Hybrid working is now more about when work is done, rather than where

A new report from Owl Labs suggests that the debate over where people work is being replaced by questions about when they work. The firm’s 2025 State of Hybrid Work report argues that the defining issue in workplace flexibility and hybrid working is now time rather than location. The study, based on a survey of 2,000 US workers, claims that almost half of respondents believe they do not have enough flexibility in their working hours. Thirty seven percent said they would turn down a job that did not provide flexible scheduling, an increase compared to last year. Around a quarter said they would find a four day week more attractive than a traditional arrangement, with many indicating they would be willing to take a pay cut in exchange for greater control over their time. On average, workers said they would give up around eight to nine percent of their salary to secure more flexible hours or a reduced working week.

One of the trends highlighted in the report is “microshifting”, a practice in which employees break their working day into shorter, non-linear blocks of time. This allows them to fit work around other responsibilities or personal activities. According to Owl Labs, interest in this type of arrangement is strongest among younger employees, with nearly seven in ten members of Generation Z and Millennials reporting that they would prefer such an approach. The report suggests that “microshifting” is becoming a central expectation for younger cohorts entering the workforce.

At the same time, the report warns of a phenomenon it calls “hybrid creep”. This refers to the gradual increase in required office days that has occurred in many organisations without formal policy changes. According to the research, this shift has contributed to rising stress levels and growing dissatisfaction. Workers who are required to be in the office full time reported higher levels of burnout and disengagement than those with more freedom to work remotely. Owl Labs argues that the quiet expansion of in-office expectations may be undermining employee wellbeing and productivity.

Another theme explored in the study is the growing importance of predictable schedules and clear boundaries. Workers said they want employers to be more transparent about meeting times and to avoid practices that extend the working day unnecessarily. Many also expressed frustration at time wasted during meetings, often caused by poor technology, delayed starts, or connectivity issues. The report notes that these seemingly small inefficiencies have a cumulative effect on morale and collaboration, particularly in hybrid settings.

The findings underline a shift in the conversation about hybrid work. While early debates focused primarily on physical presence and the number of days spent in the office, the evidence now points to a more complex set of expectations. Employees increasingly want to decide not only where they work but also how their working hours are structured. Flexibility over time has become as significant as flexibility over place.

For employers, the report suggests that policies based solely on office attendance may be out of step with employee expectations. It highlights the need to consider alternative scheduling models, experiment with reduced working weeks, and ensure that technology supports rather than hinders hybrid collaboration. It also stresses the importance of monitoring employee wellbeing, warning that “quiet cracking” — a situation in which people appear to cope but are in fact disengaged or exhausted — is becoming more common.

According to Owl Labs, organisations that adapt to these changing expectations are more likely to retain staff and maintain engagement. Those that ignore them may face higher levels of burnout, disengagement, and turnover as employees increasingly view control over time as non-negotiable.