Flexible Work Arrangement Week 2015: May 3-9th

The concept of Flexible-work has become a rather hot topic over recent years with issues like job strain, role conflict and the difficulties that many individuals face when balancing their work and family obligations”. (1) At the same time more and more employers are recognizing the positive impact that flexible work initiatives can have for their employees by helping to promote better mental and physical health in the workplace, while increasing overall job satisfaction.

Achieving work/life balance is an increasing challenge today with “time demands, scheduling dilemmas, and the problems that arise when work spills into home life or when home demands spill into work life”. Furthermore, “crisis-oriented work patterns and chaotic work routines that demand workers’ constant presence, can make breaking away from work difficult, magnifying this strain. By measuring productivity and commitment based on “face-time”, rather than the amount of work that an employee has accomplished”, we can create further issues. (2) On the other hand, when we introduce alternatives to the “one size fits all” work model, we create the potential to improve the quality of peoples lives by allowing for more flexibility, while at the same time strengthening employee loyalty, creating less turnover, and ultimately increasing a company’s overall profits.

Flexible work arrangements can mean many things including:

• Flextime- the variation of an employees starting and departure times.
• Job sharing- where two employees share the responsibilities of one full time position.
• Remote Work (or flexible work locations)- can be conducted either at home or off-site on a consistent or occasional basis.
• A compressed work schedule- refers to a regular workweek in fewer days.
• Telecommuting- essentially refers to working from home on a regular basis. (3)

Like anything else, flexible work arrangements can have both advantages and disadvantages. But with careful consideration, and a clear and comprehensive strategy, the benefits and possibilities are numerous.

An example of this potential can be seen in a recent sociological study that used an “already existing corporate initiative by the name of the Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) to predict corresponding changes to health-related outcomes”. Collecting “longitudinal data from 659 white-collar employees, at the headquarters of a Fortune 500 company in the United States, the study looked at moving employees and supervisors away from time oriented measures of work success, to a completely results based appraisal of productivity and accomplishment”. The results showed “that by increasing the employees’ scheduling control and reducing their work-family conflict, ROWE innovation promoted employee wellness and increased productivity, while lowering the costs borne by employers for health care as well as absenteeism”.(4) In another study that looked at employees using flexible work arrangements, they found that “63% of workers said that they were absent less often as a result of their flexible work arrangement schedule”.(5) Furthermore flexible work programs enable employers to schedule work across larger portions of the day, while allowing them to make more efficient use of facilities, while often requiring smaller office spaces including less equipment.(6) Flexible Work Programs have also become an important tool for retaining valuable employees and attracting future talent.

However, one of the “challenges that companies sometimes face when implementing flexible work programs, is a hesitancy from supervisors to promote this flexibility, due to apprehension with regards to the impact it may have on work quality and productivity”. (7) What many have found is that this concern can be quite accurate when flexible work programs are not implemented properly. Another issue that arises when discussing the pros and cons of flexible work arrangements is with regards to accessibility, and whether or not the requests for such programs are well received by employers and management. In one study “78% of respondents feared that they would be perceived as less committed to their jobs by their supervisors if they utilized flexible work arrangements. Employees also reported frustrations stemming from inconsistent program implementation, and for some workers access to flexibility appeared to be based on the sole discretion of a given manager”. (8)

Accessibility and flexible work arrangements can also be subject to unconscious gender bias. In another noted study “researchers found that men in high-status, non-hourly positions who said they wanted to advance their careers were most likely to be granted a compressed work schedule, while women in similar scenarios seeking flextime were far less likely to get it. Meanwhile, men in low-status careers who asked for family flex time were more likely to have their requests approved than women in like situations. In this situation, managers tended to believe that women who asked for flexible working hours were more likely than men to use the time for personal, rather than professional, reasons and that this form of gender bias is often simply a reflection of antiquated stereotypes about men’s and women’s family roles”. (9) In this respect women are often assumed to have one foot out the door when they ask for more flexible work arrangements, while men are often perceived to have more job commitment. Despite this gender bias “it appears employees are the ones who are really driving employers’ policies and that in particular, young male workers are seeking to spend more time with their families. As a result employers are adapting. In a recent 2014 Catalyst report, they found that nearly four out of five respondents said their companies offered some form of flexible-work arrangements.” (10)

We summarize this acknowledgement of Flexible Work Arrangement week with a few tips from the HR Council on how to make flexible work more successful:

Maintain a high level of contact by encouraging a two-way flow of communication between management and the distance worker, and the distance worker and their other colleagues. This is especially important if an off-site employee is working on their own.

