Tag: Office

Out of Office, Not Out of Mind …

Posted on by Paul Stradling

In this article, we look at various ways staff can stay cyber-secure while away, from setting safer out-of-office replies to avoiding phishing on the move and protecting devices abroad.

Out-of-Office Messages Can Put You at Risk

Most employees see out-of-office (OoO) replies as a harmless admin task. However, the wrong message can actually open the door to social engineering and impersonation attacks. It’s not the message itself that’s risky but what it reveals, and to whom.

For example, attackers actively scan for out-of-office responses which include return dates, job roles, colleague names, or even direct phone numbers. These details can be used to craft credible phishing emails that appear to come from someone inside your organisation or a known supplier.

To reduce the risk, the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) advises that organisations set clear rules for OoO replies. The most important steps include:

– Using different messages for internal and external recipients.

– Avoiding specific return dates or colleague names in external replies.

– Limiting details to a simple confirmation of unavailability.

For example, instead of “I’m in Spain until 15 August—please contact Lisa in Accounts,” a better external message would be: “I’m currently unavailable and will respond to your message on my return.”

Internally, it’s fine to include a bit more information, but it should still be concise if possible. The aim is to help colleagues, not advertise an absence to outsiders.

Phishing Attacks Are Timed to Catch You Off Guard

When staff are away from their usual routines, especially while travelling, they’re more likely to fall for phishing attempts. This is no coincidence and cyber criminals actively exploit periods like school holidays and summer breaks to increase attacks.

The UK Government’s Cyber Security Breaches Survey 2025 found that phishing remains the most common form of cyber attack, accounting for 85 per cent of incidents reported by businesses and 86 per cent by charities. The same survey estimated over 8.5 million cyber crimes against UK businesses in the past 12 months, of which more than 7.8 million were phishing-related.

These attacks often take the form of fake hotel confirmations, airline refund requests, or urgent security notifications that appear to come from well-known brands. A mobile phone notification while queuing at an airport (while distracted and in an unfamiliar environment) is far more likely to be clicked than an email during a typical office day.

To mitigate this, staff should be reminded before going away that:

– No reputable company will ask for login credentials by email or SMS.

– Links and attachments in unexpected travel-related messages should never be clicked without verifying the source.

– Suspicious messages can be reported to report@phishing.gov.uk or via text to 7726.

Tip: Pre-holiday reminders and short cyber awareness refreshers can make a significant difference, especially when phishing attempts are designed to catch people off guard.

Travel Exposes Devices to Extra Risks

It’s worth noting that business travellers face a different set of risks, especially if they’re logging into company systems abroad. For example, public Wi-Fi networks, hotel business centres, and even charging stations can all pose threats if used without care.

With this in mind, the NCSC recommends several precautions that should now be considered standard practice:

– Keep all software and security updates current before leaving.

– Use strong passwords and enable multi-factor authentication.

– Turn off Bluetooth and Wi-Fi auto-connect settings to avoid rogue connections.

– Only use secure, private Wi-Fi or a trusted mobile hotspot.

– Avoid public USB charging points, which can be used to extract data or install malware.

– Use a Virtual Private Network (VPN) when connecting to work resources remotely.

VPNs encrypt your internet traffic, reducing the risk of interception. Without one, using a free Wi-Fi network at an airport or hotel could expose email, login credentials or confidential files to anyone else on the same network.

Temporary Devices

Some organisations now go a step further, issuing temporary devices for international work trips. These are pre-configured with minimal data and set up to be wiped remotely in case of theft or compromise.

What Happens If a Device Is Lost or Stolen?

According to recent government data, over 2,000 official laptops, phones and tablets were reported lost or stolen in a single year. While most were encrypted, even a brief exposure could result in leaked credentials, compromised apps, or unauthorised access to systems if multi-factor authentication is not used.

In the private sector, the same risks apply. For example, if a staff member leaves a work phone in a taxi or hotel room, the consequences can range from inconvenience to data breach, particularly if no backup exists or if the device grants access to sensitive files without additional controls.

The most effective countermeasure is a layered one:

– Encrypted storage.

– Device lockout after inactivity.

– Remote tracking and wipe capability.

– Strict separation between personal and work accounts.

Employees should also know who to notify if a device is lost, and how quickly a compromise can escalate if not handled swiftly.

