Hybrid Working Models: Global Best Practices

Introduction

The post-pandemic era has cemented hybrid work as a predominant model for knowledge workers across the globe. Surveys in recent years show an overwhelming shift toward hybrid arrangements: over 90% of companies now include some form of hybrid work in their official policies, up from around 70% in 2021. In practice, this means most organizations expect employees to split time between remote and in-office work. For example, a CBRE benchmarking study finds that 92% of large firms have defined hybrid workplace policies with specified in-office days. This dramatic adoption underscores that hybrid work is “here to stay,” not a temporary trend. In the UK and North America, hybrid schedules are widespread (by early 2025 about 28% of UK workers and 30%+ of U.S. workers were working in a hybrid pattern ), and across Europe hybrid arrangements are even more common – an estimated 44% of EU workers followed hybrid schedules in 2024 . Globally, knowledge workers have settled into new rhythms blending remote flexibility with office time, and corporate real estate (CRE) leaders face the challenge of optimizing workplaces for this new normal.

Hybrid work promises to combine the connectivity and culture of the office with the autonomy and flexibility of remote work. Employees generally appreciate in-person interaction and the mentorship and serendipity it affords, but they also strongly desire autonomy over where and when they work. The best hybrid strategies recognize this duality. A recent CBRE report boiled the benefits of hybrid work down to “connectivity with flexibility,” noting employees want the “exposure and interactions” of the office as well as the freedom of occasional remote days. At the same time, executive leadership increasingly acknowledges that some office presence is valuable for engagement, innovation, and loyalty. Many C-suites believe shared in-office experiences help build organizational culture and reduce turnover, as reflected in research correlating fully remote policies with higher attrition in certain employee segments. For instance, one analysis found younger tech employees (often living in urban areas) actually showed lower turnover under mostly in-office policies than under fully remote setups, whereas experienced professionals (e.g. lawyers in suburban settings) had the highest turnover when forced fully back in-office. Striking the right balance is therefore critical.

This white paper explores global best practices for hybrid work models, with a holistic lens on workplace strategy. It is organized into four major domains:

Physical Workplace Implications: How hybrid work is reshaping office design, space allocation, and real estate portfolio strategy.
HR and Workforce Policies: Effective policies for hybrid schedules, flexibility norms, and performance management in a hybrid context.
Leadership and Management Styles: The leadership approaches, cultural practices, and management techniques that enable hybrid teams to thrive.
Technology and Digital Tools: The role of technology – from desk booking apps to AI-enhanced workplace management – in supporting effective hybrid work.

Throughout, we compare regional trends in the UK, Europe, and North America and include mini case examples and data-driven insights from leading industry research (including CBRE, JLL, Gartner, Gensler, Leesman, Verdantix, and others). We also discuss the key benefits and challenges of hybrid models, and the success metrics CRE leaders are using to evaluate and refine their hybrid strategies. The goal is to provide senior decision-makers in corporate real estate with a comprehensive, forward-looking view of hybrid working best practices as they plan for the future of work.

Physical Workplace Implications of Hybrid Work

Hybrid working is fundamentally altering how organizations plan and use their physical office space. With employees no longer at their desks five days a week, office utilization patterns have become more variable and dynamic. In general, office attendance now tends to concentrate mid-week, with Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays being the peak days in many companies. A CBRE study confirms that 98% of companies see their highest office utilization mid-week (and significantly lower occupancy on Mondays and Fridays). This predictable ebb and flow is prompting firms to rethink capacity: rather than providing one desk per employee, many are shifting to shared seating and “hoteling” models to accommodate peaks without a sea of empty desks on low days. In fact, global data shows the average office space per person has shrunk notably. CBRE’s 2023–2024 occupancy benchmarking found average square footage per employee fell by 22% in 2023, driven largely by increased space sharing and more collaborative areas in offices. The traditional metric of one assigned seat per person has given way to higher occupancy ratios – for the first time, the average global office now has more people assigned than available seats (occupancy surpassing 100%), reflecting deliberate over-subscription of desks to enable flexibility. In other words, organizations expect not everyone will be in at the same time.

Real estate portfolio strategies are evolving accordingly. Many companies are rightsizing their office footprints to eliminate underutilized space and reduce costs. Globally, 62% of firms surveyed have already reduced their office portfolio since 2020, and 63% expect further reductions by 2026. A significant 43% of organizations plan to shrink their office footprint by more than 30% in the next three years, according to CBRE’s Global Workplace & Occupancy Insights report. In North America especially, the combination of hybrid work and low average utilization (~31% in 2023 versus ~64% pre-pandemic) has created an impetus to cut excess space. Rather than viewing this purely as cost-cutting, many firms are reinvesting savings into higher-quality workplaces. The mantra emerging is “optimize for utilization and experience, not just capacity.” For example, by reducing surplus desks, companies can redirect budget into better amenities, technology, and collaborative environments that draw people in when they do come on-site. As CBRE workplace consultants put it, “reducing seats can create more vibrancy in the office and generate savings to reinvest in the space, technology and services to optimize the employee experience.” This reflects a shift from viewing real estate as a static cost to treating it as a dynamic asset that can be tuned for peak effectiveness under hybrid work patterns.

Office design is thus undergoing a profound transformation to support hybrid workstyles. One clear trend is a greater emphasis on collaborative and social spaces relative to individual heads-down workspaces. Since 2021, the average amount of collaborative space in offices globally has increased by 44%, while assigned individual space has decreased. Firms are introducing more team huddle rooms, casual lounge areas, conference and training facilities, and multipurpose spaces that can host larger group events. However, leading strategists caution that an office cannot be only a clubhouse or meeting hub – it must also support focused work and private tasks, since even hybrid employees still spend over 50% of their in-office time on individual focus work on average. JLL research finds that successful hybrid workplaces provide an effective mix of “we” space and “me” space, balancing collective collaboration areas with quiet zones or enclosed spaces for concentration. In practice, this means designing offices with variety and activity-based work settings: e.g. open collaboration zones, project team rooms, phone booths for video calls, touchdown desks, and quiet libraries or focus rooms – all equipped with the necessary technology. The goal is an adaptable, inclusive environment that gives employees choice depending on their task, mood, or schedule on a given day.

Crucially, data-driven design is informing these changes. Organizations are leveraging sensor data and occupancy analytics to understand how space is actually used under hybrid schedules. Traditional metrics like average occupancy or seat count are being supplanted by utilization rates and peak/off-peak analyses. For instance, rather than provisioning space for 100% of employees, firms examine peak daily attendance and design for that (with a buffer) while monitoring utilization trends. Micro-level utilization data helps identify which spaces are in highest demand and which sit empty. As an example, if small conference rooms are overbooked but large meeting rooms stay vacant, layout adjustments can be made. New occupancy metrics are emerging, such as the “office show-up rate” (office attendance divided by total headcount) to quantify demand, and the “office utilization rate” (attendance divided by capacity) to measure how well space supply meets that demand. These metrics give CRE teams a more nuanced view of how hybrid work affects space needs. CBRE notes that more flexible hybrid policies make predicting behavior harder, prompting organizations to set clearer guardrails (like core days or minimum days) to attain some predictability for planning. Many firms now use scenario planning tools to model different hybrid attendance patterns and their space implications.

