The term "hybrid work"​ is getting f'd up

When we say the "future of work is hybrid" we don't mean only remote/in person. That is a truly limited view of how hybrid the world is and is becoming.

Something crazy is happening.

The term "hybrid work" is being stigmatized into a one-dimensional definition.

In other words, its getting all f'd up!

The whole bloody phrase is being shoved into a box!

First, a short story that happened to me this week to set the stage

SCENE: I get an email to be a potential speaker at a conference for HR specialists. The conference organizer requests a meeting to get to know me and my topic before making a decision. I send over a preliminary title and overview of my talk.

Here's a paraphrased version of our tense 30-minute meeting:

CONFERENCE ORGANIZER (CO): We can't let you use the word hybrid in the title of your talk. That word means something different to this audience. They won't understand your meaning. They'll feel it's a bait and switch from what they're expecting. They want to know about policies and strategies to implement hybrid work--people working remote/in person.

ME: I'm happy to rework the title, but my topic is not about hybrid workplaces or styles. I think it's actually beneficial for your audience to realize the broader concept of hybridity within an organization, which includes hybrid workplaces, hybrid jobs, and hybrid talent, among other aspects like products, management, and teams. I'd like to expand the definition for them and build more awareness. Otherwise, aren't they missing the bigger picture?

CO: Haven't you had this friction with other conferences? Aren't other people skeptical about your use of the word hybrid? Right now, people just want to know how to do hybrid work right. In other years, your topic would be fine, but not right now.

ME: If the future of work is hybrid, and if keeping up with a changing society and workforce is something your audience cares about, then isn't it imperative they understand the full landscape of hybridity? It's not just about how people do hybrid work better, the current state is also about understanding how to hire, manage, and retain hybrid talent and create hybrid jobs. It's all interconnected. These sides of the conversation are absent. That's why people bring me in. Groups want me to share my perspective and research because they see it's important to the future of work.

....end scene.

And, an hour later, to my surprise and delight, they emailed me and said they'd like me to come speak.

...Back to the main point

We've entered a bizarre moment in the hybrid work era where "hybrid work" only means one thing.

The word hybrid is being tainted and pigeonholed.

I'm even being told not to use it the way I'm using it!

Rewind three years ago: I had a google alert set for "hybrid work" and it hardly ever triggered results. When it did, they were mostly about hybrid cars or hybrid energy.

Today: I get notifications daily with news stories declaring the latest policy, practices, and strategies for hybrid work. Except, each use of the term "hybrid work" only refers to remote/in person working conditions.

What happened?

We've hit a dilemma of semantics and accurate communication.

The term "hybrid work" is being used too narrowly. We're misconstruing and entirely missing the bigger picture of the variety of hybridity that exists within work from structures and products to roles and talent.

Hybrid work means much, much more than where a position is located.

Even more concerning, is this bit of news.

This past week, LinkedIn announced:

Job seekers can filter for hybrid, on-site and remote positions in the professional network’s job search tool and indicate their preferences on their profiles via the Open to Work feature.

(Click here to read the full article)

The reason this is problematic is that it reinforces a narrow definition of hybrid work and perpetuates this meaning to the 774+ million people globally who use LinkedIn! (Yes, that's the real stat)

This is a problem.

Additionally, it might also affect the algorithm. Will LinkedIn search results get skewed to favor the location of work as being hybrid instead of the myriad of other ways hybridity is key to the work itself or the type of talent people are searching for?

Take a look at my favorite job posting by Jump Associates. I found this on LinkedIn because they were seeking a hybrid thinker. This is a screenshot I took over a year ago.

Imagine how this might get lost in the shuffle if LinkedIn reprioritizes how it's algorithm "sees" the term hybrid:

We (all 774+ million LinkedIn users) need to realize hybridity is a criteria that can exist within MANY structures and elements of work.

Hybridity entails where we work, how we work, who does the work, and what we create when we work together.

Hybridity is a multifaceted concept.

I propose a better solution for LinkedIn. They should add hybridity as an element of searching/filtering across many categories such as:

• location of work: remote /on-site /hybrid= where the work happens

• style of work: in person, virtual, hybrid= for the majority of time spent working, how the work is expected to be done

• how hybrid the work is: none or traditional/ some or moderate/ highly hybrid= there are a number of factors to consider here, but work exists on a scale from not hybrid to highly hybrid (usually this is work that requires deep expertise in an area only humans can do and an ability to work with technology or AI to achieve more complex results)

• type of work (in the job posting): traditional or hybrid= this is a description of the job to be done. If it's hybrid, it would need to be reinforced by terms in the job description such as interdisciplinary, cross-functional, internal/external responsibility, dual reporting, hybridized functionality (like BizDevOps support), specialized human skills + AI/robotics interaction, etc.

• qualifications/ requirements: traditional or hybrid= traditional would state "at least X years of experience in the following areas" whereas hybrid would state "at least X years of experience working at the intersection of A, B, and C"

• who does the work: an expert, generalist, or hybrid (person who works at the intersection of multiple professional identities)

• ...what else would you add?

Just last week, I talked with someone who's interested in a LinkedIn badge to designate she's a hybrid professional. I'm looking into this!

What else would you suggest LinkedIn should add in terms of showcasing hybridity beyond its narrow definition?

What are your thoughts on the definition of hybrid work? Is it too narrowly focused?

Do share your thoughts by reply to me here.