Report

Human Resource Management

Term - III (2024)

Impact of Hybrid Work on

Leadership, Employee Productivity & Internal Firm Outcomes

Submitted by:

ABHIJEET SAHOO ABM20043 ADITYA SRIVASTAVA PGP39344

AASHIKA PANSARI PGP39340 ADRISH BHATTACHARYA PGP39345

AASHNA SHAH PGP39341 AKHIL KABRA PGP39346

ABHINAV MUNGHATE PGP39342 KARUNA SAI PGP38131

ABHISHEK NAGPAL PGP39343 PRIYANKA SRIVASTAVA PHD24024

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3
CHANGING CONSTANTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 3
OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 3
METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4
ANALYSIS........................................................................................................................................................................................ 5
ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE ............................................................................................................................................ 5
OCTAPACE Profile ............................................................................................................................................................. 5
THEMATIC DEEP DIVE ......................................................................................................................................................... 6
Leadership Assessment ................................................................................................................................................... 6
Employee Performance & Satisfaction ................................................................................................................... 12
Internal Firm Outcomes ............................................................................................................................................... 16
BUSINESS RELEVANCE .......................................................................................................................................................... 23
CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................................................................. 24
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................................................................. 26
APPENDIX-I............................................................................................................................................................................ 26
Leadership assessment and ideology questionnaire ........................................................................................ 26
Employee performance & satisfaction questionnaire: ..................................................................................... 27
Internal firm outcomes questionnaire: .................................................................................................................. 28
APPENDIX-II .......................................................................................................................................................................... 29
Internal firm outcomes qualitative survey ........................................................................................................... 29
GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................................................................................... 31
BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................................................................... 32

Page | 1
ABSTRACT

The advent of hybrid work models and digital nomadism has catalyzed a transformative shift in the
traditional workplace, posing both unprecedented challenges and opportunities for organizations across
industries. The impact is multifaceted, influencing not only the physical office setup, but also altering ways
of working, communication norms, collaboration dynamics, and employee expectations. Stakeholders,
including employers, employees, and clients, find themselves navigating uncharted territories as they strive
to strike a balance between flexibility and operational efficiency.
The consulting and advisory services industry, which has traditionally relied on in-person working and face-
to-face interactions to drive creativity, innovation, and impact, has been facing headwinds with the
emergence of newer ways of working. Effectively navigating these dynamics and consistently delivering
value and differentiation, has become a top priority. Major consulting firms have focused on fostering and
constantly innovating their culture to ensure that people skills create a strategic differentiator for them.
However hybrid and remote work has upended these efforts, brought a seismic shift in the ways of working
and consequently affected this highly valued culture as well.
Understanding the impact of hybrid models on the company culture, industry-specific ways of working and
stakeholder perspectives provides a baseline for these firms in designing and implementing best-fit
strategies to drive client relationships, employee engagement and overall firm performance.
This whitepaper focuses on profiling the culture of the firm that ultimately underpins these three pivotal
themes that firms need to evaluate while developing “hybrid-native” strategies:
● Leadership Assessment and Ideology
● Employee Performance and Satisfaction
● Internal Firm Outcomes
The report uses OCTAPACE profiling to evaluate the culture of the firm and adopts a statistical approach to
assess these themes in both pre- and post-hybrid working models. Targeted surveys with leadership,
employees, and clients were conducted to analyse the impact and identify areas that have performed better
or worse in the light of this transition.

Page | 2
INTRODUCTION

CHANGING CONSTANTS
As the consulting business moves into a new era where home desks and coffee shops are increasingly
replacing office spaces, consultants operating remotely are revolutionising how the industry interacts with
clients and delivers value.
Traditionally, consultants travelled frequently to meet clients, worked out of client sites, and engaged with
colleagues face-to-face. This model allowed them to build strong relationships, foster collaboration, and
innovation, and deliver high-quality and impactful results. During the pandemic, however, consultants
shifted to a completely remote work environment, relying on digital tools and platforms to communicate
and collaborate. This model, while posing ubiquitous challenges, also allowed for higher flexibility,
autonomy, and in several cases, enhanced performance.
In the post-pandemic era, consultants are adopting a hybrid working model, where they choose to work
from remote locations depending on the nature and need of their engagements. This model brings together
the best of both worlds by driving employee productivity and client outcomes while balancing the need for
flexibility.
However, hybrid work has spawned newer concerns such as security risks, isolation, disappearing boundaries
between professional and personal lives, and perceived loss of the ‘consulting culture.’
Analysts and consultants are faced with difficulties in executing engagements while being remote and
ensuring security and data confidentiality. Treading the fine line between delivering outcomes and
maintaining work-life balance has become increasingly challenging. Meanwhile, senior leaders and partners
are now tasked with building and sustaining strong client relationships and company culture in virtual
settings. Evaluating individual performances, coaching teams, and managing career progressions have added
an additional dimension of complexity to human capital strategy across the organisation.
In a similar vein, clients today are concerned about ensuring impactful results, providing swift feedback, and
leveraging remote teams to drive maximum value out of advisory services.

OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS

Hybrid Work: The firm or organisation determines the days & times at which their employees are allowed to
work out of the office (in a remote setting) or mandated to go to office. For this report, the employees work
2 full days a week in the office while being permitted to work from a location other than the office the
remaining the time.
Leadership Effectiveness: The measure of how effective the firm’s senior leadership (Associate Director,
Director, Executive Director, and Partner) is in maintaining accountability, ensuring a positive work culture,
and their ability to manage day-to-day operations.
Productivity: Three dimensions of Forsgren’s SPACE framework is used to measure productivity; Satisfaction
and well-being, Performance, and Communication & collaboration.
Internal Firm Outcomes: Upskilling (including Learning & Development), Innovation, and Informal Social
Activities are used as indicators of internal firm outcomes.
Page | 3
METHODOLOGY

Industry: Technology Consulting (focused on PwC).