To illustrate the new thinking in office design, CBRE’s workplace strategy group has even proposed innovative office layout concepts tailored to different hybrid scenarios. Four examples include: “The Boulevard,” a focus-oriented layout with a central social corridor linking collision points; “The District,” an activity-based neighborhood where employees choose different settings day-to-day; “The Plaza,” an event-centric design allocating a high proportion of space to collaborative areas; and “The Park,” a community hub primarily for training, onboarding, and cultural events. The Park concept is aimed at organizations with many fully remote workers who come in mainly for team events. It dedicates the majority of space to group collaboration and amenities, with relatively few individual workstations.

Example of an innovative hybrid office layout – “The Park” concept (a collaboration-based hub). In this design by CBRE’s Workplace team, only about 12% of space is for individual work (“Me” space), while nearly half is group collaboration space and the rest is amenities and support. Such layouts serve as community hubs for firms with mostly remote staff, providing a destination for training, social connection, and company events.

Early evidence suggests that workplaces intentionally designed for hybrid work can yield significant performance benefits. A global study by the Gensler Research Institute found that employees in high-performing, well-designed workplaces reported dramatically better outcomes than those in inferior office environments. Remarkably, 94% of employees in top-tier workplaces said working from the office positively impacts their individual productivity, compared to only 45% of employees in low-rated workplaces. Similar gaps were found for speed of decision-making (92% vs 43% reporting a positive impact) and other indicators. This underlines that quality matters: simply bringing people back to any office is not a panacea – the office must be purposefully configured to support how people work now. Unfortunately, many workplaces have not yet caught up. Gensler’s broad 2023 survey of 14,000 workers across nine countries revealed that only 38% of their offices had been redesigned since the pandemic began. A majority of employees felt their current office was not optimized for the variety of work modes (focused work, virtual collaboration, in-person meetings, etc.) they engage in throughout the day. The opportunity for CRE leaders is clear: there is a “critical divide” between employee needs and current workplace design, and closing this gap by enhancing workplaces for hybrid work can greatly improve productivity, engagement, and the desire to use the office.

Key physical best practices include: investing in flexible furnishings and modular layouts (so spaces can be reconfigured for different uses or team sizes), improving the amenity mix (cafés, lounges, outdoor areas, wellness rooms – features that make the office a magnet, not an obligation), and upgrading meeting technology to create parity between in-person and remote participants. With 57% of all meetings in the office now including virtual attendees (and as high as 62% in the UK), conference rooms need excellent video conferencing setups, acoustics, and perhaps interactive tools to support hybrid collaboration. In summary, the physical workplace must transform from a one-size-fits-all sea of desks into a high-performing ecosystem of spaces. The best offices today are smaller but smarter – tuned to actual usage patterns – and are compelling, human-centric environments that offer things remote work cannot (face-to-face energy, spaces for creative collaboration, and access to tools/resources). Corporate real estate leaders in the UK, Europe and North America are all converging on this principle, though at different paces. European workplaces, for instance, often emphasize employee well-being amenities and sustainable design (e.g. more natural light, ventilation) as part of the hybrid-era upgrades, while many U.S. companies have rapidly adopted unassigned seating and desk booking to drive up utilization efficiency. In the UK, there is a focus on “spoke” locations or suburban hubs to reduce commute burdens on hybrid staff, whereas in continental Europe some firms are experimenting with shorter workweeks alongside hybrid schedules as part of broader flexibility initiatives (a trend beyond pure office design). Regardless of region, the CRE mandate is the same: create workplaces worth coming into. The physical office must earn the commute by providing an environment optimized for both productivity and social connection – effectively becoming a tool to energize employees and foster innovation when they gather in person.

HR and Workforce Policies for Hybrid Work

Designing a hybrid-friendly office is only one side of the coin; organizations also need HR policies and work norms that support hybrid work arrangements. Over the past two years, companies have trialed and refined a spectrum of hybrid work policies – from fully flexible (where employees choose when to come in, if at all) to structured hybrid (e.g. 2-3 mandatory office days or “core days” each week) to primarily office-based with occasional remote exceptions. According to JLL’s Future of Work Survey 2024, corporate approaches have begun to crystallize into two broad camps: “Hybrid adopters” vs. “Office advocates.” Around 56% of organizations globally fall into the hybrid-adopter category, embracing some mix of remote and in-office days, while 44% are “office advocates” wanting employees back in the office full-time or nearly full-time . This represents a shift from just a couple years prior; in 2022, fully 77% of corporate decision-makers saw hybrid work as key to talent strategy, but by 2024 a sizeable fraction had swung back toward an office-first stance . In North America, many high-profile employers (especially in finance and tech) announced stricter return-to-office mandates in 2023–2024, requiring three or more days on-site. In contrast, European companies (and public sector employers) have generally been more flexible, often settling on hybrid norms like 3 days in, 2 days remote or even allowing employees to largely self-determine their schedules within broad guidelines. The UK sits somewhere in between – numerous UK firms have adopted “2-3 office days per week” models, but with an understanding that those days should include a common mid-week core (to maximize presence overlap on Tuesdays–Thursdays).

Setting the right hybrid policy is a delicate balancing act. Employers must weigh the benefits of face-to-face interaction and easier supervision against the risk of undermining employee morale and retention if policies are too rigid. There is mounting evidence that overly strict return-to-office (RTO) mandates can backfire. Research by Gartner found that at organizations which instituted mandatory office days, employee intent to stay was significantly lower – particularly among high performers, women, and millennials – compared to organizations with more choice. In Gartner’s data, high-performing employees experienced a 16% drop in intent to stay when subjected to in-office requirements. Many view blanket mandates as a sign of mistrust, especially if they successfully maintained productivity while remote. Additionally, Gartner noted that certain groups who highly value flexibility (younger workers, working mothers) are the most likely to resign in response to strict in-office policies. Leesman workplace surveys echo that engagement can suffer under inflexible regimes – their data shows that employees who have no choice in where they work are less engaged and have worse experience scores than those who have flexibility, even if forced back more often. In one insight, only 20% of employees with full choice stayed in office 3+ days/week, but this jumped to 34% for those with no choice (i.e. mandates do increase attendance), at the cost of increased frustration and lower perceived ability to do one’s best work. The question for leaders becomes: Is the short-term gain in attendance worth the hit to morale and possibly productivity? Many have concluded it is not. As a Gartner analyst bluntly summarized, “The benefits of in-office work aren’t worth the risks of a rigid mandate” when the negative impacts on talent outcomes are so steep .

