Debate Results

Speaker A argued that hybrid work lowers the risk of employees leaving their jobs. He pointed to results from a large trial at Trip.com, where people working part-time from home were just as productive as office workers but far less likely to quit. This suggested that hybrid policies can strengthen loyalty without sacrificing performance.

Speaker B questioned the claim but did not provide counter-evidence. Since Speaker A offered clear data while Speaker B only cast doubt, A met the burden of proof. The argument goes to Speaker A.

Speaker A said hybrid work was successful because "many colleagues I know are happier and more productive." These stories gave a personal view but only described individual cases, not the wider trend across a company.

Speaker B argued that anecdotes don't prove much on their own. He demanded statistics that cover an entire workforce. Since Speaker A stayed with stories while B insisted on systematic evidence, Speaker B carried the stronger argument here.

Both speakers agreed that hybrid policies help employees by offering freedom and improving retention. Speaker A stressed that companies also benefit, since performance stays steady and fewer people quit.

Speaker B pointed to the challenge for junior workers, who may miss out on mentoring when remote. Speaker A countered that structured programs could fill the gap. Because both sides made valid points but neither fully solved the problem, this round is a tie.