The Executive Blindspot - Designing Policies You Don't Use

For the past year, many of my executive level conversations about flexible work have sounded the same.

‍

“People are coming back.”


“Working from home was a Covid phase.”


“We need people in the office again.”

‍

When you look at the actual data, the big “snap back” to the office hasn’t really happened.

‍

Our latest Cultivate research shows the average work from home entitlement in New Zealand sits at 1.7 days per week, only slightly down from 1.8 days in our 2024 research.

‍

That’s barely moved. Despite the headlines, hybrid work has largely stabilised. The more interesting story for me isn’t a return to the office. It’s a growing disconnect between executives and the rest of the workforce.

‍

The people writing the rules benefit from flexibility the least

‍

One of the most striking findings for me in our research is this: Executives are the group least likely to utilise flexible working. They’re also around three times more likely than other employees to say they are less productive working from home.

‍

Meanwhile, the rest of the workforce is telling a very different story. About two-thirds of workers say working from home improves their productivity, while fewer than one in 10 say it makes them less productive. That disconnect matters. In most organisations, the people with the least positive experience of flexible work are also the ones designing the policy.

‍

In my experience working with executive teams, this dynamic shows up regularly. Leaders will say things like: “I just work better in the office” or “the energy is better when people are together.”

‍

Those observations may well be true, for that individual leader, but they often become organisation wide rules. That’s where misalignment starts.

‍

Flexibility isn’t collapsing, but it is tightening

‍

The narrative that flexible work is disappearing isn’t quite right. We are seeing a subtle shift.

‍

The share of workers reporting reduced flexibility has doubled in the past year, from a net 4% in 2024 to 8% in our latest research. So, it’s not a flood, but it is a clear signal that some organisations are tightening.

‍

In conversations with leaders recently, I’ve noticed the same pattern.

‍

Executives will say: “We’re not forcing people back, we’re just nudging.” or “We want people together more often.”

‍

Those nudges may seem small, but employees notice them. Nearly half of workers who experienced a reduction in flexibility believe ‘executive preference’ played a role in the decision. Whether that’s accurate or not, the perception alone can damage trust.

‍

Many policies still aren’t evidence-based

‍

Here’s the part that surprised me the most. While many leaders say they’ve had conversations about productivity and hybrid work, only around 15% report using internal data or external research when shaping policy.

‍

Which means 85% of organisations are largely operating on instinct. That’s unusual.

‍

In most parts of business, leaders pride themselves on evidence-based decision making. We wouldn’t launch a new product or enter a new market based purely on gut feel. Yet when it comes to workplace policy, something that affects every employee, instinct often wins.

‍

Flexibility still has quit-trigger power

‍

Another question I hear from executives right now is: “Does flexibility still matter in a tougher labour market?” The data suggests it does.

‍

Among employees who currently have work-from-home entitlements, 36% say a reduction would make them reconsider their future with their employer, and around 45% of Kiwi workers say they would reconsider their job if flexible working was taken away.

‍

When people consider new roles, the signal is even stronger. 82% say flexible working is either a strong preference or a deal-breaker. Only 18% say it doesn’t influence them. For many people, flexible work isn’t a perk anymore. It’s simply how modern work operates.

‍

The hybrid leadership excuse is fading

‍

Another argument we’ve heard for the last few years is that hybrid teams are simply harder to lead. The data is shifting.

‍

Today:

• 75% of leaders manage teams with flexible work arrangements

• 74% say leading hybrid teams is the same or easier than managing fully office-based teams

‍

In my experience, this reflects a broader shift. Five years ago, hybrid leadership felt experimental. Now it’s just another management capability.

‍

Where organisations get into trouble

‍

The biggest mistake I see right now is blanket policies. Three days in the office.
Four days in the office.
Everyone back. From an executive perspective, those rules feel tidy. From a workforce perspective, they often feel arbitrary. Different roles operate differently. Different teams collaborate differently. The organisations navigating this well aren’t “swinging the axe”. They’re testing, segmenting, and refining. Treating flexibility as a design problem, not a compliance rule.

‍

Here’s my uncomfortable question for executive teams

‍

Are you designing workplace policy based on evidence or based on our own personal preferences?

‍

Our research suggests something slightly uncomfortable. The group most likely to set flexible working policy is also the group least likely to experience its benefits personally. That doesn’t mean executives are wrong. But it does create a blind spot. Blind spots around how people want to work can become expensive. Flexible work didn’t disappear. It evolved.

‍

The organisations that recognise that, and design for it deliberately, will have a real advantage over those trying to turn the clock back if they encounter retention issues in 2026.

‍

If you are interested in seeing our research or would like me to walk you through it in person then please reach out.

‍