The emerging best practice is to pursue a “human-centric” hybrid policy that sets clear expectations without heavy-handed ultimatums. This often involves establishing guidelines or default hybrid schedules (such as “team X will be on-site Tuesdays through Thursdays”) but also giving employees and managers some autonomy to adapt those guidelines. Gartner recommends that HR and business leaders co-develop hybrid policies with input from employees, rather than imposing top-down rules. Companies that allowed teams or employees to help shape their hybrid arrangements saw higher engagement and discretionary effort levels in Gartner’s studies. Another best practice is to tie on-site expectations to purposeful activities. Instead of mandating arbitrary attendance, progressive organizations specify why and when they want people in person – for example, “We gather in-office on Mondays for team collaboration and on Thursdays for client meetings and all-hands events.” By focusing on specific collaborative, creative or social activities that are better in person (brainstorming sessions, training workshops, team-building exercises, project kick-offs, etc.), companies make office days more meaningful. Gartner found that organizations who concentrated on in-person “anchor” activities (and kept other work flexible) had the best outcomes in terms of employee performance and retention. The key is communicating a clear “why” for any in-office requirements – employees respond much more positively when they understand the purpose (e.g. “We meet on-site to collaborate, build morale and innovate together”). Indeed, a CBRE survey in 2023 showed that among companies which clearly communicated the value proposition of the office to employees, 57% reported their staff were coming in more than three days per week – whereas only 41% saw that level of attendance if they did not communicate any rationale. In short, communication and intentionality can greatly influence hybrid policy success.

For most organizations, the sweet spot has been a hybrid schedule of 2–4 days in-office per week with some degree of employee flexibility. CBRE’s benchmarking indicates that a majority (57%) of companies now favor a “mostly office” hybrid model – typically requiring at least 3 days in – while none in their 2024 survey were allowing a permanent fully-remote policy. However, even those requiring 3+ days often still give leeway on which days or allow occasional remote weeks as needed. In Europe, many employers legally or culturally must allow flexibility; for instance, France’s right-to-disconnect and other labor policies encourage balanced approaches. The UK has seen widespread adoption of “Core hours/days” concepts, where employees can choose remote work but are asked to be reachable during certain core hours and attend key meetings in person on core days. In North America, some large companies began mandating specific office days (e.g. all staff on Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday), which boosts physical attendance but can strain employee goodwill if not handled delicately.

Performance management in a hybrid environment is another critical HR consideration. Managers can no longer rely on seeing people at their desks as a proxy for productivity. This shift is pushing organizations to redefine how they track and evaluate performance – focusing more on outcomes, deliverables, and results rather than hours in the office. Some firms have invested in training managers to manage by objectives and to give effective feedback remotely. Others use project management and collaboration software to make work progress visible regardless of location. The challenge is to ensure equitable evaluation and development for both in-office and remote employees. A concern often raised is proximity bias – the tendency to favor employees seen in person more often. To counter this, companies are formalizing processes like regular check-ins for remote team members and calibrating performance reviews to emphasize measurable contributions. According to Leesman data, hybrid workers who are in-office only 2–3 days per week currently report the poorest workplace experience of any group, which could be due in part to feeling less supported or connected. HR policies must address such gaps, for example by establishing “remote inclusion” norms (all meetings have a virtual join option, important announcements are shared digitally, success is celebrated across channels, etc.). There is also a growing role for employee listening and sentiment analysis – many organizations conduct periodic surveys or use analytics (sometimes AI-driven) to gauge how employees are coping with hybrid arrangements and where friction points lie (e.g. difficulty with childcare on mandated days, or burnout from always-on video meetings). These feedback loops allow HR to fine-tune policies over time.

One innovative approach some companies have tried is instituting “experiments” or pilot programs with their hybrid policy, then measuring outcomes. For example, a company might pilot a no-meetings Friday (everyone can work from anywhere with no in-person meetings) or test a rotated schedule (teams alternate which days they are in to reduce density) and then assess impacts on productivity, collaboration, and space use. CRE and HR teams are collaborating more closely to connect these dots – in fact, CBRE predicts that CRE leaders will develop a new integrated scorecard partnering with HR, Finance, and IT to track how workplace changes influence employee performance, engagement, and retention alongside real estate metrics. This aligns with the idea that success in hybrid work will be measured jointly by people outcomes and space outcomes (more on success metrics in a later section).

In summary, the best hybrid workforce policies are those that provide structure but also flexibility. They typically: set a baseline expectation for in-office attendance (to align leadership and employees), ensure that time in office is intentional and well-spent, give employees some voice or choice in the arrangement, and maintain fairness and support for those working remotely. Clarity is important – leading firms create a “hybrid work playbook” or set of house rules so everyone knows how to coordinate (e.g. core hours, expected response times, how to indicate your in-office vs remote status, booking desks, etc.). JLL’s research found that clarifying these rules and empowering managers to orchestrate hybrid work at the team level helps minimize frustration and maintain work-life balance for employees. For instance, managers may be given discretion to set team on-site days that work best for their group, within overall company guidelines. Training for managers is key here – many firms are investing in programs to help managers “lead hybrid teams” effectively, covering topics like managing performance by outcomes, fostering inclusion, and scheduling collaboration time. We will delve more into leadership practices in the next section. But from a policy standpoint, organizations in the UK, Europe, and North America are learning that flexibility with accountability is the winning formula. A rigid one-size-fits-all mandate is rarely optimal; neither is a hands-off “come in if you want” approach. The hybrid policies that stick are those co-created with input, clearly communicated, and continuously refined through experience and feedback. As one Gartner analyst put it, don’t derail your long-term talent strategy with the wrong RTO approach – aim for intentional, transparent policies instead of a one-size-fits-all edict .

Leadership and Management in a Hybrid Era

Effective leadership is arguably the make-or-break factor in hybrid work success. In a distributed, partially remote workforce, leaders and managers must foster culture, trust, and performance in new ways. The old management paradigm of supervising by sight (e.g. the manager who equates presence with productivity) is giving way to a leadership style centered on outcomes, empathy, and empowerment. A consistent finding across surveys is that employees crave supportive and communicative leadership to navigate hybrid work. For example, CBRE’s 2024 Occupier Survey noted that employee attendance improves when company leadership clearly communicates the “why” of the office and role-models the desired behaviors. In companies where leadership effectively articulated the value of coming into the office (such as explaining how in-person time drives mentorship, team cohesion, client innovation, etc.), employees were significantly more likely to come in regularly. This highlights that vision-setting and communication are now core leadership tasks. Leaders should paint a compelling picture of how hybrid work will function and why it benefits both the organization and employees.

One best practice is for executives to “lead by example” in hybrid arrangements. If a company expects people to be in the office three days a week, the leadership team should be visibly present and engaged on those days as well. Otherwise, a “do as I say, not as I do” scenario can quickly undermine morale. In fact, CBRE found that only ~27% of companies had formal consequences for not following hybrid policy (e.g. asking employees to come in when they don’t), and even among those, barely half enforce them regularly. Instead of policing, the more effective approach has been inspirational leadership – getting buy-in by demonstrating commitment. As the CBRE report notes, “Policy adherence starts with leadership; leaders should model the behavior they want to see. If leaders don’t show up in the office, or use the collaborative spaces, employees won’t either.” Thus, many organizations now encourage senior leaders and team managers to deliberately work from open areas, hold meetings in-person on core days, and socialize with teams in the office. Simple actions like a CEO doing weekly office walk-arounds or a department head working from a hot desk alongside their team can send a strong signal.

