Dr. Gleb Tsipursky – The Office Whisperer
Nirit Cohen – WorkFutures
Angela Howard – Culture Expert
Drew Jones – Design & Innovation
Jonathan Price – CRE & Flex Expert
Companies that approach flexible work strategically see a 19% average productivity increase — translating into 7.6 hours per week gained per employee. Companies that don’t are reacting to market pressure, employee demands, and whatever their competitor down the street is doing, without accurately framing the impact on the business and their workforce.
The difference isn’t about offering flexibility. It’s about defining what flexible work actually is in your organization.
The Problem: We Don’t Agree on What Flexible Work Is
Is flexible work a lever that allows a high-performing workforce to execute the strategic priorities of the business effectively?
Is it one policy-based aspect of multi-faceted employee experience?
Or is it a benefit meant to compete for talent, without consideration of the day-to-day execution potential?
Right now, we don’t agree. Three recent studies prove it:
- Cisco’s Global Hybrid Work Study
- JLL’s Workforce Preference Barometer
- Owl Labs’ State of Hybrid Work
Each study surveyed thousands of employees, globally and in the U.S. about similar “hybrid” and “remote” work factors, but they reached different conclusions in several areas because of different definitions of what flexible work is in the first place.
This lack of clarity — is it a strategy, policy or benefit? 0 —limits the consistency of insights required to optimize where, when and how work happens best, today and in the future.
Where All Three Studies Agree
Before looking at how different perspectives cause these studies to diverge, it’s worth noting where they agree on the current state of flexible work in organizations.
All three studies confirmed a return to the office, but with continuing flexibility across places and spaces.
According to Cisco, the percentage of hybrid workers globally dropped from 62% in 2022 to 45% in 2025 (42% of those hybrid workers onsite 2-3 days a week), with 49% fully onsite and 6% fully remote.
In the U.S., Owl Labs found 28% hybrid (of which 39% are onsite 3 days a week), 9% fully remote and 63% fully in-office.
More stories for you
The studies also agree that the definition of flexible work must evolve beyond “where” work happens — either onsite, remotely and/or hybrid — to include “when.”
In fact, Owl Labs found 83% of employees say flexible hours matter more than flexible location, and Cisco defines flexibility across three dimensions: where, when, and how people work.
This reinforces the need to expand beyond “hybrid” and “remote” to define flexibility.
While some form of flexible work is an expectation for most workers, all three studies identified caregivers as most vulnerable, and not just mothers.
JLL found 46% of caregivers feel overwhelmed. Owl Labs reported 68% of working parents worry caregiving will hurt job performance. Cisco noted younger employees in prime caregiving years make up most non-compliers with office mandates.
The data isn’t contradictory. All three studies are looking at the same workplace reality. What differs is how they interpret what it means based on the way flexible work is defined.
Three Studies, Three Definitions, Three Different Outcomes
Flexible work as a business strategy
Cisco’s study of 21,513 workers across 21 countries states plainly that “flexibility is non-negotiable and drives performance.” Not “employees want it.”
The study shows how flexible work drives performance related to talent, productivity, operating costs, connectivity, use of office space, and employee well-being. It’s a strategic lever.
While the research breaks down how different types of work models impact outcomes, a key finding is that 50% of high performers work for organizations requiring less than three days in the office per week. That’s a strategic choice about where, when and how work gets done to win operationally.
The outcome: A 19% average productivity increase, which translates into 7.6 hours per week gained per employee.
Flexible work as policy-based employee experience
JLL’s survey of 8,700 office workers across 31 countries positions flexibility as one important element of what makes work satisfactory overall.
According to JLL, hybrid “policies” are supported in the context of “quality workplaces, an empowering managerial culture and learning and development opportunities.”
Therefore, among employees with negative views of hybrid policies, the problem isn’t the policy itself. It’s the lack of support that enables it.
The outcome: 72% of employees surveyed report having a positive sentiment of “hybrid” policies, but 38% say offices need significant improvement, which is proof of the lack of alignment.
Flexible work as an employee benefit
Owl Labs’ study of 2,000 U.S. workers describes, “employees and employers alike are prioritizing flexibility, often willing to trade compensation or quietly sacrifice productivity to protect it.”
Flexible hours are what employees find “most appealing” in job offers. And a lack of it is why 37% said they would turn down a job.
This frames flexible work as procurement and protection of a valued benefit, but not a means to optimize performance.
The outcome: 40% of hybrid and remote workers say if they were no longer allowed to work flexibly, they would start looking for another job, rather than clearly defining impacts to ensure continuation.
Why These Different Outcomes Matter
These aren’t just unique angles from which to analyze the research. They reflect the general confusion around how to position flexible work in an organization, and that confusion shows up in your business results.
Approached strategically, like the Cisco research, the question becomes: “Which flexible work model helps us achieve our business objectives?” The parameters that determine where, when and how work happens best are defined to achieve those outcomes. The result is measurable productivity gains.
Positioned tactically as a policy, like the JLL findings, you’re balancing seemingly separate and competing considerations. Instead of centering flexible work and then aligning workspace, culture and manager to enable performance across places, spaces and time, it becomes one among many dials to adjust.
The result is decent sentiment scores but misalignment between what employees experience and what they need — 38% say offices need significant improvement even while 72% have positive views of hybrid policies.
Positioning flexible work as a benefit, like Owl Labs, risks focusing on the minimum offering required to compete for talent and missing the broader potential strategic impact on the business, like productivity and innovation.
The result is a retention threat — 40% would look for another job — rather than a performance advantage.
What High-Performance Flexible Work Actually Is
From the comparison of the studies and from our more than two decades of experience executing flexible work strategies, the best definition is this: the way to achieve high levels of performance working across places, spaces and time within well-defined parameters.
What those parameters will look like depends on the type of work different business lines and functional areas engage in. One size will not fit all, even within the same organization.
If that outcome is innovation, then, as Cisco found, parameters that allow for a greater degree of flexibility will deliver the highest “ability to innovate.”
If you want collaboration, consider how to optimize in-person interactions, avoiding full-time office requirements which performed worst on most metrics Cisco measured.
If retention is the goal, expand upon JLL’s policy-focused employee experience working flexibly. That includes an appealing workspace and a supportive manager that enables performance regardless of where, when and how it happens.
What to Do Now
Stop talking about “hybrid policy” mandates or flexible work “benefits.”
Instead, define the flexible work model you co-create with your workforce by starting with the work or outcomes you want to achieve, then defining where, when and how that work happens best.
The companies pulling ahead aren’t reacting to what employees want or what competitors are doing. They’ve decided that flexible work is a business capability that solves actual business problems. They can tell you what they’re trying to achieve, where, when and how it happens best, and whether it’s working.
You can’t optimize what you haven’t clearly defined. And right now, as the three studies show, most organizations aren’t on the same page about what flexible work is.
The difference shows up in productivity data, engagement scores, and whether your best people are quietly looking for the exit.
If you can’t articulate your definition of flexible work yet, start there. Because chances are, you don’t have one.
