Hybrid Working: The Big Considerations for SMB’s
Debbie Morrison • April 3, 2022

For the food & beverage and manufacturing industries, the COVID-19 pandemic created widespread challenges —everything from a surge in demand for food and beverage products, the manufacture and supply of packaging, raw materials and ingredients to staffing, distribution and logistics.


Rampant illness resulted in a reduction in workforces for many consumer goods organisations compounded the issues, forcing them to temporarily rely on untrained, unskilled workers or hire temporary help. Of course, this impacts efficiency, quality and potentially, food safety through mistakes in manufacturing or a potential lack of proper process controls, leading to higher risks, especially for food processing or manufacturing.


While close contact in food manufacturing environments is inevitable, social distancing is especially difficult on production lines where workers are typically within inches of each other. Measures like slowed production lines and socially distanced workers, whilst a feasible solution is difficult to maintain when high consumer demand pressures production facilities to operate at full capacity.


Manufacturing challenges aside, dispersed or remote working teams add another layer of difficulty to properly maintaining compliance with regulatory and best practice safety measures. Naturally, this throws up a range of safety, compliance and legal concerns for HR teams and business owners.


It’s been widely publicised and accepted that ‘hybrid’ work is predicted to continue, if not become the new norm. New COVID variants remain an ongoing risk, as such home working may well remain a critical safety measure for FMCG businesses. Moreover, employees increasingly value and expect some degree of working from home or flexible working at the least.


Given the continued pressures on businesses, there are a number of important factors start-ups and scale-up consumer goods companies must heed when making decisions around long-term hybrid-working, especially if they don’t have in-house HR or legal teams. Start-Up & Scale-Up FMCG Leaders need to be across a range of legal and HR regulatory and compliance requirements to successfully manage hybrid working over the long term.

 

The complexities of Industrial instrument restrictions on flexible work

Food & beverage manufacturers need to navigate the many industrial instruments that may restrict when and where work can be performed, when breaks must be taken and what amounts have to be paid to employees for work at different times. This adds a layer of complexity for hybrid working policies, which can make the retention of staff and casual workers challenging for executives and business leaders. Furthermore, attracting new employees can be difficult if restrictions that impact awards such as the Food, Beverage and Tobacco Manufacturing Award are not clearly communicated.

 

Cross-border hybrid work: The risks to compliance and insurance

For Australian FMCG businesses, it’s crucial to work closely with supply chain, distribution and 3PL partners in addition to managing employees working interstate or across jurisdictions since border restrictions create a number of challenges. Cross-border work, especially supply and distribution of goods or raw materials can impact state-based compliance requirements, including, for example, any changes regarding the jurisdictional coverage under discrimination and work health and safety laws and confirming the correct payroll tax and workers compensation arrangements are in place. 


According to a study conducted by Aberdeen Group, 45% of supply chain executives say that they are experiencing increased pressure for regulatory compliance and internal compliance to contracts. To avoid the risk of bad reputation, ethical or compliance issues with suppliers, organisations need to carefully assess their suppliers both new and existing since supply chain risks have a direct impact on the firm’s profitability according to 69% of supply chain executives. In addition, the ability to meet customer demand (54%) and supply disruptions (50%).

 

Avoid Hybrid-Working Prejudice

The flexibility afforded by hybrid working can be considered one way in which employers can meet some employee expectations when it comes to diversity and inclusion. However, Start-Up & Scale-Up consumer goods organisations that employ a mix of office and site-based staff need to navigate hybrid working with care to ensure the pros don’t become cons.


Having learned to live with COVID-19, the sense of a return to normality in recent months could see a swift move by consumer goods companies to mandate a return to the office. Physically present employees will feel like a boon for employers, however, employee attitudes have changed and for many office workers, that will not be welcome news. 

Navigating the tensions resulting from the paradox of low paid, casual staff who have had to work on-premise versus office workers who’ve enjoyed the flexibility of working from home needs careful handling by executives.


The COVID-19 pandemic put these casual workers in the front line, those in manufacturing, food and beverage production and retail were classified as essential. In contrast to office workers who could work from home, in effect protecting themselves from COVID-19 risk, many front-line workers had no choice but to work on site. HR leaders have been challenged to balance the safety and wellbeing of these workers while keeping them motivated and ensuring business continuity. 


