---
title: 'From Hybrid to HQ: Inside Ireland''s Financial Services RTO'
description: 'Morgan McKinley''s 2026 Ireland report: 66% rank hybrid as their top benefit, only 13% of firms offer it, 62% of staff want to leave, and women take the hit.'
url: https://nerdleveltech.com/from-hybrid-to-hq-ireland-financial-services-rto
language: en
date: '2026-05-27'
category: career
tags:
  - Return to Office
  - Hybrid Work
  - Morgan McKinley
  - Irish Financial Services
  - RTO
  - Workplace Diversity
  - Employee Wellbeing
  - Productivity
markdown_url: https://nerdleveltech.com/from-hybrid-to-hq-ireland-financial-services-rto.md
attribution: 'Source: NerdLevelTech — https://nerdleveltech.com/from-hybrid-to-hq-ireland-financial-services-rto'
terms: https://nerdleveltech.com/llms.txt
---

# From Hybrid to HQ: Inside Ireland's Financial Services RTO

Ireland's financial services industry is now operating under a settled return-to-office (RTO) pattern — and the data shows that pattern is at odds with what its workforce actually wants. Recruitment firm **Morgan McKinley** (part of Org Group), in its 2026 guide *From Hybrid to HQ: The Impact of Return to Office on Financial Services in Ireland*, reports that **66%** of employees now rank hybrid work as their most valued benefit while only **13%** of organisations offer a fully flexible arrangement, and **77%** of employers are struggling to attract skilled talent. Stacked on top of that mismatch, **51%** of Irish financial services workers say they are unhappy with their current office attendance policy, **62%** say it has increased their desire to leave their role, and **70%** report needing higher pay to cover the cost of getting to work.[^1][^2]

This article walks through what the report and its accompanying landing page actually say — every figure, chart and quotation below comes from Morgan McKinley and is attributed accordingly.

<table style="width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;margin:24px 0;border:1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.4);">
  <tr>
    <td style="padding:18px;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;border:1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.4);width:33.33%;">
      <div style="font-size:34px;font-weight:700;color:#9B7BD9;line-height:1.1;">66%</div>
      <div style="font-size:14px;margin-top:8px;opacity:0.85;">rank hybrid as their most-valued work benefit</div>
    </td>
    <td style="padding:18px;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;border:1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.4);width:33.33%;">
      <div style="font-size:34px;font-weight:700;color:#9B7BD9;line-height:1.1;">13%</div>
      <div style="font-size:14px;margin-top:8px;opacity:0.85;">of organisations offer a fully flexible arrangement</div>
    </td>
    <td style="padding:18px;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;border:1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.4);width:33.33%;">
      <div style="font-size:34px;font-weight:700;color:#9B7BD9;line-height:1.1;">77%</div>
      <div style="font-size:14px;margin-top:8px;opacity:0.85;">of employers struggle to attract skilled talent</div>
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td style="padding:18px;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;border:1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.4);">
      <div style="font-size:34px;font-weight:700;color:#F06292;line-height:1.1;">51%</div>
      <div style="font-size:14px;margin-top:8px;opacity:0.85;">are dissatisfied with their current RTO policy</div>
    </td>
    <td style="padding:18px;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;border:1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.4);">
      <div style="font-size:34px;font-weight:700;color:#F06292;line-height:1.1;">62%</div>
      <div style="font-size:14px;margin-top:8px;opacity:0.85;">say office mandates have increased their desire to leave</div>
    </td>
    <td style="padding:18px;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;border:1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.4);">
      <div style="font-size:34px;font-weight:700;color:#F06292;line-height:1.1;">70%</div>
      <div style="font-size:14px;margin-top:8px;opacity:0.85;">need higher pay to cover commuting costs</div>
    </td>
  </tr>
</table>

## What You'll Learn

- The talent-attraction tension at the centre of Morgan McKinley's report
- How many days a week Irish financial services staff are now in the office, and how that maps to what employers think they require
- The "productivity perception gap" between leadership and staff
- How stricter office mandates are landing disproportionately on women
- The five recommendations Morgan McKinley puts forward for employers
- A plain-English summary of what it all means

