WinWin4WorkLife’s Post

How to solve the remote work stalemate—study offers tools for successful hybrid work https://lnkd.in/gckP74gi The remote work debate often focuses only on leadership or the ... US workers with remote-friendly jobs still work from home nearly half ...

The debate rages on. Onsite, hybrid or remote. Which is better? It’s a little more complicated than just picking one.   There have already been many studies on the topic. Remote work has been found in previous studies to improve productivity and employee retention. Remote work is also associated with higher job satisfaction, decreased stress and better work-life balance.   Not every study about working remotely though paints a rosy picture. Previous results found that remote workers move less and are more likely to feel isolated.   Researchers from the University of Michigan took an approach to studying remote, hybrid and onsite work settings that I haven’t seen yet. They decided to investigate whether there are differences in perception of the workplace culture of health (COH) based on work location. They used a previously published COH form that allows employees to rate their perceptions of how their workplace supports their health and well-being.  The tool is organized in four domains: 1. Senior leadership support, policies and practices. 2. Supervisor support 3. Co-worker support 4. Employee morale   The results are in. 🥁 Employees’ perceptions of their workplace’s COH were not dependent on work location. Essentially a ‘tie’ when it comes to how an employee perceives their employer’s support for their well-being. Why is this important? Numerous research studies have shown that how an employee perceives their employer's support for their well-being is a good proxy for engagement (i.e. an indicator of organizational success). Does my employer care about my well-being? If the answer is 'yes' then employees are more committed to their job than those who answer 'no'.   I recommend you read the whole article though to learn some of the twists and turns of how remote and hybrid working is impacting well-being. If you’re a leader, it’s especially important to get in tune with why your employees who prefer remote and hybrid work conditions are convinced these are the best situations for them.   What do you like the most about working remotely? What do you like the least?   #leadershipdevelopment #humanresources #wellbeingatwork Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (JOEM) Chester Elton, what do you like about working from home and / or, what don't you like?

Hot Take: If your company still treats remote work like a privilege, you’re already behind. It’s not a perk anymore it’s the bare minimum. Since 2020, the world of work has changed, permanently. 📊 87% of employees say flexibility is a top priority when picking a job. 📈 Studies show remote teams are just as productive sometimes more when systems are well designed. Yet, some companies still think “come back to the office” is culture. It’s not. It’s control. Culture isn’t built by sitting beside each other. It’s built by trust, shared values, and consistent communication. And the irony? The most remote teams often have stronger culture than those dragging people in three times a week. Remote work isn’t the future. It’s the present. The question is how many leaders are still stuck in 2019? What’s your honest take is remote work truly sustainable long-term, or are we all pretending it’s the new normal? #FutureOfWork #RemoteWork #Leadership #Productivity #Culture

The Psychology Behind the Onsite vs. Remote Work Few workplace debates are as emotionally charged as the one between onsite and remote work. But beneath the surface of “productivity” and “collaboration,” there’s something deeper happening, a clash of human psychology, trust, and identity. Before 2020, the office wasn’t just a workplace; it was a symbol of purpose. Arriving on time, sitting among colleagues, and being visible to leadership created a sense of belonging and validation. Psychologists call this “social proof of effort” when being seen working becomes a proxy for being valuable. Remote work disrupted that signal completely. Suddenly, the contribution became invisible. Managers lost their visual cues of engagement. Employees lost daily micro-interactions that reinforced status and connection. Yet, research tells an interesting story. A 2023 Stanford study found that hybrid and remote workers were 13% more productive on average, largely due to fewer interruptions and better focus. Meanwhile, the Harvard Business Review notes that teams with clear outcome-based performance systems experience higher engagement and trust in remote settings than those still relying on physical presence. So why the resistance? Because humans equate presence with control. For many leaders, seeing their teams in person restores a sense of certainty. And for many employees, going to the office fulfills a basic psychological need, relatedness, one of the three pillars of self-determination theory (along with autonomy and competence). But autonomy, the freedom to decide when and where to work, has now become equally vital to motivation. Take that away, and performance doesn’t just dip; intrinsic motivation erodes. So, what’s the real lesson here? It’s not that onsite or remote work is inherently better. It’s that organizations must learn to lead psychologically, not geographically to replace visibility with trust, supervision with clarity, and presence with purpose. The future of work isn’t about location. It’s about how deeply we understand what drives human behavior when no one is watching. #RemoteWork #HybridWork #Leadership #Psychology #FutureOfWork #Productivity #FaisalButt

🏠 Is Remote Work Killing Company Culture — or Redefining It? Since 2020, remote work has rewritten how teams connect — and not everyone agrees on what it’s done to culture. Some leaders say it’s eroded the sense of belonging that kept teams strong. Others argue it’s made work more human — allowing people to balance life, stay productive, and focus on what actually matters. Gallup’s 2025 data show only 28% of fully remote employees feel strongly connected to their company’s mission but McKinsey reports that most remote workers feel happier and more satisfied overall. So maybe the question isn’t whether remote work killed culture… Maybe it’s whether it revealed which cultures were strong enough to survive outside the office. What effects have you seen? Has remote or hybrid work made your culture stronger — or stretched it thin? #RemoteWork #Leadership #FutureOfWork #CompanyCulture Smart hiring. Real results.

