Be clear about what shared time is for
Whatever the hybrid arrangement, teams get more from time together when they agree what it is for.
Whatever the arrangement, teams get more from time together when they agree what it’s for.
Any hybrid setup works better when the team has named the work that benefits from being together and the work that needs uninterrupted focus.
Ask the team where being in the same place improves the work: difficult decisions, hands-on learning, building relationships, tasks that depend on shared equipment. Then identify what needs focus time. Naming both makes the arrangement easier to use and fairer to review.
Research can frame the discussion. A randomized trial with 1,612 Trip.com employees found that two home-working days a week reduced attrition and improved satisfaction without hurting measured performance. It covered graduate employees in one company, so the local operating context still matters.
Where I’d start: agree the purpose of shared time, response expectations and how decisions get documented. Review delivery, collaboration and access to development over a reasonable period. Check that colleagues outside the room get the information they need.
The test: neither presence nor remote status measures contribution on its own. Solve the actual delivery problem and don’t use location as a proxy for it.
Disagree? Tell me on LinkedIn. That’s where the discussion happens.