Use a combination of face-to-face communication, the telephone and e-mail. Face-to-face is best for key management tasks focused on motivation, team building, performance management and introducing changes in the work or the relationship with the employee. Telephone communications can be effective for planning, reviewing, and strategizing. E-mail is best for quick contact and confirming conversations.

Informal processes may need to become more formal. For example, comments and ideas made over lunch break or by the water cooler may need to be e-mailed to off-site workers.
Be super-organized and plan well. Reliance on face-to-face meetings often results from disorganization, with managers spending their days reacting to situations and solving problems that would not arise as often as they do if work were well managed.

Beware that “out of sight” can mean “out of mind”. Take care that off-site workers get access to training and promotion opportunities. Career development is important for all employees no matter where they work.

Ensure appropriate orientation for staff that work in the office so that they are assured that all employees – regardless of their work location – are equally pulling their weight.
Promote team building between on-site and off-site employees by inviting employees who work at home to come in for a special lunch, training or other activity.

Ask home-based employees to provide occasional office coverage to keep them in touch with the realities of the workplace. (11)

References:

1. http://www.inc.com/encyclopedia/flexible-work-arrangements.html)
2. Padavic, I., & Reskin, B. (2002). Sociology for a New Century: Women and men at work. (2^nd     ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452233857
3. https://www.hr.cornell.edu/life/support/flexible_arrangements.html
4. Moen, P., Kelly, E., Tranby, E., & Huang, Q. (2011). CHANGING WORK, CHANGING HEALTH:  CAN REAL WORK-TIME FLEXIBILITY PROMOTE HEALTH BEHAVIORS AND WELL-BEING?Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(4), 404-29. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/920095972?accountid=44262
5. http://workplaceflexibility2010.org/images/uploads/FWA_FactSheet.pdf
6. http://hrcouncil.ca/hr-toolkit/workplaces-flexible.cfm
7. http://workplaceflexibility2010.org/images/uploads/FWA_FactSheet.pdf
8. http://workplaceflexibility2010.org/images/uploads/FWA_FactSheet.pdf
9. http://www.shrm.org/hrdisciplines/diversity/articles/pages/managers-distrust-women- aspx
10. http://www.hreonline.com/HRE/view/story.jhtml?id=534357575
11. http://hrcouncil.ca/hr-toolkit/workplaces-flexible.cfm

Sense and Sensitivity

In the last month, I have received a multitude of calls from both existing and potential new clients, asking for Global Learning’s guidance when it comes to workplace sensitivity.   

Workplace sensitivity is the physical, cultural and emotional awareness of people in a shared workspace. 

From Halloween costumes to poorly communicated frustration to lifestyle assumptions, here are some examples of the situations I have been recently hearing about:

Situation 1:

It’s Halloween, and the office is filled to the brim with pirates, kittens, and zombies. In walks a manager, a 50 year old Korean-Canadian woman wearing a Jamaican flag, colored Rastafarian hat complete with fake dreadlock extensions, baggy jeans, and an armband with a symbolic marijuana leaf on it. To make matters worse, she also chooses to carry around a fake “joint” for the day.

The issue (beyond it being blatantly racist): A subordinate of the manager is the child of Jamaican immigrants.

Situation 2:

In the midst of meeting a deadline, an employee’s computer crashes leaving their work inaccessible for over an hour. While describing the situation to a co-worker, the employee uses the phrase:

“I just want to shoot myself, I’m so frustrated. Seriously pass me the gun so I can kill myself now.”

The issue: A family member of a nearby co-worker had recently attempted to commit suicide. 

Situation 3:

An employee is reading a fashion/health magazine on her break and begins to talk about a featured article on breastfeeding. The employee turns to a co-worker and states:

“Oh my god, that is just so disgusting! This woman breast-fed her child till he was 3. That’s so gross!”

The issue: The co-worker she was speaking to has very specific views about breast-feeding, and chose to breast feed her children until they were 5. 

As to why many organizations feel motivated to deal with workplace sensitivity, the two reasons we hear most often are: “We don’t want to get sued.” and “Because it’s the right thing to do.” But as leaders, workplace sensitivity goes well beyond legal compliance and social justice.

Workplace sensitivity issues are often deeply rooted in shame. Not only does the initial person feeling offended deal with a sense of shame, but very often, shame is used as retaliation to the person who sincerely made a mistake. 