A recent survey found that 83% of remote-friendly companies report “high” or “very high” productivity. It’s a good reminder that performance isn’t about proximity — it’s about trust, accountability, and clarity of goals. The best teams deliver results wherever they are, not just when they’re in the same room. Remote work isn’t a compromise; done right, it’s a competitive advantage. https://lnkd.in/e96Rv58e

One of the best articles I’ve read in a while. FORBES: Why Leaders Need To Rethink The Work-From-Home Debate By Jane Sparrow https://lnkd.in/ejN5Q57w Some highlights… “At their best, offices aren’t about attendance - they’re about energy.” “A Harvard Business School study found that remote workers completed more tasks but achieved fewer creative breakthroughs. Productivity can hold in the short term, but over time, innovation and growth suffer.” “Few studies claim that remote work strengthens culture. Many warn instead of cultural drift, diluted values and social disconnection. Some organizations manage to offset this with intent and strong digital processes, but if it takes significant structure to recreate what used to happen naturally, it raises the question of overall value.” “Perhaps the biggest issue isn’t about process, but mindset. Remote working has accelerated what I call “I-thinking” - the belief that “I’m happier and more productive at home,” without considering the wider “we.” “Every organization has two groups: those who are thriving and clear on their role, and those who are new, learning or struggling.” “That’s why many companies are building in structured, intentional in-person moments. Not to control, but to connect. These are opportunities to re-establish shared purpose, exchange energy, and align priorities in ways digital tools alone can’t.” “…dispersed teams struggle to innovate at scale.” “Leaders now have to navigate this with empathy, not edict.” “…the value of office time lies in purposeful presence, not simply physical attendance.” “This was never just a debate about where people sit. It’s a question of how culture lives.” Thanks to my HOK colleague Catherine Yatrakis, AIA, LEED AP for sharing.

I read this article sadly could not agree with the views of the author. I can count on both hands the people who I am connected with who are neurodivergent and lost there jobs this week due to crippling office working. IT DOES NOT WORK... yes I am shouting, as no one is listening to the real needs of their employees. Jane Sparrow recent Forbes piece suggests that leaders must revisit remote work because proximity fuels creativity, mentoring, and cohesion. But this perspective risks romanticising office culture while ignoring the structural inequities and outdated assumptions that underpin it. 1. The “culture erosion” argument is flawed. Culture isn’t built by proximity, it’s built by trust, clarity, and shared purpose. If a team’s values dilute without physical presence, that’s a failure of leadership, not location. processes can sustain. Moreover, the idea that informal office moments are irreplaceable dismisses the intentionality and accessibility of remote-first models. 2. The “new starters need proximity” claim lacks nuance. Yes, onboarding and mentoring require support, but proximity doesn’t guarantee it. Many new employees feel isolated in offices too, especially in hierarchical or exclusionary environments. When remote models are designed well, they offer structured mentoring, clearer documentation, and more equitable access to leadership. Ultimately, the real issue is whether organisations invest in inclusive systems, not whether people share a postcode. 3. The “innovation suffers remotely” narrative is selective. Citing a Harvard study that remote workers complete more tasks but fewer breakthroughs ignores the diversity of innovation itself. Many breakthroughs come from deep work, collaboration often stifled in noisy, performative office spaces. Therefore, the assumption that creativity thrives only in physical proximity marginalises those who innovate differently, such as us Neurodiverse folk. 4. The “we-thinking vs I-thinking” dichotomy is reductive. Framing remote work as selfish overlooks its systemic benefits: reduced carbon footprint, broader talent pools, and improved wellbeing. It also dismisses the lived experience of disabled, neurodiverse, or caregiving employees for whom office mandates are exclusionary. Collective performance doesn’t require collective presence, it requires collective design. 5. The “hybrid done well” mantra still centres control. Even when framed as flexible, hybrid models often default to office-first norms. The “three days or out” approach isn’t nuance, it’s coercion. True flexibility means trusting people to choose how they work best, not what suits legacy leadership styles. And we must ask, who benefits financially from return-first models? Often, it’s those with commercial real estate interests, consultancy packages, or leadership visibility tied to physical presence. so I have to ask Is this about people, or about profit and filling empty office spaces?

A recent survey found that 83% of remote-friendly companies report “high” or “very high” productivity. It’s a good reminder that performance isn’t about proximity — it’s about trust, accountability, and clarity of goals. The best teams deliver results wherever they are, not just when they’re in the same room. Remote work isn’t a compromise; done right, it’s a competitive advantage. https://lnkd.in/e33FuA_4

In today's remote work landscape, human connection is more essential than ever. While remote work offers flexibility and convenience, it can also risk isolating employees, impacting engagement, well-being, and productivity. According to MIT Sloan Review, fostering “referent power” — the kind of influence born from genuine human engagement — can drive individual and team success beyond traditional positional authority. Leaders must be intentional about creating opportunities for social interaction, balancing work and home life, and supporting mental health to combat feelings of isolation. Remote environments challenge us to build deeper, more transparent relationships through virtual means, which is critical for sustaining motivation and discretionary effort. As we continue to embrace hybrid and remote models, let’s prioritize human connection as a core component of workplace culture — because connection drives commitment, creativity, and performance. What strategies have you found effective in nurturing human bonds within your remote teams? Share your insights! #RemoteWork #HumanConnection #EmployeeEngagement #Leadership #WorkplaceCulture #HybridWork #MentalHealth #TeamSuccess (Source: MIT Sloan Review, Workhuman)