The era of “one-size-fits-all” relocation policies may be coming to an end. Today’s mobile workforce is more diverse—in family structure, lifestyle, and personal needs—than ever before. Mobility professionals are under growing pressure to deliver personalized, cost-effective, and equitable experiences. And increasingly, exceptions are becoming a reflection of outdated program design rather than outlier needs.
To better understand how companies can strike the balance between consistency and flexibility, we spoke with experts from two mobility leaders approaching the challenge from complementary angles: Lynda Lescault of Dwellworks and Bill Nemer of Graebel.
Rethinking the Standard: Equity Over Exceptions
Lynda Lescault, director of global accounts at Dwellworks, makes a compelling case for reevaluating the rigidity of typical benefit structures, particularly in destination services (DS).
“It’s long been assumed that an assignee with children … has more complex needs than a single college grad,” she says. “And yet, in a one-size-fits-all all policy … the family with school-age children is often disadvantaged because they receive the exact same amount of destination support as their single colleagues. Take that same misalignment forward to a more active diversity and equity environment, and you can see the challenge.”
Lescault suggests that a sliding scale of support can help ensure employees with more complex needs aren’t shortchanged.
“In a mobility program of 100 people, for example, if the destination service benefit is based on the global benchmark of three days (24 hours) of guidance, we can assume 60% would use their fully authorized DS benefit, 20% may require a little more assistance (people moving with children, pets, parents, or other complexities), and 20% may need a little less time (singles moving with a suitcase, mobile phone, and a DIY approach to change management),” Lescault says.
“As a benchmark for offering the right amount of guidance for an optimal employee experience, Dwellworks recommends this baseline of three days/24 hours. Then, automatically offering an additional day, or even two, based on personal demographics confirmed at authorization, that would ensure a more equitable outcome for employees moving with a partner, pets, children, special abilities needs, etc. This extra time could make all the difference in these individuals’ mobility journeys.”
This flexible approach doesn’t just improve employee experience; it can also be cost-neutral or even cost-saving. “Quality DSPs will only invoice for time spent,” Lescault says. “So, for a portion of a mobility population, less than three days of guidance will be sufficient, and the client will be invoiced accordingly, accruing a cost savings and potentially a net ‘break even’ in the destination services budget overall.”
The View From the Exception Desk
Bill Nemer, senior vice president at Graebel, provides a clear view into the structured world of exception management. “The most common exceptions are for extending benefits for temporary living and for extra household goods services,” he says. “Temporary living exceptions address the transition to and from individual housing situations, and household goods exceptions provide support for unique needs outside of what’s included in the policy.”
“Each client is unique,” he adds, “and it is critical to align the exceptions management process with their corporate culture and program goals.”
At Graebel, a structured system ensures consistency. “We create an exceptions matrix for our teams to reference when an exception is requested.” Before submitting a request, “we brainstorm if there are any alternative solutions, evaluate whether similar exceptions were approved or denied in the past, and determine the potential costs.”
This process is backed by data. “We utilize our system to document the request, whether it was approved or denied, and to track the costs, including exceptions that are cost neutral. This allows for comprehensive analysis and reporting.” When certain exceptions are consistently approved, “we can make recommendations to modify the policy.”
One proactive strategy Nemer highlights involves repurposing existing benefits. “Recently we had a client that rebranded [their] Miscellaneous Expense Allowance as an Exception Allowance. This has resulted in a significant drop in exception requests.”
Communication is also key. “Taking the time to clearly explain how benefits can be maximized can help reduce exceptions.” And when dealing with more complex moves, “you can’t provide exceptional relocation experiences if you don’t know the ins and outs of the move and the mobile employee’s needs.”
As the environment evolves, so does policy. “Companies are offering more choice options to reduce exception requests,” and “creating policy amendments to manage the challenges in today’s ever-changing environment.”
Nemer summarizes the challenge simply: “Mobility professionals must manage costs responsibly while creating exceptional customer experiences. They also need to create consistency in exceptions, to avoid biases, while also supporting individual needs.”
Flexible Framing, Structured Support
What emerges from both Dwellworks’ and Graebel’s approaches is a shared commitment to rethinking how mobility support is delivered: proactively, equitably, and with employee experience at the center.
Dwellworks emphasizes building flexibility into policy design from the start, offering scalable benefits based on individual needs. This preemptive model minimizes the need for employees to ask for more—they’re simply given what makes sense for their situation.
Graebel, on the other hand, ensures that when exceptions do arise, they’re handled with discipline and insight. Their structured matrix, data tracking, and cost analysis transform exception management from a reactive process into a tool for continuous policy refinement.
Both perspectives recognize that fairness doesn’t always mean sameness. Whether it's proactively adjusting benefit levels or using exception trends to drive policy change, the goal is the same: create consistent, equitable, and responsive mobility programs that meet employees where they are—without compromising the integrity of the program.