Employer responses such as paying bonuses have been band-aid reactions at best. Whilst bonuses may help to motivate workers in the short-term, broader, more considered approaches from HR are required to avoid longer-term problems. For example, base pay has generally not improved for these workers according to a study by Corkery & Mahashwari, 2020). Furthermore, access to sick pay and better health insurance or support for health & wellbeing hasn’t improved, despite employees facing increasing workloads and greater exposure to COVID-19 as consumer demand continued to rise. Needless to say, the mismanagement of this can be costly. Employers should give consideration to how they can help to support employees return to the office rather than implementing blanket policies on a full-time return to the office.

 

Managing Health & Safety Remotely

The benefits of ‘hybrid’ work don’t come without risk. Employers often have much lower visibility and practical control of remote working environments, in addition, the excess work hours, stress, anxiety, isolation or loneliness all need to be considered.


It’s the responsibility of business leaders to proactively take the necessary steps to support employees working remotely, through the regular communication of health and wellbeing messages addressing risks to physical safety and mental health. 
 

Inclusivity and Wellbeing for remote staff

Whilst there are tangible benefits to hybrid-working, there is also the potential for unintended cultural consequences for teams who rarely interact in person. With employees and job seekers alike expecting greater efforts from employers to not only build diverse and inclusive company cultures but to empower and support the health and wellbeing of staff.
Ensuring employees feel connected and engaged has never been so important. Business leaders must proactively work to implement initiatives that bring employees together in ways that are meaningful and enjoyable for them. Setting aside the time and resources for public recognition, regular communication (especially for remote staff) and team building or social activities can help employees to feel included and valued. 


Whilst technology and collaboration tools can certainly be useful to help enable greater communication, the onus is on leaders to ensure the initiatives and practices are established in the first place, ensuring these tools are used effectively. The key to success here is flexibility. Giving employees a role in determining what initiatives are implemented and how they are managed is critical. Organisations should be cognisant of the desires and expectations existing employees and future generations have of workplace culture. Both are increasingly interested and perceptive of what organisations are doing to safeguard health and well being and promote diversity and inclusion in the workplace, especially in light of what has been termed the ‘Great Resignation’ and the current war on talent.


How ELR Can Help

At ELR Executive, we recognise that FMCG Start-ups and Scale-ups may not have the in-house HR and Legal expertise to safely navigate the complicated legal and compliance  regulations to properly manage and safeguard staff and themselves in a hybrid working environment over the longterm. We work closely with our partners to help them identify talent who are skilled in handling the complexities of human capital management for the consumer goods industry. 


If you’re interested in understanding how we can help develop a talent pool of future leaders, you can arrange a confidential discussion with one of our experts today by clicking this link 'chat'.