Communication is another pillar. Especially with part of the team remote at any given time, leaders must communicate frequently and transparently through multiple channels. Regular all-hands meetings (with hybrid attendance options), weekly team check-ins, and active use of collaboration platforms (Teams, Slack, etc.) to share updates all help maintain alignment. It’s notable that in CBRE’s analysis, among companies that clearly communicated the value proposition of in-office work, a majority saw higher attendance (as cited earlier: 57% had employees in 3+ days). Communication needs to flow both top-down and bottom-up. Gathering employee feedback on the hybrid experience is critical – whether through engagement surveys, focus groups, or informal listening sessions. The most successful implementations occur when leadership shows openness to iterating on hybrid practices based on employee input. For example, a company might learn that employees value coming in mainly for team connection, so they pivot to emphasize “team days” and drop an arbitrary individual attendance target. Leaders who demonstrate that they are listening and adapting build trust, which is the currency of hybrid work.

Managing hybrid teams also requires a shift in performance management and coaching style. Rather than monitoring hours, managers should set clear goals and deliverables, then trust employees to meet them with appropriate flexibility. Many firms have instituted training for managers on “managing by results” and avoiding micromanagement in a hybrid setting. There is also emphasis on output-based metrics and frequent feedback. Interestingly, the Leesman Index data shows that employees who are in the office 4–5 days a week currently report the highest workplace experience, while those in 2–3 days report the lowest. This suggests managers might need to pay special attention to the hybrid cohort to ensure they feel engaged – for instance, scheduling one-on-one check-ins on days those employees are remote to touch base on workload and well-being. Well-being is indeed a leadership concern now: hybrid or remote workers can easily feel isolated or burned out if boundaries blur. Progressive managers encourage teams to practice work-life boundaries (not expecting replies late at night, encouraging real lunch breaks, etc.). Some companies have designated “focus time” blocks or meeting-free days to alleviate Zoom fatigue.

Another aspect is cultivating team cohesion and culture when people are not together every day. Leaders and managers should become facilitators of intentional in-person interactions. Research indicates that one of the top reasons employees will come into an office is for the people. In one CBRE sentiment survey, 65% of employees cited morale and relationship-building with colleagues as a primary factor for returning to the office. Managers can tap into this by making office days more community-oriented: scheduling team brainstorming, trainings, or even social events when most of the team is in. Operations teams in some firms now coordinate “anchor events” on common days – e.g. all-hands lunches, guest speakers, or cross-department mingling opportunities – to enhance the social capital that employees gain by coming in. Leadership support for such activities (and budget for team offsites or on-site gatherings) goes a long way. In hybrid models, the office’s greatest amenity is other people, so leaders should promote and celebrate that aspect. Encouraging peer-to-peer connection, perhaps through employee resource groups or mentorship programs, also helps maintain culture in hybrid settings.

Cross-functional collaboration at the leadership level is another best practice. Implementing hybrid work is not solely an HR or CRE project; it requires coordination between HR, IT, Corporate Communications, and the real estate/facilities team. The most successful hybrid strategies involve a cross-functional task force or steering committee that brings these perspectives together. For example, HR can provide data on employee engagement and attrition, IT can ensure the tech tools are in place, Communications can craft messaging and solicit feedback, and CRE can adjust space and services. A collaborative governance approach ensures all aspects (people, space, technology, communication) are aligned. Cushman & Wakefield’s experience team notes that companies which break down silos between HR and CRE are better able to create seamless employee experiences and respond to changing needs.

From a management style perspective, trust and empathy have become core competencies. In hybrid environments, managers have to trust their teams to work responsibly outside direct sight – and most data shows that productivity can be maintained or even improved with autonomy. If there are performance issues, the remedy is coaching and clarity, not blanket restrictions for everyone. Empathy is crucial as employees’ situations vary (some may have caregiving responsibilities, health concerns, long commutes, etc. affecting their ability to be on-site consistently). Leading organizations equip managers to have open conversations and make individual accommodations when reasonable, while still meeting business needs. This human-centric approach builds loyalty and often results in employees going the extra mile. Gartner’s advice is to avoid one-size-fits-all mandates and instead use “intentional, transparent decision-making” that considers both business outcomes and employee input .

Finally, leaders need to be forward-looking and adaptable. The hybrid model itself is evolving (“Hybrid 2.0” as some call it) with new possibilities like more geographically distributed teams, or “work from anywhere” months, etc. Senior leadership should continuously revisit: Is our current policy serving its purpose? Are we seeing the desired outcomes in performance, innovation, and culture? If not, be willing to course-correct. For instance, if innovation has dipped, maybe increase in-person project kick-offs or invest in better collaboration tech. If new hires struggle with onboarding, maybe introduce periodic in-person onboarding bootcamps. The visionary CRE leader will also tie hybrid work strategy to broader organizational goals – for example, using it as part of the Employee Value Proposition (EVP) to attract talent (offering flexibility can be a selling point, and pairing that with great office facilities can differentiate an employer). JLL’s Future of Work report emphasizes that CRE teams have an opportunity to shape an “evolutionary office model” that becomes a strategic asset in talent retention and productivity. Achieving this requires leadership that is not just operationally managing hybrid work, but strategically leveraging it to drive the organization forward.

In summary, the best leadership and management practices for hybrid models include:

Communicate clearly and often: Share the purpose of the office, set expectations, and keep everyone informed of any policy adjustments or company direction. Transparency builds trust.
Model the behavior: Leaders and managers should be present (physically on-site per the expected schedule) and actively engage in hybrid work themselves, demonstrating the norms they preach.
Empower and trust teams: Train managers to lead by results, give teams autonomy to organize their hybrid workflow, and avoid micromanaging remote work. Focus on outcomes and remove obstacles rather than enforcing rigid schedules.
Foster inclusion and team culture: Ensure remote staff are included in meetings and decisions. Plan regular in-person team events to strengthen relationships. Encourage mentoring, networking, and social interaction on office days to reinforce culture.
Be flexible and empathetic: Recognize individual circumstances. When possible, accommodate employees’ needs (e.g. adjusting which days they come in) as long as work gets done. Show empathy – this engenders goodwill and loyalty, which ultimately boosts performance.
Lead change collaboratively: Bring together HR, IT, Comms, and CRE to collectively support the hybrid workforce. Solicit employee feedback and be willing to iterate on policies and workplace practices.
Maintain accountability: While being flexible, also hold people accountable for results. Clearly outline performance expectations and deadlines. If hybrid work issues arise (like communication breakdowns or dips in productivity), address them constructively through coaching or process tweaks rather than scrapping the model.
Invest in manager development: Managing hybrid teams is a learned skill. Provide managers with training (for example, how to run effective hybrid meetings, how to mentor junior staff remotely, how to ensure fairness in assigning high-visibility projects, etc.). An informed, capable management layer is key to making hybrid work sustainable.

