The how/where/why/how of work as we know it is still evolving, and for mobility leaders, the lingering question is how best to respond to it!

As part of The RES Forum’s Vision 2030 study, Weichert Workforce Mobility partnered with The RES Forum to explore how Global Mobility must evolve for what the research describes as a “post-global mobility” era—one defined by flexibility, fast-moving technology, and work models that look far less like traditional assignments and far more like a blend of hybrid, project-based, and AI-enabled ways of working.

In Part 2 of our 3-part Vision 2030 conversation, Jennifer Connell (Vice President, Advisory Services, Weichert Workforce Mobility) joins David Enser (Director, The RES Forum) and Soren Sturup-Toft (Immigration & Global Mobility Lead EMEA & APJ, Databricks) to explore what happens when traditional mobility models meet a workforce that expects more flexibility, less disruption, and clearer purpose. The result is a sharp, timely discussion that challenges old assumptions and points toward what comes next.

Here is a preview of the ideas shaping that conversation and why this video is well worth a watch!

Remote Work Isn’t One Strategy

One of the strongest themes in the discussion is that remote work can’t be treated as a single policy idea. Temporary remote work, permanent remote work, distributed teams, and virtual assignments each create different operational and talent implications. That distinction matters because companies are not all evolving at the same pace, and mobility teams need frameworks that are flexible enough to support a range of models, not just one.

New Assignment Models Are Taking Shape

The traditional long-term assignment is no longer the automatic answer, but that does not mean global experience is losing relevance. It means organizations are rethinking how it is delivered. Shorter-term, phased, distributed, and virtual models are gaining traction because they offer international exposure with less disruption. As Soren notes, “most people with the right incentives would have the appetite for a long-term assignment.” The takeaway is clear: the opportunity still matters, but the structure may need to change.

Mobility Is Getting More Complex

The conversation also makes clear that mobility is becoming considerably stickier to navigate on a human level. Family priorities, dual-career households, financial pressures, and broader social attitudes are all influencing willingness to move. In David’s words, the blockers were often “family, family, family.” For mobility leaders, that means program design must account for real-life complexity and not just business needs.

There’s No One-Size-Fits-All Path Forward

Another critical point? Organizations are approaching this moment from very different starting places. As Jennifer notes, companies are “all at different levels of maturity,” which means mobility strategy cannot rely on a single blueprint. The discussion also looks ahead to how AI and better data may help organizations connect skills, readiness, and opportunities more intelligently, pushing mobility closer to a true workforce planning function.

Tune In!

If Part 1 framed the forces reshaping work, Part 2 shows what those shifts mean in practice for mobility teams. It is a thoughtful conversation about flexibility, talent development, family realities, and the models that may define mobility’s future. And if Global Mobility is being asked to become more strategic, more adaptive, and more human-centered, this discussion delivers a balanced view of what that evolution could require.

Volume up – let’s go!

Stay Tuned: In Part 3 of this series, we’ll explore how AI could help match skills to roles and locations, what gig-economy realities mean for workforce planning, and the risks and compliance challenges that come with distributed teams.