## About the Report

*From Hybrid to HQ* is a multi-region Morgan McKinley study covering its operating markets, including Australia, Canada, Hong Kong SAR, Ireland, Japan, Mainland China, Singapore and the UK.[^1] This article focuses on the **Irish segment**, which is based on a survey of **440 respondents** drawn from Morgan McKinley's database of clients and candidates within the Accounting & Finance (A&F) and Banking & Financial Services (BFS) sectors.[^1]

| Profile | Employee respondents | Employer respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Total | Part of the 440-respondent Ireland sample | Part of the 440-respondent Ireland sample |
| Sector | 80% in A&F (57%) or BFS (23%) | 42% A&F, 21% BFS, 17% HR |
| Company size (largest bracket) | 50–249 employees (23%); 50% in firms <500 staff | 1,000+ employees (34%) |
| Age (largest bracket) | 35–44 (34%) | 45–54 (40%) |
| Gender | 58% female, 41% male | 49% / 49% split |
| Compensation (most common) | €50,000–€75,000 (35%) | €100,000–€150,000 (28%); 23% earn over €150,000 |
| Caregiving responsibilities | 48% carry them | 51% carry them |
| Ethnicity (largest group) | White (80%), Asian (9%) | White (92%), Hispanic (2%) |

Source: Morgan McKinley methodology section, page 16.[^1]

## Insight 1: Half the Workforce Is Unhappy With the Current Model

According to Morgan McKinley, **80%** of Irish financial services employees are required in the office between two and five days a week, with **three days** being the single most common pattern at **32%** of employees and **38%** of employers reporting it as the standard.[^1]

The split on satisfaction is brutal in its simplicity: when asked whether they are happy with their company's current in-office requirement policy, **49%** of employees said yes and **51%** said no.[^1] When the same employees were asked in an open question what would be gained from a full return to office, **24%** answered "nothing."[^1]

<figure style="margin:24px 0;">
  <svg viewBox="0 0 820 380" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" style="width:100%;height:auto;font-family:system-ui,-apple-system,sans-serif;color:inherit;">
    <title>In-office days required per week — Employees vs Employers</title>
    <text x="410" y="22" text-anchor="middle" font-size="15" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">In-Office Days Required Per Week</text>
    <text x="410" y="40" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor" fill-opacity="0.65">Source: Morgan McKinley, From Hybrid to HQ (2026), Figures 1.1 &amp; 1.2</text>
    <!-- y-axis grid lines and labels -->
    <g font-size="10" fill="currentColor" fill-opacity="0.7">
      <line x1="80" y1="80" x2="800" y2="80" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.15"/><text x="74" y="83" text-anchor="end">40%</text>
      <line x1="80" y1="135" x2="800" y2="135" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.15"/><text x="74" y="138" text-anchor="end">30%</text>
      <line x1="80" y1="190" x2="800" y2="190" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.15"/><text x="74" y="193" text-anchor="end">20%</text>
      <line x1="80" y1="245" x2="800" y2="245" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.15"/><text x="74" y="248" text-anchor="end">10%</text>
      <line x1="80" y1="300" x2="800" y2="300" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.5"/><text x="74" y="303" text-anchor="end">0%</text>
    </g>
    <!-- Bars: 7 groups, 90px wide each, starting at x=90 -->
    <!-- Group 1: 5 Days. Emp 13%, Empr 4% -->
    <rect x="100" y="228.5" width="32" height="71.5" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="135" y="278" width="32" height="22" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="135" y="225" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">13%</text>
    <text x="151" y="275" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">4%</text>
    <text x="135" y="318" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">5 days</text>
    <!-- Group 2: 4 Days. Emp 10%, Empr 7% -->
    <rect x="200" y="245" width="32" height="55" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="235" y="261.5" width="32" height="38.5" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="216" y="241" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">10%</text>
    <text x="251" y="257" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">7%</text>
    <text x="235" y="318" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">4 days</text>
    <!-- Group 3: 3 Days. Emp 32%, Empr 38% -->
    <rect x="300" y="124" width="32" height="176" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="335" y="91" width="32" height="209" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="316" y="120" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">32%</text>
    <text x="351" y="87" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">38%</text>
    <text x="335" y="318" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">3 days</text>
    <!-- Group 4: 2 Days. Emp 25%, Empr 22% -->
    <rect x="400" y="162.5" width="32" height="137.5" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="435" y="179" width="32" height="121" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="416" y="158" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">25%</text>
    <text x="451" y="175" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">22%</text>
    <text x="435" y="318" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">2 days</text>
    <!-- Group 5: 1 Day. Emp 6%, Empr 2% -->
    <rect x="500" y="267" width="32" height="33" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="535" y="289" width="32" height="11" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="516" y="263" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">6%</text>
    <text x="551" y="285" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">2%</text>
    <text x="535" y="318" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">1 day</text>
    <!-- Group 6: No requirement. Emp 8%, Empr 4% -->
    <rect x="600" y="256" width="32" height="44" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="635" y="278" width="32" height="22" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="616" y="252" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">8%</text>
    <text x="651" y="275" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">4%</text>
    <text x="635" y="318" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">No req.</text>
    <!-- Group 7: Depends on team. Emp 3%, Empr 16% -->
    <rect x="700" y="283.5" width="32" height="16.5" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="735" y="212" width="32" height="88" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="716" y="280" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">3%</text>
    <text x="751" y="208" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" fill="currentColor">16%</text>
    <text x="735" y="318" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">Team-led</text>
    <!-- Legend -->
    <rect x="260" y="345" width="14" height="14" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <text x="280" y="357" font-size="12" fill="currentColor">Employees</text>
    <rect x="400" y="345" width="14" height="14" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="420" y="357" font-size="12" fill="currentColor">Employers</text>
  </svg>
</figure>

