Work models have once again moved to the center of corporate attention. After a period of intensive testing of flexible arrangements, many organizations are reassessing their existing approach to remote and hybrid work. In doing so, they are searching for a direction that can reconcile business needs with employee expectations. Yet reaching such a compromise is not always possible, and in 2026 this may contribute to growing tensions between employers and staff.
The work model remains a point of contention between employees and employers. A study by Hays Poland found that professionals value full flexibility in terms of both working time and place (46%), while only 10% of organizations currently offer such a solution.
This year, 20% of companies plan to change their current work model. The largest share of them (9%) intends to increase the amount of in-office work. Only 3% want to move toward more frequent remote work.
A lack of transparent communication and mutual understanding of the needs of employers and employees may lead to higher turnover. A clear and logical explanation of company decisions regarding changes to the work model will remain crucial to maintaining employee trust.
Recently, the labor market has seen another wave of reports about companies restricting employees’ access to working from home. Employers are increasingly deciding to review their existing solutions and raise expectations regarding employee presence in the office. Most often, they justify this by pointing to the need to improve efficiency, information flow, professional development, and innovation. These arguments, however, often fail to gain employee acceptance, as workers primarily expect flexibility from their employer.
Employee and employer expectations clearly differ
According to the Hays Salary Report 2026, the vast majority of organizations currently operate under a hybrid model with a clearly defined scope of remote work. The largest group, 30% of employers, expects employees to be present in the office two to three days a week. Meanwhile, nearly half of specialists and managers would prefer a model in which they have full freedom to decide where they work and how regularly they carry out their professional duties. Yet such full flexibility exists in only one in ten organizations.
In practice, the mismatch between professionals’ expectations regarding the work model and the actual offer from employers may lead to lower job satisfaction and even prompt people to consider changing jobs. Hays research shows that, from the employee perspective, the main non-financial factor influencing the acceptance of a job offer is precisely the model of work performance (64%).
“Professionals who want to retain flexibility regarding where they work have specific reasons for doing so. They see easy access to remote work as one of the key foundations of their wellbeing and their work-life balance. This is particularly important at a time of growing volatility and business dynamism,” notes Aleksandra Tyszkiewicz, CEE Executive Director – Enterprise Solutions at Hays Poland.
Changes in the work model as part of business strategy?
Increasing the amount of in-office work carries the risk of lower employee satisfaction, higher turnover, and a narrower talent pool. Even so, some employers have decided that in 2026 they will change the work model currently operating in their companies.
Organizations planning such changes remain in the minority. However, among the companies that have included this step in their strategy for the coming months, those seeking to increase the amount of office-based work dominate. Unfortunately, this is also the least attractive solution from the perspective of professionals.
What, then, may explain why nearly one in ten organizations expects employees to be in the office more frequently? On the one hand, it may be a response to the complexity and pace of change taking place in business. Employers may assume that having teams more available in the office will strengthen information flow and knowledge sharing, improve organizational management, and help maintain competitiveness in an uncertain business environment. In this context, increasing office-based work may be seen as an attempt to preserve competitive advantage.
On the other hand, it may be an effort to address HR challenges that many organizations are currently facing—difficulties in team integration, a decline in employees’ sense of belonging, or unsatisfactory productivity. Although the pandemic period demonstrated that working from home does not necessarily reduce efficiency, some organizations remain convinced that office work offers greater control over business processes and may therefore have a positive impact on productivity. Some companies also justify such decisions by referring to organizational culture, which is more difficult to shape under remote working conditions.
Ordering employees back to the office, or significantly increasing the amount of office-based work, is sometimes also used as a method of informal workforce reduction. “For some employees, losing flexibility becomes a motivation to decide to leave the company on their own. This happens particularly when organizations that have so far offered remote work and hired people living in different parts of the country decide to bring staff back to the office,” comments Aleksandra Tyszkiewicz.
Unpopular decisions can be costly
Professionals understand that the labor market is changing and that organizations must adapt to new conditions. However, when a decision to change the work model is not grounded in the company’s strategy and does not take employees’ real needs into account, employees lose trust in the organization, while their satisfaction and sense of security decline. In practice, this means that the real challenge is not so much the change in the work model itself, but rather how that change is justified.
Specialists and managers do not want to give up their established routines and sense of balance without a reason they can clearly understand. As Aleksandra Tyszkiewicz of Hays adds: “A return to the office must be logical, consistent, and well communicated. Employees—both current and prospective—should understand what they are genuinely losing and gaining. Otherwise, limiting flexibility may be tantamount to losing valuable talent.”
Transparent communication and mutual respect are therefore not only signs of organizational maturity, but also essential conditions for building trust and sustaining a company’s long-term ability to attract top specialists.
