A: Great question … one being asked by employers everywhere. There’s no silver bullet for everyone because there are unique circumstances in every case. The best course is to understand how a hybrid arrangement serves the organization for people in a particular role and apply that guideline to everyone.

For example, if this individual can fulfill his principal responsibilities against a measurable benchmark, e.g., a sales goal or quota, it would be easier to assess his performance without regard to where he is doing it. But there may also be broader expectations for that role that aren’t so easily measured. What if this individual serves as a mentor for a younger sales person or is expected to represent the company at industry events? Those expectations need to be considered, along with the more measurable metrics to determine what makes sense. This standard should then be applied to everyone in similar roles so that you’re not setting an individual precedent, but establishing a guideline for what works for the company as well as employees in similar circumstances. Remember, too, that there’s no substitute for SETTING CLEAR EXPECTATIONS. If you visit my essay on Accountability, you’ll find a handy checklist to make that a reality.

You may still lose them, but caving in to individual demands grants this person “favored nation” status, which diminishes the strength of the organization and sets a precedent that won’t go away. You should also expect that the “favored” person will keep pushing their advantage and you’ll face other demands down the line, from them and others who see an open door to getting their needs met. While no organization wants to lose one of its top performers, the longer term damage to the culture will be greater. It just may not seem like it at the time.