Sample Population: More than 30 for each of the three aspects studied and the OCTAPACE profiling.
Sampling Technique: Judgement (Purposive) Sampling.
Measurements:
● The standard two-part OCTAPACE profiling questionnaire developed by U. Pareek(2002) was used to
contrast and compare the changes in the underlying culture of the firm due to hybrid work.
● A survey questionnaire to be developed specifically for the current study (using a Likert scale) for all
three aspects viz. Leadership effectiveness, Employee productivity, and Internal firm outcomes.
Focus Group Discussions will be used to supplement the survey findings for Employee productivity
and Internal Firm Outcomes. The questionnaire will collect comparative data about the three aspects
for both the pre-COVID regular working model and the post-COVID hybrid working model.
● Focus Group Discussion (FGDs) were conducted to assess the qualitative aspects of internal firm
outcomes such as training, upskilling, internal and external collaboration, and innovation.
Procedure: Three hypotheses will be developed (one for each aspect) that will be subject to the outcomes
of the above-mentioned survey. The survey results are to be analysed using a standard two-tailed t-test. The
significance level has been defined at 0.05 i.e. p-value < 0.05 used to reject our null hypothesis and accept
the alternate hypothesis.

Page | 4
ANALYSIS

ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE
Organisational culture is the collective behaviour of all employees who are part of an organisation and the
meanings that the people attach to their both long and short-term actions. Organisational values, visions,
norms, working language, systems, symbols, beliefs and habits collectively constitute culture.
Udai Pareek says that ideas about culture can also be seen as having more than one level. Values are what
give a group its unique character. They are at the core (first level). Climate is the second-level concept.
Climate can be thought of as how people feel about an organisation, its members, groups, and problems.
The third level idea is about the atmosphere, which affects how someone or something grows and develops.
The dimensions of OCTAPACE profile
The eight dimensions of OCTAPACE culture are openness, confrontation, Trust, Authenticity, pro-action,
autonomy, collaboration and experimentation. These are all important for strong, effective and ultimately
successful firm outcomes.
In current hybrid work times, the escalating importance of culture is also due to the increasing turbulence,
complexity, and unpredictability faced by organisations in their ever-changing external environments.
Remote work fundamentally changes the way employees interact, work and perceive the environment of
the office as the lines increasingly blur between personal and professional.

OCTAPACE Profile
Statistical Analysis

Table : Octapace Themes with Mean Statistics

Page | 5
Substantial increase in “Openness” dimension is observed post hybrid work. Pareek defines it as
‘spontaneous expression of feelings and thoughts, and the sharing of these without defensiveness’ and
studying the broader effects of hybrid work it becomes clear that employees have become more likely to
express their feelings both in formal and informal settings. Further during hybrid work consulting firms that
already have a stronger focus on feedback mechanisms, have doubled down on these mechanisms. This
might overall encourage openness in the firm. We see a marginal increase in “Confrontation” as well
highlighting not just increased confrontation (taking up more work and tackling the newer challenges of ways
of working) but also exploration.
A sharp decline in the dimension of “trust” is visible during hybrid work as compared to pre-pandemic
traditional work. The qualitative primary research conducted as part of the study highlighted that the
physical distance between the employers and consultants has created deeper fault lines. As mentioned by
Pareek the outcome of trust includes “empathy, timely support, reduced stress and reduction and
simplification of forms and procedure”. The lack of physical interaction necessarily reduces empathy, with
the responsiveness of support is negatively affected by consultants working across timezones. These two
aspects inevitably foment stress while the concerns for security and confidentiality in these volatile and
uncertain environments create complex forms and procedures.
Finally collaboration and experimentation dimensions also showcase the strong effect hybrid work has had
on the working of consulting firms. As the increased use of digital technologies and tools for video
conferencing has allowed people to connect in real times, they barely substitute for authentic human
interactions thereby affecting collaboration.
Although many aspects of OCTAPACE dimensions have been negatively impacted, firms have excelled in the
“experimentation” fronts. The VUCA world has presented a completely unseen crisis before the consulting
agencies as they find themselves in uncharted waters while at the same time, the economic downturn has
made businesses more reluctant to approach consultants. This has forced these firms to experiment and
innovate to find novel solutions.

THEMATIC DEEP DIVE

Leadership Assessment
Effective leadership is a key factor that influences long-term performance in any industry, especially in the
context of consulting firms where ‘consultants’ are the central assets. Major consulting firms have shifted
from addressing their employees as ‘human resources’ to ‘human capital’ signaling an enhanced focus on
selecting and nurturing the best talent. Traditional work allowed consulting leaders to effectively exploit the
in-person working styles to keep a tab on the grassroot sentiments, effectively framing and implementing
policies that best leveraged this talent capital. Over the years, open-door policies and open offices have been
pioneered by consulting firms and employees are encouraged to have candid conversations across the
hierarchy.
These ideas have been curated for the traditional work environment and are centered around the ‘office
culture.’ However, with the advent of remote work, many of these strategies cease to be feasible. N. Sharon
Hill in her article in the MIT Sloan Review discusses how hybrid work can compromise group effectiveness,
hinder organizational alignment and leadership impact. To be effective in hybrid work, consulting leaders
need to develop and demonstrate new skills and competencies that allow them to be more agile and
Page | 6
 adaptable to changing employee needs
and expectations. Leaders are expected
to exclude trust and empathy despite
being physically distant all while
maintaining their ability to effectively
communicate firm values through the
digital media.
Statistical Analysis
In the light of these developments, the
effects of hybrid work on leadership
visibility, agility, and the ability of senior
leaders to effectively manage firm
operations and create a positive culture
have been studied. The leadership
survey gathered responses against ten
questions that tracked leadership
effectiveness and overall firm
performance in the traditional work setting vis-a-vis the hybrid work environment. The responses were
gathered based on a nine-point Likert scale.

Figure : Key statistics regarding survey on Leadership Assessment and Ideology

Key Statistics:
● The mean and median both show a substantial decrease in the post-hybrid model in contrast to the
pre-hybrid model Indicating a reduction in average leadership effectiveness and overall firm
performance.
● The Variance and Standard deviation show a significant increase moving from the pre- hybrid model
highlighting a wider divergence in opinion and increased uncertainty across the spectrum in the post-
hybrid model.

