Purpose: The purpose of this study was to extend the limited understanding of the unique nature of hybrid teamwork, which has been underdeveloped in the existing literature despite its high prevalence in today’s workforce. Method: A qualitative multiple case study was employed, and involved interviews about experiences of hybrid work with team members and leaders of four hybrid work teams. Archival documents related to hybrid work were also collected from participating teams. Analysis involved deductive-inductive within-case thematic analyses for each team, followed by a comparative cross-case analysis. Findings: The cross-case analysis identified three aggregate dimensions: dynamic dispersion, the technology paradox, and me versus we: the flexibility paradox. Dynamic dispersion findings indicated that individual work practices are highly dynamic and variable, influenced by numerous factors, and that these practices are often highly idiosyncratic between team members and change dynamically over time within person. These individual work practices influence team-level virtuality, making geographic dispersion dynamic over time. The technology paradox dimension demonstrated that technology is being experienced as both an affordance and a hindrance to teamwork, both of which could serve to increase or decrease team virtuality. Finally, me versus we: the flexibility paradox identifies a new concept in which tensions between individual autonomy and team effectiveness emerge in hybrid work teams. Implications: This study enhances our understanding of hybrid team virtuality, introduces the flexibility paradox, and is the first primary study to the author’s knowledge to investigate hybrid teams accounting for the dynamic and changing work practices within and across individuals.