the cultural benefits of return to office, organizations are investing in providing greater clarity, managing people performance in new ways, and developing leadership capabilities to create better dynamics between leaders and teams.

Assumption 3: Returning to the office will have a positive impact on productivity. 

Also true. Organizations with occupancy rates over 50% were also two times as likely to report higher productivity.

What makes a difference with productivity when implementing return to office?

• Organizations citing improved productivity were more than 40% more likely to have invested in a better physical and technical in-office experience for their workforce.
• All organizations with improved productivity reported that they communicate the value and purpose of return to office via one-on-one conversations with managers.

What’s the key takeaway? In-office time plays a part in productivity. But in-office experiences must be better to draw people back and enable them to be more productive. Dig in to understand where your office space may be misaligned with employees’ expectations and the work they are performing. Get personal in conveying the value of the office and invest differentially to improve the physical and technical aspects to enable employee productivity. 

What’s the bottom line on hybrid work?

These insights paint a clear picture of a workforce transformed. Working models, policies and programs require a similar refresh in light of such dramatic change. There’s no one right answer to successfully implementing hybrid working models. But a bespoke blend of flexibility and adaptability can certainly go a long way towards enticing people to embrace this approach. With that comes a whole world of potential, including the ability to dial up productivity and culture, while dialing down attrition.

If you find these points interesting, stay tuned for more research coming in the following months, including EY Global Work Reimagined Survey.