Page | 7
 ● The data is left skewed in the pre-hybrid model while skewing to the right in the post- hybrid model
implying reduced leadership confidence and efficacy among more respondents versus average
responses.
To assess the statistical significance of the observed changes in Leadership Assessment & Ideology between
the pre-Hybrid and post-hybrid Working Models, hypothesis tests were conducted based on twenty-three
recorded responses.
The following Null and Alternate Hypotheses were defined:
Null Hypothesis (H0): Leadership impact, organizational effectiveness, firm strategy, and overall firm
performance are not significantly impacted by the introduction of hybrid working models.
Alternate Hypothesis (Ha): Leadership impact, organizational effectiveness, firm strategy, and overall firm
performance are significantly impacted by the introduction of hybrid working models.
A paired t-test (difference of means for related observation groups) was conducted to determine if any
statistical difference existed between pre and post hybrid working models. A significance level of 0.05 was
defined for the analysis.

Page | 8
Table: Paired t-test statistical metrics

Page | 9
The determined P-Value (9.7E-05) is less than the defined significance level (0.05). Consequently, the null
hypothesis is rejected, and the alternate hypothesis is accepted.
The observed changes in mean scores between pre and post hybrid working models are statistically
significant and leadership assessment of effectiveness and firm performance has deteriorated in the post-
hybrid work setting.

Across the defined metrics, scores for post-hybrid working models are consistently lower compared to the
pre-hybrid metrics. Leadership’s perspective of firm performance, ability to manage accountability, drive firm
operations and positively impact firm culture have all declined in the post-hybrid working model. Traditional
norms of accountability dated measures of firm performance and top-down communication strategies are
clearly not working. These trends point towards umpteen challenges that the leadership is faced with and
necessitate the development of innovative leadership and delivery models that are hybrid – native

Different Leadership Perspectives and Impacts:

1. Leadership's ability to manage accountability and performance:
● Leadership's ability to manage accountability and performance encompasses setting clear
expectations, assigning tasks, monitoring progress, and providing feedback. The decrease in the score
from 9 to 7 out of 10 between the pre-hybrid and hybrid working models indicates a potential
challenge in adapting accountability and performance management to the new environment. Insights
suggest that communication barriers, remote progress tracking difficulties, or the need for revised
performance evaluation methods may contribute to this decline. To address these challenges,
implementing new strategies, providing additional training, and enhancing technology tools for
accountability and performance management in the hybrid work setting are essential.
● The Goal Setting Theory of HRM by Edwin Locke and Gary Latham in the late 1960s and early 1970
can help explain the challenges of managing accountability and performance in post-hybrid work
Page | 10
 environments. This theory emphasizes the importance of setting clear, specific, and challenging goals
aligned with organizational objectives. By involving employees in the goal-setting process, providing
regular feedback and communication, and ensuring goals are achievable yet challenging, HRM
leaders can effectively manage accountability and improve performance outcomes in the hybrid work
landscape.

2. Leadership's contribution towards positive culture:

● Leadership's role in fostering a positive workplace culture saw a slight decrease in effectiveness, with
the score dropping from 8.8 to 7.7 out of 10 during the transition to a hybrid work model. This shift
may have posed challenges in maintaining team cohesion, communication, and morale, especially
between remote and in-office employees. To address this, leaders should prioritize transparent
communication, encourage collaboration, recognize achievements, and show empathy for
employees' well-being. These efforts can help mitigate the impact of the hybrid work model on
employee engagement and satisfaction.
● The Social Identity Theory of HRM by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s suggests that
employees' sense of belonging and connection to the organization may weaken in post-hybrid work
environments due to reduced face-to-face interactions and limited visibility of leaders. To address
this, HRM can strengthen employees' social identity by emphasizing shared values, fostering a sense
of community, and enhancing leadership visibility through virtual platforms

3. Leadership's perspective on overall firm performance:

● The shift from a pre-hybrid to a hybrid working model has led to a decline in leadership's perception
of overall firm performance, with the score decreasing from 8.6 to 7.1 out of 10. This change reflects
challenges in monitoring productivity, maintaining team cohesion, and ensuring effective
communication in a hybrid environment. To address this decline, leaders should focus on enhancing
performance monitoring, fostering collaboration, and providing support to employees. These efforts
will help realign leadership's perspective with actual performance and drive improvements in key
areas affected by the shift to hybrid work.
● The HRM theory relevant to the context of declining overall firm performance in post-hybrid work
environments is Transformational Leadership Theory by James MacGregor Burns in 1978. This
theory emphasizes the importance of leaders inspiring and motivating employees to achieve higher
levels of performance. In the case of Amazon, Salesforce, and Facebook, the decline in satisfaction,
engagement, and productivity may be linked to a lack of transformational leadership behaviours,
such as providing a compelling vision, fostering a supportive environment, and empowering
employees. To improve overall firm performance in post-hybrid work environments, HRM can focus
on developing leaders who exhibit transformational leadership qualities through training and
development programs.

4. Leadership visibility and communication:

● Leadership visibility and communication, reflecting how effectively leaders engage with employees
and communicate organizational goals, declined slightly from 9 to 8.6 out of 10 during the transition
from pre-hybrid to hybrid working models. This suggests challenges in maintaining regular
communication and fostering a sense of connection. To address this, leaders should prioritize
Page | 11
 frequent communication, leverage technology, and establish regular check-ins to maintain alignment
across teams.

● The Situational Leadership Theory (SLT) by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard in the late 1960s
and early 1970s offers insights into addressing the challenges posed by post-hybrid work models. SLT
suggests that leaders should adapt their approach based on the readiness of their followers. In hybrid
work environments, where communication effectiveness and visibility may decrease, leaders can
adopt a supportive and participative style to enhance communication and engagement. HRM can
support this by providing leadership training to help leaders adjust their style to meet the demands
of hybrid work, ultimately improving leadership presence and communication.

