Managers want you back in-office because they’re not ready for hybrid

The push to return to the office is often rooted in a lack of preparedness among managers to lead hybrid teams, writes Dr Gleb Tsipursky.

Despite the clear benefits of hybrid work models, a significant number of managers are pushing for their teams to be back in the office. A KPMG report of responses from 100 CEOs of large companies shows that over a third expect to have all corporate workers back in the office full-time by 2027. While some cite productivity concerns or cultural cohesion as reasons, a deeper look reveals a fundamental issue: many managers lack the training to effectively lead hybrid teams.

The training gap: Back in the office v hybrid leadership

A recent Gallup survey highlights a stark reality: only 10 per cent of managers have received mandatory training on how to manage employees in a hybrid work environment. An additional 18 per cent have access to optional training, but busy schedules and competing priorities often mean these resources go unused. Without comprehensive, organisation-wide training on hybrid work best practices, the vast majority of managers are left to navigate this new landscape on their own.

This training gap has significant implications. Managers who are unprepared to lead hybrid teams often struggle with maintaining productivity, ensuring effective communication, and fostering a cohesive team culture. These challenges can lead to frustration and a natural preference for the familiarity of in-office work, where traditional management techniques feel more applicable.

The consequences of a lack of planning

The same Gallup survey reveals that nearly half (48 per cent) of hybrid workers are on teams that have not discussed an informal or formal plan for how to collaborate effectively in a hybrid environment. This lack of planning exacerbates the difficulties managers face, as without a clear strategy, hybrid work can quickly become chaotic.

Employees on teams with a well-defined hybrid collaboration plan are 2.2 times more likely to report that their organisation’s hybrid policy has an extremely positive impact on team collaboration. Additionally, these employees are 66 per cent more likely to be engaged at work and 29 per cent less likely to experience burnout. The absence of such plans leaves managers and their teams struggling to find a rhythm, further driving the desire to revert to traditional office settings.

The impact on employee engagement

Effective hybrid work management is not just a matter of logistics; it has a profound impact on employee engagement and wellbeing. When managers are equipped with the right tools and training to lead hybrid teams, employees benefit from a more structured and supportive work environment.

Without proper training, managers may unintentionally create conditions that lead to disengagement and burnout. For instance, inconsistent communication can result in employees feeling disconnected from their team and organisational goals. Similarly, unclear expectations around availability and performance can cause stress and reduce job satisfaction. These negative outcomes can be mitigated with the right training and planning, but without them, managers may see a return to the office as the only viable solution.

Bridging the training gap: A path forward

Addressing the training gap for managers is crucial for the success of hybrid work models. Organisations must invest in comprehensive training programs that equip managers with the skills needed to lead hybrid teams effectively. This includes not only technical skills, such as using digital collaboration tools, but also soft skills, like remote communication, team building, and performance management in a dispersed environment.

Mandatory training should be prioritised to ensure all managers are prepared to lead hybrid teams. Optional resources, while beneficial, are insufficient on their own. By making hybrid work training a fundamental part of leadership development, organisations can create a more consistent and effective approach to managing remote and hybrid teams.

Moreover, organisations should encourage the development of formal and informal collaboration plans for hybrid teams. These plans provide a clear framework for how teams will communicate, collaborate, and maintain productivity, reducing the uncertainty and inconsistency that can plague hybrid work arrangements.

Conclusion

The push to return to the office is often rooted in a lack of preparedness among managers to lead hybrid teams. Without proper training and planning, the challenges of managing a dispersed workforce can seem insurmountable, leading managers to prefer the familiarity of in-office work. However, with the right investment in training and the development of clear collaboration plans, organisations can empower their managers to lead hybrid teams effectively, reaping the benefits of flexible work arrangements while maintaining high levels of engagement and productivity.

As the world of work continues to evolve, it is imperative that organisations recognise and address the training gap among managers. By doing so, they can create a more supportive and effective hybrid work environment that benefits both employees and the organisation as a whole.

Gleb Tsipursky, PhD, is the chief executive of hybrid work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts. He was named the ‘Office Whisperer’ by The New York Times for helping leaders overcome frustrations with hybrid work and generative AI.