Why You Should Be Hiring Leaders Who Embrace Discomfort

By John Elliott • April 6, 2025
Comfort has become the silent killer of executive performance. In an era defined by disruption, volatility, and shrinking margins, too many leadership teams are still optimising for control, not adaptability. They talk about transformation, but build cultures of stability. They prize clarity, yet avoid the ambiguity where real growth lives. The problem isn’t capability. It’s discomfort intolerance. The solution? Start hiring and promoting leaders who deliberately seek discomfort—not just those who can tolerate it when it arrives. Growth Mindset Isn’t Enough Anymore You’ve heard the term "growth mindset" countless times. It’s become a leadership cliché. But it’s not wrong—it’s just incomplete. A growth mindset says, "I believe I can learn." Discomfort-driven leadership says, "I will actively seek out the hardest experiences because that’s where I’ll grow fastest." The distinction matters. Leaders with a growth mindset tend to thrive when external change forces them to adapt. But leaders who embrace discomfort create those conditions on purpose. They invite hard feedback. They question their own success. They take action before external pressure arrives. According to a 2023 study by Deloitte, only 22% of executives say their leadership team is “very prepared” for the future—despite record spending on transformation programmes (Deloitte Human Capital Trends, 2023). That gap exists because most teams are trained to manage change , not lead into uncertainty . Ask yourself: Are you hiring leaders who wait for disruption—or ones who walk towards it? Discomfort Is the Driver of Strategic Advantage Companies don’t fall behind because they make bad decisions. They fall behind because their leaders avoid the hard ones. In high-stakes industries like FMCG, where regulatory pressure, margin compression, and shifting consumer loyalty are accelerating, comfort is dangerous. It fosters: Short-termism Decision paralysis Lack of innovation Cultural stagnation McKinsey found that organisations with a strong tolerance for ambiguity—where leaders frequently challenge their own assumptions—are 2.4x more likely to be top-quartile performers on total shareholder returns (McKinsey & Company, 2022). In other words: embracing discomfort isn’t a trait—it’s a multiplier. Let’s take an example. When COVID hit, Lion Brewery—one of Australia's largest beer producers—was forced to rethink logistics and supply overnight. But smaller craft breweries who had already diversified through direct-to-consumer models adapted faster. Why? Their founders had already been operating in discomfort. They were trained for volatility. What Discomfort-Driven Leaders Actually Do Differently You can spot these leaders. They don’t always look like the most confident in the room—but they’re always the most effective in a storm. They: Seek feedback from critics, not fans Prioritise strategy over popularity Tackle underperformance head-on—even if it means conflict Ask hard questions that slow down groupthink Regularly step out of their functional lane to challenge assumptions They also act . Not rashly—but decisively. In a recent Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) survey, directors ranked “resilience and adaptability” as the #1 trait they now seek in new appointments—outranking experience for the first time (AICD, 2024). That’s not a trend. It’s a shift in what leadership now demands. The Real Cost of Hiring for Comfort Not hiring discomfort-driven leaders isn’t just a missed opportunity—it’s a risk. Here’s what it’s costing you: Strategic Drift: Without challenge, strategies become stale. Your team optimises yesterday’s model. Talent Exodus: Top performers disengage when they see leadership avoiding tough calls. Innovation Bottlenecks: Safe cultures don’t take smart risks. New ideas die in committee. Crisis Fragility: Leaders who haven’t been tested won’t perform when stakes are high. Bain & Company found that companies with decision-making cultures built around speed and tension—not consensus—were 95% more likely to deliver sustained value creation (Bain, 2023). Ask yourself: Is your executive team equipped for bold calls—or just built for calm waters? How to Identify Discomfort-Driven Leaders in Interviews Everyone talks a good game in interviews. But few have the scar tissue that comes from operating in real discomfort. The trick is to go beyond surface-level success stories. Here’s how: Ask Better Questions: “What’s the most uncomfortable decision you’ve made in the last 12 months—and how did it play out?” “Tell me about a time you got strong pushback from your team. What did you do?” “What’s a belief you held strongly that you’ve now abandoned?” “When have you chosen a path that was harder in the short term, but better long term?” Look for: Specificity (vagueness = theory, not lived experience) Self-awareness without self-promotion Signs of humility: they talk about learning, not just winning Evidence of risk-taking: role changes, cross-functional moves, or failed experiments Pro tip: Ask referees how the leader handles ambiguity. Not just performance. This will tell you more about how they lead under pressure. What to Do Now: Practical Actions for Executive Teams If you want to build a leadership culture of discomfort, you have to engineer it. It won’t happen organically in high-performing, risk-averse teams. Here’s how to start: Audit Your Current Team: When was the last time each leader took on something that scared them? Rethink Talent Criteria: Shift from stability and experience to adaptability and action under pressure. Redesign Development: Stretch your execs with ambiguous, cross-functional challenges—not just workshops. Model It at the Top: If the CEO isn’t embracing discomfort, no one else will. You don’t need to create chaos. You just need to stop insulating your leaders from discomfort—and start asking them to seek it. The Discomfort Dividend You can’t build a future-ready business with comfort-first leadership. The next generation of strategic advantage will come not from better processes or faster tech—but from bolder human decisions. From leaders who are willing to feel awkward, wrong, or out of their depth—because they know that’s where the value is. So next time you're hiring a leader, ask yourself: Are they looking for clarity—or ready to lead without it? Do they want the role—or are they ready for the risk that comes with it? Are they seeking comfort—or prepared to create discomfort for progress? Because in 2025, comfort is a luxury your business can’t afford .

Are You Hiring for Emotional Intelligence — or Emotional Avoidance?