5. Leaders ability to manage firm operation:

● The "leadership's ability to manage firm operation" refers to how effectively leaders oversee
organizational activities to achieve strategic goals. The decrease in the score from 9.2 to 7.9 out of
10, transitioning from the pre-hybrid to hybrid working model, indicates a decline in leadership
effectiveness. Insights suggest challenges in coordinating teams, maintaining productivity, and
ensuring communication in the hybrid work environment. To address this, leaders must enhance
remote management skills and foster accountability.
● The Contingency Theory by Fred Fiedler in the 1960s suggests that effective leadership and
management practices depend on situational factors and require leaders to adapt their approaches
accordingly. In the context of hybrid work models, leaders must adjust their strategies to effectively
manage and coordinate operations amidst new challenges introduced by remote work. This theory
can guide leaders in developing flexible and adaptable management strategies tailored to the specific
circumstances they face.

Employee Performance & Satisfaction

From client research and analyses to proposal delivery, and
engagement execution, analysts, consultants, engagement
managers and partners are actively involved across the
engagement lifecycle. Gathering perceptions from the
engagement team provides key insights into the impact of
working models on overall engagement delivery.
Amidst the rise of hybrid work, employees engaged in hybrid
workplace settings encounter unique challenges. As per an
industry report[2], the use of collaborative
Figure : Key metrics to measure hybrid work’s impact

tools at the office have grown by over 40% since the pandemic, and adapting to newer modes of
collaboration has been received with mixed results across the industry. Secondly, maintaining the quality
and security of data and information, especially when collaborating with sensitive client information has
been a key concern. On the interpersonal front, balancing work, and well-being, as well as managing the
expectations and preferences of clients and colleagues, has led to increased levels of stress and a feeling of
Page | 12
"burnt out” among consultants. Building and sustaining meaningful relationships and trust with colleagues
is another challenge that has plagued the hybrid-era consultant. Lastly, one of the salient strengths of any
consulting firm - its network and resources, has become disproportionately challenging to harness in the
face of the hybrid work environment.

Statistical Analysis
Evaluating the impact on employee performance and satisfaction in the transition to a hybrid model is
essential, given the distinct challenges such as increased reliance on collaborative tools, heightened concerns
about data security, elevated stress levels, and difficulties in building and maintaining relationships. This
employee survey gathered responses against ten questions that tracked employee performance and
satisfaction levels in the traditional work setting vis-a-vis the hybrid work environment. The responses were
gathered based on a nine-point Likert scale.

Figure: Key statistics regarding survey on Employee Performance and Satisfaction

Key statistics:
● The mean shows a minor increase while the median shows no change in the post- hybrid model in
contrast to the pre-hybrid model indicating a slight improvement in the performance of employees.
● The Variance and Standard deviation show a significant increase moving from the pre-hybrid model
highlighting a wider divergence in performance and increased work satisfaction across the spectrum
in the post-hybrid model.
● The data is left skewed in both pre and post-hybrid models implying better employee performance
among more respondents versus respondents' average.

Page | 13
To assess the statistical significance of the observed changes in Employee Performance and Satisfaction
between the pre-Hybrid and post-hybrid Working Models, hypothesis tests were conducted based on thirty
recorded responses.
The following Null and Alternate Hypotheses were defined:
Null Hypothesis (H0): Employee perspective, including job satisfaction, ability to deliver outcomes and
workplace productivity is the same across traditional office-based and hybrid working models.
Alternate Hypothesis (Ha): Employee perspective, including job satisfaction, ability to deliver outcomes and
workplace productivity is different across traditional office-based and hybrid working models.
A paired t-test (difference of means for related observation groups) was conducted to determine if any
statistical difference existed between pre and post hybrid working models. A significance level of 0.05 was
defined for the analysis.
Table : Paired t-test statistical metrics

Page | 14
Determined P-Value (5.32E-01) is more than the defined significance level (0.05). Consequently, the null
hypothesis cannot be rejected.
The observed changes in mean scores between pre and post hybrid working models are not statistically
significant. This indicates that employee perspectives in terms of job satisfaction, ability to deliver
outcomes, and workplace productivity remain the same across traditional office-based and hybrid working
models.

Across the evaluated metrics, scores for post-hybrid working models are consistently higher compared to
the pre-hybrid metrics except for employees' perception of opportunities for growth and intent to continue
at the firm. Positive changes in scores, such as increased employee job satisfaction, employee
recommendation of workplace to peers, and employee productivity, suggest improvements in preference
for and likeability of the workplace. Studies, including those from Future Forum and PwC, illustrate that
knowledge workers express a higher satisfaction with remote work compared to traditional office settings.
Notably, flexibility in work location and schedule has been linked to substantial improvements in productivity
and work-life balance. For instance, employees with the freedom to choose their work location reported up
to 44% better work-life balance scores, while schedule flexibility led to even more pronounced benefits, with
productivity scores improving by 53%. Business leaders have corroborated these findings, observing notable
enhancements in workforce productivity during the pandemic. Furthermore, employee sentiment surveys,
such as those conducted by BCG, indicate that a majority of employees were able to maintain or even
increase their productivity on both individual and collaborative tasks despite the abrupt shift to remote work.

The analysis highlights how a hybrid work model enhances productivity by offering flexibility, improved
work-life balance, less commuting, greater autonomy, a focus on results, advanced technology use, better
work environments, healthier habits, and wider collaboration. This model supports employees in managing
personal and professional life, thus boosting efficiency. Reduced commute times free up energy for work or
rest, while increased control over work settings enhances job satisfaction and motivation. The emphasis on
results over hours worked drives efficiency and acknowledges high achievers. Utilising collaborative tools
Page | 15
enables seamless communication and teamwork, regardless of location. Employees can choose work
environments suited to their tasks, fostering both focus and team dynamics. Additionally, the model
encourages healthier lifestyles and global teamwork, offering further productivity gains.

Several theories support the benefits observed in hybrid work models. The Perceived Organisational
Support (POS) theory by Eisenberger (1986) indicates that hybrid models, by offering flexibility and respect
for individual preferences, boost employees' sense of being valued and their motivation. Self-Determination
Theory (SDT) by Richard Ryan and Edward Deci (1980) points out that the autonomy provided in hybrid
settings enhances motivation and productivity by meeting employees' needs for autonomy, competence,
and relatedness. Goal Setting Theory by Edwin A. Locke (1968) aligns with the hybrid model's emphasis on
output, motivating employees to meet specific and challenging goals. Affective Events Theory (AET) by
Howard M. Weiss and Russell Cropanzano (1996) suggests that the model's flexibility and reduced commute
times lead to positive emotions like happiness and less stress, thereby improving work engagement and
productivity. These theoretical perspectives collectively explain the observed improvements in productivity
and employee satisfaction in hybrid work settings, advocating for a thoughtful implementation of such
models to maximise their benefits.

