Chances are you weren’t even familiar with the term “hybrid work model” before 2020. But in that same year, as the COVID 19 pandemic closed the doors of businesses across the US and the world, remote work became a lifeline for many industries. And, perhaps not surprisingly, as the pandemic slowly came to an end, so did fulltime remote work for many companies. But employees weren’t so happy about giving up working from home – that’s when the hybrid work model was developed. Simply put, hybrid work allows employees to work remotely from home, while still maintaining an in-office presence as much as needed. In this article, we dig a little deeper into how full-time remote work evolved into a hybrid work model, and what companies have learned from that process.
Timeline & Evolution
Pre-pandemic baseline: Before the pandemic, remote work (working from home) existed but was limited in scale. For example, only ~6.5 % of U.S. private‐sector workers worked primarily from home in 2019 according to the Bureau of Statistics. Many companies were skeptical: concerns about productivity, monitoring, culture, informal learning.
The pandemic shock: With lockdowns and health mandates, firms scrambled to move to full remote. This was a massive one-off shift (the “forced experiment”). Although many company owners and managers were skeptical – assuming productivity would take a nosedive if workers were allowed to perform their duties outside of the traditional office environment – thanks to technological tools designed to measure productivity levels (tools such as MySammy) – employees were just as productive working from home as they were working from the office.
Transition to hybrid work -- the “new normal:” As restrictions eased, many organizations moved not back to full in-office but to a hybrid model (some days office, some remote). Current research shows that this shift appears lasting. For example, in one working-paper: “Hybrid working appears to have no negative impact on productivity but is popular because it improves recruitment & retention” (WFH Research). Another major report from McKinsey & Company shows that office attendance remains well below pre-pandemic levels; the hybrid model is stabilizing.
What Companies Learned
1. Flexibility matters — but with defined guardrails. Many employees proved they can work remotely and effectively; but it’s not just “anywhere, anytime” chaos. Firms learned that remote/hybrid work needs structure: clear expectations, coordination, communication norms. Flexibility is now a competitive differentiator (for talent, retention), but it needs purposeful design (not “just go home and do whatever”).
2. Productivity isn’t inherently worse — but conditions matter. Studies show fully remote may have 10% lower productivity compared to fully in-office under some conditions (per one Stanford working paper) but hybrid models often show neutral or slight gains. And companies that take advantage of the technological tools available showed no difference – and, in some cases, even an increase – in productivity levels of employees working from home. MySammy, for example, is a cloud-based software designed to measure productivity levels of remote employees without the need for “spyware” or blocking websites. Used with complete transparency, MySammy not only provides valuable information regarding employee productivity, but it also actually encourages remote workers to perform at their optimum levels.
3. Culture, connection and informal learning remain fragile. One of the consistent challenges: remote/hybrid models reduce “chance encounters,” informal mentoring, culture‐building, serendipitous social interaction. For example, research in software teams shows hybrid team resilience depends on intra‐group interaction and how the configuration supports team maturity. To build strong capabilities, companies should invest in culture, team cohesion, mentorship, and intentional planning for in-office or virtual time. Hybrid work requires more than splitting days; it needs purposeful structure.
4. The workplace footprint and talent pool implications are real. Remote and hybrid arrangements allow firms to tap a wider geographic talent pool, reduce office space, re-think real estate. For example: office attendance remains ~30 % lower in many places vs. pre-pandemic levels. The real estate and talent implications are strategic: firms can rethink location, cost structure, recruiting, but must align with collaboration needs and culture.
5. One size doesn’t fit all; hybrid is a spectrum. Hybrid doesn’t mean “everyone in 2 days, home 3 days” uniformly. Different teams/functions have different needs (client facing, R&D, manufacturing support). Study in software industry: Teams differ in preferences, dynamics, tasks. Hybrid policy must be tailored — to role, team, geography, employee preferences — rather than a blunt “X days in office for all.”
Summary
The move from remote → hybrid is not simply a temporary fad — research suggests the hybrid model is here to stay. If you’re developing your own hybrid work model, a great place to begin is by signing up for your FREE MySammy trial today!