When leadership embraces these practices, hybrid working can flourish. Indeed, a Cushman & Wakefield analysis in late 2023 found that just pushing people to attend the office is insufficient to guarantee productivity – factors like inspiration, energy, learning opportunities and sense of belonging (all greatly influenced by leadership and culture) have a stronger impact on productivity than simply time in office. By focusing on those drivers – through inspiring leadership, supportive management, and a culture of trust – organizations get far more value from their hybrid model than they would through mandate and monitor.

Technology and Digital Tools Enabling Hybrid Work

Technology is the glue that holds hybrid work together. In a model where employees alternate between remote and in-office, digital tools must seamlessly bridge the physical and virtual workplace. Over the past few years, organizations worldwide have accelerated the adoption of a wide range of technologies to support hybrid arrangements. These span from collaboration platforms and video conferencing systems to advanced office booking and analytics solutions, and even emerging AI tools that enhance workplace management. The overall trend is toward Smart Offices that leverage data and automation to create a frictionless experience for hybrid employees.

A foundational tech capability for many hybrid workplaces is space booking systems – typically mobile or web apps that allow employees to reserve a desk, office, or meeting room for the days they plan to be on-site. These tools are critical in a shift to unassigned seating or activity-based layouts. Employees can see what spaces are available, indicate when they will be in, and even find where their teammates are sitting on a given day. Modern solutions (often part of Integrated Workplace Management Systems – IWMS) have grown more sophisticated. According to Verdantix, workplace software vendors have heavily invested in features that let organizations define granular hybrid work rules and automate adherence. For instance, using an admin console, a manager can set up rules like “Team A can only book desks in Zone 1 on Tue/Wed” or “Limit bookings to 3 days a week per person” to enforce company policy. One vendor (Appspace) allows customizing booking permissions by location, department, or even role, down to individual employees. Another (Planon) enables creating work style profiles – e.g. a software developer role is assumed to spend 60% of time at a desk and 40% in collaboration spaces – which can inform how space is allocated and suggest booking recommendations. These kinds of tools ensure that hybrid schedules are coordinated rather than chaotic, preventing scenarios like everyone showing up on one day and the office overflowing. They also help collect data on who is coming in when and how spaces are used, feeding into analytics.

Beyond booking, occupancy sensors and IoT devices are increasingly deployed to monitor space utilization in real-time. Sensors on desks, in conference rooms, or anonymized badge data can reveal patterns of office usage that might not be apparent from schedules alone. CBRE notes that firms plan to make greater use of “micro-level utilization data” from networks and sensors to dynamically manage their buildings and optimize the hybrid experience. For example, sensors might detect which areas of an office are consistently underused, leading CRE to repurpose them, or automatically turn off HVAC in zones not in use to save energy. This plays into sustainability goals as well. Some companies use digital heatmaps of office utilization throughout the week to continually tune cleaning schedules, cafeteria services, etc., aligning operations with actual demand. The end game is a data-driven workplace where nothing is wasted – empty space can be eliminated, and popular spaces are expanded or enhanced.

Another category of tools focuses on the employee experience in the office by integrating multiple functions into a single interface. For example, some firms have an “office app” that employees use for everything from booking a desk or meeting room, accessing the building (digital badge), finding colleagues, to even adjusting environmental controls at their workspace. Verdantix highlights that workplace solution providers are building deeper integrations with building operational technology (OT) and business software to streamline the in-office experience. A case in point is Johnson Controls’ new workplace app which ties into building systems so that an employee can, say, book a room and have their badge access and preferred temperature set automatically for that room. Similarly, Siemens’ Enlighted platform connects IoT sensors for lighting and climate – employees can use an app to control lighting or window shades at their location, and the system learns individual preferences via machine learning to auto-adjust the environment over time. These kinds of smart office integrations make the office more responsive and personalized, addressing a common complaint that working from home allows more personal comfort control than a generic office. In addition, workplace systems are linking with calendaring and HR systems: for example, one platform (Thing Technologies) will integrate with HR leave records so that if an employee calls in sick or is on vacation, any desk or room bookings they had are automatically freed up for others. This reduces friction and ensures scheduling info is always up to date.

Of course, collaboration and communication tools remain the lifeblood connecting remote and in-office staff. Virtually all organizations now rely on a suite of tools such as Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Slack, Google Workspace, WebEx, etc. to enable real-time collaboration. The investment in AV hardware for conference rooms has also grown – high-quality cameras, microphones, large interactive displays, and even immersive telepresence setups in some cases – all to make hybrid meetings more effective. Given that the average office worker spends ~42% of their time collaborating (virtually or in person), ensuring that remote participants can fully engage in meetings is crucial. Many companies have adopted meeting room innovations like the “equal faces” view (where in-room attendees each appear on screen for remote participants) and digital whiteboarding tools so everyone can contribute regardless of location. There is also a trend toward asynchronous collaboration tools (project management software like Asana, Trello; shared digital workspaces like Miro or Figma) so that teams can continue progress without needing to be simultaneously online.

One of the most exciting developments is the incorporation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and chatbots to simplify hybrid work processes. Vendors are rolling out AI-driven features that can act as virtual assistants for employees and workplace managers. For instance, an employee can ask a smart chatbot in the workplace app, “Where is the best place for me to work on Thursday?” and the system could respond with a suggestion (based on where teammates are, what meetings they have, etc.) and even offer to book a desk. OfficeSpace Software’s chatbot “Ossie” is an example that allows managers to query workplace data in natural language – e.g. “What was our office utilization last month?” and instantly get a chart or answer. These AI capabilities lower the barrier to accessing and using workplace information. Predictive analytics are also being used: the platform Mapiq uses AI to detect issues like an office location that has fewer meeting rooms per person compared to others and then recommends actions such as reallocating space or adjusting policies. Some booking systems now have intelligent rebooking – Eptura introduced a feature where if you move a meeting time, the AI will automatically find and book an appropriate alternate room for you if your original room becomes unavailable. This kind of “smart healing” of schedules saves employees from the headache of scrambling for new space when plans change.

Another novel AI application is helping with the logistics of commuting and scheduling. One vendor plans to use AI to suggest optimal commute times for hybrid workers based on live traffic, weather, and their day’s schedule. Imagine an app notifying you: “Leave at 8:20am for the office today to avoid a rainstorm and still arrive before your 9am meeting.” Such concierge-like services can enhance the daily experience of hybrid employees. More broadly, AI is expected to play a greater role in strategic planning – e.g. forecasting future space needs by analyzing trends or even simulating different hybrid policy scenarios and their impact on real estate requirements.