Oversharing on Social Media Can Be Just as Dangerous

Even without phishing or device theft, sharing too much about travel plans can lead to risk. A well-timed LinkedIn post saying “off to Greece for two weeks” may seem harmless, but it confirms a person’s absence to anyone watching, including cyber criminals looking to exploit out-of-office gaps.

Posting photos of boarding passes, passports or hotel locations on social media can also invite fraud. In recent cases, scammers have used partial passport information combined with leaked credentials to access travel accounts or generate fraudulent documents.

The safest approach is to wait until you’re home before sharing holiday updates publicly, or to keep posts strictly limited to private audiences.

Clear Expectations and Small Changes Make a Big Difference

While cyber threats grow more sophisticated each year, the most effective defences are still relatively simple:

– Don’t overshare in auto-replies.

– Watch for phishing while on the move.

– Keep devices locked down and updated.

– Avoid unnecessary risks abroad.

UK businesses can do more to embed these habits into everyday culture, especially during peak holiday months. Even if a full training session isn’t feasible, a short checklist or pre-departure reminder can reduce exposure significantly.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The risks outlined here are not theoretical. They reflect common oversights that continue to be exploited by attackers year after year. For UK businesses, especially those with remote or hybrid teams, these issues matter because they affect every department. A single out-of-office reply or a misjudged click while abroad can lead to reputational damage, operational disruption or financial loss.

The increase in phishing attacks during holiday periods shows how cyber criminals adapt their tactics to match human behaviour. The fact that over 85 per cent of cyber incidents reported by UK businesses now involve phishing should act as a clear warning. Routine travel or time off is not a reason to lower defences. In many cases, it is when organisations are most vulnerable.

All this creates a strong case for better awareness, firmer controls around device use while travelling and more consistent defaults for things like out-of-office replies and remote access. These measures are not expensive. In most cases, they come down to clear expectations, simple communications and a few minutes of preparation that can prevent much bigger problems later.

For individual employees, these risks are not always obvious, particularly for those in non-technical roles. That is why basic guidance on travel-related security should be part of the normal rhythm of work. Whether someone is attending an overseas meeting or switching off for a well-earned break, the same principles apply.

This also matters for HR, compliance and communications teams. The way cover is arranged, the wording of public messages and the tone of internal guidance all play a part in how securely staff behave while away. Responsibility for this does not sit with IT alone.

In the end, protecting an organisation during staff holidays is not about large-scale policy overhauls. It is about recognising that certain periods carry higher risk and planning accordingly. When simple habits like cautious messaging, phishing awareness and secure device use are embedded into daily working culture, the chances of a successful attack drop significantly. Also, in a landscape where cyber criminals only need one opening, those habits are what keep your business protected.

Tech News : Mass Resignations From Office-Only Jobs

Posted on by Paul Stradling

Nearly half of UK professionals would rather leave their jobs than return to the office five days a week, according to new research from recruitment giant Hays.

Disconnect

The findings of the Hays survey appear to highlight a growing disconnect between employee preferences and employer policies on post-pandemic working models and, it seems, the potential consequences could be severe. With hybrid working now the norm for most office-based staff, businesses pushing for a full return risk not just resistance, but an outright exodus of talent.

Hybrid Working Still Dominates

Since the pandemic reshaped traditional work models almost overnight, hybrid working has emerged as the clear favourite for many professionals. Hays’ Spring 2025 Employment Trends survey, which canvassed over 8,000 workers and employers across the UK, found that a massive 77 per cent of professionals are now working in some form of hybrid setup. The most common arrangement, three days in the office and two days remote, is the one adopted by a quarter of all companies surveyed.

Although the survey highlights how one in five employers now allows staff to choose their own working pattern, this figure has dropped slightly from 26 per cent in the previous survey, suggesting a slight shift towards more structured expectations.

Very Few Companies Plan To Increase Office Attendance

The overall preference, however, is clear, and not just among employees. While a minority of companies are increasing office attendance, only 8 per cent of employers said they plan to enforce a full-time return within the next six months. Meanwhile, 66 per cent admitted they were concerned about potential backlash if they did.

Why Don’t Workers Want To Return To The Office?

According to the Hays survey, the key factor that’s fuelling this resistance to returning full-time is cost. Hays found that 73 per cent of professionals cited commuting expenses as a major factor in their reluctance to come back to the office more often. A full return would lead to higher costs for 88 per cent of workers, and the financial strain is particularly pronounced among women.

