Flexible work arrangements currently edge out fully in office work on employee experience measures. Gallup's May 2026 hybrid work indicator finds exclusively remote employees report the highest engagement and hybrid employees the highest share who say they are thriving, though the gap between the two is a few percentage points and manager quality matters more than location.
What does the data actually say about work location and engagement?
The clearest recent comparison comes from Gallup's hybrid work indicator, which tracks engagement across remote, hybrid, and on-site U.S. employees. As of May 2026, exclusively remote employees have the highest engagement rate at 37%, followed by hybrid employees at 34% and on-site employees in remote-capable jobs at 29%. On the thriving measure the order flips: 54% of hybrid employees say they are thriving, compared with 52% of remote employees and 49% of on-site workers.
| Work model (Gallup, May 2026) | Engaged | Thriving |
|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | 34% | 54% |
| Fully remote | 37% | 52% |
| Fully in office (remote-capable jobs) | 29% | 49% |
The bigger story sits underneath those percentages. Gallup's annual State of the Global Workplace report found that just over half of employees in North America are not engaged (51%), meaning they are uninspired by their work and do the bare minimum, and 16% are actively disengaged and seeking a new employer. Globally, that disengagement is expensive: employee disengagement accounts for $8.9 trillion in lost productivity worldwide. So the honest read of the data is that flexible arrangements have a small edge, but the much larger problem is a workforce that is disengaged regardless of where people sit.
Why does flexible work still win, even with Zoom fatigue in the mix?
Part of the answer is what Microsoft's Work Trend Index calls the hybrid paradox: people want the flexibility to work from anywhere, but they simultaneously crave more in-person connection. Fully remote setups solve for flexibility but can starve that need for connection. Fully in office setups solve for connection but remove the flexibility employees have come to expect. Hybrid, done well, is an attempt to get both.
There is also harder evidence that hybrid does not cost companies anything on output. A randomized controlled trial of 1,612 employees at Trip.com, published in Nature and led by Stanford economist Nicholas Bloom, found that employees who work from home for two days a week are just as productive and as likely to be promoted as their fully office based peers. On the retention side, resignations fell by 33% among workers who shifted from full-time office work to a hybrid schedule, with the biggest gains among women, non-managers, and employees with long commutes. That combination, unchanged output plus a meaningfully lower quit rate, is why hybrid keeps showing up as the safer default in the research.
Is video meeting overload quietly hurting employee experience?
Yes, and it is measurable. Stanford's Virtual Human Interaction Lab, led by Jeremy Bailenson, examined the psychological consequences of spending hours per day on platforms like Zoom and identified nonverbal overload as a root cause of video call fatigue. The underlying mechanisms include close-up eye gaze, the cognitive load of producing and reading nonverbal cues, the all-day mirror of watching your own face, and reduced mobility, all of which are absent in a normal in-person conversation.
Microsoft's own telemetry backs this up at scale. The company found that the number of meetings per week had increased by 153% globally for the average Teams user since the start of the pandemic, with no indication the trend has reversed. More recently, Microsoft's data shows meetings after 8pm are up 16% year over year, with global and flexible teams accounting for much of the increase, evidence of a workday that now stretches into what Microsoft calls a triple peak pattern. None of that is unique to Zoom specifically; it is a structural feature of video-first collaboration that hybrid and remote employers need to actively manage rather than assume will self-correct.
What matters more than the work model: manager quality or location?
The data is fairly blunt on this. In Owl Labs' 2024 State of Hybrid Work report, about 92% of employees rank having an MVP manager as the most important factor in their work lives, which is just two percentage points behind the share of employees who named compensation as their top priority (94%). That same data suggests employees value managerial support nearly as much as their paychecks and even more than their healthcare benefits. The 2025 edition of the same report found a supportive manager remains a top workplace factor for 89% of employees, even as overall stress has risen and 68% of parents are concerned that caregiving responsibilities could affect their job performance.
Put together, location explains a few percentage points of difference in engagement and thriving. Manager quality and caregiving support explain far more of whether an employee has a good or bad experience, on Zoom or in the building.
How can employers design a better employee experience across Zoom and in-person work?
- Cap back-to-back video meetings and build in breaks to reduce nonverbal overload and self-monitoring strain.
- Protect in-person days for connection and mentoring rather than solo focus work.
- Invest in manager training over office mandates; supportive managers move the needle more than location.
- Set explicit norms against after-hours meetings and messages to stop the triple peak day from becoming permanent.
- Build caregiving-aware policies given how many working parents already worry about the conflict.
FAQ
Is hybrid work better than fully remote for employee experience?
On Gallup's May 2026 indicator, exclusively remote employees report slightly higher engagement (37% versus 34%) while hybrid employees report slightly higher thriving (54% versus 52%). The gap between the two is a few percentage points, not a dramatic difference, so manager quality and workload design usually matter more than the hybrid versus remote choice itself.
Does returning to the office full time improve engagement?
The data does not support that. Gallup's May 2026 indicator shows fully in-office employees have the lowest engagement (29%) and the lowest share reporting they are thriving (49%) of the three groups measured, while a large randomized trial found no performance benefit to five-day office attendance compared with a hybrid schedule.
Why do video meetings feel more draining than in-person meetings?
Stanford researchers point to nonverbal overload, the strain of constant close-up eye contact, seeing your own face on screen, and reduced physical movement, as core drivers of video call fatigue that do not occur in a normal face-to-face conversation.
What has the biggest impact on employee experience if not location?
Manager quality. Owl Labs data shows employees rank having a supportive manager nearly as high as compensation and above healthcare benefits when asked what matters most in their work lives, regardless of whether they work remote, hybrid, or in office.
Where people work is just one part of the 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 workplace research for general informational purposes and is not a substitute for organizational psychology or legal advice. Figures are drawn from the sources below as captured on the noted dates and may change as newer reports are released.
Sources:
- Gallup, "Indicator: Hybrid Work" (engagement and thriving by work model, May 2026 data), captured September 26, 2026
- Gallup 2024 State of the Global Workplace, via Facilities Dive, "Hybrid employees show higher rates of workplace engagement," captured July 1, 2024
- Gallup 2024 State of the Global Workplace, via NAIOP (now CREDA), "Gallup Report Indicates Need for In-Person, Engaged Workplaces," captured June 27, 2024
- Gallup 2024 State of the Global Workplace, via Sociabble, "Gallup's State of the Global Workplace 2024 Report: Key Findings," captured May 15, 2025
- Owl Labs, "State of Hybrid Work Report" 2024, via Business Wire, captured September 24, 2024
- Owl Labs, "State of Hybrid Work 2025," captured August 28, 2026
- Microsoft Work Trend Index, "Hybrid Work Is Just Work. Are We Doing It Wrong?" captured September 22, 2022
- Microsoft WorkLab, "Breaking down the infinite workday," captured August 28, 2026
- Microsoft Work Trend Index, "To Thrive in Hybrid Work, Support Flexibility in Work Styles," captured September 9, 2021
- Bailenson, J., "Nonverbal Overload: A Theoretical Argument for the Causes of Zoom Fatigue," Technology, Mind, and Behavior, captured March 6, 2026
- Bloom, N., Han, R., Liang, J., "Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance," Nature, captured June 12, 2024