The hybrid working playbook: what to do, what to avoid, and why evidence matters

During the pandemic, hybrid working surged from one in 10 to over a quarter of all workers. If you read the news, you’d be forgiven for thinking that this is now universally being rolled back. Return-to-work mandates have been widely reported, and earlier this year Nigel Farage described working from home as “a load of nonsense” and claimed people are more productive only when they are physically in the office. 

In fact, evidence suggests that hybrid working enjoys strong support from employers and employees. 

CIPD research shows that 74 per cent of UK organisations now support some form of hybrid working, and surveys show that its use is still rising. In a survey of employees with hybrid working arrangements conducted by Organise, 87 per cent reported that they are more productive at home, and 85 per cent said it had enabled or made it easier for them to stay in work. 

Robust academic research shows that hybrid working on a typical split of three days in the office and two days working from home, has no negative impact on productivity and delivers measurable gains in satisfaction, inclusion and retention.

Tess Lanning

The real challenge

The real challenge for most employers is how to embed hybrid working in ways that support performance, fairness and sustainable organisational culture.

Face‑to‑face time plays an important role in collaboration, innovation, mentoring and relationship‑building. Informal interactions, the conversations that happen before and after meetings, or through shared problem‑solving, remain a valuable part of organisational life.

These benefits do not require full‑time office attendance. But they do require employers to think purposefully about how time in person and at home are best used and structured. 

The dos: what effective hybrid working looks like

At Timewise, we work with employers across sectors to design work that works for modern lives, as well as meeting organisational needs. Our work shows that hybrid working is not a binary choice between ‘office’ and ‘home’. It is a design challenge. 

Do make fairness and inclusion central

Hybrid can be a powerful tool for inclusion. For many, flexibility is essential rather than optional. Research shows that forced full‑time office attendance would lead large numbers of workers to resign or look elsewhere. In one survey, for example, one in five employees without access to hybrid working said they were considering leaving their job due to the lack of flexibility. 

Parents, disabled and neurodivergent employees, carers and later‑career workers are particularly likely to depend on flexibility to remain in work and perform at their best. These groups represent a significant proportion of the workforce. Hybrid policies need to reflect their needs explicitly, rather than treating flexibility as an exception.

Disabled employees are among those likely to depend on flexibility to remain in work. Photograph: iStock

Do focus on the purpose of ‘in‑person’ time

It’s common to focus on the number of days people attend, rather than on what in‑person time is meant to achieve. Before setting expectations about attendance, organisations should be clear about purpose.

What activities benefit most from being done together in person? For example, team connection, project kick‑offs, mentoring, creative problem‑solving or performance conversations. Hybrid works best when in‑person time is designed around specific, valuable activities rather than treated as an end in itself.

Do use coordinated team‑level anchor days

Evidence increasingly supports the use of coordinated anchor days, agreed at team level. These are predictable days when team members come together, creating shared in‑person time without imposing unnecessary rigidity across the organisation.

The House of Lords inquiry into home-based working highlighted anchor days as an effective way of supporting relationships and collaboration. Coordinated presence is often more meaningful than ad hoc attendance in fully office‑based environments, where teams may not see each other consistently or interact meaningfully.

Do provide more structure for early‑career employees

Newer and more junior employees benefit most from proximity, informal learning and regular access to colleagues. Many organisations find offering more structured in‑person support during the first one-to-two years strikes an effective balance.

This should be treated as a team‑level agreement, not an individual rule imposed on new starters. Early‑career colleagues bring energy, digital skills and fresh perspectives that benefit teams. In‑person time works best when it is genuinely shared.

Do invest in manager capability

Hybrid working places new demands on managers. Managing outcomes rather than presence, building trust across locations, and ensuring fairness between remote and in‑office colleagues are not easy tasks to achieve.

Organisations that embed hybrid effectively invest in practical management development: supporting managers to hold effective one‑to‑ones, design inclusive team rhythms and meetings, and address proximity bias (the tendency to favour those who are seen most often). Without this investment, even well‑designed policies can falter in practice.

Do make the office purposeful

If employees come into the office only to spend the day on video calls, the value of in‑person attendance is lost. Offices need to support the activities that benefit from being together: collaboration, learning, connection and focused group work.

This may require rethinking space design, investing in hybrid‑ready meeting technology, and ensuring teams can sit together when they need to. Small design choices, such as preventing teams from booking adjacent desks, can undermine the aims of hybrid working.

Do think about flexibility more broadly than remote working

Flexibility isn’t just about remote and home working. Can you facilitate other forms of flexibility to help staff manage their wider life needs alongside work – such as part-time working, staggered start and finish times, term-time only options, job shares or compressed hours? Seek to engage staff to understand their preferences and create an approach that meets their needs as well as those of the organisation.

The don’ts: what to avoid

Don’t equate visibility with productivity

There is no evidence that physical presence is a reliable proxy for performance.

Over‑emphasising attendance risks eroding trust and disengaging employees.

Outcome‑based management, by contrast, is associated with higher engagement and discretionary effort.

Don’t adopt a blanket approach

Different roles and teams have different operational requirements. A site‑based role will have different in‑person needs from a corporate function; geographically dispersed teams face different constraints from single‑site teams. Allowing for these differences is good management.

Don’t let hybrid become unstructured

At the other extreme, leaving everything to individual discretion can lead to teams rarely coming together, weaker integration for new starters, and gradual cultural drift. Sustainable hybrid working balances flexibility with coordination and shared expectations.

Don’t overload anchor days

When anchor days become back‑to‑back meetings, they lose their value. In‑person time should allow space for informal connection, learning and collaborative work. Reviewing how anchor days are actually experienced is essential.

Don’t forget about frontline staff

Some roles cannot be done remotely. Focusing on hybrid working alone disadvantages these workers and can lead to tensions between office-based and frontline staff. By understanding and seeking to meet all staff needs, you can improve workforce engagement across the board. 

Don’t overlook the legal context

UK employment law increasingly expects employers to create positive flexible working cultures. Under the Equality Act 2010, employers must make reasonable adjustments for disabled employees. The 2025 Employment Rights Act strengthens flexible working rights and places greater responsibility on employers to justify refusals.

The bottom line

Hybrid and flexible working arrangements support employee health and wellbeing with associated business benefits for productivity and staff satisfaction. Responsible employers recognise and support the rising numbers of people that need to manage work alongside the everyday pressures of modern life, from parenting and caring to health. 

Contrary to what Nigel Farage suggests, this does not have to be in competition with organisational goals. The question is not whether to offer flexibility, but how to design and manage it.

The evidence points to clear principles: be explicit about purpose, coordinate in‑person time at team level, equip managers, design offices for collaboration, and keep fairness and inclusion at the centre.

Timewise works with employers to design and embed work that works for modern lives. For more information, visit:
timewise.co.uk

Tess Lanning is director of programmes at Timewise