The Positive Affectivity and Job Satisfaction Theory of Locke (1976) is a foundational theory that links
employee happiness and satisfaction directly to productivity. According to Locke's theory, job satisfaction is
significantly influenced by the fulfilment of an individual's basic needs and values. When these needs and
values are satisfied, it leads to positive emotional states or happiness. This positive affectivity, in turn, is
closely associated with higher levels of motivation and productivity. The theory suggests that happier
employees are more engaged and committed to their work, leading to better performance outcomes

Conversely, a decrease in employees' perception of opportunities for growth and intent to continue at the
firm indicate potential stagnation that may be setting in. While the transition to hybrid working has elevated
several workplace metrics for employees, the observed decline in employees' perception of opportunities
for growth and intent to continue at the firm, point towards increasing tendencies to switch jobs and
consequently the need for firms to develop employee centric organisational policies, that consider the
preferences for and nuances of remote and hybrid work.

Internal Firm Outcomes

In the time before the pandemic, the workplace
thrived on in-person interactions within office
spaces. These settings facilitated comprehensive
training, upskilling and peer-led learning
opportunities. Employees engaged in direct
communication, brainstorming, and sharing of
knowledge in a low-barrier, interactive
environment. This in-person collaboration played
a pivotal role in fostering a sense of camaraderie
and teamwork – significantly enhancing Internal
Firm Outcomes.

Page | 16
However, the post-pandemic model shifted to remote work, altering the traditional in-person collaboration
setting. This change affected the way employees interacted, learned, and generated ideas. The hybrid model
introduced new challenges and opportunities for collaboration, utilising digital tools and platforms, altering
the nature of training and development, and influencing how innovative ideas came to life.

Upon employees' return to the workplace, a leading industry report underscores their strong preference for
the hybrid model. The hybrid work approach extends beyond mere enhancements in productivity and
efficiency. It enables teams to explore innovative solutions through unconventional approaches. In
navigating the forthcoming hybrid landscape, organisations must prioritise striking a delicate balance. This
equilibrium revolves around two critical facets: empowering employees through collaboration and skill
enhancement initiatives while ensuring their well-being. This approach addresses diverse employee needs,
promoting a cohesive and productive work environment across varied work setups.

Statistical Analysis

Investigating the intricate interplay of collaboration dynamics, skill enhancement initiatives, and employee
well being offers essential insights for fostering innovation. This employee survey gathered responses
against ten questions that tracked internal firm outcomes in the traditional work setting vis-a-vis the hybrid
work environment. The responses were gathered based on a nine-point Likert scale.

Key Statistics:
● The mean and median both show a substantial decrease in the post-hybrid model in contrast to the
pre-hybrid model indicating a reduction in average levels of upskilling, innovation, and collaboration
among employees.
● The Variance and Standard deviation show a significant decrease moving from the pre-hybrid model
highlighting lesser divergence in opinion and decreased agreement across the spectrum in the post-
hybrid model.
Page | 17
 ● The data is marginally left skewed in post than pre-hybrid model implying reduced training,
innovation, and collaboration among respondents versus respondents' average.

To assess the statistical significance of the observed changes in Internal Firm Outcomes between the pre-
Hybrid and post-hybrid Working Models, hypothesis tests were conducted based on the thirty recorded
responses.

The following Null and Alternate Hypotheses were defined:

Null Hypothesis (Ho): Internal firm outcomes such as innovation, collaboration and practice development
are the same across traditional office-based and hybrid working models.
Alternate Hypothesis (Ha): Internal firm outcomes such as innovation, collaboration and practice
development are significantly different across traditional office-based and hybrid working models.

A paired t-test (difference of means for related observation groups) was conducted to determine if any
statistical difference existed between pre- and post-hybrid working models. A significance level of 0.05
was defined for the analysis.

TableTheme for Paired T-test: Statistical Metric

Page | 18
The determined p-value (2.55E-02) is less than the defined significance level (0.05). Consequently, the null
hypothesis is rejected, and the alternate hypothesis is accepted. The observed changes in mean scores
between pre and post hybrid working models are statistically significant, indicating that these outcomes
differ significantly across the two models. The evidence suggests that internal firm outcomes are influenced
by the choice between traditional office-based and hybrid working models.

Across all evaluated metrics, post-hybrid working model scores consistently lag the pre-hybrid metrics.
Decline in scores for effective collaboration and teamwork, informal and social activities point towards the
inability of remote work models to meet employee expectations in these areas. Similarly, decline in scores
for meaningful ideation and impactful project delivery imply potential roadblocks to free-flowing ideation in

digital-only settings. Further, decrease in the effectiveness of upskilling and L&D programs signal towards
the in-sufficiency of remote learning and development to achieve desired outcomes. These trends
collectively indicate nuanced effects on collaboration, upskilling, innovation, teamwork, project delivery, and
social activities in the post Hybrid Working Model. This points towards firms’ need for strategic interventions
that identify best-fit delivery models to drive heightened firm outcomes.

Focused Group Discussion:

A focused group discussion (FGD) was conducted with professionals from PwC to analyse the changes in
upskilling and learning & development (L&D), innovation, and informal social activities in response to the
COVID-19 pandemic. The participants varied in experience, ranging from consultants with 4 years of
experience to a manager with 11 years, all working in the IT and services sector. This diverse group provided
insights on how their firm shifted to online learning platforms, the adaptation of innovation processes to
remote work challenges, and the impact on informal social activities due to the shift to virtual environments.
The discussions revealed both strategic and operational shifts within the organisation, demonstrating how
the pandemic served as a catalyst for significant changes in workplace dynamics and professional
development approaches.

