Comparing Behavioral Interventions for Employee Productivity in Office vs. Remote Settings

Abstract

Employee productivity is increasingly influenced by workplace context, particularly in the wake of hybrid and remote work models. This study examines the effectiveness of behavioral interventions—such as goal setting, feedback mechanisms, nudges, and self-monitoring—on employee productivity in traditional office versus remote work environments. Using a mixed-methods approach, including surveys of 1,500 employees and controlled field experiments across 20 multinational firms in Europe and North America, the research identifies key differences in intervention outcomes. In office settings, structured feedback, peer accountability, and environmental cues significantly enhance focus and task completion. Conversely, in remote settings, self-monitoring tools, digital reminders, and flexible scheduling prove more effective due to reduced direct supervision and increased autonomy. The study highlights the importance of tailoring behavioral strategies to workplace context and provides practical guidelines for managers seeking to optimize performance across diverse work arrangements. Results contribute to the behavioral management literature by demonstrating that productivity interventions are not universally effective but require customization to employee environment, emphasizing the need for context-aware human resource policies and technology-assisted performance tools.