According to Verdantix, workplace technology vendors are under pressure to innovate rapidly as hybrid work becomes the norm, especially with younger generations expecting seamless tech integration at work. We are likely to see even more AI for advanced planning (like predictive occupancy to help building managers dynamically adjust spaces), deeper integration of workplace apps with everything from corporate travel booking to employee wellness programs, and new features aimed at boosting spontaneous collaboration (one challenge of hybrid is the loss of impromptu encounters – some tools now can nudge you when colleagues you often work with will be in the office the same day, prompting meet-ups).

Security and network infrastructure also deserve mention. With hybrid work, IT departments have had to strengthen VPNs, deploy zero-trust security models, and ensure reliable video conferencing bandwidth both in offices and for remote workers. Many companies have had to upgrade conference room tech and increase their number of smaller video-enabled meeting spaces to accommodate lots of hybrid meetings. Gartner has pointed out that on-site workers can actually be less satisfied than remote workers if their tech and interactions at the office are clunky – highlighting that investing in good technology in the office (fast Wi-Fi, modern hardware, seamless connectivity) is just as important as supporting remote tech.

In regional context, North America has been a leader in adopting advanced IWMS and sensor analytics, driven by a large tech vendor ecosystem and a focus on cost optimization. Many U.S. offices are implementing occupancy sensors at scale and using tech to consolidate space (especially as sublease vacancies climb). Europe tends to be strong in IoT integrations and sustainability-related workplace tech (smart lighting, energy management tied to occupancy) given stricter environmental regulations; European firms often emphasize tech that improves employee well-being (air quality sensors, smart ergonomics, etc.). The UK market, being very service-sector heavy, has widely adopted room/desk booking tech – the UK’s high rate of hybrid meetings (62% of meetings in UK offices are hybrid) means British companies have been early adopters of sophisticated video conferencing suites and scheduling tools to coordinate office presence. One UK trend has been integrating commute planning apps with office booking, since commute time is a major factor in an employee’s willingness to come in on a given day.

Overall, technology is enabling hybrid work at both the operational and experiential levels. On one hand, it gives CRE and facility managers the data to run a leaner, more efficient real estate operation (e.g. cutting space, saving energy, and validating decisions with utilization data). On the other hand, it gives employees the digital support to work anytime, anywhere – the ability to seamlessly transition from home office to corporate office, to find colleagues and resources when on-site, and to stay connected with teammates virtually. The firms that invest thoughtfully in these digital tools often see smoother hybrid workflows and higher employee satisfaction. For example, a study by Leesman/Haworth found 91% of employees actually like hybrid working overall, but their day-to-day satisfaction depends on factors like ease of scheduling and tech reliability. By removing friction (through tools that handle the logistics) and enhancing connection (through robust collaboration tech), companies equip their hybrid workforce to be as engaged and productive as possible.

Benefits, Challenges, and Success Metrics of Hybrid Models

A well-implemented hybrid work model can deliver substantial benefits, but it also comes with challenges that need to be managed. Below we outline the key advantages organizations have realized with hybrid working, the major obstacles and risks to overcome, and the metrics corporate real estate and HR leaders are using to gauge hybrid work success.

Benefits of Hybrid Work

Talent Attraction & Retention: Hybrid flexibility has become a top perk for employees and job candidates. Offering the ability to work remotely part of the week greatly expands the talent pool (including geographically) and appeals especially to workers who demand work-life balance. Surveys show employees overwhelmingly prefer hybrid arrangements and may leave employers who revoke them. Companies embracing hybrid (with supportive culture) have seen reduced attrition and higher engagement, particularly among high-value employee segments that prize autonomy (e.g. experienced professionals, working parents). In short, hybrid work is now a key component of the Employee Value Proposition – a Gartner study even found that rigid RTO policies can put an organization’s long-term talent strategy at risk , whereas flexible models improve morale and loyalty.
Increased Productivity & Performance: When implemented with the right support, hybrid work can boost productivity. Employees can do their focused, deep work at home with fewer interruptions, and come to the office for high-value collaborative or creative work. Many report being “more productive remotely for certain tasks” and equally or more productive overall in hybrid mode. Notably, productivity gains are tied to workplace quality – 94% of workers in well-designed hybrid offices say the office positively impacts their productivity (versus 45% in poor offices). This suggests that hybrid work plus an optimized workspace yields the best performance. Additionally, hybrid arrangements often extend work across a more flexible schedule (people can choose when they are most effective), which can improve output as long as boundaries are maintained.
Employee Well-being & Work-Life Balance: A major benefit of hybrid models is giving people more control over their schedules and environment, which has been linked to lower stress and better well-being. Commuting fewer days per week saves employees time and money, and they often reinvest that time into exercise, family, or rest. Many employees report an improved work-life balance with hybrid – they can run errands or handle family matters on remote days without taking time off, for example. Furthermore, hybrid work normalized support for mental health (e.g. midday breaks, quieter work setting when needed). However, it should be noted that well-being depends on individual circumstances; some younger employees living in small flats, for instance, value the office as a place to focus and socialize. Overall though, hybrid flexibility is seen as a net positive for workforce well-being.
Real Estate Cost Savings & Portfolio Optimization: From the CRE perspective, hybrid work allows organizations to significantly reduce their real estate footprint and costs without sacrificing collaboration. As noted earlier, many companies are shrinking office space by 20–30% or more, which can translate to millions in savings on leases and operating expenses. Importantly, these savings can be partially reallocated to improve remaining spaces (better design, technology, amenities), creating a positive feedback loop. Hybrid strategies also encourage more efficient use of space – e.g. sharing ratios above 1:1 mean fewer wasted empty desks. Some firms are converting portions of their portfolio to flexible space or co-working memberships, which align costs more closely with actual usage. In addition, with a distributed workforce, companies can consider hub-and-spoke models or smaller regional offices, potentially locating in lower-cost areas. These optimizations were much harder under a full in-person mandate.
Business Continuity & Resilience: Hybrid work inherently builds more resilience into operations. Because employees are set up to work remotely, the organization is better prepared for disruptions – be it extreme weather, transit strikes, or public health issues – with minimal impact on productivity. We saw this benefit during the pandemic, but it applies going forward as well. A distributed work model can also reduce single points of failure (for example, if one office suffers an outage, employees can work from elsewhere that day). This flexibility in where work gets done makes the enterprise more agile and able to continue operating under various scenarios.
Reduced Carbon Footprint: With fewer commutes and potentially smaller office spaces (less energy usage), hybrid work can contribute to corporate sustainability goals. Many companies have calculated significant reductions in commuter emissions when employees work from home multiple days. Offices optimized for hybrid can be more energy-efficient as well – using smart systems to only heat/cool utilized areas, etc. Some European firms explicitly cite hybrid work as part of their carbon reduction strategy in ESG reports.

