Evidence for Scottish Government hybrid working policy decision: FOI release

Information requested

Under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002, I am submitting a refined request for information regarding the decision to transition from full-time remote work to a hybrid working policy, as referenced in the Saltire article “Next Phase of Hybrid Working” (7 May 2025) and your response to FOI/202500465200. The provided annexes lacked specific evidence, metrics, or clear justification for the policy change, and I seek further details to understand the decision-making process.

Please provide the following information:

1. Quantitative Metrics:

• Any data or metrics used to justify the hybrid working policy, including but not limited to:
• Productivity measures comparing remote vs. hybrid working.
• Staff retention or absence rates under remote vs. hybrid models.
• Cost analyses (e.g., office space utilization, travel expenses, or IT savings).
• Collaboration or innovation outcomes (e.g., project delivery rates or staff feedback scores).
• Please provide these in the form of reports, data tables, or summaries.

2. Qualitative Evidence:

• Detailed findings from staff surveys, focus groups, or trade union consultations mentioned in Annex 2, including:
• Response rates and key themes.
• Specific concerns or benefits identified regarding remote vs. hybrid working.
• If full reports are unavailable, please provide anonymised summaries.

3. Unredacted Documents:

• Unredacted or minimally redacted versions of the following documents from FOI/202500465200:
• Annex 3: Executive Team Meeting Paper.
• Annex 4: Hybrid Working Review – Summary of Findings.
• Annex 5: Email Correspondence.
• If redactions are still required under Section 30(b)(i) or (ii), please provide:
• A detailed explanation of how disclosure would inhibit free and frank advice or exchange of views.
• A public interest test assessment justifying why withholding outweighs disclosure.

4. Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) and Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment:

• Copies of the EQIA and Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment referenced in Annex 1, which are planned for publication by July 2025.
• If these are not yet available, please confirm the exact publication date and provide any draft versions or interim findings.
• Please explain why early release would not be in the public interest, given the policy’s impact on staff and public resources.

5. External Research:

• Copies of external research or best practice reports cited in Annexes 2 and 3 as informing the hybrid working decision.
• If specific reports cannot be shared, please provide their titles, authors, and a summary of their relevance.

6. Decision-Making Process:

• A detailed description of how the Executive Team weighed evidence to conclude that hybrid working was preferable to full-time remote work, including:
• Key factors or criteria used (e.g., wellbeing, collaboration, operational needs).
• Any dissenting views or alternative options considered.

I recognise that some information may be exempt under FOISA, but I request that you disclose as much as possible (e.g., anonymised data or partial documents) to maximise transparency. Given the significant public interest in understanding a policy affecting thousands of employees, workplace wellbeing, and public expenditure, I ask you to prioritise disclosure where feasible.

Response

Quantitative Metrics and Qualitative Evidence:

I have provided the following documents;

• An analysis of 2024 People Survey results for core Scottish Government, by working style and demographic characteristics.
• A full report on our work spaces survey, conducted in Summer 2021
• A full report on our hybrid working survey, conducted in Autumn 2022

Unredacted Documents:

Junior Civil Servant names were redacted under Section 38(1)(b) (personal information) to protect the identity of colleagues who are not Senior Civil Servants as standard practice. This was the only information redacted from documents you listed from FOI/202500465200:

• Annex 3: Executive Team Meeting Paper. Junior Civil Servant names redacted under Section 38(1)(b) (personal information) to protect the identity of colleagues who are not Senior Civil Servants as standard practice
• Annex 4: Hybrid Working Review – Summary of Findings. Junior Civil Servant names redacted under Section 38(1)(b) (personal information) to protect the identity of colleagues who are not Senior Civil Servants as standard practice
• Annex 5: Email Correspondence. Junior Civil Servant names redacted under Section 38(1)(b) (personal information) to protect the identity of colleagues who are not Senior Civil Servants as standard practice

Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) and Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment:

While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance we are unable to provide some of the information you have requested because an exemption(s) under Section 27(1) of FOISA applies to some of the information requested, the draft Equality Impact Assessment as we intend to publish this information by the end of July 2025, which is within 12 weeks of the date of your request. We consider that it is reasonable to withhold the information until that date, rather than release some of this information before the planned publication. This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’.

Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is some public interest in release because of existing interest in public sector workers and their home working arrangements and this will be met by our planned publication.

External Research:

The following external research or best practice reports were cited in Annexes 2 and 3

• Leesman, Insights (2024) Nurturing meaningful connections or drifting apart? – The Hybrid Future
• Leesman report (2025) The Hybrid Future - Leesman
• Leesman report (2024) The experience gap - Leesman
• Return to Office Mandates and Brain Drain, University of Pittsburgh (November 2024) Return to Office Mandates and Brain Drain by Yuye Ding, Zhao Jin, Mark (Shuai) Ma, Betty (Bin) Xing, Yucheng (John) Yang :: SSRN
• 2021 Research by ClimateXChange ClimateXChange | Scotland's centre of expertise on climate change
• Study finds hybrid work benefits companies and employees | Stanford Report
• Andy Lake Andy Lake - flexibility.co.uk
• Prof. Nicolas Bloom (Stanford University) Study finds hybrid work benefits companies and employees | Stanford Report

Decision-Making Process:

Reference to FOI 202500465200 Annex 3 (17 March) which has been published confirmed the recommendations presented to the Executive Team. FOI+202500465200+-+Information+Released+-+Annex+3.pdf

Junior Civil Servant names were redacted under Section 38(1)(b) (personal information) to protect the identity to protect the identity of colleagues who are not Senior Civil Servants as standard practice. The information presented included 4 attachments;

• The Executive Team Blue Box Template
• Executive Team Hybrid Working Recommendation final slides
• Executive Team Hybrid Working background material final slides
• Executive Team Paper hybrid communication element

Reference to FOI 20500465200 Annex 4 (17 April 2025) which has been published confirmed the information presented to the Executive Team decision by correspondence. FOI+202500465200+-+Information+Released+-+Annex+4.pdf

Junior Civil Servant names were redacted under Section 38(1)(b) (personal information) to protect the identity to protect the identity of colleagues who are not Senior Civil Servants as standard practice. The information presented included 4 attachments;

• Executive Team – paper requesting final sign off to settled position April 2025
• Annex A to ET update paper – feedback from Directors
• Annex B to ET April update on hybrid working – draft policy statement
• Annex C to ET update on hybrid working – draft SCS communications pack o

DOCUMENTS EXEMPT

• EXEMPT - Executive Team – exemption under Section 30(b)(i) and Section 30(b)(ii)of FOISA has been applied
• EXEMPT - Executive Team – exemption under Section 27(1) of FOISA has been applied

As explained above the reason for the exemption under Section 27 (1) of FOISA has been applied.

The only other exemption applied under Section 30(b)(i) and Section 30(b)(ii) of FOISA was due to disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank provision of advice.

This exemption recognises the need for officials to have a private space within which to provide free and frank advice to other officials before the Scottish Government reaches a settled position. Disclosing the content of free and frank advice could substantially inhibit the provision of such advice in the future.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate.

However, there is a greater public interest in allowing a private space within which officials can provide full and frank advice to other officials, as part of the process of exploring and refining policy position.

This private thinking space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, based on the best available advice, so that good policy decisions can be taken.

I have provided the emails received from the Executive Team for finalised decision on the following;

• Agree the revised policy position on hybrid working
• Agree the communications and engagement plan
• Note the plans for moving into the implementation stage including planned engagement with the CSGU and diversity staff networks.

Junior Civil Servant names have been redacted under Section 38(1)(b) (personal information) to protect the identity to protect the identity of colleagues who are not Senior Civil Servants as standard practice.

Due to size and file types, we are unable to upload some of the documents referred to above.

If you wish to consider, please contact us at the address below and we will be happy to provide.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.

FOI 202500470884 - Information Released - Annex A

File type

PDF

File size

1.1 MB