Hybrid Work Benefits Employees, But Officism is Increasing

Key Takeaways: Officism — a bias against remote workers —i s increasing, with executives 5x more likely to perceive remote staff as less productive despite data showing hybrid workers often have stronger professional relationships. To mitigate this, organizations should transition from monitoring activity to measuring objective outcomes, provide specialized manager training for virtual leadership, and use employee listening programs to track equity in promotions and development.

Oliver Lee Bateman, Ph.D.

February 14, 2022

The shift to remote work during the pandemic changed how people view their jobs, how they prioritize work-life balance, and what they expect from their employer. Half of workers now prefer remote or hybrid environments. Yet with this shift, a new workplace bias has emerged: officism, or negative attitudes toward employees who continue to work remotely, even though remote employees are not necessarily less productive than their in-office counterparts. This bias presents a serious threat to the employee experience.

Unfortunately, officism is only getting worse, particularly from managers. Although more people are being asked to return to the office at least part of the time, a large population of employees is not going back. Some organizations have realized these employees can be just as productive from home. Others face employees who refuse to return, with half of workers saying they would look for a new job if forced back to an office environment full-time.

Why do managers and employees see remote work productivity differently?

Our panel research of more than 1,400 working Americans found that half of the respondents would prefer to work in an all-remote or hybrid environment, and those who are already working a more flexible schedule want it to stay that way.

Interestingly, while employees are transparent about wanting a virtual or hybrid work environment, managers and executive leaders are not on the same page. This population reports having the highest levels of officism, even more so today than when we first started tracking this trend last summer. They aren't alone. Gen Z employees also harbor strong officism attitudes, likely because early-career workers are concerned about being overlooked, distracted, or disconnected in a hybrid workplace. Executive leaders are five times as likely and managers are three times as likely to believe remote workers are less productive than their in-office counterparts. However, employees who work with the most flexibility (in terms of location and hours), report an increase in productivity year-on-year, and they directly attribute that increase to their ability to choose when and where they work. This percentage, nearly 7 in 10, is 30% higher than in-person workers.

Unfortunately, manager and leader sentiment is not aligned to employees’ beliefs about their output. The perception by people leaders that employees aren’t able to be as productive remotely is actively hurting employees’ career prospects. Those with officism attitudes believe remote workers have less career growth potential and weaker manager relationships. If these views persist, officism bias will directly impact remote workers when it comes to promotions, compensation increases, and performance reviews. Worse, affected employees may not even be aware it’s happening.

One reason for the disconnect between managers and workers is that managers are struggling to track and monitor productivity for remote employees. In our panel research, 70% of respondents who have some level of supervisory responsibility say they find it more difficult to gauge virtual worker productivity.

However, this is a manager deficiency rather than an employee problem. People leaders need to learn new skills when it comes to managing people they don’t see or interact with on a daily basis. That starts with shifting away from the mentality that productivity equals time and effort, and moving toward measuring the outcomes that work is driving.

Those with supervisory responsibility are also concerned about maintaining relationships when employees aren’t physically together in the workplace. This concern is not unfounded. In our earlier research, 76% of respondents said co-located managers and employees have better relationships, making it the area of officism with the most agreement across all levels within the organization. However, our data indicates that it’s not just where a person sits that improves relationships, but the types of interactions they have. The pandemic has about a third of employees feeling disconnected from their coworkers, but that number is quite similar regardless of the amount of time spent in the office. In fact, of the three types of employees (in-person, remote, or hybrid), hybrid employees seem to have cracked the code, with more than half saying their relationships with coworkers and managers are stronger than they were last year. This is in contrast to less than 4 in 10 for either of the other two groups.

To better deal with officism, organizations should act early with targeted strategies:

Train managers to measure outcomes, not activity. Set clear expectations and objectively measure the results of employees’ effort, without overseeing every phase of a task or project. Rethink performance metrics to go beyond annual supervisor ratings.
Create purposeful interactions. Managers need support in building quality touchpoints between employees that keep working relationships strong. That means fewer status meetings and more intentional collaboration.
Track career outcomes by location. If organizations monitor development opportunities, performance ratings, and promotions based on the physical location of their employees, they can quickly identify and remedy officism as it occurs.

How does officism affect employee engagement and career growth?