By John Elliott • March 24, 2025
Emotional intelligence is one of the most valued traits in executive leadership today.  It’s also one of the most misunderstood. In interviews, every candidate knows how to speak about empathy, collaboration, and “bringing people on the journey.” But when does that emotional intelligence start to look more like emotional avoidance? If you’re hiring into a senior role in consumer goods or food and beverage manufacturing, this distinction matters. Hiring someone who avoids hard conversations risks building a culture that performs around problems, not through them. The leaders delivering the best outcomes in 2025 understand how to build trust and rapport — without dodging the accountability that comes with real leadership. Emotional Intelligence: What It Gets Right In complex, fast-paced industries like FMCG and food production, leaders need more than technical expertise. They must influence, de-escalate tension, manage change, and build alignment across functions. That’s where emotional intelligence shines. High-EQ leaders are more likely to: Retain talent through strong, trust-based relationships Remain composed in high-stakes environments Reduce conflict through proactive, clear communication Drive psychological safety while still pushing for results The research backs this up. According to a 2024 EHL Insights report , emotionally intelligent leaders improve employee satisfaction, engagement, and collaboration — all essential in manufacturing settings where coordination between departments is critical. But there’s a fine line between emotional intelligence and emotional overcorrection. When Emotional Intelligence Becomes Emotional Avoidance The risk is subtle: leaders who over-index on empathy may begin to avoid the discomfort of conflict altogether. That looks like: Letting underperformance linger to “keep the peace” Over-relying on collaboration instead of making firm decisions Avoiding direct feedback Prioritising harmony at the expense of clarity A 2024 Forbes article described how emotionally avoidant leaders — despite good intentions — often undermine the very culture they’re trying to protect. Accountability erodes, decisions slow down, and high performers become disengaged. We’ve seen this play out in executive search mandates across the sector. On paper, a candidate may appear ideal: emotionally intelligent, highly personable, well-liked. But dig deeper, and a pattern emerges — reluctance to address performance issues, vague language around past team challenges, and a track record of avoiding direct confrontation. That’s not emotional intelligence. That’s fear, dressed as empathy. Emotional Intelligence Is a Must — But It’s Not the Full Picture More organisations are making emotional intelligence a key leadership trait in hiring — and for good reason. In high-change environments, emotionally intelligent leaders: Build trust across teams quickly Navigate transformation without losing people along the way Stay composed under pressure Handle interpersonal complexity with clarity But some of the most costly mis-hires we see come from leaders who present as highly empathetic, but struggle to lead through tension. Not because they lack EQ — but because they confuse it with keeping everyone comfortable. The difference? The leaders delivering the best outcomes in 2024 and 2025 are doing both: Holding people accountable while building engagement Delivering hard feedback without defensiveness Balancing calm with courage These are the leaders who retain high performers, protect standards, and still earn trust across the business. Hiring Outcomes Are Better When EQ Is Tested in Context The most effective hiring processes we’re seeing in the market today aren’t just asking, “Is this leader emotionally intelligent?” They’re asking: Can this person hold accountability and empathy at the same time? Have they delivered under pressure without letting performance slide? Do they create safe cultures that are also high-performing? The difference in outcomes is clear: More resilient leadership teams Better cultural fit Fewer surprises post-placement What to Look for in Executive Interviews Hiring emotionally intelligent leaders isn’t just about what they say — it’s about how they’ve acted in real moments of challenge. The most effective hiring panels are getting beyond rehearsed narratives by asking sharper questions: To probe real emotional intelligence: “Tell me about a time you had to lead a team through a change that wasn’t popular.” “How do you approach a conversation when someone on your team is underperforming?” “Describe a time you disagreed with your CEO or board. What did you do?” Watch for signals: Are they clear and specific, or vague and diplomatic? Do they show respect and resolve? Do they accept responsibility, or redirect it elsewhere? In reference checks, ask: “How did they manage pressure or uncertainty?” “Were they able to deliver difficult feedback directly?” “Did they avoid difficult decisions in the name of team cohesion?” When emotional intelligence is genuine, it shows up in results — not just relationships. Why This Matters Now Organisations in the consumer goods and food manufacturing sectors are undergoing constant disruption — from digitisation to regulatory shifts to cost pressures. In this environment, leadership soft skills aren’t optional. But it’s not enough to hire likeable leaders. The ones delivering real impact are those who bring empathy and edge. They’re able to sit with discomfort, hold the mirror up, and still bring people with them. That’s what true emotional intelligence looks like in 2025. So when you’re hiring your next senior leader, don’t just ask if they care. Ask if they can care and confront — with courage, with clarity, and with conviction. Because your culture doesn’t need more harmony. It needs more truth.
Share by: