Why Work Setup has zero direct score
Remote is not universally better. On-site is not universally worse. Hybrid is not automatically a midpoint in value. The same label can mean isolation or focus, collaboration or interruption, autonomy or blurred boundaries, depending on the person and role.
An automatic Remote > Hybrid > On-site scale would also double count consequences already captured elsewhere. Model V2 keeps the label as descriptive context and asks you to enter office days, commute, work hours, Stress, Happiness, Career Growth, and Benefits explicitly. Changing only the label cannot alter any category or the final score.
Shared experimental baseline
Unless a scenario states otherwise, both jobs use $100,000 expected total compensation, 40 work hours, no commute, zero office days, 15 PTO days, Stress 5, Happiness 5, all three Growth ratings 5, Benefits 5, and equal priorities (20% each). These controlled values isolate the named changes.
| Experiment | Explicit new-job consequences | Category differences | Final | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. Remote → On-site label only | None; every scored input identical | All 0.00 | 0.000 | Close call |
| B. Remote → On-site with routine changes | 45-min one-way commute, 5 office days; Stress 5→7 | Time −0.75; Quality −0.20 | −0.190 | Leans toward staying |
| C. Remote → On-site with upside | 10-min commute, 5 days; Growth 4→8 in all three inputs; Benefits 4→8 | Time −0.167; Growth +0.80; Benefits +0.80 | +0.287 | Leans toward switching |
Experiment A: the label is neutral
Current Work Setup is Remote and new Work Setup is On-site. Nothing else changes. Money, Time, Quality, Growth, and Benefits are all 0.00; the final remains 0.000. Reversing the labels or using Hybrid produces the same result. The calculator may mention the setup change as context, but it contributes no points.
Experiment B: concrete burdens favor staying
The 45-minute commute over five days is 7.5 hours/week, so Time is −0.75. Stress rising from 5 to 7 gives stress improvement −0.40; because Stress is half of Quality and Happiness is unchanged, Quality is −0.20. Under equal weights:
Quality contribution = −0.20 × 20% = −0.040
Final = −0.190 → Leans toward staying
The result changes because of time and expected stress, not because “On-site” carries a penalty.
Experiment C: an On-site role can win
Here the current Remote job has all Growth inputs and Benefits at 4/10. The new On-site role has Learning, Advancement, Future Opportunities, and Benefits at 8/10. Its commute is short: 10 minutes each way over five days, or 1.667 hours/week. Everything else remains equal.
Growth contribution = +0.80 × 20% = +0.160
Benefits contribution = +0.80 × 20% = +0.160
Final = +0.287 → Leans toward switching
The score stops just below the +0.30 “Strong case” boundary. Again, the setup label adds nothing; explicit career and benefit improvements outweigh the short commute.
Translate a setup into questions you can answer
- Time: How many office days are actually required, how long is one leg of the trip, and do work hours differ?
- Quality: What stress and happiness do you realistically expect—not what the policy label implies?
- Growth: Will the role change learning, advancement, or future opportunities? Rate each separately.
- Benefits: Compare the actual package; do not use “flexible” as a substitute for a benefits rating.
- Outside the model: Consider workspace suitability, caregiving, disability access, team cohesion, location risk, and policy reliability separately.
Do not automatically edit commute or stress when selecting a setup. The calculator intentionally requires those judgments from you, so two people can evaluate the same arrangement differently without either being “wrong.”
Compare the consequences you expect
Use the setup label for context, then enter the schedule, time, wellbeing, growth, and benefit differences themselves.
Run a Work Setup ComparisonSee the commute calculations or inspect every rule on How It Works.