Left unchecked, officism damages the employee experience in three specific ways: it reduces engagement, limits career prospects for remote workers, and fractures company culture. The disparity between leader and employee perceptions creates long-term disadvantages for employees who want flexibility in where, when, and how they work. Strong feelings of resentment from one group of workers toward another erode trust and collaboration. It has a harmful business effect too: research has found disengaged employees are less productive and ultimately hurt the bottom line.

Organizations need to understand employee and manager sentiment about return-to-office policies, work-life balance, remote work opportunities, and how all of it is affecting their well-being, their engagement, and their future within the organization. This can be done with a thorough employee listening program that includes surveys throughout an employee’s lifecycle, such as onboarding, exit, return-to-office, and other moments that matter. By listening to and acting on their feedback, your company can respond appropriately, and devise policies that work for most people.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is officism?

Officism is a workplace bias where employees or managers hold negative views toward colleagues who work remotely. People with officism attitudes tend to believe remote workers are less productive, have fewer career opportunities, and build weaker relationships than those in the office, even when data shows otherwise. Perceptyx research first identified this trend in 2021 through a panel study of more than 1,000 working Americans.

Who is most likely to have officism attitudes?

Managers and senior leaders show the highest levels of officism. Perceptyx research found that executive leaders are five times as likely, and managers three times as likely, to believe remote workers are less productive than their in-office counterparts. Gen Z employees also show strong officism attitudes, as many worry about being distracted, overlooked, or missing career-building moments when teams are distributed. Because directors and above typically design return-to-office policies, their bias can directly shape how flexible those policies become.

How does officism affect remote workers’ career growth?

Officism can put remote workers at a disadvantage when it comes to promotions, pay increases, and performance reviews, often without them knowing it. Perceptyx research found that 68% of people with high officism attitudes believe there is greater career growth potential in a physical office. When managers who hold that belief control career decisions, remote employees may be passed over even when their results match or exceed those of in-office peers. Tracking development opportunities and performance ratings by employee location is one way organizations can catch and correct this bias early.

How can organizations reduce officism?

Three actions make the biggest difference:

Measure outcomes, not activity. Train managers to evaluate what employees produce, not where or when they work. Remote employees who have the most flexibility report 30% higher productivity gains year-over-year than in-person workers.
Replace low-value meetings with purposeful ones. Connection does not require more meetings. It requires better ones: structured interactions that give distributed teams a real reason to engage.
Run an employee listening program. Lifecycle surveys tied to onboarding, return-to-office transitions, and other key moments help organizations track sentiment by work location and catch bias in promotion or performance data before it compounds.

Does officism increase during economic uncertainty?

Yes. When employees worry about layoffs or economic downturns, officism attitudes often intensify. Remote workers may feel more vulnerable to being "out of sight, out of mind" during workforce reductions, while in-office employees may resent colleagues they perceive as less committed. Economic anxiety can also push leaders toward control-oriented cultures where physical presence becomes a proxy for loyalty or productivity. Organizations should be especially vigilant about tracking officism during periods of job insecurity, as bias in performance reviews or layoff decisions can have lasting legal and cultural consequences.

How does CEO control culture contribute to officism?

CEOs and senior leaders who prioritize visibility and control over results tend to create environments where officism thrives. When leadership equates physical presence with productivity or commitment, that message cascades through the organization and shapes manager behavior. Research shows executive leaders are five times as likely to believe remote workers are less productive, and when those executives design rigid return-to-office mandates, they signal that flexibility is a privilege rather than a performance-neutral option. Organizations with strong control cultures often struggle to retain top talent who value autonomy, and they risk embedding officism into promotion and compensation decisions.

Can officism create environments where harassment goes unreported?

Yes. Officism can create power imbalances that make remote workers more vulnerable and less likely to report workplace issues, including sexual harassment. When remote employees already feel their contributions are undervalued or their career prospects are limited, they may fear that raising concerns will further damage their standing or make them targets for retaliation. Additionally, if officism attitudes lead managers to believe remote workers are less committed, those workers may worry their complaints won't be taken seriously. Organizations should ensure their reporting mechanisms are accessible to all employees regardless of location, and that employee listening programs specifically track whether remote workers feel safe raising concerns about misconduct or bias.