The quest for a perfect hybrid working: A case study of Mars Wrigley Poland

1Introduction

Even though the statement: “Work is universal. But, how, why, where and when we work has never been so open to individual interpretation” [1, p.16] was made over a decade ago, it has become even more relevant in today’s context.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought flexible working, particularly remote work, into the spotlight. With governments worldwide announcing comprehensive lockdowns and many states issuing stay-at-home orders, employers were forced to implement flexible working arrangements on the fly. Then, as businesses reopened, requests for flexible working from employees became commonplace. One significant development is the rise of hybrid work, which allows employees to blend remote and office-based work according to their preferences and needs [2]. This shift underscores a newfound emphasis on employee autonomy and the importance of fostering a healthy work-life balance, reshaping not only how individuals approach their jobs but also how organizations structure their workplaces. Employers who presumed that everyone would return to their offices as before have no choice but to adjust to employees’ expectations or to accept that their recruitment and retention rates will be at risk [3–5].

Interest in flexible working practices began long before the pandemic, resulting in numerous studies analysing various forms of flexible working practices and gaining a better understanding of their impact on both individuals and organizations [6–11].

Workplace flexibility was defined as “the ability of employees to make changes on where, when and the total time they would spend or engage in work-related tasks” [12, p. 152]. Therefore, flexible working arrangements are arrangements that provide employees with a degree of choice regarding when, where and how much they work [13–17]. The term flexible working has been used in a broad sense to encompass various working patterns that diverge from the standard working pattern (be it 9-to-5 hours, shift work or central workplace). However, there have been several main types of named and recognized flexible working arrangements in use prior to the pandemic: part-time work, term-time work, flexitime, working from home, mobile working, annual hours, job sharing and a compressed work week [18]. These practices offer different levels of flexibility both to the employers – to align the supply and demand for labour more effectively – and to the employees – to accommodate their needs and preferences. While it is recognized that not all flexible working is voluntary [19], the assortment of practices that offer so-called flexibility for employees and flexibility of employees [20] can be somewhat confusing. The voluntary nature of these practices can influence whether employees truly benefit from them [21–23].

Traditionally, flexibility has been seen as a feature of low-quality jobs [24, 25], where employers impose non-standard working practices such as temporary or part-time employment to achieve organizational flexibility. At the centre of this view is the assumption that given the choice, employees would prefer permanent and/or full-time jobs. However, much of this evidence relates to flexibility of employees rather than flexibility for employees. This contradicts the definition of flexible working arrangement, where the key principle is to provide employees with the choice over how, when and where they perform their jobs. “The central feature of these [flexible] work arrangements is that it is the employee, not the employer, who chooses the working arrangement, so-called flexibility for employees” [26, p. 84]. Flexibility for employees gives them the freedom to choose how they do their work and it is this element of choice that has a positive impact on employees’ perceptions of their work [27]. A lack of understanding of what lies at the heart of flexible working practices can be the reason for their ineffective implementation, leading to employee dissatisfaction which can ultimately impact their engagement [13]. And yet, giving employees the freedom to choose does not mean that they are the only beneficiaries of flexible working practices. On the contrary, several studies have confirmed the benefits of implementing flexible working practices for employers as well, such as growth of employee commitment, higher retention rates or improved productivity levels [9–11, 13, 28–31] demonstrating that providing flexibility for employees can benefit both employees and organizations.

In this article, we will focus on hybrid working as a flexible working practice that only earned its place on the list of such practices after the pandemic [32] and, as such, lacks in-depth exploration. While studies acknowledge the rising demand for hybrid working among employees [30, 33–36], the concept itself remains underexplored within the realm of flexible work practices. Recognizing this research gap and the apparent interest in this evolving practice, our study seeks to precisely define hybrid working and delineate its core characteristics as a flexible working arrangement. Furthermore, we endeavour to identify the essential factors crucial for the successful implementation of hybrid working. The key questions this study sought answers to were therefore what defines hybrid working as a novel flexible work arrangement and what factors play a key role in its effective implementation. To bridge this research gap, we have chosen a single-case study methodology, as such studies are conducive to inductive theory-building, especially in the nascent stages of research [37]. Our approach involved in-depth interviews, featuring open-ended questions that encourage thorough exploration of experiences, perspectives, and situational nuances, coupled with a comprehensive analysis of secondary data sources.

The paper draws upon a study conducted on the implementation of hybrid working within Mars Wrigley Poland (MWP), global manufacturer of chocolate, chewing gum, mints, and fruity confections. The remainder of the paper provides a theoretical background on the evolution of hybrid work, followed by a description of the methodology and data analysis, the findings and the discussion, and finally the conclusions encompassing theoretical contributions, practical implications, limitations, and future research opportunities.

2Theoretical background

Even before the pandemic, companies were experimenting with offering their employees more flexibility in terms of where they work, but very few were taking full advantage of hybrid working that we are experiencing nowadays.