Shame invokes withdrawal, anger and fear. These emotions lead to mental distraction and any number of volatile reactions. It’s our responsibility as leaders to inspire, instill and maintain a constant flow of innovative productivity within our organization. Shame in any form is lethal to innovation.

In case you missed it, we highly recommend watching the TED talk by @BreneBrown on Shame.

You can watch it here: http://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_listening_to_shame.html

Workplace sensitivity issues frequently arise from what many perceive as harmlessly intended humour. Humour in the workplace can be a wonderful thing: it can attract business, enhance the relationship with clients, and can even be a clear sign of a great leader. Truly humourous people can be quick problem-solvers, all while maintaining a team’s energy level. But there has to be very clear lines drawn as to what your organization will and will not tolerate as “funny”.    

As a leader, ask yourself these two questions in regard to workplace sensibility:

How are you as an organizational leader educating your team in regard to understanding workplace sensibility?  

How do you as an organizational leader handle the situation when insensitivity occurs in your workplace?  

Your response to these sensitive, yet real life situations set the tone for your employees as well as for the reputation of your organization as a whole.

“Rudeness is the weak man’s imitation of strength.”  - Eric Hoffer

Where Are You Leading Us?

As a society, we have developed the practice of choosing leaders to maintain what we hope will be high-quality efficiency in our workplaces and our communities. The goal of any leader should not only be to always maintain productivity, but to also continuously strive to seek it.  

When political leaders utilize social platforms that seek to remove rights from law-abiding  individuals, I must question: how is this efficient or productive? 

Last Tuesday, the province of Quebec elected Pauline Marois of the Parti Quebecois as the first female premier in its history. My “fellow Canadian female leadership” hat is tipped to her for such an achievement. However, Ms. Marois’ position on diversity has certainly given me pause for concern, as she has wandered into my professional arena.

Marois balanced her victory on a platform that sought - and could potentially succeed in - removing all religious references and attire from all provincial institutions. This would include turbans, head scarves, and even yarmulkes. Excluded from the list of religious symbols: the crucifix, as one hangs at the National Assembly and has been deemed of historical significance.

I’m a big fan of empathy and the act of envisioning the experience of others. 

Imagine this, if you will:

It’s your first day of work with the province of Quebec,where you will answer phone calls from the public at the Attorney General’s office. Upon your arrival, you are greeted by a young man clothed with a turban. He treats you with respect and does everything he can to make sure you feel comfortable on your first day. He even makes it his job to introduce you to the rest of the team. Not once does he ever say anything religious, let alone regarding his own faith. 

Does this man’s turban or actions in any way, shape or form:

• prohibit you from doing your job?
• prohibit you from freely expressing yourself?
• place you in any danger?

The answer is no.

Why would a leader such as Pauline Marois seek to oppress personal identities for political gain? 

What is the point?

The only point to invoke such laws is to make those who are uncomfortable with difference feel more comfortable.  

This is unproductive and inefficient.

Our global history is fraught with examples, teaching us that oppression will only lead us, at best, to short-lived functionality.  There will always be a break in the system caused by the mental strain of resentment. These cracks inevitably carry with them a firestorm of financial loss and extreme emotional damage.

We cannot, however, sit back and only shake our fists at the leaders we have elected to follow. 

As constituents of any society we must look at these situations with deep understanding. The more people choose to align themselves with any leader, the louder that leader’s voice becomes.  

What does this mean? If you choose to follow, promote, vote for a leader who is actively seeking to deny equal rights to any law-abiding individual, you are choosing to promote oppression. 

This is your right. But what will this do for the future of your community? What lesson will younger generations learn from such actions?

Say you were invited to three parties on the same evening. Each party has a very specific set of criteria required to attend it.

With your physical, mental and fiscal well being in mind, which party would you choose?

The party where:

• You are welcome as you are, but all that is expected of you is that you abide by the law.  
• You are welcome, but only if you alter yourself to be similar to everyone else and, if you don’t, it’s against the law.
• You are not welcome at all. Just being you is against the law.

I firmly stand for you and your right as an individual to follow whichever leader - and attend whichever party - you feel makes the most sense to your life’s journey.  But you must always recognize the proven dangers when following a leader that seeks to oppress law-abiding citizens.

Leadership on the grounds of oppression will inevitably result in an outcome that contains fear, tension, and distress.

I ask again: how is promoting the oppression of law-abiding constituents’ efficient leadership? 

The answer is and will always be: it’s not.

“He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” -Thomas Paine