Professor Sir Cary Cooper of the University of Manchester’s Organizational Psychology & Health Department, who is celebrating his 50 th anniversary as Professor, shares his views on the hybrid workplace and flexible work environment debate.
Many people today prefer hybrid working. The preference for hybrid working is widespread across all generations. However, Gen Z and millennials are particularly fond of it. In any case, well before the pandemic hit, the evidence was overwhelming that flexible working, in whatever form, delivered higher levels of job satisfaction, retention of talent, less stress-related ill health and where it was possible to accurately measure it, delivered higher performance/productivity (see Norgate & Cooper, Flexible Work, Routledge, 2020).
There are two types of flexible working: hybrid and 2+3 or 3+2. There is a difference between hybrid and flexible working.
Being flexible for all
The psychological contract that a person has agreed to may be different than another, but it must still deliver on the bottom line. In the majority of flexible option organisations, hybrid approaches are preferred over flexible ones. If the organization mandates that employees spend 3 days in the office, they will feel less trusted, have less control over their work-life and prefer to work with an employer who offers them truly flexible working arrangements.
It is a fact that few, if not none of the Gen Z/millennials would want to return to work five days a week as mandated by senior managers! In this new work environment, organisations who insist on a 5 day week will struggle to retain and recruit talent. Mark Twain said: “If you do the same thing every day, you will always get what you have always gotten” – which is lower productivity in today’s workplace. UK bottom of the G7 on productivity per capita and 17th in the G20 countries) and lack of talent retention/attraction.
Managing exceptions
We also need to think about two other aspects of hybrid working. How can an organisation deal with employees who are required to work at the ‘coalface,’ but cannot be flexible due to the nature and responsibilities of their jobs (eg. Bus drivers, assembly line workers on a paced schedule, etc. There is an indirect bias against women who spend less time in the workplace because they are raising children.
For those who cannot work flexible hours or whose jobs require in-person attendance, I suggest that we look at a 4-day work week. This is a good option for some, but not for others. Nurses, given that there is evidence from countries like Sweden, NZ and UK, that this has a positive impact on the bottom line, in terms of increased productivity, reduced sickness absence, and job satisfaction. This is a way to compensate them for losing the option of flexible working, but it won’t affect their performance or other bottom-line metrics.
Second, because women are often the primary caregivers for their children and at home, they may need to spend more time working at home. It could hinder their promotion chances compared to male employees. In-person work in the office has many benefits, including attending more meetings and learning about the organisational politics. HR leaders must plan for this indirect dynamic and understand it. The final decision on a person’s promotion and development should be based not on their appearance, but on whether they have met targets and performed well.
Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote once: “The reward for a job well done is that you did it.”
Professor Cary Cooper is co-author of The Remote Workplace Culture. Published by Kogan Page in 2022.
