How can you balance the needs of remote and in-office workers?

Clear communication starts with understanding. If we take the example of hybrid, only 32% of companies convey their hybrid plans well, which can unsettle employees. To bridge this gap, it's essential to educate managers. They're the front-runners of change, but a staggering 28% aren't even aware of their company's main goals (Sull and al., 2018). By equipping managers with knowledge and ensuring they're well-versed in the strategy, they can effectively communicate and implement it with their teams. When managers are informed, it paves the way for a unified approach to transformation.

In managing a hybrid workforce, what I like to do is introduce a dynamic mix of communication tools beyond the basics. I find that incorporating emerging platforms and collaborative technologies keeps the team engaged. What really works is fostering a culture of continuous feedback through innovative channels, like dedicated digital spaces for idea sharing. Additionally, organizing virtual social events and team-building activities helps bridge the physical gap. I believe in aligning our communication not just with goals but also integrating our shared values into everyday conversations. It's about staying ahead with evolving tools and injecting creativity into our communication approach for a truly connected and motivated hybrid team.

To communicate effectively, I like to always use my calendar! When remote, things come up. In office, side chats can be happening. To not disturb colleagues in either case, I am diligent about scheduling time!

Managers need to rethink their views on remote work. In a SHRM survey, 67% of managers felt remote workers were more replaceable than those in the office, and 42% often forgot about them when giving tasks. This bias is evident as half of the people, particularly younger ones, feel a push to return to the office, even when remote work is an option. This "Fear of Missing Out" (FOMO) stems from managers' preference for on-site workers, sometimes even overlooking remote employees when delegating tasks. It's vital for leaders to address and, first, change these perceptions.

Visibility and presence are key to career growth. Studies show that those who work closely with managers or are often seen in the office have better promotion rates, despite similar performance levels to others. Research also reveals a bias against remote workers, who despite being more efficient, face stigmatization and lower promotion rates. This creates pressure to return to the office, especially among younger employees who fear missing out on opportunities. Also, surveys suggest a gender imbalance where men return to the office more, potentially exacerbating career disparities. Additionally, black employees are less inclined to return to the office to avoid toxic environments, risking further discrimination in hybrid workplaces.

Recency bias and proximity bias are two sneaky and all too naturally happening tendencies we all have. And they are not easy to overcome. This can help: - design processes eg performance reviews to explicitly address this - make people aware of it, especially managers, leaders, and any kind of decision makers - also make people aware of this, and the fact that you work on this awareness for everyone - give people practical guidance on how to deal with and counter this - have controls on place to check for any biases happening in your people management - make bias awareness a key element of company culture.

One method I've learned to lean into being remote and managing a remote team is to build in the personal conversation pieces to the beginning of our regular touchbases. Starting off with asking - and truly wanting to know - how they are doing, how their weekend was, how their kid's ballet recital went, etc. can easily build rapport. When we were all in the office, these conversations happened organically in the halls, or you overhear the information and could sprinkle it in. Now you have to be intentional to have that HUMAN connection. Even being very introverted & action oriented, I have noticed it brings me more joy, & have seen it open new levels of comfort for the team to work more effectively.

Associating loneliness with being remote would be a misleading shortcut; many office-based employees felt isolated long before remote. Even open spaces, which were expected to promote collaboration, are shown to contribute to decreased face-to-face interactions. For that reason, loneliness is an issue regardless of the place that people are working in. Even if humans are social beings who will never be satisfied by exclusively virtual interactions, it would be naive to identify the loss of connection as a remote problem, since the office has never turned out to be a catalyst for social bonds. The office allows people to meet, but not to connect; putting people in the same place for happy hours won't create high-quality connections.

In hybrid settings, inclusion and belonging are key elements. It’s easy to „forget“ those who are farther away, or even not in the office as much as others. That’s the natural effect of proximity bias. To counter this effect: - always consider activities to be suitable for both, those in the office and those remotely - do sth for the remote group exclusively to show „we know you’re part of the team and we’re thinking of you specifically“ - do substitute activities where in- office activities cannot be equally/similarly be done for remote. I’ve worked with (and for) hybrid teams throughout my whole career, and these things make a huge difference and impact on team culture and performance.

While hybrid raises the right questions, it doesn't provide the right answers, which could make these systems more detrimental and less attractive than they seem. Hybrid acts as an anchor to our past and is more about complacency, rather than a lasting solution. Even if it seems right to seek some stability and certainty in a constantly changing world, returning to our old ways of working would be a gloomy organizational and human failure. We have, indeed, an amazing opportunity to let our openness bring us to new models, which, for the better, question the very meaning of work in people's lives. Other methods, like WFA, while being viewed with skepticism, could ultimately be more innovative, more uniform, and consider everyone equally.