Remote employees are less likely to be promoted, recognized, or heard in hybrid meetings than colleagues sitting in the room, according to recent workplace research. The cause has a name: proximity bias. Fixing it starts with how meetings are designed, not just where people sit.
Is Proximity Bias Real, and What Does It Cost Remote Employees?
Multiple independent surveys point the same way: people who are physically visible tend to be noticed, mentored, and promoted more often, quietly and regardless of actual output.
A 2025 Paycor article on proximity bias found that it continues to give in-person workers greater access to recognition, high-profile projects, and advancement opportunities, and Agilus, the Canadian staffing firm that summarized it, adds that even in organizations that prioritize inclusion, employees who spend more time in the office remain more visible to leadership. That builds on Envoy's earlier 2022 workplace survey, which found that 96% of executives admit they are more likely to notice contributions made in the office than those completed remotely, despite many employees believing their efforts are equally visible.
In practice, this means two equally strong performers can end up on very different career paths simply because one sits closer to the decision makers.
Does Hybrid Work Actually Boost Employee Engagement?
It depends on the mix, but the data favors flexibility over rigid mandates. As of May 2026, exclusively remote employees have the highest engagement rate at 37%, followed by hybrid employees at 34% and in-office employees in remote-capable jobs at 29%, according to Gallup's hybrid work indicator.
| Work location | Engagement rate (Gallup, May 2026) |
|---|---|
| Hybrid | 34% |
| Fully remote | 37% |
| Fully in-office (remote-capable jobs) | 29% |
Gallup's analysis also found that hybrid work models work best when teams, not individuals, decide the rules for scheduling and coordination, since shared norms make people more productive and less anxious than top-down mandates.
Do Return to Office Mandates Actually Improve Performance?
The evidence says mostly no, and they carry real costs. After implementing return-to-office mandates, S&P 500 companies experienced abnormally high employee turnover and longer time-to-hire when filling job vacancies, according to University of Pittsburgh research. On average, the time to fill job vacancies increased 23%, and the hire rate decreased 17% after RTO mandates, with the increase in turnover more pronounced among women, senior employees, and more skilled workers.
Separate data reinforces the pattern: companies with strict RTO policies had roughly 13% higher turnover (169% versus 149%) and were twice as likely to say turnover had increased, compared with companies whose policies stayed flexible.
| RTO impact metric | Change after mandate |
|---|---|
| Time to fill vacancies | +23% |
| Hire rate | -17% |
| Turnover (strict RTO vs. flexible) | 169% vs. 149% |
In an earlier 2024 study, the same researchers concluded that RTO mandates not only hurt employee satisfaction but also failed to boost company profits, noting that their findings were consistent with employees' concerns that "managers use RTO for power grabbing and blaming employees for poor performance."
Is Zoom Fatigue Still a Real "Employee Experience" Problem in 2026?
It is more nuanced than the 2021 headlines suggested. Stanford University researchers argued that video meetings demand greater cognitive processing than in-person meetings, largely because participants must manage their own image, read social cues that come across as flat, and stay "on camera" for extended periods.
However, a more recent study published in the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology suggests the phenomenon may have faded: the findings indicate that video meetings are no longer significantly more exhausting than other types of meetings for most employees in the post-pandemic workplace. The takeaway for employers is that fatigue risk depends heavily on meeting design, camera norms, and meeting length, not the platform itself.
How Can Employers Build More Equitable Hybrid Meetings?
Meeting equity, giving remote and in-office participants an equal shot at being seen and heard, is a fixable design problem, not an inevitable side effect of hybrid work. Jabra's research found that 61% of employees say they feel more engaged in meetings when everyone attending has their camera turned on, and 70% say standardized professional video cameras would help meeting participants take part on equal terms.
- Give every attendee their own camera tile, even people sitting in the same conference room, so no one is reduced to a shared wide shot.
- Let teams, not managers alone, set shared norms for cameras, response times, and meeting structure.
- Capture decisions in a shared, real-time log during the meeting, not in a hallway conversation afterward.
- Rotate who joins remotely, including leaders, so proximity advantage does not always sit with the same people.
- Tie recognition and promotion criteria to documented outcomes, not to who leaders remember seeing most.
FAQ
Does working remotely hurt your chances of a promotion?
It can, but the likelier cause is proximity bias rather than any real gap in performance. Research from Paycor and Envoy shows executives and managers are more likely to notice, remember, and reward contributions they witnessed in person, which can put remote employees at a disadvantage without anyone noticing, even when their output is equal or stronger.
Are return-to-office mandates actually increasing productivity?
The available research does not support that claim. University of Pittsburgh researchers found RTO mandates raised turnover and slowed hiring at S&P 500 firms without a corresponding profit benefit, and other data shows companies with strict RTO policies report higher turnover than companies with flexible arrangements.
What is proximity bias in hybrid meetings?
Proximity bias is the tendency for managers and colleagues to favor, trust, and remember people they physically see more often, which in hybrid teams usually means in-office employees get more visibility, mentorship, and advancement opportunities than equally capable remote colleagues.
Is Zoom fatigue still a real problem in 2026?
It is more situational than universal at this point. Older research, including Stanford's nonverbal overload analysis, argued that video meetings demand more cognitive effort than in-person ones, but a newer 2025 study found the exhaustion effect has largely faded for many workers, suggesting fatigue now depends more on meeting length and camera norms than the platform itself.
How can companies make hybrid meetings more equitable?
The most effective fixes are structural: give every participant an individual camera tile, let teams set their own hybrid norms instead of imposing them top down, log decisions in real time so remote employees are not briefed after the fact, and base recognition on documented outcomes rather than in-person visibility.
Meeting equity is just one window into your employee experience. If you are curious where your teamwork, leadership, or organization as a whole could grow, book a free consultation. We'll look at where you are today and point you to the changes that matter most. Book your free consultation
Disclaimer: This article summarizes third-party research and industry surveys for general informational purposes and is not legal, HR, or organizational design advice. Figures reflect the sources and capture dates listed below and may change as new research is published.
Sources:
- Gallup, "Indicator: Hybrid Work" (engagement by work location, May 2026 data), captured September 26, 2026
- HR Dive, "RTO mandates lead to 'brain drain' attrition, researchers say," December 9, 2024, captured August 28, 2026
- Archie App, "Return-to-Office Statistics, Research & Trends," citing ZipRecruiter data, captured August 28, 2026
- Agilus, "Proximity Bias in Hybrid Work: Stay Visible and Get Promoted," citing Paycor 2025 and Envoy 2022 surveys, captured August 28, 2026
- Jabra, "Meeting equity, explained," captured August 28, 2026
- Atlassian, "Science just confirmed what you already knew: Zoom fatigue is real," citing Stanford University research, captured August 28, 2026
- PsyPost, "New study suggests 'Zoom fatigue' is largely gone in the post-pandemic workplace," captured August 28, 2026
- HR Dive, "Gallup: Hybrid work rates have stabilized, and flexibility is key," captured August 28, 2026