A search for the terms “hybrid work” and “hybrid team” before 2020 yields few results, and even fewer when we add flexibility to these terms. While many earlier studies focused on the dichotomy of face-to-face (traditional or co-located) versus distributed (virtual or non-co-located) work [38–42], with virtualness held constant, Griffith and Neale [43, p. 409] pointed out that “teams are not face-to-face or virtual, but rather can be described as more or less virtual – traditional, hybrid, or virtual.” They described hybrid work as the presence of hybrid groups that meet face-to-face as well as virtually. Similarly, using the multidimensional concept of virtuality, Fiol and O’Connor [44] defined hybrid teams as those that exist along a continuum from more to less virtual, acknowledging the potential variability in face-to-face contact between team members. On the other hand, Halford [44] refers in his definition of hybrid work to a spatial hybridity, defining it as a “multi-location” style of working where individuals have the flexibility to divide their time between different locations using information technology. This draws attention to flexibility and choice, which closely aligns with the concept of contemporary hybrid working. Chung and van der Lippe [16] also address these elements and while they use the term flexiplace instead of hybrid, they use it to encompass the possibility of choosing to work outside of the traditional workplace premises.

However, prior to the pandemic, most researchers considered hybrid working in the context of virtual, partially distributed teams. These teams typically consisted of both co-located members and geographically dispersed members. The concept of hybrid working, characterised by performing tasks from different locations and thus combining face-to-face and computer-mediated communication, was mostly associated with these types of teams [46–49]. While geographic distribution and reliance on communication technologies are common tendencies in partially distributed teams, their defining feature is the utilization of both remote and face-to-face communication [44, 50]. This characteristic is also shared by today’s hybrid working teams.

Nevertheless, these teams lack other important characteristics found in today’s hybrid working. Firstly, hybrid working has evolved from a model where some employees work permanently on-site and others work remotely to a model where individuals have an option to work in a mixed manner during the week. Secondly, it has transitioned from teams consisting of members placed in one location and geographically dispersed, to teams that primarily operate within a single location. Finally, the rationale for implementing hybrid working has shifted, with the focus now being on fulfilling the needs of employees rather than solely being driven by business justifications.

In the past, hybrid working was primarily an organizations’ response to a rapidly changing environment, providing them with the flexibility to remain competitive [38, 46, 51–56]. The growing prevalence of virtual, distributed teams is attributed to a combination of technological and organizational advancements with various business benefits associated with the use of such teams [53]. These benefits include access to a global and diverse talent pool, accelerated scaling and growth, cost-effectiveness through hiring specialists from emerging markets, reducing office expenses or increased team agility. The key distinction between hybrid work before the pandemic and now is that the choice was made primarily by the organization rather than by the employee.

Nowadays, a hybrid team encompasses both in-office and remote workers, allowing employees the autonomy to choose their preferred work setting, whether it’s in a physical office or remotely [2]. Hybrid work is commonly understood as a blend of remote/home and on-site working, as noted by various authors [57, 58]. Some emphasize a division of working days based on the mode of work [5, 59], while others specify a combination of days spent at home and at the office throughout the week [31]. Yet others emphasize the significance of employee choice in determining their workplace, highlighting the flexibility for employees it provides [2, 60]. This perspective directly places hybrid working in the spectrum of flexible working practices.

Implementing flexible working practices requires careful attention to several key factors. Firstly, organizations must ensure the provision of appropriate information and communication technology to enable remote work and effective collaboration among team members [61]. Furthermore, organizations must map out the types of work to determine which tasks are suitable for flexible or remote work and which ones require physical presence [61, 62]. This entails preparing business processes to accommodate flexible work arrangements and calibrating workload analysis and performance measurement methods to suit the flexible work environment [61–63]. Optimizing supporting networks, including both technological and human networks, is crucial for ensuring smooth operations in a flexible work setup [61, 62]. Clear and effective internal communication from management is paramount to ensure that all employees understand the new work model and its implications [61, 62, 64]. Formulating policies, guidelines, and facilities tailored to flexible work is essential for providing employees with the necessary framework and resources to carry out their work effectively [61, 62, 64]. This includes developing flexible work policies, providing access to supportive technology, and offering training and education to managers and HR staff on flexible work arrangements [61, 63]. Moreover, the alignment of policies with strategic and operational objectives, as well as the structure of the HR department to provide support at all levels, are critical for the successful implementation of flexible work practices [63, 64]. Similarly, Gratton [65] underlines the necessity of adequate technology and infrastructure, supportive organizational culture, and transparent communication in implementing hybrid work. Furthermore, she stresses the significance of mapping out types of work, adjusting business processes, and formulating tailored policies and guidelines, as well as acknowledges the importance of fairness, equity, and work-life balance in fostering a positive work environment. All authors point out that these factors are interdependent and should be considered comprehensively to meet the specific needs of each organization and its context.

