Broker managing director believes ‘hybrid models do not work’ as they have driven a ‘lack of service and output’

By Ann Manning, managing director at ManningUK

In recent years, the workplace has undergone a seismic shift.

The global Covid-19 pandemic, which came about in 2020, forced organisations to embrace remote working on a scale never seen before.

Ann Manning

Ann Manning

However, in my opinion, this was introduced as a forced temporary measure to avoid the spread of coronavirus and should not, therefore, be assumed to be a permanent working practice.

For many employees, this newfound flexibility became a revelation – offering better work-life balance, reduced commuting stress and a greater sense of autonomy. But, as we navigate the post-pandemic era, the debate over flexible working is revealing a growing divide between employers and their staff.

At the heart of this tension lies a fundamental question – how do we balance the needs of businesses with the wellbeing of employees?

The ‘get back to work’ argument

For many employers – myself included – bidding staff to return to the office is not about exerting control. Rather it is about fostering collaboration, innovation and company culture.

In-office work provides opportunities for spontaneous interactions – casual exchanges over coffee or hallway banter that often sparks creative ideas and strengthens team bonds. These moments are impossible to replicate in a virtual environment.

Additionally, there is a concern about productivity and accountability. While remote work has its merits, some employers believe that being physically present ensures greater focus and a clearer separation between personal and professional lives.

For roles that rely heavily on teamwork or hands-on collaboration, the office environment often remains indispensable.

Work is not just a means of economic survival, but it often plays a significant role in shaping identity, fostering social interactions and providing a sense of purpose and accomplishment. Its nature and definition have evolved over time, adapting to cultural, technological and economic changes.

How many online meetings can you count where the doorbell rings with an Amazon delivery, the dog starts barking or you find your employee sitting in a cupboard as the only available workspace? From my personal experience, far too many of these situations occur on a regular basis.

Since hybrid working become mainstream in the UK, service in the insurance industry is virtually non-existent. Yes, we are often provided with mobile telephone numbers in order to reach partners, but how many times have you found these devices switched off rather than on?

In addition, how many email responses do you receive stating that the professional you are trying to reach only works on a Tuesday and Wednesday, so they will attend to your email on their return.

Where is this industry going? We are a service industry – or at least we were.

While hybrid working has provided mental health benefits for some employees, the downsides of remote work cannot be ignored.

Blurred work-life boundaries, diminished face-to-face interactions and feelings of isolation can lead to staff loneliness and disengagement.

These challenges underscore that a one-size-fits-all approach to work is insufficient for addressing the varied needs of a diverse workforce. I saw this day-in-day out with the young staff at ManningUK.

‘Casualty’ of remote working

An overlooked casualty of remote working is the opportunity for informal learning.

Younger employees and new hires benefit greatly from observing and interacting with experienced colleagues. These moments of on-the-job learning often happen organically in the office – whether overhearing a conversation, participating in an impromptu meeting, or receiving immediate feedback on a task.

Furthermore, banter – as trivial as it may seem – plays a vital role in creating a cohesive workplace culture.

Light-hearted conversations and shared jokes help build trust and camaraderie among colleagues, fostering a sense of belonging. In virtual settings, these interactions are often reduced to brief exchanges in chat messages or video calls, which can feel forced or transactional.

The absence of banter can lead to a more siloed and impersonal work experience, potentially impacting team morale and collaboration. While technology can facilitate communication, it cannot fully replicate the warmth and spontaneity of face-to-face interactions.

Striking a balance

The solution to this growing divide between employers and employees on hybrid working, in my view, lies in discussion and communication.

Hybrid models do not work – that has been proved with the lack of service and output. We need to think of something more attractive as a compromise.

Employers should also invest in creating a workplace environment that employees want to return to – one that emphasises connection, growth and wellbeing.

The future of work is not about choosing sides, but finding common ground.

By addressing the concerns of both employers and employees, we can build a more inclusive and resilient workplace that thrives on flexibility, innovation and human connection.

Perhaps we should remember what the intention of work is. Yes, work-life balance is crucial – but if our industry is to survive, we need to look back at what our clients require and remember it is them who pay our salary.

Or are employers seeking to go down this route to save money? Downsizing office space, especially in the city, lowers heating costs, for example.

For me, I would rather be in the office teaching and encouraging my staff to learn and progress, watching their careers grow rather than sitting at home behind a screen. Maybe I am in the minority?