Challenges of Hybrid Work

Maintaining Company Culture & Connection: One of the biggest concerns with hybrid work is how to preserve a strong organizational culture and team cohesion when people are not together every day. The serendipitous interactions – hallway conversations, team lunches – happen less often, and new employees don’t absorb culture as organically. There’s a risk of a “two-tier” experience where those who come in frequently bond more with leadership, potentially creating cliques or information silos. Without intentional effort, remote/hybrid employees may feel less connected to the company’s mission and values. Companies are combating this by reimagining culture-building activities (more all-hands, virtual social events, scheduled in-person retreats, etc.), but it remains a challenge to strike the right balance between flexibility and togetherness.
Communication Gaps and Collaboration Hurdles: Hybrid teams can suffer from communication breakdowns if not carefully managed. Important discussions might happen informally in the office and not get conveyed to those remote. Time zone differences (if teams are geographically spread) complicate scheduling. Brainstorming or complex problem-solving can be harder via video. While collaboration tools help, “water cooler” moments are harder to replicate. There’s also meeting fatigue – a tendency to overcompensate with too many virtual meetings. Some companies found that hybrid work requires developing new communication norms (like documenting decisions in shared channels, using more asynchronous collaboration to include everyone). It’s a learning curve that requires training and vigilance to ensure no one is left out of the loop.
Ensuring Equity and Avoiding Bias: A nuanced challenge is preventing proximity bias – the subconscious favoring of employees who are seen in person more often. Managers might, even unintentionally, give better performance reviews or plum assignments to those who come on-site frequently, under the impression they’re “more committed,” which can disadvantage those who work remotely more. Similarly, career advancement could skew if leadership visibility is uneven. Organizations must actively counter this by standardizing evaluation criteria and creating equal opportunities for remote workers to lead projects or be showcased. Some have instituted “virtual first” practices (e.g. if one person is remote, everyone joins a meeting via their own laptop, to level the playing field of participation). Nonetheless, maintaining fairness in a hybrid model is a challenge that HR needs to monitor (through feedback surveys, etc.) to ensure no demographic or group is inadvertently penalized by their work arrangement preference.
Managing Performance and Accountability: While many companies have adapted, some managers still struggle to manage teams they can’t physically see. There can be trust issues or difficulties in assessing productivity without traditional visual cues. The flipside is some employees feel they have to prove they are working by being constantly online, leading to overwork. Companies need to refine performance metrics and managers need training in setting clear goals and outcomes. If not done well, there’s a risk of either micromanagement (excessive monitoring software, constant check-ins which hurt morale) or, conversely, too little guidance for remote workers (who may then flounder). Gartner recommends focusing on results and giving employees input into how they achieve them. But it takes time to shift legacy management mindsets.
IT Security and Infrastructure: Supporting hybrid work means a broader attack surface and more reliance on home networks and devices, which can increase cybersecurity risks. Companies have had to invest in secure VPNs, endpoint security, and remote IT support. Even so, phishing and other attacks targeting remote workers are on the rise. Infrastructure-wise, not all employees have equal home setups; bandwidth or hardware issues can hamper some remote workers (though this is improving as people upgrade their home offices – e.g. 58% have a dedicated home office space by 2023, up from 42% in 2020). Ensuring everyone has the right tools (second monitors, proper chairs, etc.) and secure connections is an ongoing challenge, especially for firms with less IT budget or in regions with uneven connectivity.
Real Estate and Space Management Complexity: Hybrid work introduces a new complexity to managing offices. Predicting attendance can be tricky (though patterns have emerged, like mid-week peaks). Facility managers must juggle variable demand – some days spaces are full, other days half-empty. Services like cafeterias or shuttles need flexible provisioning. Cleaning schedules and maintenance have to adapt to new usage patterns. Also, many companies are still figuring out the optimal space ratio – some initially downsized too much and found the office overcrowded on team days; others downsized too little and are carrying unused space. It can take a few cycles of measurement and adjustment to calibrate. Additionally, organizations have to manage booking “no-shows” (when people reserve a desk but don’t come, tying it up) and general etiquette around shared spaces – new policies and employee education are needed here.
Employee Isolation and Overwork: While hybrid can improve balance, it can also blur work-life boundaries if not managed. Some remote-heavy employees may feel isolated or disconnected, leading to disengagement or mental health concerns. Others might overwork – with the office right at home, some find it hard to “switch off,” leading to burnout. Hybrid models need supportive measures (like encouraging people to come in periodically to reconnect, or providing wellness resources). Younger employees or new hires, in particular, often need more in-person mentorship – if they end up remote by default, they might struggle to assimilate or grow. Companies have noticed Gen Z and younger millennials reporting more challenges with remote onboarding and feeling a lack of social learning; Cushman & Wakefield’s data showed the youngest generations had the steepest drop in well-being and need targeted support.

Key Success Metrics for Hybrid Work

To evaluate how well a hybrid working model is functioning, organizations are tracking a mix of quantitative metrics and qualitative indicators. Here are some of the key success metrics and KPIs:

