How to Evaluate the Efficacy of Your Hybrid Work Model

• Leaders must discern if their hybrid work model is the best fit for their company or if it requires fine-tuning. 
• The journey begins with defining clear evaluation criteria, a step often overlooked. 
• Despite the abundance of external data on hybrid work preferences, each company’s unique culture, systems, processes, and talent make internal data invaluable for decision-making. 

As the trend towards hybrid work gains momentum, with 74% of U.S. businesses adopting this model, the need for effective evaluation becomes imperative. Unlike the uniform office-based work system of Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., hybrid work practices vary extensively. What suits one company might not necessarily be effective for another, even within the same industry. So, leaders must discern if their chosen model is the best fit for their company or if it requires fine-tuning. 

The journey begins with defining clear evaluation criteria, a step often overlooked. For instance, an Omdia report reveals that although 54% of organizations reported improved productivity with the hybrid model, only 22% set metrics to quantify these enhancements. 

The adage “what gets measured, gets managed” emphasizes the need for thoughtfully chosen metrics that are directly linked to the organization’s success. These metrics should ideally be quantitative and objective, but if necessary, they can be qualitative and subjective to prevent bias. 

Hybrid Work Model as a Strategic Choice 

From assisting 21 organizations in their transition to hybrid work, I’ve learned the importance of involving the entire C-suite in the metrics formulation process, with the Board’s approval. Too often, executives, preoccupied with their tasks, delegate this responsibility to the HR department. 

This approach is misguided. The shift to a hybrid work model is a strategic decision concerning the company’s long-term future. It demands adequate focus and coordination from the organization’s top leaders. Otherwise, miscommunication could lead to confusion about what constitutes “success,” resulting in disorder post-transition. 

The C-suite should ideally define the metrics during an offsite meeting, allowing them to focus on long-term strategic decisions without daily work distractions. Before this meeting, initial metrics should be evaluated, including a baseline of quantitative and objective measures. Additionally, comprehensive employee and middle management surveys, as well as focus group interviews, should be conducted to assess subjective and qualitative measures. Despite the abundance of external data on hybrid work preferences, each company’s unique culture, systems, processes, and talent make internal data invaluable for decision-making. 

Choosing the Right Metrics for Your Hybrid Work Model 

In my experience, companies concentrate on a variety of success metrics, with varying degrees of importance. These metrics should be assessed before implementing a permanent hybrid work policy to establish a baseline and then evaluated quarterly to gauge the impact of policy adjustments. 

Retention is a straightforward, quantitative, and objective metric. Recruitment, while more subjective and challenging to quantify, is also crucial. Evidence suggests that offering more remote work improves both retention and recruitment. For example, 95% of HR leaders from a survey of 1,000 respondents believe offering hybrid work is important for recruitment, and 60% perceive it boosts retention. Another report by Owl Labs, surveying 2,300 full-time U.S. workers, showed 52% would accept a salary cut of 5% or more for the flexibility to choose their work location. 

If a more flexible policy is chosen, I advise clients to advertise it on their “Join Us” webpage, as the University of Southern California’s Information Sciences Institute did. This tactic often leads to an increase in job inquiries referencing this policy, as well as enthusiasm from potential hires during interviews. This response can be measured. 

Performance is a crucial metric, though its ease of measurement depends on the nature of the work. A study published in the National Bureau of Economic Review reported that software engineers on a hybrid schedule wrote 8% more code over six months compared to their office-based counterparts. If clear performance measurements aren’t available, regular weekly assessments from supervisors can be used. However, software tracking programs should be avoided as they have been shown to cause stress in 45% of employees. 

Metrics related to culture and talent management, such as morale, engagement, wellbeing, happiness, burnout, intent to leave, and quiet quitting, are essential but challenging to measure. They often require more qualitative and subjective approaches like customized surveys tailored to hybrid and remote work policies. 

Wellbeing and burnout can be assessed through the hard metric of sick days taken. Observing changes over time, adjusted for seasons, can help evaluate the impact of your policies on employee mental and physical health. 

Diversity, equity, and inclusion is a crucial metric often neglected, yet greatly influenced by hybrid work. Underrepresented groups strongly prefer more remote work, and companies opting for a mostly office-centric schedule may face talent loss unless resources are invested to enhance their DEI. 

Finally, consider professional and leadership development, and onboarding and integration of junior team members. The Conference Board survey finds 58% of employees would leave without adequate professional development, a sentiment even stronger among underrepresented groups. 

Conclusion 

Once baseline data from these diverse metrics are obtained, the C-suite must decide which metrics are most important to your organization. Choose the top three to five metrics, weigh their importance relative to each other, and use these to decide on a hybrid work policy that optimizes for your desired outcomes. If metrics don’t meet expectations, revise the policy and evaluate its impact. Run experiments to compare alternative versions of the hybrid policy. Reassess and revise your approach monthly for the first three months, then quarterly going forward.