Summary of Upskilling and L&D related Discussion:

Page | 19
The findings from the focused group discussion (FGD) on upskilling in organisations before and after the
COVID-19 pandemic provide several insights into how companies have adapted their learning and
development initiatives. Here's a summary of the insights derived from the responses:
1. Shift to Online Learning Platforms:
Across the board, there's a clear shift from in-person workshops to virtual platforms. The emphasis is on self-
paced learning and the use of online certifications, which is evident in responses R1 and R5, highlighting
adaptability and self-motivation.
2. Challenges of Virtual Training:
Respondents acknowledge challenges in engagement and technology access in virtual settings (R1 and R2).
Firms faced issues with a lack of hands-on experience and worked to overcome them by incorporating
simulations and case studies (R4).
3. Changes in Skill Demands:
Post-pandemic, there's a noted increase in demand for digital, mental health and wellness, and resilience
training (R2, R3). This aligns with a broader shift towards adaptability, navigating the remote environment,
and data privacy/security (R3 and R5).
4. Enhanced Flexibility and Engagement:
Organisations are seeking to maintain engagement in a remote setting, utilising regular feedback and virtual
check-ins (R1). The blended learning approach and online mentorship are particularly noted for maintaining
engagement (R4).

Summary of Innovation related Discussion:

The findings from the focused group discussion (FGD) on the changes in innovation within organisations
before and after COVID-19 reflect a paradigm shift in business operations, strategy, and workplace culture.
Here's a summary of the insights from the responses:
1. Acceleration of Digital Transformation:
A consistent theme across all responses (R1, R2, R3, R5) is the significant acceleration of innovation within
firms due to the pandemic. This includes a shift from traditional in-person meetings to virtual platforms and
the development of new digital tools to support remote work, enhancing productivity and operational
flexibility.
2. Adoption of Agile and Decentralised Innovation:
There has been a marked transition to agile methodologies (R1, R5) and decentralised innovation (R2). This
shift has allowed for more rapid prototyping, testing of solutions, and grassroots innovations that enhance
overall resilience and empower employees.
3. Innovation in Collaboration Tools:
In response to the need for effective remote collaboration, firms have developed or integrated in-house
platforms for video conferencing, project tracking, and document sharing (R2, R4). These tools have
streamlined communication and improved team coordination.
4. Enhanced Focus on Employee Well-Being:
There is a new emphasis on employee well-being and mental health as key areas of innovation (R4),
recognizing that a healthy and motivated workforce is crucial for sustainable growth.
5. Strategic Partnerships for Innovation:

Page | 20
External collaborations with tech startups and academic institutions to co-create solutions have become
important (R4). This reflects a broader approach to innovation that leverages external expertise and
technologies.
6. Shift in Focus Post-Pandemic:
There is a unanimous indication of a shift towards digital-first innovations post-pandemic (R1, R5), with firms
focusing more on solutions that enhance remote work capabilities and cybersecurity (R1, R5). There's also a
greater focus on creating robust logistics solutions and digital tracking systems (R3).

Summary of Informal Social Activities related Discussion:

The focused group discussion (FGD) findings on the changes in social activities within organisations pre and
post-COVID-19 highlight a significant shift in how companies approach employee interaction and morale.
Here's a summary of the insights from the respondents:
1. Impact on Informal Social Activities:
Respondents R1, R2, R3, and R5 all note a decrease in the frequency and spontaneity of informal social
activities due to the pandemic, as remote work has necessitated a shift from face-to-face socialising to virtual
interactions.
2. Importance of Informal Social Activities:
All respondents underscore the critical role that informal social activities play in maintaining team spirit and
morale, with R2 and R5 emphasising their importance for fostering a sense of community and supporting
mental health, especially given the isolation many have experienced during the pandemic.
3. Adaptation Strategies:
Organisations have adapted by organising regular virtual team-building activities and check-in meetings (R1),
introducing online social events (R2), implementing a 'buddy system' (R3), and celebrating birthdays and
work anniversaries virtually (R4).
4. Long-term Behavioural Changes:
There appears to be a lasting shift towards virtual social activities (R1), with a noted reliance on technology
for social interactions (R2), a decrease in spontaneous social interactions (R3), and a greater emphasis on
structured social events over informal gatherings (R4).
5. Innovations in Social Engagement:
The use of collaboration tools and platforms to create virtual spaces for informal chats and social interactions
(R5), as well as structured social events like virtual trivia nights and coffee catch-ups (R2), illustrate innovative
approaches to maintaining team spirit.

Kirkpatrick’s four Level Model

The most widely accepted framework is the four stage training evaluation model proposed by Kirkpatrick
(1959). Kirkpatrick’s framework classifies training evaluations into four categories:

● Participants’ reactions to the training program (Reaction)

● Changes in attitude, knowledge or skill levels (Learning)
● Changes in work behaviours (Behaviour)
● Changes in organisationally desired outcomes (Results)

Page | 21
From the study, we can conclude that training result from pre and post hybrid working model, has very less
impact changes.

Page | 22
BUSINESS RELEVANCE

In the context of the evolving industry landscape influenced by digitalization, it is imperative for firms
such as PwC, which generates a significant portion (45%) of its revenues from its advisory line of
business, to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the hybrid model. A report from the Gartner Digital
Business Buying Behavior Survey suggests that 70% of IT service buyers have increased their spending
on consulting services. The new digital business acceleration is a positive trend contributing to
growth, and hence, it is crucial for PwC to maintain a steadfast stance in response to changing
attitudes. The hybrid model does not imply a complete absence of office presence; rather, it
establishes guidelines and expectations regarding appropriate times and modes of engagement for
individuals both in-person and remotely. This is evident in the case of teams operating in Acceleration
Centers and their regular interactions with the main offices in the United States. It becomes crucial
to dwell on the aspects of collaboration and how they affect the lifestyles of employees, related
stakeholders, and the performance of an organization. Dr. Alexandra Samuel, coauthor of Remote,
Inc.: How to Thrive at Work, Wherever You Are talks about punctuated collaboration. In the model,
collaboration is focused, specific, and time-bound.

In addition to its focus on culture and people, innovation has consistently played a central role at
PwC. This is evident in their latest publication on megatrends, where they explore the ongoing
evolution and unfolding of these trends. The way these trends are manifesting today has significantly
shifted compared to a decade ago. On similar lines, a report from Forrester highlights that mastering
hybrids will require organizational innovation. And achieving that innovation requires
experimentation. With its business spread across geographies, PwC has always led technology-
dominated projects from the front, wherein it has indulged itself in the use of technologies that
resonate with today’s trend of digitalization. Whether it is collaborating with clients across different
time zones or facilitating seamless communication with counterparts and acceleration centers
through digital platforms, PwC has consistently recognized the importance of upskilling and resource
development. However, it is crucial to delve deeper and comprehend how these practices have
evolved considering the transition towards a hybrid model. Ultimately, combining modern
technologies with human factors—norms, culture, and leadership—offers powerful tools for making
hybrid work.

Page | 23
CONCLUSION

The statistical analysis sheds light on pivotal insights into the optimization of hybrid work models for
consulting and advisory services firms. Through rigorous hypothesis testing across five key themes, the
impact of post-hybrid working models is examined in comparison to traditional office-based approaches.

The evidence is compelling and transformative. Leadership Assessment & Ideology, and Internal Firm
Outcomes all reveal statistically significant differences, with lower scores in the post-hybrid work setting –
underscoring the challenges of hybrid work and the need to design and adopt newer strategies, which are
hybrid–native.

These findings signal a call to action for organizations to re-evaluate leadership strategies and approaches,
innovate to build strong and impactful client relationships and design employee strategies that overcome
the inherent shortcomings of hybrid work arrangements to drive better internal outcomes.

However, the analysis also surfaces other nuanced results. Employee Performance and Satisfaction, exhibit
no statistically significant differences between traditional and hybrid working models. It appears that clients
and consultants are as happy with the hybrid working model as they were in traditional office-based settings.
While the introduction of hybrid working models has not impacted these themes negatively, the analysis
prompts a thoughtful reflection on how organizations can further refine their post-hybrid strategies to
enhance employee satisfaction and manage client perceptions more effectively.

In the light of these findings, tailored strategies for optimizing post-hybrid working models need to be
defined and adopted. While organization dynamics play a critical role in defining these best-fit strategies,
the following broad recommendations can serve as a guardrail in shaping organizational policies for
optimizing hybrid work.

● Structured leadership enhancement programs with a focus on engaging and managing remote
teams while defining digitally guided accountability frameworks and evaluation policies.
● Setup of dedicated account teams that discover, refine, and disseminate best practices to manage
client engagements in virtually directed interactions while identifying touchpoints that demand in-
person interactions.
● Definition of employee centric hybrid working strategies that factor in workforce preferences for
flexibility and challenges engagement teams face in both remote and in-person work models.

Page | 24
 ● Driving internal firm strategy by assessing “intent-outcome fit” and devising the optimal modes of
delivery across all firm programs.

This report serves as a compass, guiding organizations in their pursuit of optimized hybrid work models –
providing a foundational assessment and pointing to key areas and themes that require re-calibration and
re-invention. The OCTAPACE cultural profile supports the above statistical survey and analysis performed.
This highlights the role of culture as the underlying cause of these changes. Firms must realise that effecting
cultural changes would be vital in arresting the wider consequences arising out of hybrid work.

The road ahead demands a strategic blend of leadership evolution, client-centric approaches, employee-
centric policies, and dynamic internal strategies. By pivoting to hybrid-native ways of thinking and
maintaining a fine balance between in-person and remote work, organizations can not only adapt, but thrive
in the evolving landscape of digital nomads and increasingly fluid definitions of the workplace.

Page | 25
APPENDICES

APPENDIX-I

Leadership assessment and ideology questionnaire

Pre Hybrid Working Model Post Hybrid Working Model

To what extent do you agree that leadership To what extent do you agree that leadership
visibility and communication were effective in visibility and communication are effective in
the traditional office setting? the current hybrid work setting?

How confident are you in the ability of How confident are you in the ability of
leadership to adapt and manage the firm's leadership to adapt and manage the firm's
operations during the pre-hybrid working operations in the current hybrid work model?
model?

On a scale from 1 to 9, how would you rate the On a scale from 1 to 9, how would you rate the
overall firm performance in terms of overall firm performance in terms of
productivity, efficiency, and impact before the productivity, efficiency, and impact after the
introduction of the hybrid work model? introduction of the hybrid work model?

To what extent did leadership strategies To what extent have leadership strategies
contribute to a positive work culture before the contributed to maintaining a positive work
adoption of hybrid work? culture in the post-hybrid work environment?

To what extent did you feel that leadership in To what extent do you feel that leadership in
the traditional office setting effectively the current hybrid work setting effectively
established accountability mechanisms and establishes accountability mechanisms and
provided tools to monitor and track individual provides tools to monitor and track individual
and team performance? and team performance?

Page | 26
Employee performance & satisfaction questionnaire:
Pre Hybrid Working Model Post Hybrid Working Model

How satisfied were you with the work-life balance How satisfied are you with the current work-life
in the traditional office setting? balance in the hybrid work setting?

To what extent did the office environment To what extent does the flexibility of the hybrid
contribute to your job satisfaction before the work model contribute to your current job
introduction of the hybrid work model? satisfaction?

How likely were you to recommend your workplace How likely are you to recommend your workplace
to others before the adoption of hybrid work? to others in the current hybrid work environment?

How would you rate your perceived level of How would you rate your perceived level of
productivity and impact on projects in the productivity and impact on projects in the current
traditional office setting? hybrid work setting?

To what extent did the opportunities for career How has the perception of opportunities for
progression and professional growth in the career progression and professional growth in the
traditional office setting influence your perception current hybrid work setting influenced your views
of promotion and rewards, and subsequently, your on promotion, rewards, and your intention to stay
intention to stay with the firm? with the firm?

Page | 27
Internal firm outcomes questionnaire:

Pre Hybrid Working Model Post Hybrid Working Model

To what extent did in-person collaboration To what extent does virtual collaboration contribute
contribute to innovative solutions and ideas in to innovative solutions and ideas in the current
the traditional office setting? hybrid work setting?

