Hybrid Has to Be Equity-Aware
One of the biggest risks with hybrid work is that it can quietly reinforce inequity. When some people are remote and Five years after the pandemic forced a sector-wide shift to remote work, many nonprofits are still trying to figure out what comes next. Some organizations returned to the office. Others never looked back. And most have landed somewhere in between: hybrid.
The challenge? Hybrid sounds like a compromise. In practice, it’s often just confusion.
In theory, hybrid work should offer the best of both worlds—flexibility, connection, and access. But in reality, many nonprofits are stuck with unclear expectations, inconsistent norms, cultural drift, and teams working in silos. That’s because most hybrid models aren’t designed—they’re inherited.
The issue isn’t hybrid itself. It’s the lack of definition. Without clarity on what hybrid actually means—for your team, your programs, and your mission delivery—it becomes one more source of friction.
If you’re treating hybrid as a half-step between remote and in-person, you’re missing the opportunity to build something that truly works.
The Myth of Flexibility Without Structure
Hybrid policies are often rolled out in the name of flexibility—which is a good thing. But flexibility without structure just creates confusion.
Here’s what I’ve seen when organizations skip the design step:
- Teams default to in-person meetings that leave remote colleagues out
- Norms around responsiveness and availability vary wildly
- Tools like Slack, Zoom, and email are used inconsistently, creating silos
- New hires struggle to get oriented without a clear picture of how decisions are made
At a regional nonprofit navigating a hybrid transition, things started loosely—teams were told to “work from wherever made sense.” What followed wasn’t flexibility. It was fragmentation. Without shared expectations, each manager made up their own rules. Some enforced strict 9-to-5 video presence. Others leaned into async work. Staff were left guessing who was working when, how collaboration was supposed to happen, and where decisions were being tracked.
Over time, frustrations built up. Office-based staff felt remote colleagues weren’t pulling their weight. Remote staff felt overlooked. Promotions and high-visibility projects started skewing toward those who showed up in person.
What they needed wasn’t a stricter attendance policy. They needed alignment—clear norms around communication, decision-making, and accountability—so flexibility didn’t come at the expense of trust.
Hybrid Isn’t a Location Policy. It’s an Operating Model.
The most effective hybrid organizations don’t just define where work happens. They define how work happens.
That includes:
- Norms for communication tools (Slack vs. email vs. meetings)
- Expectations around availability, documentation, and responsiveness
- Onboarding processes that work for both remote and on-site staff
- Systems that make work visible, regardless of where it’s happening
- Shared rhythms for check-ins, team meetings, and planning cycles
A national nonprofit I worked with approached hybrid as an operations issue—not just an HR one. They didn’t settle for a vague “work from anywhere” policy. Instead, they rolled out a full hybrid playbook that defined meeting types, documentation expectations, and even when in-person collaboration was most valuable. It gave people structure to rely on—and space to work confidently, no matter where they sat.
Hybrid can support autonomy. But only when the scaffolding is solid.
others are in the room, power and access start to tilt.
In hybrid models without safeguards, it’s often those with more visibility—those physically present—who get more opportunities, more recognition, and more influence. And that can erode trust fast, especially among early-career staff, part-timers, and those with caregiving responsibilities.
That’s why equity can’t be an afterthought in hybrid design. It has to be built into the structure:
- Rotate who runs meetings and who facilitates check-ins
- Keep all-hands meetings remote-first, even if some staff are in the office
- Equalize access to leadership through structured one-on-ones and shared documentation
- Ensure onboarding doesn’t assume office presence to build relationships or learn the ropes
Hybrid equity isn’t about treating everyone the same. It’s about giving everyone the same access to clarity, connection, and opportunity—wherever they are.
Culture Doesn’t Just Happen—It’s Built
There’s a common fear that hybrid work will dilute culture. And if left unattended, it absolutely can.
But physical presence doesn’t automatically build culture either. I’ve seen more misalignment in crowded offices than in some of the best-designed hybrid teams.
Culture isn’t about where people sit. It’s about what your organization values—and whether those values show up in your daily rhythms.
At one organization, culture-building didn’t mean more happy hours. It meant small, intentional rituals—like a “Monday Momentum” thread where staff shared something they were proud of that week. It took five minutes, but helped people stay connected and visible across locations.
The strongest hybrid cultures I’ve seen are the ones that:
- Celebrate wins visibly
- Document and revisit team rituals
- Build structured space for informal connection
- Normalize async praise, feedback, and leadership visibility
None of this needs to be elaborate. It just needs to be consistent.
Program Delivery in a Hybrid World
For nonprofits delivering face-to-face services, hybrid work doesn’t mean every role is hybrid. But it does mean your systems should support everyone—whether they’re in the field, at a desk, or somewhere in between.
That includes:
- CRMs that allow shared visibility across roles
- Scheduling tools that accommodate both fixed site hours and flexible admin work
- Program design processes that include virtual and in-person contributors
- Operational tools that support mobile delivery—like tablets and cloud-based tracking
A community health organization I supported ran in-person programs in rural areas while keeping their admin and leadership teams fully remote. What made it work wasn’t a policy—it was integration. Field data flowed into a centralized system. Support staff were available on-call. Communication loops were designed to work across time zones and geographies. They didn’t pretend everyone’s job looked the same. But they built systems that kept everyone aligned.
Hybrid doesn’t have to be symmetrical. It just has to be coherent.
Leadership Visibility Looks Different in Hybrid
In a physical office, leadership presence can be passive. You walk through, you’re seen, people feel connected.
In a hybrid model, presence has to be designed.
Effective hybrid leaders don’t micromanage—but they do make themselves visible in intentional ways:
- They show up in shared channels, consistently
- They document decisions and share context proactively
- They model the norms they want to see—especially around communication and responsiveness
- They create space for input and reflection, not just status updates
Leadership in hybrid work isn’t about control. It’s about clarity. And when done well, it builds trust that stretches across distance.
Rethinking What Belongs In-Person
Hybrid also gives organizations a chance to rethink why they come together in person—not just when.
I often ask teams: “If we only had two days together each quarter, how would we use them?”
Most answers have nothing to do with reports or project trackers. They center around:
- Strategic planning
- Relationship building
- Creative problem-solving
- Celebrating wins and learning from setbacks
- Cross-team learning and reflection
One team I worked with blocked three in-person retreats each year—focused on collaboration, alignment, and resetting priorities. They didn’t meet often, but when they did, it mattered. Their remote operations stayed lighter because trust and alignment were deliberately refreshed.
In-person time doesn’t need to be constant. But it should be intentional.
Final Thought
Most hybrid setups weren’t really designed—they just evolved. A few people come in, a few stay remote, and everyone does their best to make it work. But “making it work” shouldn’t mean guessing.
Hybrid can absolutely support great teamwork and strong mission delivery—but only when it’s built on clear norms, shared systems, and a structure that fits the way your organization actually operates.
If your team is ready to make hybrid more intentional—and a lot less stressful—I’d be glad to help. It doesn’t take a full overhaul. Just the right adjustments in the right places can make all the difference.
I also dive deeper into this in my upcoming book, Remote Operations Uncovered: The Essentials No One Told You—And How to Get It Right, releasing in July 2025. It’s a complete guide to running high-functioning, mission-driven organizations in a remote or hybrid world—covering everything from systems and structure to communication, culture, and accountability.