3Research methods

4Results

5Discussion

The results of the data analysis and interpretation show that hybrid working is a team-managed flexible working arrangement where employees can work both in the office and remotely. It is a people-first approach that aims to maximise productivity and job satisfaction. This means that employees have the freedom to choose between the office and remote work, taking into account their own needs and the needs of their organization, enabling them to work where they can be most productive. Our study confirms that decisions on the specific rules for organizing hybrid work schedule lies with the respective departments and teams [82], thereby increasing employee satisfaction [83]. When setting the rules for hybrid working, it is important to adapt them to the preferences of the team, as each team knows the nature of their work and how they work most effectively. Insight into employees’ preferences and viewpoints will require managers to adopt a different approach to managing hybrid teams, including tailored support and the development of additional competencies. All this ensures that hybrid working is not a one-size-fits-all model, as not only every team, but also every organization has its own unique characteristics that will be critical in its implementation. This can account for the uniqueness of the model, which will consequently have an impact on achieving an organisation’s sustainable competitive advantage, and further benefits for companies implementing the hybrid model [84].

However, our study analysis reveals that there are certain factors that will favour the implementation of the hybrid working model. Employees should not only be connected, but they should also feel connected. This means ensuring that hybrid working employees are not only technologically empowered with access to work tech tools that enable them to work effectively, but also have the freedom to work in their preferred way through equal access and asynchronous team collaboration. This primarily means that employees believe they have strong connection to organization, leadership team, and to their direct team and immediate colleagues. This belief not only reinforces the potential for effective collaboration, but also has a positive impact on the identification with the company’s goals and values as well as promoting psychological safety and team identity. These elements have been identified in the research as crucial to consider when introducing flexibility at work [85]. Access to resources and information is the antecedent of psychological safety because such contextual support helps reduce insecurity and defensiveness among team members [86]. However, in the era of digital collaboration and tech empowerment, many business leaders find it difficult to build new bonds of trust between the organization and the employee now that the traditional, continuous “line of sight” no longer exists [87]. This suggests the need for a cultural shift.

There is no such thing as an ideal culture, but rather a suitable one [88]. New hybrid arrangements, whatever they are, should accentuate company’s values, support its culture [65] and blend the need for accountability with the need to protect relationships and build trust. Following Bass and Avolio [89] typology, predominately or moderate transformational organizational cultures exhibit the qualities necessary in the context of hybrid working. They describe such cultures as those having a sense of purpose where both leaders and followers share mutual interests and go beyond their self-interests. Trust does not depend on formal agreements and the organization is flexible, adaptive, and emphases potential of its individual employees who go above and beyond for the good of the company. In transformational organizational cultures, “everyone is likely to be constantly talking about purposes, vision, values, fulfilment, without emphasizing the need for formal agreements and controls” [89, p. 550], because they will feel that their preferences will be taken into account, which is what the implementation of hybrid working requires. A thorough understanding of employee preferences through a combination of surveys and interviews as well as consultive management is key to ensure that any hybrid model chosen will be a good fit [65, 90].

The transition to a hybrid workplace is a significant organizational change that, in addition to vision and budgets, particularly relies on the presence of supportive leaders. Hybrid arrangements require not only written rules but, above all, a sense that employees are not left alone with the challenges inherent in the change process. Even a slight increase in perceived managerial support can have meaningful implications for employee attitudes and behaviours [91]. “Managers should work to support their employees and build the associated trust in order to have a reservoir of ready change recipients when organizational transformation is inevitably attempted” [92, p. 95].

Finally, hybrid working is not as simple as employees deciding where they will work. Successful and sustainable hybrid working models are those where leaders adopt a holistic approach which means setting a clear strategy addressing culture, technology, and employee experience, but also constantly looking at the changes being made, continuously improving and transforming.

6Conclusions

In conclusion, hybrid working which embodies a team-managed flexible working model, underscores the significance of accommodating individual and organizational needs in determining work location preferences. Moreover, the adoption of a people-first approach in hybrid working empowers employees to choose their work environment based on personal preferences and organizational requirements. Furthermore, the transition in the role of the manager from a directive to a supportive stance reflects the evolving nature of hybrid work arrangements. Managers play a crucial role in facilitating employee autonomy and providing support, fostering a collaborative and inclusive work environment conducive to productivity and well-being.

The implementation of hybrid working presents a multifaceted challenge that requires careful consideration of several key elements. Firstly, maintaining connections among employees is paramount, facilitated through the deployment of various communication tools and initiatives aimed at fostering unity and team integration. Secondly, it is imperative to ensure that the organizational culture is conducive to flexible work arrangements while upholding productivity and company values through active employee engagement and input. Thirdly, ongoing support and training programs are essential to assist employees in adapting to the evolving nature of hybrid work. Moreover, equipping leaders with the necessary skills and tools to effectively manage hybrid teams is crucial for success. Lastly, a holistic approach is indispensable, involving a comprehensive analysis of employee needs, encompassing both technical infrastructure and organizational aspects, all while considering the unique values and culture of the company. By addressing these key elements, organizations can navigate the complexities of implementing hybrid working arrangements with greater success.