How effective were traditional training and How effective are virtual or remote training and
development programs in upskilling employees development programs in upskilling employees in
before the introduction of the hybrid work the current hybrid work model?
model?

On a scale from 1 to 9, how would you rate the On a scale from 1 to 9, how would you rate the level
level of collaboration and teamwork in the pre- of collaboration and teamwork in the post-hybrid
hybrid working model? working model?

To what extent did physical proximity To what extent do virtual collaboration tools and
contribute to the generation of innovative ideas platforms contribute to the generation of innovative
and projects in the pre-hybrid working model? ideas and projects in the current hybrid work
environment?

To what extent did informal, in-person social How have virtual or remote social activities (e.g.,
activities (e.g., team outings, workshops, or online team-building events, virtual workshops, or
gatherings) contribute to a positive and informal virtual gatherings) contributed to
collaborative work environment in the maintaining a positive and collaborative work
traditional office setting? environment in the current hybrid work model?

Page | 28
APPENDIX-II

Internal firm outcomes qualitative survey

Table of FGD participants

Work Experience
Respondents Designation (in years) Field of activity Company

R1 Consultant 4 IT and services PwC

R2 Senior Consultant 5.5 IT and services PwC

R3 Senior Consultant 6 IT and services PwC

R4 Consultant 4 IT and services PwC

R5 Manager 11 IT and services PwC

Page | 29
 Table of FGD structure and questions

Introduction
Purpose: Study the impact of hybrid work on internal firm outcome

Upskilling, L&D

1 How has your firm's approach to employee upskilling and learning & development
changed since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic?

2 What challenges did your firm face in delivering training and development
programs during the pandemic, and how were they addressed?

3 Have you noticed a shift in the types of skills or training that employees seek or
require post-COVID-19?

4 How has the adoption of remote or hybrid work models affected your firm's
learning and development initiatives?

Innovation

5 Did the COVID-19 pandemic accelerate innovation within your firm? If so, in what
ways?

6 How did your firm adapt its innovation processes to the challenges posed by the
pandemic?

7 Can you provide examples of innovations in project management and collaboration

that were a direct response to the pandemic and their impact on your firm's
operations or market position?

8 Has there been a change in the focus areas of innovation within your firm post-
COVID-19?

Informal Social Activities

9 How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected informal social activities at your
company?

10 What strategies did your firm employ to maintain a sense of community and social
interaction among employees during periods of remote work?

11 Have you noticed any long-term changes in the way employees engage in informal
social activities as a result of the pandemic?

12 How important do you think informal social activities are in the current work
environment compared to the pre-COVID-19 era?

Page | 30
GLOSSARY

Page | 31
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (2023, April 24). Leadership Strategies for the Hybrid
Workforce | MIT Sloan Management Review. MIT Sloan Management Review.
https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/leadership-strategies-for-the-hybrid-workforce/
2. He, E. (2023, February 23). Survey: Employees Want Business Technologies to be More
Collaborative. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2023/02/survey-employees-want-
business-technologies-to-be-more-collaborative
3. Power, R. (2022, February 6). Are you innovative enough? A hybrid setup could help you do more.
Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/rhettpower/2022/02/06/are-you-innovative-enough-a-
hybrid-setup-could-help-you-do-more/?sh=58191f37a7d3
4. Hughes, N. (2022, September 19). Making hybrid work. Grant Thornton Northern Ireland.
https://www.grantthorntonni.com/insights/articles/making-hybrid-work/
5. Forecast analysis: Digital Business Consulting Services, Worldwide. (n.d.). Gartner.
https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/3994057
6. Gownder, J. (2022, October 13). Hybrid work requires experimentation. Forrester.
https://www.forrester.com/blogs/hybrid-work-requires-experimentation/
7. Future Forum(2021).Future Forum’s Remote Employee Experience Index. (n.d.).
https://futureforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/21SLA0003-Future-Forum-White-Paper-
AC-FIN.pdf
8. Productivity has risen with remote/hybrid working, but worker trust may pose a larger challenge:
PwC survey. (n.d.). PwC. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/news-room/press-releases/2021/pwc-
future-of-work-survey-2021.html
9. Survey Shows Employees Felt Surprisingly Productive During COVID-19. (n.d.). BCG Global.
https://www.bcg.com/press/11august2020-survey-shows-employees-felt-surprisingly-productive-
during-covid-19
10. Does Hybrid Work Actually Work? Insights from 30,000 Emails. (2022, September 6). HBS Working
Knowledge. https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/does-hybrid-work-actually-work-insights-from-30000-
emails
11. Aprilina, Rizky & Martdianty, Fanny. (2023). The Role of Hybrid-Working in Improving Employees'
Satisfaction, Perceived Productivity, and Organizations' Capabilities. Jurnal Manajemen Teori dan
Terapan | Journal of Theory and Applied Management. 16. 206-222. 10.20473/jmtt.v16i2.45632.
12. Wigert, B. B. (2023, July 21). The Future of Hybrid Work: 5 Key Questions Answered With Data.
Gallup.com. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/390632/future-hybrid-work-key-questions-
answered-data.aspx
13. White, B. B. W. A. J. (2023, July 21). The Advantages and Challenges of Hybrid Work. Gallup.com.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/398135/advantages-challenges-hybrid-work.aspx
14. Santillan, Edfel & Santillan, Effel & Doringo, Joel & Pigao, Kevin & Mesina, Von. (2023). Assessing
the Impact of a Hybrid Work Model on Job Execution, Work-Life Balance, and Employee Satisfaction
in a Technology Company. Journal of Business and Management Studies. 5. 13-38.
10.32996/jbms.2023.5.6.2.
15. 2023 Learnings: 37 Hybrid Work Statistics to Remember | Gable. (n.d.).
https://www.gable.to/blog/post/hybrid-work-statistics

Page | 32
16. Corporation, D. (2022, May 4). How Hybrid Work Can Enhance Work Satisfaction and Productivity.
Deskpass. https://www.deskpass.com/resources/hybrid-work/how-hybrid-work-can-enhance-
work-satisfaction-and-productivity

Page | 33