Organizational operating environments have never been particularly stable: competition intensifies, technology evolves, and expectations regarding employee well-being and employee experience change. At the same time, global factors—such as pandemics and supply chain challenges—have an impact in new ways. Change is a constant state—not a project that eventually ends. When a company seeks to renew its operating methods, strategy, or culture, it does so simultaneously in an environment where the foundation is shifting beneath its feet.
In this context, hybrid and remote work models, which are themselves forces of change, bring specific difficulties when an organization seeks to transform. Below are some key challenges highlighted in the article Hybrid Still Isn’t Working (Harvard Business Review, Jul–Aug 2025) by Peter Cappelli and Ranya Nehmeh.
- Decline in collaboration and spontaneous interactions
The article notes that a hybrid model, or a vaguely defined “partly remote, partly in the office” approach, often leads to situations where collaboration, learning, and social ties weaken.
When a company wants to change—such as introducing a new process, shifting the culture, or changing the operating model—spontaneous encounters (hallway conversations, quickly generated ideas, informal mentoring) are often critical. In remote/hybrid work, they do not happen automatically, which can slow down the change initiative or leave it superficial. - Risk to culture and identity
Cappelli & Nehmeh point out that hybrid models can weaken organisational culture and a shared identity if shared routines, face-to-face interaction, and social capital are not intentionally designed. In a change situation, this means that when an organisation tries to create a “new way of working”, a “new culture”, or “build more cohesive teams”, it may run into the fact that people do not feel they are part of a shared effort. The dispersion associated with remote and hybrid work can further reduce the sense of a common direction. - Steering leadership and norms becomes more complex
The article notes that a hybrid model requires a new kind of leadership: how is performance measured, how are teams coordinated, and how do you ensure that remote employees are not left outside “visibility”?
When a company is undergoing change—such as an organisational restructuring, a shift in the operating model, or a digital transformation—leaders must simultaneously manage both the change itself and the challenge of making the hybrid model work. This increases the risk that the change will not progress as planned, because leadership is fragmented, norms are unclear, and accountability is dispersed. - Ambiguity of norms and expectations
The hybrid model often operates without clear rules of engagement: when should one be in the office, how does remote work function, how is team collaboration organized. According to the article, this ambiguity is a significant problem. In a change situation, this means that people do not know what is expected of them in the new model—which can cause delays, frustration, and even resistance. If an organization wants to change, but the work model is vague or unclear, the change remains superficial. - Risk of inequality and visibility in remote/hybrid work
The article highlights that hybrid work can create a so-called “two-speed culture”: those who work in the office more often may gain more visibility and influence than those who work remotely. In a change initiative, this is a risk: if some employees feel sidelined, it can weaken commitment to the change, create distrust, and slow down the adoption of the new model.
What does all this mean from a change management perspective?
When an organization embarks on a change process, it should identify from the outset what kind of work and collaboration model it has and how it supports or hinders change. If hybrid/remote work is part of everyday operations, it must be specifically planned how the change will proceed in that context.
- In change communication, it is essential to make visible why change is needed (e.g., changes in the competitive environment, technological disruption, internationalization of partnerships). When the foundation is shifting, the challenges of hybrid work are not a side effect but a central risk factor.
- Establish clear ground rules: how teams meet, how new operating models are implemented remotely or in a hybrid setup, and how culture and team spirit are maintained. Hybrid does not work “by default”; it must be a deliberately designed part of the change.
- Leadership and coaching: Change requires leadership especially when work is distributed. Training is needed, for example, in leading remote teams, ensuring visibility and participation, and building shared rituals.
- Monitoring and agility: Because the operating environment is constantly changing, both the work model and change processes must be adaptable. Measure the amount of collaboration, response times, and the adoption of new operating methods.
Summary
While hybrid and remote working models offer flexibility and can be a competitive advantage, they do not automatically support organisational change—on the contrary, they can create hidden friction in collaboration, culture, leadership, and commitment. The Harvard Business Review article “Hybrid Still Isn’t Working” highlights that organisations must be highly intentional when choosing a hybrid model and leading change through it.
When the environment changes—and it will change—the organization must plan how work happens, how people are involved, how culture functions, how leadership operates. If this step is forgotten, hybrid work can be a source of resistance to change or inefficiency rather than a force for change.
