You are Elena Roig, HR Director of Linnea Industrial Software, a 1,450-person company with one unit in Barcelona and another in Munich. Eleven Barcelona engineers have quit in three weeks, and the CEO wants a flexible-work policy for both units this quarter, on a single budget. Before you design anything, you have to decide what is behind those exits.
The situation
On 3 February 2026 the overnight count confirms it: eleven engineers in Barcelona's product-engineering group have resigned in three weeks. All cite the same thing: a local competitor has just announced a hybrid model with four-day weeks, and Linnea's rules look rigid beside it. A pulse survey puts a number on the rest: 38% of the Barcelona unit are actively considering leaving this year. Voluntary turnover is already 19%, and each exit the company regrets costs about €62,000.
The two units have grown into opposites. Barcelona's 820 people, younger and used to collaborating in a shared office, build products and look after customers. Munich's 630, older and used to working alone at client sites, sell industrial-controls consulting. Munich's turnover is only 9%, but its engagement score sits at 61, thirteen points under its target of 74. Together they bring in €198 million a year at a 13% operating margin.
The CEO's brief is short: one policy covering both units, launched within the quarter, on a fixed budget of €1.2 million, about 60% of what both units' first choices would cost. Around 40% of staff, client-site consultants and round-the-clock support, cannot flex under any design. If Barcelona's numbers are not improving two quarters after launch, the CEO has already said what replaces your design: one identical return-to-office rule for both units.
You have known those engineers since 2014, when you joined as their HR partner. Now your team has to agree, before a euro is spent, on what their exits mean: pay, the daily friction of rigid hours and commuting, or an engagement gap among people who still like their work?