Hiring an Engaged Hybrid Workforce

We operate in a “VUCA” world: volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. To grasp shifts in workforce design, one must acknowledge that the global economy has staggered from crisis to crisis since March 2020. The upheaval started with COVID-19 lockdowns, which redefined business practices and the white-collar workforce for two years. This was succeeded by fiscal imbalances for nations, stemming from pandemic-induced deficit spending, asset inflation, war funding, mindless migration policies, and disruptions to global trade and supply chains, ultimately leading to the decline of globalization. Despite these macroeconomic forces, technology’s influence is relentless, continuously streamlining work processes through automation and the rapid adoption of AI.

In April 2020, we predicted that a lockdown extending beyond six weeks would fundamentally alter the unwritten agreement between employers and employees, solidifying remote work as an expectation, particularly at the employers’ risk. Managers, especially those with a directive leadership style, reluctantly adapted, convinced that the workplace would eventually revert to its pre-pandemic state. This, however, did not occur. These same leaders also anticipated that high achievers and natural leaders would return to the office more quickly than the majority of their workforce. This expectation also proved unfounded. Companies continue to struggle to convince their high-value employees to return to the office on a full-time basis. Firms discovered their attempts to influence a mandatory return of high-value employees by suggesting they risked upward mobility also failed as a persuasive argument. In fact, many high-value Generation X, Y, and Z professionals expressed a willingness to forego leadership opportunities with their current employer in deference to team recognition, maintenance of work-life balance, and compensation commensurate with their output. Many high-value employees refuse to be bound by traditional corporate expectations, as they possess a multitude of employment options, including fractional and management consulting roles.

Instead of focusing on return-to-office mandates, companies should prioritize identifying and retaining their most valuable talent. Studies consistently reveal a concerning reality about workplace engagement: 74.3% of employees admit to not enjoying their jobs, while Gallup reports indicate that 17% are “actively disengaged” and 52% are “not engaged.” In total, nearly 69% of employees are either disengaged or not fully committed to their work. Some studies suggest even higher figures, with one report indicating 79% disengagement.

These figures have remained consistently concerning, underscoring a more profound systemic challenge. The appropriate response is not merely another engagement program or initiative, but rather a strategic evaluation of the workforce to identify those employees who are genuinely engaged and consistently deliver high performance, irrespective of their working environment.

Amidst current disruptions, leadership agility and employee adaptability have emerged as vital attributes, particularly for sustaining effective hybrid and remote workforces. While we’re familiar with the concepts of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) and Emotional Quotient (EQ), it’s only in the wake of the disruptions caused by COVID-19 to organizations and supply chains that Adaptability Quotient (AQ) has started to gain the attention it deserves.

At an organizational level, the Adaptability Quotient (AQ) gauges a business’s capacity to respond to evolving market conditions and technological innovation. The pandemic, in particular, delivered an unprecedented test to the AQ of both companies and individuals, compelling swift adjustments to product, service, and business strategy—a challenge that few organizational or behavioral experts could have foreseen.

Rutherford International’s Screening & Hiring Diagnostic Report possesses research tools to establish a proprietary benchmark for clients seeking to determine if a prospective employee or an existing employee has the potential to high perform in more than 1,500 possible roles. Through this benchmark, employers can empirically determine which employees are most adaptive to remote or hybrid work environments, and if not, develop a customized career development program for the employees needing to strengthen this capacity before permitting them to work off-site.

Remote and hybrid teams are only as strong as their weakest link. The science-based empiricism of behavioural research and diagnostic tools we apply is unique in auditing the necessary natural talents members of departments and project teams require in the aggregate to be productive and collaborative.