Flexible working in insurance: what 116 insurers told us
Between 1 and 31 May 2024 we surveyed 116 UK insurance companies, with Insurance Times and Gerrard White, on one question: what is the objective and impact of your hybrid and flexible working policy? Most surveys on this subject ask employees what they want. We asked employers what their policy had done to hiring, quality of hire, productivity, wellbeing, culture and retention. This is what they told us. The findings are from 2024; the direction of travel since then is a question we would like to ask again.
The headline findings
Not everyone wants hybrid or flexible working, but almost everyone values having the choice. Most insurers offered flexibility in some form, and the ones that did not reported lower quality hires, fewer offers accepted and poorer staff wellbeing. The number of office days required affected applications, with three or more days the point at which numbers fell. Working from home did not reduce productivity in the companies we surveyed, and time apart did not damage culture where the company invested in keeping people connected. Retention was hardest for the least flexible organisations. And a large proportion of companies did not know what their policy was doing to any of these things.
How insurers were working in 2024
A third of the 116 companies had no mandatory office days. 12% required one day a week, 25% two, 22% three and only 8% four or five. Of the 78 companies that mandated at least one day, two-thirds let staff choose which day, and where a day was fixed, Thursday was the most common choice.
On hours, 43% offered flexible working around core hours, 38% dealt with requests individually and 15% had fixed hours. 65% applied the same hybrid policy to every employee and 51% applied the same flexible-hours policy to all staff; the rest varied by department, job title or individual. HR and the C-suite most commonly authorised the policy.
What the policy did to hiring
Applications fell most where the most office time was required. 30% of companies mandating four or five days reported a drop in applications, and more than half of companies with no mandatory days reported a rise. Offer acceptances followed the same pattern, falling where three to five days or fixed hours were required: 20% of four-or-five-day companies reported fewer acceptances. Quality of hire rose most under no days or one day combined with core-hours flex, and fell most at the two extremes, full-time office and fully remote.
The recruitment findings in full, with what to put in a job advert and what to do if you have to be office-based, are in our post on office policy, applications and retention.
What it did to productivity
Companies with no mandatory office days were among the most likely to report a productivity increase, at 55%. Companies requiring one day a week were the most likely of all: 64% reported an increase and 7% a decrease. A three-day mandate produced the weakest result, with 24% reporting a rise and 24% a fall. Fixed hours were associated with lower productivity (25% down against 19% up), while 51% of companies with core-hours flexibility reported an increase. The report's conclusion is that the assumption that people at home do less is not supported by the results.
What it did to wellbeing and culture
The fewer the mandated office days, the more likely a company was to report improved wellbeing. 38% of companies with fixed hours reported a decrease in wellbeing, and 40% of companies with a three-day mandate did. On culture and cohesion, companies expecting staff in one or two days a week were the most likely to report an improvement, and those requiring three or more days the least likely, with 36% of three-day companies reporting a decline. The report's caveat is that improving culture under a flexible policy takes investment and innovation to make up for less time together.
The productivity, wellbeing and culture findings, and how to measure your own policy, are in our post on productivity, wellbeing and culture.
What it did to retention
This was the clearest result in the survey. Half of the companies mandating four or five office days reported a fall in staff retention, and 44% of those with fixed hours did. The report's conclusion is that less flexible organisations will have to offer other benefits to compensate for their location and hours policies.
Where policies were heading
Compared with 2024, policies in 2023 had been less restrictive for 20% of companies. Looking to 2025, 19% expected their hybrid policy to become more restrictive, 5% less restrictive, 55% expected no change and 21% did not know. The report's warning is that tightening should be done cautiously, because the survey suggests the cost lands on hiring, retention, productivity and wellbeing at the same time.
What the report recommends
Measure the effect of your policy on hiring, quality of applicants, retention, productivity, wellbeing and culture, and involve the C-suite. Review every role for whether it can sensibly be hybrid with core-hours flexibility. Tell applicants the policy early in the process, with the actual days and hours rather than the words "hybrid" or "flexible". If some roles must be full-time in the office or on fixed hours, offset that with an attractive package. Remember that people want the choice more than any particular pattern. If the skills to build culture across a hybrid team are not in-house, bring them in. And if tighter rules are planned for next year, act with the measurements running.
Where Vermelo comes in
We hire into insurance businesses under every one of these policies, and our embedded recruitment teams report on the hiring effects as part of running the process: applications, offer acceptances and early retention, by working pattern. If you want to know what your policy is doing before you change it, start there: embedded talent from Vermelo, or see how we work with insurers on insurance recruitment solutions. For individual hires where the working pattern is part of the brief, our sister company Gerrard White recruits across the sector.
Download the full UK Insurance Working Policy Report 2024, or talk to us about your hiring.
About the survey
The UK Insurance Working Policy Report 2024 is based on an online survey run by Vermelo between 1 and 31 May 2024. Organisations were invited to take part by Insurance Times, Gerrard White and Vermelo, and 116 companies completed it: 41% with up to 200 employees, 18% with 200 to 1,000, 21% with 1,000 to 5,000 and 20% with more than 5,000. Respondents were C-suite (17%), HR manager and above (46%) and operations manager and above (37%). Percentages are the share of companies reporting an increase or decrease under each policy. Insurance Times covered the findings when they were published: new research shows flexibility in working practices is vital in the insurance sector's war for talent.
The working policy survey, answered
Not according to the insurers we surveyed. Companies with no mandatory office days were among the most likely to report a productivity increase (55%), and those requiring one day a week were the most likely of all (64% up, 7% down). The worst results came from a three-day mandate, where as many companies reported a decrease as an increase (24% each). Fixed hours told the same story: 25% of companies with fixed hours reported lower productivity, against 19% higher, while 51% of those with core-hours flex reported an increase. If productivity is the worry, the survey suggests looking at the policy before looking at the people.
Fewer than you might think, as of May 2024. A third of the 116 companies surveyed had no mandatory office days, 12% required one, 25% two, 22% three, and only 8% expected staff in four or five days a week. Of those that did mandate at least one day, two-thirds let employees choose which; where a day was fixed, Thursday was the most common. On hours, 43% offered flexible working around core hours, 38% dealt with requests individually and only 15% had fixed hours. Two-thirds applied the same hybrid policy to every employee.
Yes, at every stage. Companies requiring four or five days a week were the most likely to report a fall in applications (30%) and a fall in job offer acceptances (20%), while more than half of companies with no mandatory days reported increases in both. The effect ran through to keeping people: half of the companies mandating four or five days reported a decrease in staff retention, as did 44% of those with fixed hours. Three days was the point at which the results turned. The survey's practical advice is to state the actual days and hours in the job advert rather than 'hybrid' or 'flexible', so candidates aren't lost at offer stage.