For example, 59 per cent of women surveyed said commuting would significantly impact their finances, compared with 41 per cent of men. This gender gap also plays out in the headline figure, i.e. while 48 per cent of all respondents said they would consider quitting over a full-time RTO mandate, that figure rose to 58 per cent for women, and fell to 42 per cent for men.

Pam Lindsay-Dunn, COO of Hays UK and Ireland, has warned that businesses could be on the brink of a talent crisis if they push too hard, saying, “Employers need to realise they are at serious risk of losing top talent if they make a full-time return-to-office compulsory,” and that, “Our research clearly shows how highly professionals still value the option to work from home.”

Other Factors

Although cost was cited as the main reason to resist returning full-time to the office in the Hays survey, other factors known to make a hybrid work model preferable include:

– Work-life balance. Many workers now organise their lives around flexible routines, from school pickups to avoiding rush-hour stress.

– Employee wellbeing. Studies have repeatedly linked flexible working to lower stress levels and improved mental health.

– Productivity. As highlighted by the Hays survey, a majority of employers (52 per cent) said there was no difference in productivity between home and office workers. Another 19 per cent said remote workers performed better, while only 13 per cent believed office-based staff were more productive.

‘Look At The Bigger Picture,’ Hays Urges Employers

Despite the push from some corporate giants to increase in-office time, the data suggests this approach is increasingly out of step with employee sentiment. Recent moves from companies like Amazon, PwC and Santander to tighten RTO rules have already triggered staff unrest, and Hays’ findings suggest the UK workforce may not respond kindly to similar measures elsewhere.

Hays’ Lindsay-Dunn has advised employers to weigh their options carefully, saying: “Before making any significant changes to their current working model, employers must look at the bigger picture,” and “That means factoring in commuting costs, wellbeing, productivity and the benefits that hybrid working brings to both the individual and the business.”

Indeed, previous research by the University of Pittsburgh warns that companies pushing full-time office returns risk triggering a “brain drain”, with high performers, particularly women, more likely to leave in favour of flexible employers.

Retention Risks and Recruitment Challenges

For UK businesses already grappling with talent shortages and recruitment pressures, the findings from the Hays Spring 2025 Employment Trends survey raise red flags. If nearly half the professional workforce is willing to walk over RTO demands, the potential for disruption is hard to ignore. Employers may, for example, face:

– Higher recruitment costs. Replacing experienced staff is expensive and time-consuming.

– Loss of institutional knowledge. Departing staff can take critical skills and insights with them.

– Brand damage. Perceptions of inflexibility may deter top candidates from applying.

At a time when retaining skilled staff is already a challenge, a misstep on working policy could prove costly.

For example, while many companies have increased expectations around office time, in reality, actual enforcement remains rare. This may reflect a broader recognition that rigid models could backfire, particularly when productivity data doesn’t strongly favour office-based work.

Not Everyone’s A Fan of Hybrid Working

While hybrid working is widely embraced, it’s not without its critics. For example, some business leaders argue that in-person collaboration fosters creativity, innovation, and company culture, particularly for newer staff or junior employees. Others raise concerns around remote management, communication gaps, and the long-term impact on team cohesion.

However, it should be noted here that evidence on these points is mixed. For example, research from the University of Melbourne found that companies with flexible working policies performed better on the stock market over the long term. This could mean that while some managers may feel more in control with staff on-site, this doesn’t always translate to better outcomes.

Also, full flexibility may not suit every worker. For example, some employees, especially those in shared accommodation or with limited space, may prefer office environments where they can focus. That’s why some employers still offer office-first policies with optional home working, depending on role, seniority or team dynamics.

That said, Hays’ latest findings suggest that forcing a full return across the board could do more harm than good.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

What this research makes clear is that the conversation around work patterns is far from over. While some employers are moving to reassert control over when and where work happens, many employees remain firmly committed to the flexibility they’ve grown used to since the pandemic. Hybrid working has shifted from being a stopgap solution to a preferred way of life for a large part of the UK workforce, and attempts to reverse that may meet more resistance than some leaders expect.

For UK businesses, the Hays survey figures appear to indicate that poorly handled return-to-office policy may not just lead to internal dissatisfaction, but it could lead to the loss of valued staff, weakened morale, and a dent in employer reputation. In a competitive labour market, especially in knowledge-based sectors, retaining skilled professionals means understanding what motivates them, and right now, for many, that includes the autonomy and balance hybrid work affords.

