Workplace flexibility is often discussed as a benefit. For the national security workforce, it is increasingly a matter of mission readiness, retention, and trust. In this episode, workforce strategist and former federal executive Mika Cross joins the podcast to talk about how flexibility is shaping the future of federal and cleared work—and why getting it wrong carries real risk.
Debates around telework and hybrid work are not new to government. What has changed is the workforce landscape. Cross notes that the question is no longer whether flexibility works. Federal data shows that strategic flexibility can save taxpayer dollars, expand access to talent, and support productivity. The challenge now is implementing it thoughtfully, especially in secure environments where not all work can be performed remotely.
For cleared professionals, flexibility goes beyond where work happens. Alternative work schedules, shift flexibility, job sharing, and outcome-based performance models can help reduce burnout and flight risk without compromising security requirements. This matters because losing experienced cleared talent carries outsized mission risk due to long replacement timelines and the loss of institutional knowledge.
The conversation also highlights the national security implications of military spouse employment. Frequent relocations, licensing barriers, and limited job portability continue to drive underemployment among military spouses. Congress has increasingly recognized this issue, including provisions supporting remote work for military spouses, acknowledging the direct link between family stability, service member retention, and readiness.
Despite common assumptions, national security organizations have often led the federal government in adaptive workforce practices. Prior to recent policy shifts, intelligence agencies consistently ranked highly for work-life balance, demonstrating that flexibility and security can coexist when applied strategically.
As workforce policies continue to evolve, this discussion reinforces a central takeaway: flexibility is not a concession. It is a strategic tool essential to sustaining the national security mission.
