How many days a week in the office are enough? You shouldn’t need to ask

This professional online article, published in The Conversation, examines the transformation of workplace expectations and hybrid work arrangements following the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on evolving employee preferences, managerial attitudes, and organisational adaptation. Drawing on survey evidence and policy analysis, it explores how large-scale remote work adoption during lockdowns reshaped attitudes toward flexibility, with most workers now preferring hybrid arrangements combining office-based and remote work.

The discussion situates these shifts within broader research on productivity, collaboration, and career progression, including evidence that remote workers may face reduced promotion opportunities despite comparable or higher productivity. It highlights concerns raised by policy bodies such as the Productivity Commission regarding potential costs of remote work, including diminished networking, reduced informal learning, and impacts on long-term career trajectories.

The article critically examines “legacy management” models that privilege physical presence in the office, arguing that such approaches may reflect outdated assumptions about productivity and control rather than current evidence. It considers how managerial resistance, organisational culture, and implicit bias continue to shape hybrid work implementation, potentially disadvantaging employees seeking flexibility, including carers and other non-traditional workers.

The article argues that there is no universal optimal hybrid work model, and instead advocates for context-sensitive, individualised approaches that prioritise autonomy, flexibility, and evidence-based management practices. It concludes that the future of work depends on the extent to which organisations and leaders adapt to new empirical realities and redesign work systems to reflect diverse employee needs and contemporary patterns of work.