Hybrid Working Retention Worth $204.7B, IWG and Arup Say

Economic modelling released this week by workspace group International Workplace Group (IWG) and engineering firm Arup estimates that keeping staff longer through flexible schedules could be worth $204.7 billion to the US economy and £10.8 billion to the UK over the next five years. Workplace Insight reported the findings on September 24, 2026.

The modelling treats hybrid work as a way to keep people. Across every channel the analysts measured, keeping people around longer produced the largest share of productivity gains. The numbers put hard data behind a debate that has mostly run on feelings: whether letting people split the week between home and office moves the needle on workplace productivity, a question other recent research has approached from the AI side.

IWG is the world's largest platform for flexible work, operating brands including Regus and Spaces, and Arup is a global firm of designers, engineers and planners. Their analysis looks at a five-year horizon and converts things like lower turnover and preserved know-how into economic value. These are modelled estimates, not measured outcomes, but the direction is clear.

The timing matters. The findings landed on September 24, just as companies lock in next year's workplace policies, and they give flexible-work advocates something new: a number big enough to sit next to the real-estate math that usually dominates these conversations. Most of the public argument so far has run on surveys about what workers prefer. This one is about what the economy gains.

Retention is where the money is

That headline figure is the payoff from hybrid working retention, according to the analysis, and the largest single source of productivity gains in the modelling. Companies that hold on to experienced staff step off the treadmill of constant hiring, and the modelling suggests the payoff goes well beyond cheaper job ads.

A separate estimate in the same modelling looks at what happens when people walk out the door. When an employee quits, the company loses project momentum along with the unwritten process knowledge that keeps work moving. Replacing both takes far longer than filling an empty desk. The analysis puts the value of avoiding that disruption at $65.5 billion in the US and £5.7 billion in the UK over five years.

Talent attraction is the next biggest bucket. Wider hiring pools and stronger candidate appeal could contribute another $98.3 billion in the US and £6.5 billion in the UK, while more efficient recruitment and onboarding adds a further $9.4 billion and £600 million respectively, according to the report.

Flexibility now beats salary as a hiring tool

The demand side backs this up. Separate IWG research cited in the report found that 81 percent of chief human resources officers said hybrid working was important for retaining top talent, and 86 percent identified flexible working as the benefit prospective employees want most.

It has become the standard move in the competition for technology workers. Some 37 percent of business leaders surveyed named hybrid or flexible working as their strategy for attracting tech talent, slightly ahead of the 35 percent who named competitive pay, Workplace Insight reported.

Job seekers are explicit about it too. Coverage of the research on business-money.com noted that more than a third of US workers now cite remote work as the leading factor when choosing a new job, ahead of salary. For a generation weighing its first or second employer, where you work has become as decisive as what you are paid.

What it means for the office debate

The CHRO numbers deserve a second look. Human resources chiefs own hiring budgets and feel turnover costs before anyone else does, so when 81 percent of them call hybrid working important for keeping top talent, that is the people closest to the problem voting with their job descriptions. In the report's framing, flexibility is infrastructure for keeping teams together.

These figures land in the middle of the ongoing fight over return-to-office rules. Employers have spent the past two years tightening attendance requirements, while worker surveys keep showing that flexibility is non-negotiable for many. Until now, supporters of flexible work mostly had morale on their side. Now they have a number.

The report keeps a role for offices. It says that how and where people work changes whether they stay, and staying is where the economic value concentrates. From the employer's side, the practical read is straightforward: every avoided resignation protects knowledge that is expensive to replace.

For people early in their careers, the takeaway is leverage. If flexibility is the benefit candidates want most and the tool employers use to keep their best people, it is a legitimate negotiating chip at the hiring table. The companies that get hybrid working retention right are the ones the modelling says will keep their teams intact, and the headline number is the clearest measure yet of what that is worth.