Flex-Time- Is the Concept Coming or Going?
Do your employees make their own hours? This week, the subject of “Flex-Time” kept popping up on my computer. USA Today said the practice of flexible hours and allowing your employees to work at home has stalled. Major companies aren’t offering the option, and many employees fear that having such an arrangement puts them a greater risk for being laid-off.
Time Magazine had an article Richard Sloan forwarded to me that implied Flex-Time is not only good, but essential if you want to employ talented people with constraints on their time (you could insert “mothers” here). Their study of Best Buy’s corporate practices found workers are happier and more productive when they make their own schedules (plus they have less long fruitless meetings).
The last item popped up in an e-mail article by Tobi Elkin from Mediapost.com (Sorry, but I can’t figure out how to link it here). At a conference of executive women in New York, called “Power Women,” the topic turned to flexible hours. "The workforce must change," declared Dr. Caroline Kovac, an executive at IBM. She said that it’s not just women who need flexibility. "You need to find flexibility for all employees. We need to find a better way."
Shelly Lazarus, chairman and CEO, Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide said the advertising business is all about talent. "It’s not about flex time; it’s about meeting people on their own terms." That may apply to more than just the creative personalities she employs.
As a small business owner, you make your hours–probably way too many of them. How do you feel about the hours of those you hire? Are your employees good enough to manage their own schedules? Does it depend upon the personality? Are you willing to sacrifice hours spent in the office for better talent? They are all questions growing businesses face. Lend your fellow entrepreneurs a hand and share your experiences.
July 28th, 2005 at 10:26 am
It is puzzling that people who employ other people think their employees are slaves. Is there some pathology surviving from ancient times at work here?
If we think of persons as systems, it is obvious that we all benefit by optimizing the system. To the extent that a person’s job does not damage the person’s private life, the person’s private life does not in turn damage the person’s job. The word to study is "synergism".
People work best when they optimize their efforts across all their chores. People are not machines. A mistreated machine will fail; a mistreated person will get even.
July 28th, 2005 at 1:10 pm
I have a very understanding boss/es. I work a 6 hour day and if I work over I gain comp time, which I like. We are a small firm, and while I feel maybe I should move on to a company where I can gain more benefits, the flexibility is just too good to give up.
August 3rd, 2005 at 9:53 am
IRT Joan’s questions:
If you don’t feel your employees are good enough to manage their own schedules, you’ve either made a mistake in hiring or have not developed them well enough. Every benefit that can be afforded an employee only serves to make the corporate culture more appealing, allowing for the greatest creativity and contribution from all. Of course, there have to be limits, but they should be few and prudently set in place.
IRT Robert DellAngela’s comments:
Unfortunately, especially in SE Michigan, the old school, 20th century style of management persists. It worked okay for assembly line workers, but with the creative class and service industries growing as they have, business needs to move away from "command and control" management, and more toward empowerment and autonomy. Many managers are more comfortable with the control model, perhaps because they don’t trust letting go and allowing more freedom, perhaps because they just have a deeper, psychologically rooted need for control in their lives. It’s unfortunate that their issues often times negatively impact their employees on the job.