Morgan McKinley flags that with only **4%** of companies offering "no requirement" and only **3%** of employees (vs **16%** of employers) reporting that individual teams have authority to set their own schedules, the prevailing hybrid setup functions as a top-down mandate rather than a flexible, trust-based arrangement.[^1] Nearly half of employees (**48%**) carry caregiving responsibilities for children, elderly parents, or pets — meaning the "home office" is a piece of working infrastructure, not a perk.[^1]

## Insight 2: The Office Builds Culture, But Workers Pay the Bill

Morgan McKinley's data shows clear agreement that office time delivers some real benefits — chiefly collaboration and culture — but workers carry an unequal share of the cost. The table below shows what each group says it experiences from being in the office.[^1]

| Benefit experienced from in-office working | Employees | Employers |
|---|---|---|
| Enhanced collaboration | 47% | 73% |
| Culture-building | 31% | 69% |
| Learning and mentorship opportunities | 28% | 51% |
| Access to better equipment | 18% | 11% |
| Better work/life boundaries | 13% | 24% |
| Increased productivity | 12% | 22% |
| Better for clients | 8% | 18% |
| Higher cybersecurity | 3% | 9% |
| Helps attract talent | 2% | 9% |
| None / nothing | 12% | — |

Source: Morgan McKinley, *From Hybrid to HQ* (2026), Figure 2.1.

The financial cost falls squarely on staff. **70%** of employees identify the need for higher pay to cover commuting costs as a major negative of in-office working, against a salary base where €50,000–€75,000 is the most common bracket (35% of respondents).[^1] Morgan McKinley calls this a financial "tax" on returning to the office — and one that is reshaping employee priorities away from compensation and toward flexibility.[^1]

## Insight 3: The "Productivity Perception Gap"

Of all the findings in the report, the gulf between how employers and employees perceive office productivity is the starkest.

