The Hidden Cost of Managerial Bias in Remote Work: How Outdated Leadership is Undermining Productivity

The Hidden Tax on Your Organization

Imagine a hidden tax draining your organization of its most valuable assets. This tax does not appear on any financial statement, yet it quietly saps productivity, fuels turnover, and stifles innovation. It is the tax of outdated managerial intuition, a toll exacted on employees who dare to work outside the traditional office walls.

The Shocking Reality of Proximity Bias

A groundbreaking 2025 peer-reviewed study published in Work, Employment and Society reveals the deep-seated nature of proximity bias — the tendency of leaders to favor employees who are physically closer to them at the expense of flexible workers. This bias often leads managers to penalize their most effective people, thus directly sabotaging their workplaces.

The Flawed Mental Shortcuts of Managers

The research, involving nearly 1,000 UK managers, uncovers the flawed mental shortcuts and discriminatory patterns that cloud professional judgment. These managers are making career-altering decisions based on gut feelings rather than objective results, failing to capitalize on the enormous benefits of flexible work.

The Damning Twist

The study shows that managers automatically assume hybrid workers — those who split time between home and the office — are less productive than their fully on-site colleagues. When performance information was not provided, hybrid workers faced a 7.7% lower probability of receiving a promotion and a 7.1% lower probability of getting a salary increase compared to office-based workers.

The Stunning Revelation

When managers were informed that a hybrid worker’s performance was identical to a similarly situated on-site worker, the penalty vanished entirely. This demonstrates that the disadvantage faced by hybrid workers is driven purely by a managerial assumption of underperformance, not by any actual difference in output.

The Insidious Bias Against Full-Time Remote Workers

Full-time remote workers face an even more insidious form of bias. Even when managers know a full-time remote employee performs just as well as an on-site one, they are still less likely to get a promotion or a raise. This penalty is almost entirely driven by the belief that full-time remote employees are simply less committed to their jobs.

The Toxic 'Ideal Worker' Norm

This proximity bias is rooted in the 'ideal worker' norm, a toxic and outdated expectation that employees signal devotion through constant availability and face time in the office. Choosing to work from home full-time directly violates this unwritten rule.

The Costly Misperceptions

Managers’ misperceptions look even costlier when set beside the hard business outcomes rolling in from national statistics and corporate trials. A six-month hybrid pilot reported in a peer-reviewed study in Nature cut attrition by 33% and shifted executives from skepticism to support after they witnessed a productivity increase.

The Intersection with Gender and Parenthood

The study’s most disturbing findings emerge when examining how these biases intersect with gender and parenthood, revealing a chaotic web of contradictory and discriminatory standards. Fathers and childless men who work from home face penalties because managers question both their performance and their commitment. Mothers, however, are trapped in a different, more complex bias.

The Path Forward

The path to a thriving modern workplace does not require forcing everyone back into a cubicle. It requires training managers to abandon their biases, manage by objectives, and build a culture based on the only thing that truly matters: tangible, measurable results.