The choice advantage: Autonomy over amenity

Hybrid working, Workplace experience, Productivity, Wellbeing

The Problem: Hybrid - How does it work?

Hybrid working is the dominant workstyle, but it doesn’t have an instruction manual, leaving many strategies stuck between what others are doing - the latest trendy office amenities designers are often pushing - and what teams actually need.

Workplace leaders are caught in a difficult tug-of-war between what the business needs and what works best for employees. Team culture and collaboration are essential, but unpopular mandates based on ‘gut feeling’ (instead of data) create friction and frustration. Employees feel forced back into offices only to spend their day on remote calls, while leaders struggle to justify the cost of physical space that no longer seems to drive performance.

The solution: The ‘Autonomy over amenity’ approach

Dr Madi Hanc’s PhD research at University College London (UCL) examined the effects of flexible working on productivity and wellbeing at a time when hybrid working was still a niche perk (2015–2019). The research found a surprising solution that directly addresses the 2026 hybrid debates:

Flexibility over work location and schedule was associated with employee wellbeing and learning. Surprisingly, the quality of the work environments was not a statistically significant factor.

Key findings (the longer read):

Choice is associated with wellbeing: Employees with the highest degree of agency over when and where they worked reported the most significant levels of wellbeing.
Time choice is associated with productivity: Greater control over work schedules empowered employees to achieve higher cognitive scores on a cognitive testing app over a week, suggesting that they learned more easily.
Autonomy over amenity: Surprisingly, the physical quality of work environments showed no significant association with productivity or wellbeing, suggesting that the ability to choose a space is far more impactful than the space itself.

Methodology and research sponsors:

The research methodology moved beyond static lab surveys and into the real-world environments where work actually happens. Participants included employees with various degrees of choice over where and when they could work.

Real-time tracking in natural environments: The study used an ecological momentary assessment (EMA) approach to measure variables in participants' actual workspaces over five working days.
Cognitive performance testing and an established wellbeing scale: Participants completed daily digital questionnaires and cognitive tasks via a smartphone app to measure productivity and wellbeing as they worked. The short Warwick-Edinburgh mental wellbeing scale (SWEMWBS) was used to measure wellbeing.
The sample: The findings are based on 136 unique study participants from 10 organisations across the financial, technology, and real estate sectors. A core group of 50 to 66 individuals provided the complete data needed for the cognitive and wellbeing analysis.

Research sponsors: This research was supervised by Professor Alexi Marmot and sponsored by industry leaders from Cushman and Wakefield, RBS, CoreNet Global, and British Land, whom the author gratefully acknowledges.