Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance | Nature
www.nature.com
Working from home has become standard for employees with a university degree. The most common scheme, which has been adopted by around 100 million employees in Europe and North America, is a hybrid schedule, in which individuals spend a mix of days at home and at work each week1,2. However, the effects of hybrid working on employees and firms have been debated, and some executives argue that it damages productivity, innovation and career development3–5. Here we ran a six-month randomized control trial investigating the effects of hybrid working from home on 1,612 employees in a Chinese technology company in 2021–2022. We found that hybrid working improved job satisfaction and reduced quit rates by one-third. The reduction in quit rates was significant for non-managers, female employees and those with long commutes. Null equivalence tests showed that hybrid working did not affect performance grades over the next two years of reviews. We found no evidence for a difference in promotions over the next two years overall, or for any major employee subgroup. Finally, null equivalence tests showed that hybrid working had no effect on the lines of code written by computer-engineer employees. We also found that the 395 managers in the experiment revised their surveyed views about the effect of hybrid working on productivity, from a perceived negative effect (−2.6% on average) before the experiment to a perceived positive one (+1.0%) after the experiment. These results indicate that a hybrid schedule with two days a week working from home does not damage performance. A trial investigating the effects of a hybrid working schedule in a Chinese technology firm in 2021–2022 shows that working from home two days a week improved job satisfaction, reduced quitting and did not affect performance.

Abstract:

Working from home has become standard for employees with a university degree. The most common scheme, which has been adopted by around 100 million employees in Europe and North America, is a hybrid schedule, in which individuals spend a mix of days at home and at work each week1,2. However, the effects of hybrid working on employees and firms have been debated, and some executives argue that it damages productivity, innovation and career development3,4,5. Here we ran a six-month randomized control trial investigating the effects of hybrid working from home on 1,612 employees in a Chinese technology company in 2021–2022. We found that hybrid working improved job satisfaction and reduced quit rates by one-third. The reduction in quit rates was significant for non-managers, female employees and those with long commutes. Null equivalence tests showed that hybrid working did not affect performance grades over the next two years of reviews. We found no evidence for a difference in promotions over the next two years overall, or for any major employee subgroup. Finally, null equivalence tests showed that hybrid working had no effect on the lines of code written by computer-engineer employees. We also found that the 395 managers in the experiment revised their surveyed views about the effect of hybrid working on productivity, from a perceived negative effect (−2.6% on average) before the experiment to a perceived positive one (+1.0%) after the experiment. These results indicate that a hybrid schedule with two days a week working from home does not damage performance.

    • rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.eeEnglish
      29·
      3 days ago

      I’ve gone full remote during pandemic and never came back to office. Luckily, my manager doesn’t care as long as I turn in the results

    • Hannes@feddit.orgEnglish
      131·
      3 days ago

      I feel as if full remote with a day in the office every couple of weeks for teambildung is fine as long as it’s voluntarily.

      I much prefer retrospectives and post mortems of projects in person, too. Still no reason to force people to come in as long as the work gets done

  • Talaraine@fedia.io
    27·
    3 days ago

    It’s common knowledge that the days we work in the office, nothing gets done. All the meetings where a middle manager needs to see his minions before him in a room ensure we have no other time.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      3 days ago

      Yea articles like this serve one purpose, management failed RTO…so now they’re trying to sound like they never wanted RTO and hybrid is what they meant. WFH is better in every single way…less traffic, less traffic accidents, less people sitting in smog, less smog, less tire shaving flying around, more time for the employee to enjoy in the morning, the list is a mile long…and there is absolutely 0 positives for RTO.

  • YoFrodo@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6·
    3 days ago

    Commutes need to be considered as a form of on-the-clock work. Commuting should be paid (perhaps even as a fraction of normal wages)

  • PerogiBoi@lemmy.caEnglish
    4·
    3 days ago

    My office used to be fully remote during the pandemic and changed how our entire company did business. Once commercial real estate started complaining in the newspaper about their values going down, my company did a full 180 and required everyone back 2 days a week. A year went by and no one really wanted to go back in so they INCREASED the days were required in the office to 3 days.

    December 24 is scheduled for a new announcement and most people at my work expect to be told then that the requirement will be brought to 4-5 days per week.

    We went from being promised by senior management that we are remote by design to “hybrid” at 4 mandatory in office days per week. 5 for management.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.caEnglish
    31·
    3 days ago

    hybrid working from home …

    Is a cop-out, forcing commute-range on plebes’ housing and in-office stress.

    • “work where best”
    • fuck the plebes

    You gotta pick a lane, companies.