Tom Denny, Head of People at Codat - Output Over Hours Worked

On the AllVoices Reimagining Company Culture podcast, we sat down with Tom Denny, Head of People at Codat, to dig into shifting from hours worked to outcomes delivered. Having spent multiple years at a recruitment agency specializing in Software Engineering, Tom landed Codat as a client when the Founders were right at the start of their journey. He had the pleasure of assisting them with the searches for their first-ever employees and helped grow the team to 24 over a year and a half.

The conversation moves past the usual talking points. Instead of treating output over hours as an HR theme, Tom Denny treats it as an operational discipline that sits in the daily decisions managers make about people, priorities, and trust. Below, the takeaways HR leaders, employee relations specialists, and executive teams will find most useful.

The discussion below pulls on several threads from the episode and connects them to current research and what AllVoices sees across hundreds of People teams.

What Output Over Hours Looks Like in Practice

Output Over Hours is one of those words HR teams use freely, but the on-the-ground version is much messier. In the conversation with Tom Denny, several patterns showed up that mirror what a Harvard Business Review study on hybrid work also highlights about effective people work. The gap between the slide-deck version and the daily practice is where most programs fall apart.

The data backs the case. Gallup's State of the Global Workplace data shows that organizations treating output over hours as a real discipline outperform peers on engagement, retention, and the cultural metrics that matter most over a multi-year horizon. Companies that treat it as messaging see short-term lift and long-term decline.

For HR leaders building People Team Efficiency programs, that means starting with the everyday touchpoints where output over hours either lands or fails: hiring loops, onboarding, manager 1:1s, and performance conversations. These are the places where intention turns into experience, and where employees decide whether they trust the company enough to stay, speak up, and do their best work.

The pattern across high-functioning HR teams is consistent. They write fewer policies, run more pilots, and spend more time in conversation with managers who are actually doing the work. That discipline is harder than rolling out a campaign, but it is the difference between output over hours as a phrase and output over hours as a result.

How HR Teams Make Output Over Hours Operational

The shift from concept to operation is where most teams stall. Two questions usually surface in workshops with People leaders.

Where should output over hours live in the org?

Ownership matters. Programs that sit only with HR rarely get traction. The strongest organizations pair central ownership in HR with distributed accountability across people managers, with a feedback loop into leadership. Employee Engagement can help build the capacity to run that distributed model without losing visibility, and gives the People team a single place to track what is actually happening.

What does success look like in 12 months?

Most teams need a one-year mark with concrete outcomes: a measurable change in workplace flexibility scores, a defined set of policy and process changes, and named owners for the work. Without that, the program drifts and budget questions become harder to defend. The honest version of a 12-month plan also includes two or three things you tried and decided not to repeat.

What Actually Works When You Lead Output Over Hours

Three patterns repeat across People teams that get this work right. The principles cut across industry and company size.

Define the outcome before the calendar

If managers can't articulate what done looks like, hours become the proxy. Define done first.

Train managers to measure differently

Most managers were promoted using a presenteeism playbook. Outcome-based work needs new evaluation skills.

Protect deep work, not just flex hours

Output-based culture only works if employees actually have time to do focused work. Calendar bloat will sink the model.

These three principles also depend on the underlying culture. Without a baseline of performance review, most operational changes get rejected by the organization's immune system. Build the foundation first.

Where Employee Relations Fits Into Output Over Hours

Whatever the topic, employee relations sits underneath. Output Over Hours programs that ignore the ER reality get blindsided by a case that should have been resolved early. AllVoices builds investigations management and HR case management so HR teams can connect the surface-level work on output over hours to the deeper work of resolving issues, tracking patterns, and acting on what employees raise. The two are tightly linked: when employees see issues handled fairly, they trust the rest of the work too.

How ER data informs Output Over Hours strategy

Issue patterns, response times, and resolution outcomes give HR a clearer picture than survey data alone. When the ER data is integrated into Company Culture workflows, leaders can see how output over hours translates into the lived experience of employees who raise concerns, and what to do about it. The teams that move fastest tend to review case themes monthly and feed those insights into the broader people strategy, instead of treating ER as a separate, reactive function.

Frequently Asked Questions About Output Over Hours

What does output-based work mean?

Output-based work measures performance by results delivered, not hours logged. The job description specifies outcomes, the calendar is flexible, and the manager evaluates work against agreed outcomes.

Does output-based work apply to every job?

No. Roles where presence creates value, like in-person customer service, healthcare, retail, and physical operations, still require time-based scheduling. Knowledge work is where outcome-based models fit best.

How do you start moving to output-based work?

Pilot with one team. Define three to five clear outcomes per role, agree on cadence and check-ins, and run for 90 days. Adjust based on what you learn before scaling.

How do you handle high performers who burn out under output-based work?

Output-based culture has to come with explicit limits. Managers should monitor for chronic over-delivery as carefully as under-delivery, and step in when patterns emerge.

Can outcome-based work replace performance reviews?

It can replace traditional ratings, but you still need structured conversations. Most teams move toward continuous feedback, quarterly business reviews, and annual development discussions.

The Bottom Line for HR Leaders

Output Over Hours is not a posture. It's a set of decisions, repeated over time, by people who control budgets, promotions, calendars, and the daily experience of work. The HR leaders who get traction stop treating this as a campaign and start treating it as ongoing operational practice. That reframing matters because it changes how you measure success and where you put your energy week to week.

That shift requires data, follow-through, and a clear point of view. a Harvard Business Review study on hybrid work and the broader research community make the business case clearer every year. The companies that act on it consistently win on retention, culture, and outcomes that show up on the financial statement. The ones that keep treating the work as branding tend to lose ground quietly, then noisily.

The conversation with Tom Denny is a useful reminder that the work is doable. None of it requires a huge HR team or a massive budget. It requires clear thinking, consistent execution, and the willingness to adjust when the data tells you to. Pair that mindset with the right tooling and the right partners, and output over hours stops being aspirational and becomes a measurable part of how the business runs.

Want to see how AllVoices supports HR teams running this work? Book a demo.