<figure style="margin:24px 0;">
  <svg viewBox="0 0 820 230" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" style="width:100%;height:auto;font-family:system-ui,-apple-system,sans-serif;color:inherit;">
    <title>The productivity perception gap — Employers vs Employees</title>
    <text x="410" y="22" text-anchor="middle" font-size="15" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">The Productivity Perception Gap</text>
    <text x="410" y="40" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor" fill-opacity="0.65">Source: Morgan McKinley, From Hybrid to HQ (2026), Figures 3.1 &amp; 5.1</text>
    <!-- bar 1: 14% employers -->
    <text x="20" y="92" font-size="12" fill="currentColor">Employers who believe a full RTO</text>
    <text x="20" y="108" font-size="12" fill="currentColor">would increase productivity</text>
    <rect x="280" y="80" width="84" height="34" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="370" y="103" font-size="14" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">14%</text>
    <!-- bar 2: 60% employees -->
    <text x="20" y="162" font-size="12" fill="currentColor">Employees who report lower</text>
    <text x="20" y="178" font-size="12" fill="currentColor">productivity from being in-office</text>
    <rect x="280" y="150" width="360" height="34" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <text x="648" y="173" font-size="14" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">60%</text>
    <!-- scale -->
    <line x1="280" y1="200" x2="640" y2="200" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.5"/>
    <text x="280" y="216" font-size="10" fill="currentColor" fill-opacity="0.65">0%</text>
    <text x="640" y="216" font-size="10" fill="currentColor" fill-opacity="0.65" text-anchor="end">60%</text>
  </svg>
</figure>

Morgan McKinley's open-question data shows that only **14%** of employers believe a full return to office would increase productivity — yet **60%** of employees cite lower productivity as a current impact of being in-office. Asked specifically what would be lost in a full RTO scenario, **34%** of employees cited a drop in productivity.[^1][^3] The report concludes that modern offices have become places of distraction rather than spaces that support [deep work and flow state](https://nerdleveltech.com/vibe-coding-effectively-the-art-and-science-of-flow-in-software-development).

The second-order effects are already visible. **69%** of employers report employee pushback as a consequence of increased office days, **44%** report recruitment challenges, and **33%** admit office mandates have actually led to lower productivity within their teams.[^1] Morgan McKinley's summary line is pointed: "until leadership reconciles the fact that **62%** of their staff feel an 'increased desire to leave' due to the current in-office expectations of their employer, the pursuit of office-based productivity may continue to yield the exact opposite result."[^1]

## Insight 4: Stricter Mandates Are Hitting Women Harder

This is the section Morgan McKinley's executive summary chose to lead with — and the data justifies the prominence.

The financial geometry is unequal before any mandate is applied. **36%** of women earn between **€30,000–€50,000**, compared to **21%** of men. At the top end, men are twice as likely to reach the **€100,000–€150,000** bracket (**14%** vs **7%**). Women are also more likely to carry caregiving responsibilities: **51%** of female respondents versus **45%** of male respondents.[^1] When stricter office expectations are imposed on top of that unequal baseline, the impact compounds across four measurable dimensions.

<figure style="margin:24px 0;">
  <svg viewBox="0 0 820 380" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" style="width:100%;height:auto;font-family:system-ui,-apple-system,sans-serif;color:inherit;">
    <title>Gender disparity in RTO impact — Female vs Male respondents</title>
    <text x="410" y="22" text-anchor="middle" font-size="15" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">Gender Disparity in RTO Impact</text>
    <text x="410" y="40" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor" fill-opacity="0.65">Source: Morgan McKinley, From Hybrid to HQ (2026), Figures 4.2–4.4</text>
    <!-- y-axis -->
    <g font-size="10" fill="currentColor" fill-opacity="0.7">
      <line x1="80" y1="80" x2="800" y2="80" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.15"/><text x="74" y="83" text-anchor="end">80%</text>
      <line x1="80" y1="135" x2="800" y2="135" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.15"/><text x="74" y="138" text-anchor="end">60%</text>
      <line x1="80" y1="190" x2="800" y2="190" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.15"/><text x="74" y="193" text-anchor="end">40%</text>
      <line x1="80" y1="245" x2="800" y2="245" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.15"/><text x="74" y="248" text-anchor="end">20%</text>
      <line x1="80" y1="300" x2="800" y2="300" stroke="currentColor" stroke-opacity="0.5"/><text x="74" y="303" text-anchor="end">0%</text>
    </g>
    <!-- Scale: y=300 is 0, y=80 is 80%. So 1% = 2.75px. -->
    <!-- Group 1: Satisfaction. F 47%, M 52% -->
    <rect x="140" y="170.75" width="50" height="129.25" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="195" y="157" width="50" height="143" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="165" y="167" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">47%</text>
    <text x="220" y="153" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">52%</text>
    <text x="192" y="320" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">Satisfied with</text>
    <text x="192" y="335" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">current RTO</text>
    <!-- Group 2: Productivity gain. F 10%, M 16% -->
    <rect x="310" y="272.5" width="50" height="27.5" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="365" y="256" width="50" height="44" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="335" y="268" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">10%</text>
    <text x="390" y="252" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">16%</text>
    <text x="362" y="320" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">Productivity</text>
    <text x="362" y="335" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">gain in-office</text>
    <!-- Group 3: Stress / burnout. F 69%, M 58% -->
    <rect x="480" y="110.25" width="50" height="189.75" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="535" y="140.5" width="50" height="159.5" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="505" y="106" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">69%</text>
    <text x="560" y="137" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">58%</text>
    <text x="532" y="320" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">Stress /</text>
    <text x="532" y="335" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">burnout</text>
    <!-- Group 4: Less DEI support. F 28%, M 12% -->
    <rect x="650" y="223" width="50" height="77" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <rect x="705" y="267" width="50" height="33" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="675" y="219" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">28%</text>
    <text x="730" y="263" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" font-weight="700" fill="currentColor">12%</text>
    <text x="702" y="320" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">Less DEI</text>
    <text x="702" y="335" text-anchor="middle" font-size="11" fill="currentColor">support</text>
    <!-- Legend -->
    <rect x="320" y="355" width="14" height="14" fill="#9B7BD9"/>
    <text x="340" y="367" font-size="12" fill="currentColor">Female respondents</text>
    <rect x="490" y="355" width="14" height="14" fill="#F06292"/>
    <text x="510" y="367" font-size="12" fill="currentColor">Male respondents</text>
  </svg>
</figure>

Morgan McKinley's conclusion is unambiguous: if the office environment remains unsustainable for the **51%** of women balancing caregiving loads, many middle-management leaders may opt out, "creating a potential decade-long shortage of diverse C-suite talent."[^1]

## Insight 5: Employers Are Underestimating the Damage

The report identifies a clear "perception gap" between employers and employees on the drawbacks of in-office mandates. Both groups agree on the upside — team collaboration (17% employees vs 18% employers) and productivity (14% on both sides) are the primary gains.[^1] But they diverge sharply on the downside.

On what is being lost, employees focus on life autonomy: **59%** cite work flexibility, **41%** cite the increased commute, and **34%** cite productivity. Employers frame the risk in business terms: **19%** fear reduced employee retention, **15%** worry about motivation, **12%** about work-life balance.[^1]

The asymmetry is sharpest on what is already being felt versus what is being noticed:

| Negative impact reported | Employees | Employers |
|---|---|---|
| Stress and burnout from RTO | 64% | 27% |
| Need for higher pay to cover commute | 70% | 18% (formal requests received) |
| Increased desire to leave | 62% | 29% (rise in resignations observed) |
| Lower levels of productivity | 60% | 33% |
| Employee pushback against the policy | 30% | 69% |
| Recruitment challenges | 23% | 44% |

Source: Morgan McKinley, *From Hybrid to HQ* (2026), Figure 3.1.[^1]

The dissatisfaction is showing up in how staff feel, but has not yet fully translated into the formal indicators (pay requests, resignations) that employers track. Morgan McKinley warns this is a lagging-indicator problem, not an absence of one.

## Insight 6: The Tug-of-War Has Stabilised

After several years of policy churn, the report finds a clear plateau. The desire to further reduce office time has effectively vanished from the corporate agenda.[^1]

| 12-month outlook on in-office requirements | Employees | Employers |
|---|---|---|
| Will stay the same | 83% | 84% |
| Will increase | 16% | 16% |
| Will decrease | 1% | 0% |

Source: Morgan McKinley, *From Hybrid to HQ* (2026), Figures 6.1 and 6.2.

That said, **33%** of employers have already increased their in-office requirements over the past year, and **67%** have kept them steady.[^1] The era of radical workplace pivots, in Morgan McKinley's framing, is behind us — what remains is the unresolved cost of the structure now in place. Three days a week has clearly emerged as the new dominant benchmark, with **32%** of employees and **38%** of employers reporting it as the standard.[^1]

## What Morgan McKinley Recommends

The report closes with five action points for financial services employers navigating the new normal.[^1]

**1. Bridge the productivity perception gap — measure outputs, not attendance.** With only **14%** of employers believing full RTO boosts productivity and **60%** of employees saying RTO has hurt theirs, the report recommends moving to output-based KPIs, prioritising the office for interactive tasks, and reserving remote settings for deep work.

