Hybrid vs. 100% Office Mandate – Considerations for startups

---

Hybrid vs. Full-Time Office Work

Mandates requiring employees to be in the office full-time are making headlines worldwide. Technologically, working from home (WFH) – or from anywhere – has never been easier and employees highly value the flexibility WFH allows. Who will prevail in this tussle of employee preferences vs. management demands? And what should startups do…..

Let’s focus on Hybrid (a mix of WFH and office) vs. Full-Time Office as the most common alternatives. Remote (WFH all the time) is quite different and relevant to a small proportion of employees. The Bundesamt for Statistics reported for 2023:

• 8% WFH >50% of the time
• 16% regularly WFH <50% of the time
• 13% WFH occasionally.

Employees’ Perspectives

Hybrid working is a luxury available for some of the workforce, which can create inequalities, as it did during the pandemic when essential workers were in their workplaces, while we lounged at home, ‘Winnie the Pooh-ing’ it on conf calls (you know, professional attire above the waist, not so much below). 

While Hybrid working appears to combine the best of both world there are pros and cons and individuals’ preferences differ.

• Many like the flexibility WFH offers to manage personal and professional commitments, though some struggle with time management and self-discipline. 
• WFH can improve work-life balance, but some struggle to switch off.
• WFH can be more productive due to reduced commuting, fewer meetings and distractions – assuming WFH space away from home/family distractions.      
• WFH weakens professional networks and work relationships.  Aspiring CEOs are unlikely to be toiling in their home office in their slippers. 
• Some feel isolated at home and this can be stressful if things aren’t going well.  The introverted particularly can retreat further.  But some are just more sociable – when I worked in Spain, it happened that some would WFH but still come in to go to lunch with colleagues!
• WFH saves employees money – on commuting (+ bonus reduced environmental impact), meals and clothes.  There is a downside to this WFH dressing down: a colleague realised how low he had sunk when he found himself dressing up to go to the Aldi!

Economists have estimated cost savings when WFH, prompting companies to consider paying lower salaries for WFH employees.  While that can be justifiable, particularly if WFH enables them to live in cheaper locations (even other countries), it may also be a tactic to incentivise office attendance.

Employer Rationale

Amazon, among others, cited strengthening company culture as one of the main reasons for requiring full-time office attendance (from 3 days/week).  Amazon’s CEO positioned the changes… 

“…as a better way to work.  We’ve observed that it’s easier for our teammates to learn, model, practice, and strengthen our culture; collaborating, brainstorming, and inventing are simpler and more effective; teaching and learning from one another are more seamless; and, teams tend to be better connected to one another.” 

Numerous articles extoll the benefits of in-office as “seamless exchange of ideas”, “immediate communication” and “quicker consensus and decision-making”.  

This all sounds good, but is it true?  And even acknowledging these in-office benefits, does 5 days in-office provide additional benefits over 3 days in-office that outweigh the negative of employees losing their valued flexibility? Or recruiting from a smaller talent pool prepared to be 5 days in-office?  

Atlassian President explained in Fortune that while the inability to share information is one of the biggest criticisms of flexible or distributed work,  the solution is not informal conversations when you run into somebody in the office one day.

“The idea that office attendance will drive creativity is predicated on the idea that the right people are in the office at the right time,” she says. “But if people are more than 10 metres away from you, it’s like they’re not in the same building.”

Clearly, many organisations function successfully without all being in the same office all the time – multi-site companies, geographically diverse teams etc.  Such organisations expend effort to maintain effective communication, information-sharing and build the company culture.

A recent PwC study found that hybrid workers feel more included and productive than those who sit at their office desk five days a week and they are more satisfied.  While that might seem counter-intuitive, PwC conclusion was:

“When companies move to a hybrid schedule, they start implementing more purposeful efforts to replace this engagement. In the process, the hybrid experience actually leads to improved engagements with more touch points.”

(Or it might also be that companies offering hybrid employment were better employers anyway.)

In any case, ‘presentee-ism’ 5 days a week would seem a blunt instrument, where focus should be on building engagement, communication, culture and employee satisfaction.  Effective collaboration and communication must involve more than being face-to-face or side-by-side.

Legal Considerations in Switzerland

Céline Schmid, employment law specialist of Kellerhals Carrard tells me that we should differentiate between remote/hybrid working within Switzerland and outside.

«Public labor law provisions, such as maximum working hours, breaks, rest periods (including time tracking), the prohibition of Sunday work, as well as health and safety regulations, also apply to home office work. And, if the employee does not have a workplace and works exclusively from home, compensation payments for expenses may also become due.

For home office remote work outside Switzerland, tax and social security implications (depending on the place of work and nationality of the employee), data protection issues, mandatory foreign law (which might overrule the Swiss employment agreement) as well as migration law regulations (i.e., work permit) need to be considered. 

A good setup at the beginning helps to prevent uncertainties and to create a good basis for the relationship on both sides.»

It gets complicated and remote work from abroad has its pitfalls, so legal advice is highly recommended. (Note: relevant presentations in SSA’s Education Session Library)

Considerations for Startups

It is important for startups to build the company culture, communications and employee engagement, regardless of # of days in the office.  

As the business expands from a few initial founders, the processes, engagement efforts and culture must evolve to integrate new employees.  More people means a requirement for more formal communication channels, information-sharing and documentation.  

I spoke with Michael Dudli, CEO & Founder of Xelon AG and SSA Board Member, about his experiences growing from a startup to a ~40 employee company located across Switzerland and in Ukraine.  Michael explained it was definitely easier when starting out to be in the office together –  usually 4 days a week by choice – and thinking back now, he believes it was very important to be together in the early phase. 

That’s not to say that it can’t work as a startup to all work remotely – it’s just more challenging, needs different tools, more handbooks and processes.  Now, as a larger organisation Xelon has the processes and documentation and HR to operate effectively across multiple locations.  

Michael emphasized the benefits of having good offices, a social environment and fun –  so people want to come into the office.  He suggested that working remotely is not about saving money for employers – because what you save on office space, you’ll need to spend on efforts to bring people together, on team building, events and offsites.

In conclusion, for startups, what really matters:

• What are you doing to facilitate communications and information-sharing, build the company culture and promote employee satisfaction? 
• Are your people properly equipped to do their jobs in the way that best suits them, considering the tasks they need to do?  

And a final thought on the concern that employees will take advantage when working from home.  I did find a study where >40% of WFH employees cited TV as a distraction (ok, it was in the US, where strange things happen…).  Trust is essential for remote work, but if you can’t trust your people or assess their performance, the real issue is probably not their location.

---