However, it’s not only employers who have decisions to make. Employees, too, are weighing their priorities, e.g. cost of living pressures, childcare responsibilities, commuting time and mental wellbeing are all influencing what the “ideal” work setup looks like. While not every role or sector can offer the same level of flexibility, the evidence suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach won’t cut it.

The implications may also apply to other stakeholders as well, e.g. from HR teams and line managers tasked with navigating new expectations, to policymakers and transport planners grappling with changes in commuting patterns. Even commercial landlords and local high streets could feel the knock-on effects of long-term shifts in where and how people work.

Overall, the Hays findings could be seen as serving as a timely reminder that workplace culture is evolving, and any business that wants to keep its best people may need to evolve with it.

Tech News : Headaches For MSPs As Microsoft Unbundles Teams

Posted on by Paul Stradling

Microsoft’s announcement that it will sell its chat and video app Teams separately from its Office product globally is likely to cause considerable headaches for IT departments and managed service providers.

Why Unbundle? 

Teams is to be unbundled and sold separately globally (it’s been unbundled in the EU since last October) in response to an antitrust lawsuit and to avert the possible associated fine.

An antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft over its bundling of Teams with its Office suite in the EU was initiated based on a complaint from competitor Slack Technologies in 2020. Teams was originally bundled with Office 365 as a replacement for Skype back in 2017 and became popular during the pandemic.

However, rival Slack (now owned by Salesforce) alleged that Microsoft was illegally tying its Teams application to its dominant Office productivity suites, thereby leveraging its market dominance to stifle competition unfairly.

The European Commission said at the time: “Microsoft may grant Teams a distribution advantage by not giving customers the choice on whether or not to include access to that product when they subscribe to their productivity suites.” 

This led to The European Commission investigating Microsoft over its amalgamation of Office and Teams since 2020 and then to Microsoft separating Teams for Office 365 In October last year in the European Economic Area and Switzerland.

Pressure 

Continued pressure from the regulator and the desire to (understandably) avoid a fine that could potentially be up to 10 per cent of its global revenue has now led Microsoft to announce that it will now be unbundling Teams and selling it separately, globally.

How Much?

Starting from April 1, customers can either continue with their current licensing deal, renew, update or switch to the new offers. Unbundled Teams will be available for new customers as a standalone app for $5.25, whereas Office packages without Teams will range between $7.75 and $54.75.

It’s worth noting that these figures may vary by country and currency and Microsoft hasn’t yet disclosed prices for current packaged products.

Trouble For MSPs 

Unfortunately, although the move may be good news for Microsoft’s rivals, it’s not a welcome announcement from the perspective of the many managed service providers (MSPs) who are resellers of Microsoft’s packages and products. Indeed, for MSPs it is likely to mean headaches in several key areas, such as:

– Service delivery and integration. Unbundling may disrupt how MSPs bundle services, demanding changes in delivery models due to the deep integration of Teams with Office applications.

– Billing and subscription management Separate billing for Teams and Office could complicate financial operations, requiring more administrative effort to manage distinct subscriptions and compliance.

– Training and support. A standalone Teams setup might increase support queries and necessitate updated training materials, placing additional demands on MSP resources.

– Client satisfaction and retention. Crucially, the change could confuse clients who are accustomed to (and expect) the convenience of integrated packages, potentially affecting their satisfaction and loyalty (during the adjustment phase), lowering the barriers to exit from their supplier.

– Market competition. Facing competitors offering more cohesive solutions, MSPs may need to reevaluate their offerings and pricing to stay competitive.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

This is not an unexpected development, given Microsoft’s unbundling of Teams in the EU last October, continued regulator and competitor pressure, and the threat of a massive fine. It’s good news for Microsoft’s competitors like Slack, however, for Microsoft, some say that even this concession and change in its product strategy may not be enough to avoid a fine.

The complications and unsettling effects it could have on UK business customers could also cause some considerable problems for the UK’s many MSPs. For example, they may find themselves having to navigate a more complex service landscape, facing challenges in service integration, billing management, and customer support. This could mean that MSPs will have to now monitor the impacts carefully and adjust their strategies to minimise the likely negative effects on their business and client relationships.

This could mean having to adapt current offerings and trying their best to ensure seamless integration and support for both Teams and Office applications independently – an extra challenge in an already difficult market.