**2. Mitigate the commute tax with financial support.** **70%** of employees feel they need higher pay to cover commuting costs, but only **18%** of employers have received formal requests. Commuter subsidies and flexible benefits packages are a strategic response to the documented retention risk.

**3. Move from top-down mandates to team-led flexibility.** Today, only **3%** of employees and **16%** of employers say individual teams set their own office schedules. Morgan McKinley recommends "anchor days" determined by project needs, not corporate-wide mandates.

**4. Redesign the office for collaboration, not desk-rows.** Given that **24%** of employees say "nothing" would be gained from a full RTO, the report recommends curating the office for breakout rooms, social hubs and mentorship zones — and measuring the quality of collaborative outcomes, not badge-ins.

**5. Monitor wellbeing — especially for women.** **64%** of employees report RTO-related stress but only **27%** of employers see it as a current issue. The gap widens further for women (**69%** burnout, **47%** satisfaction), so regular anonymous pulse surveys focused on office attendance and manager training on signs of fatigue are recommended.

In a closing commentary, **Seb O'Connell, Chief Executive Officer of Org Group** (Morgan McKinley's parent), writes that flexibility has become a competitive advantage — not a "feature" but a true lever only when it aligns with a candidate's specific priorities. For employers committed to a full RTO, the strategy must "refocus from offering flexibility to providing a compelling value proposition that enhances the in-office culture and in-person collaboration" — and accept that the available talent pool will be smaller. To remain competitive for "high demand skills in [AI and emerging technologies](https://nerdleveltech.com/ai-career-roadmap-2026-skills-tools-real-world-pathways)," he argues, firms must emphasise the tangible in-office benefits — stronger collaboration, career development, rewards and mentorship — that are difficult to replicate in a virtual environment.[^1]

## The Bottom Line: A Plain-English Conclusion

If you strip away the charts, Morgan McKinley's report says five things:

- **Three days a week has won.** Most Irish financial services staff are in the office two to five days a week, and three days is the new normal for both employees and employers.
- **About half the workforce is unhappy with that arrangement.** The reasons are concrete: an expensive commute, an office full of distractions, and flexibility that has been quietly taken away.
- **Bosses and staff are looking at the same office and seeing two different things.** Employers see collaboration and culture; staff also see stress, lower productivity and a stronger reason to start job-hunting.
- **The pain is not falling evenly.** Women, who are more often caregivers and more often in lower salary bands, are taking the hardest hit — and they are the diverse leaders companies say they want to keep.
- **The situation has stopped changing on its own.** Most firms are not planning to tighten or loosen further, so the underlying problems will not solve themselves; they have to be actively addressed.

The take-home for employers, in one line: if you want people in the office, make it worth their while — financially, professionally and personally — or you will quietly drain the people you most need to keep.

---

## Sources

[^1]: Morgan McKinley (Part of Org Group), *From Hybrid to HQ: The Impact of Return to Office in Financial Services in Ireland* (2026). Ireland-segment survey of 440 respondents across Accounting & Finance and Banking & Financial Services. The full report is available to download directly from Morgan McKinley after registration: [Report landing page](https://www.morganmckinley.com/ie/resource/guide-return-to-office-ireland).

[^2]: Morgan McKinley, landing page for the report: [From Hybrid to HQ: Is Your RTO Policy Driving Growth or Driving Your Best Talent Away?](https://www.morganmckinley.com/ie/resource/guide-return-to-office-ireland). The 66% / 13% / 77% / 68% framing stats are drawn from this published page, which Morgan McKinley presents alongside the deeper survey data inside the gated report.

[^3]: The "14%" figure for employers who believe a full RTO would boost productivity matches Figure 5.1 of the PDF and the headline of Insight 3 (page 5). The Recommendations section of the same PDF (page 14) uses 13% in prose. This article uses 14% throughout, matching the chart in the source.
