The reports of remote work’s death are greatly exaggerated. Virtual work is, in fact, very much alive.

As I write this, more than half (55%) of our current openings have a virtual option. That means every in-office role is competing against similar virtual opportunities for candidates.

Spoiler alert: the virtual roles aren’t just winning. They’re lapping the field.

Looking at our recent data, the average in-office search attracts 28 candidates, while virtual searches average 52. That’s an 86% larger candidate pool.

If you’re trying to hire exceptional talent, that’s a difference that’s hard to ignore. Here are a few recent examples from our own experience that illustrate why.

The Commute Dealbreaker

We’ve found that many organizations still assume that requiring employees to work in the office has little effect on recruiting. In today’s market, that’s rarely true.

Earlier this year, we launched a search for an in-office, junior-level position in a major metropolitan area. In the Before Times, roles like this were usually easy to fill. In a post-Covid world, they’re much harder.

Between the high cost of living and the declining appeal of some large cities, many young professionals simply aren’t willing to relocate for an entry-level role.

We found some good candidates, but we knew the client was missing out on a much larger talent pool. After some discussion, the client opened the position to virtual candidates.

It’s amazing what happens when you expand the candidate pool by a few thousand miles. Applications increased immediately, and the overall quality of the candidate pool improved dramatically. Instead of struggling to find qualified applicants, the hiring team was suddenly burdened with the inconvenience of having too many strong candidates.

The best candidates weren’t avoiding the work. They were avoiding the relocation. Or, perhaps more accurately, they were avoiding a three-hour daily relationship with Interstate 95.

If It’s Remote, Say So

We recently worked with a client that preferred a local hire but was genuinely willing to consider a strong virtual candidate. Unfortunately, the client was hesitant to make the virtual option clear in the job description because they didn’t want to undermine their preference for someone in the office. As a result, the possibility of remote work was buried beneath so many caveats that many qualified candidates assumed it wasn’t a real option.

Thankfully, strong virtual candidates applied anyway—though not before asking some version of, “When you say ‘virtual,’ do you pinky swear that means virtual?”

Once the client saw the caliber of talent available outside its zip code, it ultimately hired a virtual employee. The lesson? Candidates shouldn’t need a decoder ring to understand the job location. If remote work is genuinely on the table, say so clearly.

You Can Still Hire Local

Another client listed a role as virtual even though it hoped to hire someone locally. In the end, that’s exactly what happened.

The difference was that the client had the opportunity to compare that local candidate against talented applicants from across the country. Rather than settling for the best person nearby, the organization knew it had hired the best person available.

That’s the real advantage of offering a virtual option. It doesn’t force you to hire remotely—it simply gives you more choices. (It’s called optionality and economists love it!) You can always decide that a particular candidate isn’t the right fit.

(Think of it as online dating. You may hope to meet someone who lives five minutes away, but there’s no harm in widening the search radius. After all, the love of your life might reside in Poughkeepsie.)

Remote work isn’t the right fit for every organization or every role. But if your goal is to find the best person for the job, giving yourself access to nearly twice as many candidates is an advantage that’s difficult to ignore. Even if some of those candidates are wearing sweatpants.