If you think of flexible work arrangements simply as an employee benefit, then you are likely to see them merely as a cost. If you instead view them as a tool for boosting performance and, ultimately, your business value, then you will treat them as a useful way of doing business.

Flexible work arrangements take different forms. Some people might work extended hours for 4 days each week rather than working a regular 5-day week. Other arrangements might require people to be in the office during a core period (10am-3pm, perhaps), but allow them to set their own arrival and departure times, maybe to avoid heavy traffic, maybe to let them get their kids to school before coming to the office, and maybe because they are a morning person and simply get more done at 6am than at 6pm.

Flexible work arrangements can be very useful. They can help people balance their work and personal life better by giving them the opportunity to get their work done but still take care of personal issues; does 8 hours of work really need to be done in one 8-hour block, for instance, or can it be spread over the longer day? The conflicting responsibilities of work and home — often carried more by women than by men — drive a lot of people out of the leadership pipeline, out of a company, or even out of the workforce altogether. If flexibility helps keep those people in your workforce, would that be a bad thing?

What about commuting? Changing housing markets and trends in traffic mean many folks have got a long commute before and after work. They arrive already tired and they definitely aren’t going to stay late. Do them and the environment a favor by getting some of those cars off the road. Your team can be more productive when they don’t have to deal with the hassles of commuting.

Flexible work also increases your pool of potential talent. For example, if an employee who would be great for you lives far away, do you want to miss out on them simply because you require people to work in the office, and they don’t live in your city? If someone can contribute remotely, should you ignore their contributions because you have a policy that people have to be in the office, and they don’t want to move? And even if they ARE willing to move, do you really need to incur the expense of moving them?

Many leaders may say “I need my people in the office,” but do you really? The modern office environment is often not as helpful for work as we might hope. Too many distractions around you, too many people who stick their head in and ask you for something (relevant or not). Collaboration is great, but so is peace and quiet, and the most effective collaboration occurs when people come together when they need to and then work on their own when they need to. Rather than just assuming you need your people all in one place, take the time to figure out if it’s really true. Maybe it is, but then again, maybe not.

There is also, for many leaders, a question of trust. They feel that if they cannot see their employees working, then maybe they are just goofing off. Put aside for the moment the fact that their work results will tell you whether or not they are working, and consider this question: if you do not trust your employees, then why are they your employees?

Not every job can be flexible, and even for those that can, flexibility may take different forms. Too many leaders don’t take the time to consider how flexibility can improve performance. Rather than blindly ignoring flexible options, or treating them like rewards rather than as value-adding approaches to work, take the time to think about how your employees really need to be working to maximize their contribution, and then help them work that way.