Office Utilization Rates: This measures how effectively the office space is being used under hybrid schedules. Metrics include peak and average utilization (% of seats or space used) and attendance vs. capacity. For example, if an office consistently hits 80% utilization on peak days and 30% on low days, leadership can gauge if that variance is acceptable or if further portfolio adjustments are needed. A notable milestone has been global occupancy (assigned people vs seats) exceeding 100% in many offices – companies track this to ensure they aren’t over capacity on peak days or to justify more space sharing. Utilization trends over time indicate whether hybrid attendance is increasing, stable, or declining, which in turn reflects policy effectiveness and office appeal.
Employee Engagement & Satisfaction Scores: Many firms rely on employee surveys (pulse surveys, engagement scores, eNPS) to measure how employees feel about the hybrid work arrangement. These surveys often include questions on satisfaction with work-life balance, the office environment, communication, and overall experience. Leesman Index (Lmi) scores are one example – measuring workplace effectiveness and experience. Post-pandemic, the average Lmi for offices is ~68 (out of 100), up from ~64 pre-pandemic, but still below the home working Lmi of ~78. Companies strive to push their office experience into the high 70s or 80s to rival home, as a success indicator. Declines in engagement or low scores on items like “I feel included” or “I have the resources I need when remote” can signal issues in the hybrid model that need addressing.
Attrition and Retention Rates: Turnover is a critical metric. If voluntary attrition is rising, especially among high performers or certain demographics, it may indicate dissatisfaction with the work model. Some companies specifically track exits where reasons cite flexibility or RTO policies. As noted, differences have been observed – e.g. firms with strict office mandates often see higher quit rates in coveted groups like women and millennials. A stable or improving retention rate, conversely, can validate a hybrid strategy. Flight risk indicators (like internal surveys asking “are you considering leaving?”) are also used, as Gartner did to find high performers’ intent to stay dropped 16% with mandates. Ideally, a successful hybrid model keeps attrition at or below industry benchmarks by keeping employees happier.
Productivity and Performance Outcomes: Although harder to measure, some firms have created productivity indexes (like Cushman & Wakefield’s XSF Productivity Index composed of factors like focus, collaboration, and best work scores). They track these index scores annually. A notable insight was that C&W’s index showed a 13-point drop in 2023 vs 2022 as hybrid work settled in, correlating with declines in drivers like inspiration and belonging . Companies monitoring such metrics will look for improvements after making workplace changes. On a more concrete level, business KPIs like project delivery times, innovation metrics (patents, new product launches), sales performance, or customer satisfaction can be compared across periods or teams to see if hybrid is impacting output. If, for instance, a company sees no loss in sales and an uptick in product development speed while in hybrid mode, that’s a success sign. If creativity or responsiveness is lagging, adjustments might be needed (like bringing teams together more frequently during critical phases).
Space Efficiency & Cost Metrics: CRE leaders will measure cost per employee or cost per occupied seat pre- vs post-hybrid consolidation. If hybrid strategy enabled a 25% reduction in space, that should translate to lower cost per head. Metrics such as workspace density (people per 1,000 sq. ft.) and sharing ratio (people per seat) are tracked to ensure they align with expectations (for example, occupancy above 100% indicates successful sharing but if it hits 150% and employees can’t find desks, that’s a problem). Another metric is portfolio utilization – e.g. if after changes, 90% of the portfolio is utilized vs 50% before, that indicates success in optimization.
Collaboration and Innovation Indicators: Some organizations use more qualitative or indirect measures of how hybrid is affecting collaboration. These could include frequency of cross-team projects, number of brainstorming sessions or workshops held (possibly tracked via room bookings), or survey questions like “Do you feel you can collaborate effectively with your team?” Additionally, innovation-driven companies might monitor the volume of ideas in their pipeline or employee suggestions submitted. If hybrid work inhibited collaboration, you might see those numbers dip. Conversely, maintaining or increasing collaborative outputs while giving flexibility would be a success sign.
Well-being and Burnout Metrics: HR may track sick days taken, usage of employee assistance programs (EAP), or specific well-being survey scores to detect if hybrid work is leading to overwork or isolation issues. For example, if employees report higher stress working hybrid or there’s an uptick in burnout cases, that flags a need to intervene. On the other hand, if well-being indicators improve (perhaps due to less commuting), that’s a win. Cushman & Wakefield’s research showing long commute office regulars have lower productivity ties into this – reducing commute via hybrid can improve well-being, which should reflect in those metrics.
Utilization of Flexible Perks: One creative metric is how much employees take advantage of flexibility options – e.g. if a company offers a “work from anywhere for 1 month” policy, what percentage use it. Or attendance on optional in-office event days (if high, it means the office is adding value). These can indicate if the hybrid model is delivering perceived benefit. Low uptake might mean employees don’t feel they can actually use the flexibility (maybe due to manager attitudes), pointing to a cultural issue.

In practice, companies often use a dashboard of multiple metrics to get a holistic view. For example, a large financial firm might monitor monthly office attendance rates, quarterly engagement survey results, annual attrition, and real estate cost per FTE, among other data. If attendance is at target levels (neither too low nor overcrowded), engagement is up, attrition is steady, and cost per FTE has dropped – that would signal their hybrid model is on the right track. If one metric is off (say, engagement drops), they can investigate and address (maybe more team connection initiatives).

It’s worth noting that benchmarking data is starting to emerge so organizations can compare. For instance, Leesman finds that 58% of post-pandemic offices still deliver sub-par experience (Lmi below 70) – a company hitting above 70 can consider itself ahead of the curve. Similarly, if your average space utilization is 50% and peers in your sector are at 30%, you might be doing well in bringing people together.

Ultimately, the success of a hybrid working model is measured by whether it achieves business goals while keeping employees engaged and productive. Metrics are tools to assess this balance. Senior CRE and HR leaders in the UK, Europe, and North America are increasingly sharing these metrics in board reports and using them to guide strategy adjustments. For example, if a firm’s data shows Tuesdays and Wednesdays are overloaded but Mondays nearly empty, they might introduce incentives for Monday on-site work or adjust team schedules. Or if they see that employees with certain managers have lower engagement, that might trigger additional manager training for those groups.

Conclusion

Hybrid working models have moved from experimental to mainstream, bringing both transformation and opportunity to corporate real estate strategy. The global best practices highlighted – from reimagining office design and space usage, to crafting flexible but clear HR policies, adopting adaptive leadership approaches, and leveraging advanced technology – all coalesce around a common theme: creating a high-performing, employee-centric workplace ecosystem that transcends physical location. For heads of CRE and workplace strategy in the UK, Europe, and North America, the mandate is to enable productivity, collaboration, and culture in this new hybrid reality while optimizing the firm’s real estate footprint.

Regional nuances will continue to shape implementation. North America may see a bit more emphasis on mandating office presence in the short term, whereas Europe leans toward encouraging presence through enhanced experience (and is bolstered by generally stronger employee protection laws favoring flexibility). The UK is navigating somewhere in the middle, with many organizations trying structured hybrid approaches and closely watching outcomes. Yet, across all regions, the direction is clear: extreme positions (100% in-office or 100% remote) are fading, and hybrid (mix of remote and in-person) is emerging as the enduring model for knowledge work.

The journey is ongoing – hybrid work models will undoubtedly evolve with new technologies (AI, virtual reality, etc.), generational shifts, and external pressures. CRE leaders should remain agile, continually measure what works and what doesn’t, and foster close collaboration between real estate, HR, and IT functions. The most forward-looking organizations view hybrid work not as a challenge to be managed, but as an opportunity to reinvent how work is done for the better: more dynamically, more inclusively, and more sustainably. By following the best practices outlined in this paper – designing inspiring spaces that draw people in, implementing people-first policies that empower rather than constrain, leading with trust and vision, and equipping the workplace with smart tools – companies can unlock the full value of hybrid working. The result is a future of work where employees are happier and more productive, and the enterprise is more resilient and innovative.

Hybrid work, when done right, offers the “best of both worlds” – the human energy and social capital of the traditional office and the flexibility and focus of remote work. Achieving that balance is now a key competitive differentiator. Corporate real estate and workplace leaders stand at the forefront of this transformation, turning lessons from the past few years into strategies for long-term success. Armed with data, creativity, and a deep understanding of their workforce’s needs, they are well positioned to drive the next chapter of workplace evolution – one that is hybrid by design.

Sources: The insights and data in this paper are drawn from a range of 2023–2025 research and thought leadership by industry experts, including CBRE’s Global Workplace & Occupancy Insights, JLL’s Future of Work Survey 2024 and workplace strategy reports, Gartner’s research on hybrid work and talent risks, Gensler’s global workplace surveys, Leesman Index analyses on employee experience, Verdantix’s technology benchmarks, and Cushman & Wakefield’s XSF findings, among others. These sources collectively reinforce the conclusions that hybrid models, while complex, can yield substantial benefits if guided by informed strategy and a willingness to adapt. The companies that master hybrid working will not only optimize their real estate but also cultivate a workforce that is engaged, high-performing, and ready for the future.