Hybrid: The New Balance or the New Battleground?

The models of work have been at the center of many conversations in recent years, with discussions still ongoing on what organisations should prioritize.  While some dissenting voices still defend the need for a five-day in-office work week, there has been a boom in investment in deskless workers, where a hybrid workplace has become central to many organisations. People are prioritizing flexibility and work-life balance more and more, and organisations have shifted structures in order to meet these expectations and to capitalize on their benefits.

The pandemic forced many people into remote work roles, and while most of them had never experienced such a position, they adapted quickly and grew to enjoy the benefits. People who have experienced remote work, and its more flexible characteristics, now tend to resist the more rigid nature of in-office work and the demands from employers that they must return to their office full-time.

Flexible work systems have been in place in various organisations over the years, due to it giving organisations a competitive advantage in attracting workers as well as reducing costs by downsizing office space and reducing the need for commutes, which lessens the time people spend travelling and also promotes sustainability by lowering carbon emissions. Hybrid work is an organization’s response to workers stated needs while also looking out for their investments, limiting situations of “quiet quitting”, presenteeism and other forms of work disengagement.

Hybrid work is considered a middle ground between a fully in-office work and completely remote work, allowing for a blend of the flexibility and healthy work-life balance of remote work and the social interaction and collaboration permitted by in-office work. With this model, some workdays are spent in the physical office while the rest are spent remotely, with the model adopted (more or less structured and rigid) varying from organization to organization.

There are three model types that stand out:

• Structured and Balanced, where there are policies that allow discretion at the managerial and team level, with remote days being typically two to three days a week

• Flexible and Unconstrained, with a focus on individual cases and few restrictions, where remote work is mostly the default and on-site being optional

• Rigid and Office-First, where the remote portion of work is carefully controlled and restricted to all staff, with one day per week that must be pre-agreed upon. 

  
  

Some examples of these are Spotify’s “Work From Anywhere” program, that focus on the freedom of choice of their workers to choose both the location, based on region or time zone, and work mode, understanding that office or remote work are different experiences that will work from some people and not others, while also developing a communication structure to incentivize workers check-ins and involvement in the wider Spotify community. Another organization with a hybrid work model is Nvidia, whose approach differs from Spotify by implementing hybrid work on a case-by-case basis, allowing teams and managers to decide what works best for them, therefore fostering a sense of autonomy company-wide.

Models of hybrid work allow for people to have more autonomy in their work, which in turn develops their intrinsic motivation to do that work, while also increasing job satisfaction, productivity and effort. Similarly to organisations, research found that workers also have some concern about losing work relationships in hybrid work environments but when they identify with the organization, they take the steps to participate in organizational citizenship behavior in order to maintain them. However, when people already demonstrate low organizational identification there comes a risk of losing work-related communication in hybrid environments. Therefore, organisations have a means to minimize these negative consequences of hybrid work by boosting organizational identification, while keeping the benefits of such an environment. In order to make the hybrid model work, it must become part of the overall business strategy and structure.

Organisations concerned with the impact of the professional isolation of their team members, on their wellbeing and their productivity, can find a compromise in hybrid work. This allows a chance to have important meetings, in-person contact and spontaneous moments of collaboration that organisations value while also showing workers that their perspectives and needs are considered. Therefore, increasing their retention and attraction in comparison with organisations that offer in-office work only. Findings suggest a best of both worlds situation, where more engaged and motivated workers, due to flexibility of schedule and autonomy,  utilize their more limited in-office time more effectively to innovate and collaborate with colleagues while also being able to transport their in-person communication to their remote work tools, like emails.

The preference for hybrid work over completely in-office work is found in every generation, with gen z preferring hybrid work over both in-office only and remote only options, due to them valuing both the flexibility and work-life boundaries, while also wanting for in-person moments in order to better learn the ropes with the help from their more experienced colleagues. Meanwhile, generations more established in the workplace like Millennials, Gen X and Baby Boomers wish for a hybrid workplace more focused on the remote part, in comparison with Gen Z, valuing the flexibility, autonomy and work-life balance afforded by it.

While implementing hybrid work as an option organization wide is an important step to increase both retention and engagement, it is key to center policies on individual needs, making it a collaborative experience with the person, as in, involving them in the process while offering a range of options that fit the type and culture of the organization. However, it is important that organisations do their best to not overindulge on the new commitment and engagement shown by their workers, in order to demand additional work beyond what is stipulated or pressure people to either respond to messages really quickly or to work after hours, as this would regress all the favorability gained by implementing hybrid work.

Ultimately, hybrid work is a benefit to both employers and workers as long as it is well implemented, with a strategic design and with the support of managers and participation of team members. 

References 

Almeida, A. R., Rebelo, G., & Pedra, J. P. (2025). New Risks in Hybrid Work and Teleworking Contexts—Insights from a Study in Portugal. Social Sciences (2076-0760), 14(8), 478. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14080478

Cabrita, J. (2025), Shaping the future of work: Inside Europe’s hybrid work strategies. Eurofound Website. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/en/publications/all/shaping-future-work-inside-europes-hybrid-work-strategies

Choudhury, P., Khanna, T., Makridis, C. A. & Schirmann, K. (2022). Is Hybrid Work the Best of Both Worlds? Evidence from a Field Experiment. Harvard Business School Working Paper, 22-063

Decker, G., Butler, W. P., & Meriac, J. P. (2025). Best of Both Worlds: The Benefits of Hybrid Work Compared With Remote and In‐Person Roles. Human Resource Management, 1. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.70013

Pendell, R., & Agrawal, S. (2025). Fully Remote Work Least Popular With Gen Z. Gallup Website. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/692675/fully-remote-work-least-popular-gen-z.aspx

Tröster, C., & Brosi, P. (2025). How Hybrid Work Shapes Communication Ties: The Role of Concern about Relationship Loss and Organizational Identification. Journal of Management Studies (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.), 1. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13277