Introduction
The workplace has changed considerably over the past few years, yet many company policies continue to operate in the same rigid format. Most of these corporate bylaws operate on the basis of two categories, for instance, right and wrong, or allowed and not allowed, or present and absent.
The issue with binary policies is that they consider work as something that takes place in a fixed, predictable manner. In reality, employees work in different ways and face different situations at work. Over time, this can affect not only productivity but also important issues such as safety and inclusion in the workplace.
Recent workforce reports by organizations such as the World Economic Forum highlight that flexibility and inclusive policy design are increasingly linked to employee engagement and retention in modern workplaces.
Why Binary Policies Existed Earlier
Most jobs were manual or routine in nature and were carried out in fixed physical locations like factories, offices, or workshops. Employees worked on similar tasks, followed the same processes, operated on fixed schedules, and required strong organizational control to keep operations running smoothly.
Even in a traditional office environment, work was largely paperwork-based and repetitive. Managers relied on visibility to ensure work was being done, as there were limited tools to track progress or outcomes. Having uniform rules for attendance, working hours, and evaluation helped maintain predictability and reduced the need for individual decision-making.
In short, binary policies worked earlier not because they were ideal, but because the work system at the time required uniformity, control, and simplicity.
How the Nature of Work Has Changed:
In the past, work mainly involved routine tasks that were completed by following fixed instructions. Today, many roles require thinking, problem-solving, coordination, and decision-making, such as work in marketing, design, HR, or client servicing, where productivity cannot be measured only by working hours.
With laptops, shared drives, video calls, and messaging tools, it is no longer necessary for employees to be in the same place at the same time to complete work. You can actually do your job from your house or from a café, or even work with somebody who is in another part of the country. According to the International Labour Organization, modern work arrangements are increasingly diverse, making one-size-fits-all workplace policies less effective across roles and sectors.
Roles in workplaces are also becoming increasingly diverse. Some jobs require intense concentration, while others involve meetings and teamwork, and others require flexibility based on deadlines or clients. Applying the same rigid rules to such varied tasks creates a gap between policy and reality on the ground. Many people at work may appear busy during regular hours, but actually do more meaningful work beyond the rigid schedule.
Overall, work today is less predictable, more flexible, and more outcome-focused than before.
Why Rigid Policies No Longer Work
The main problem with rigid and binary policies today is that they try to control work in the same way as before, though work itself has changed. Some employees may finish their work early, some may take longer depending on the task, and some roles need flexibility based on deadlines or client needs. When policies expect everyone to work in the same way and follow the same structure, it often creates frustration rather than efficiency. Research on employee engagement consistently shows that environments focused only on compliance tend to experience lower motivation and higher turnover.
In many workplaces, employees are still judged by how long they stay online or how many hours they sit in the office. This does not always reflect the actual efforts or quality of work being done. As a result, people start focusing more on meeting rules instead of doing meaningful work.
Rigid policies also make it difficult to handle real situations. Health issues, personal responsibilities, or sudden changes in workload cannot always fit into strict rules. When employees feel that there is no understanding or flexibility, they stop taking initiative and only do what is required.
Reports by organizations like the International Labour Organization suggest that lack of flexibility and trust in workplace systems often contributes to disengagement over time.
Examples of Gender-Neutral Workplace Policies
Gender-neutral work policies concentrate on providing equal treatment to all workers according to their position or responsibility, irrespective of gender considerations. The case of gender-neutral parental leave is a classic example of gender-neutral work policy that organizations have adopted over time. Organizations have changed their policy of providing caregiving leave to mothers to providing parental leave to all parents of new babies because caregiving is not a preserve of women anymore.
One such example would be in the reporting systems that have been made gender-neutral under POSH. Even though the Act targets the protection of women, in some organizations that take concerns about inappropriate activity by any employee, the issue shifts from being gender-related to conduct and contributes towards the creation of a more favourable working environment.
Flexible work policies also serve as gender-neutral measures in their equal application. Flexibility options, like flexi-time or working from home, provided to all employees, avoid assuming that women are the only ones who need flexibility because of personal responsibilities. The policies support fairness insofar as they respond to individual needs without labelling them as gender-specific exceptions
These examples show that gender-neutral policies are not about removing protections but about designing systems to promote equality, safety, and inclusion for all employees in the workplace.
Real Workplace Situation Where Binary Policies Fails
In India, guidelines issued by the Ministry of Women and Child Development emphasize that POSH compliance should go beyond formal training and focus on effective implementation and reporting mechanisms.
If we consider the actual environment at the workplace, it would be found that binary policies do not always do what they should do. For example, consider a POSH awareness class. What happens at most organizations is that they ask employees at least once a year to attend the class and sign the list of people who attended the class. The procedure is complete from the company’s perspective. It does not mean that people will necessarily feel safe at work just because they attended the class.
Data published by the National Crime Records Bureau shows that under-reporting remains a concern in cases related to workplace harassment, highlighting the gap between policy presence and actual safety.
In terms of women’s safety, there is rarely a black or white issue. Often, a difficult or unpleasant circumstance that could not be easily defined as right or wrong. Employees may be reluctant to report a problem as they do not know what will happen due to their report or complaint. A black or white policy requires a clear consequence that requires a complaint or that nothing has occurred at all. There is no room left for discussion or assistance.
The same issue appears in discussions about women’s empowerment. On paper, policies may look supportive, but in daily work life, rigid rules can limit real participation. For instance, strict working hours or inflexible reporting structures may make it harder for some employees to manage responsibilities or grow in their roles. Empowerment then becomes something that exists in policy documents, not in practices.
In some cases, rigid interpretations of rules or gender-biased laws within organizations can also create confusion or unfairness. When policies are applied without understanding the situation, they may fail to protect the people they were meant to protect. These examples show that real workplace experiences are rarely binary, and policies that treat them as such often miss the bigger picture.
Need For Change in Workplace Policies
Policies are necessary, but when they are applied rigidly without considering real situations, they often fail to support how work actually happens.
Another area that clearly needs change is how performance is looked at. In many places, being available all the time or staying logged in for long hours is still treated as a sign of commitment. But this does not always match the actual work done. Someone can finish an important task efficiently, while another person may stay busy all day without much real output. When policies focus only on hours or presence, they miss this difference and often demotivate people who are actually performing well.
There is also the issue of trust, as continual monitoring and strict rule-following can make employees feel controlled rather than supported. When people are trusted to manage their work, with clear expectations and responsibilities, they are more likely to take ownership. Small changes in how policies are applied can significantly improve employee experience and willingness to contribute beyond minimum expectations.
Global workforce studies increasingly point out that flexible, trust-based policy approaches are better aligned with real work behaviour than rigid enforcement models.
Conclusion
Rigid and binary workplace policies made sense at a time when work was predictable and followed a fixed pattern. But today, work does not function in the same way. People work differently, roles vary, and real workplace situations are often more complex than a simple yes or no decision. When policies fail to consider this, they stop supporting employees and instead create frustrations, disengagement, and missed opportunities. What they need now is not to remove rules but to apply them with more flexibility and understanding. Policies that allow room for judgment, trust, and real outcomes are better suited to how work actually happens today. Adapting policies in this way can help organizations remain effective while also creating workplaces where employees feel supported and valued.
