Where are we more productive – Office or Home?

Almost every day we hear of yet another survey that ‘proves’ people are more productive when they are working from home, only to see other surveys that favour the office. It’s worth looking a bit closer at who is sponsoring or running the ‘research’ and how objective it really is.

Recently, a survey of 5,500 ‘respondents’ concluded that 66% of professionals think they would be more productive working remotely rather than in a traditional office. Just 7% chose ‘The office during regular hours’ as the place to go when they really wanted to get something done for work. But another recent survey showed that 59% of UK workers work most productively in the office. Which one is right?

It seems that you can get the answer you want by asking people who might agree with you. The first survey was carried out by Flexjobs, who service the flexible working marketplace. This is the sixth annual survey they have carried out, and it provides a thorough analysis of the reasons why people want to work flexibly. Since 2013, work-life balance (78%), family (49%), time savings (46%), and commute stress (45%) have been the top four reported reasons. But when it comes to productivity is this audience biased?

As well as 66% saying they are more productive in a home office, 52% cited home or home office as the place they go when they “really need to get something done for work.” They list the reasons for this, with fewer interruptions from colleagues (76%), fewer distractions (76%) and reduced stress from commuting (70%) as the top three.

Contrast this with another piece of research carried out by Peldon Rose, workplace designers.  Their survey showed 59% of employees working most productively in the office followed by 30% at home and 5% in a café. They point out that working outside of the office makes employees feel disconnected (50%) isolated or lonely (33%) and less productive (27%). So who is right?

The answer is of course both are right. If you ask people who predominantly work in the office where they are most productive you will find the majority will say it’s there. This could be because the kind of work they do cannot easily be done remotely, or it may be that their lifestyle doesn’t suit home working. Similarly, ask the question to remote workers and they will point out the benefits of home working over being office based, including higher productivity.

Where both surveys agree, is that people want the choice. A third of the people surveyed by Peldon Rose wish they were more trusted to manage how and when they work and 79% of the Flexjobs respondents say they are more loyal to their employers if they have flexible working options. This is born out by a recent survey by Manpower, polling 14,000 people in 19 countries, that showed 63% of workers believe they can work outside the office and 40% mentioned flexible working as one of the top three career considerations. Their report concludes that employers should neutralise flexibility stigma by changing company culture to make working outside the office acceptable. It starts from the top – leaders need to be transparent and lead by example.

What is Good Work?

I've just posted this on a CIPD discussion forum on Good Work, so thought I'd repeat it here...

It's great to hear that the CIPD is championing Good Work and encouraging the HR profession to think more broadly about Work as a topic.

Work is not just jobs and employment. Good work is not just engaging with employees and providing them with rewarding conditions of employment. Work is an activity carried out by people in order to produce a result.

To provide a product or service to a customer in exchange for payment is work. Many people do 'work' for charities and don't get paid but they get other rewards. We have to include all these activities in the definition of good work.

The Taylor Review recognises that we are seeing a major change in the way work is performed. Platforms, such as Uber or Ebay provide individuals with an opportunity to do paid work for a customer. Hence we have seen a growth in self-employment where individuals take responsibility for their own benefits but have control over when, where and how they get work done.

What Taylor tries to do is to apply 'good jobs' criteria to 'platform' work by creating the 'dependent contractor' category. This misses the point that many of these workers enjoy the independence of not being an employee and are prepared to miss out on benefits in exchange for being their own boss. Are we in danger of applying 'good jobs' criteria in a world where 'jobs' are giving way to 'work'.

One example of this is the assumption that work is measured by the hour. This conflicts with the idea of paying for a service or product based on what it is worth not how long it takes. Why should I pay an incompetent plumber for two hours work when the leak could have been fixed in an hour? This leads to confusion for platforms like Uber, where I'm happy to pay a fee for someone to drive me from A to B and there is no 'rate per hour' involved. Trying to apply National Minimum Wage in these circumstances becomes meaningless. (Maybe Universal Basic Income is the answer but that's a whole separate topic!)

Yes, we should stop unscrupulous employers from exploiting people by classifying them as self-employed to save NI contributions and avoid employment legislation. But we need to move away from the assumption that a secure lifetime career with a responsible employer is good work and the 'gig economy' is bad work. At least Taylor didn't fall into the trap of condemning all zero hours contracts, but recognised that they bring valuable flexibility and are popular among the majority of people involved.

Modern Working Practices need further reviews

The Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices has taken a fresh look at the way work is evolving and has come up with some sensible suggstions. It looked at non-standard working patterns and the introduction of ‘gig working’ using platforms such as Uber which has resulted in confusion about the status of workers.  When are they ‘self employed’ versus being employees of some sort?

The review goes part way to a solution by recommending a ‘dependent contractor’ category fitting between employees and the self-employed. These people would get some of the employment rights currently enjoyed by employees such as holiday pay, sickness benefits and the minimum wage. There would still be genuine self-employed workers but it would reduce the number of people currently treated this way by employers attempting to save money or avoid other commitments.

Importantly the review recognises that a high percentage of people with flexible work patterns are very happy with the arrangements. Many of the ‘gig workers’ are fitting in tasks around their other priorities and do not want conventional employment. This is also true of zero hours contracts, where the report concludes “To ban zero hours contracts in their totality would negatively impact many more people than it helped”.

But it still makes the assumption that good work has to be expressed in time units and not output. If people are getting the national minimum wage then they are being treated ‘fairly’. If they are working flexibly without guaranteed hours then they should get the minimum plus 20%. This cuts across the whole idea of the ‘gig economy’.

If a customer wants a service and a supplier is prepared to provide it, then work is done to make this happen. If I want to go from A to B and someone is happy to take me for a fixed price, then we have a deal. This is not expressed in an hourly rate and there is no statutory minimum I am obliged to pay for the service. Applications like Uber connect a service provider with a customer at a defined price. This is ‘work’ in the Digital Age but it’s not employment in a ‘job’ with an hourly wage or annual salary.

As these new ways of working continue to grow we have to have laws and business practices that reflect the gig economy. Trying to apply outdated ideas of employment in the new world of work is not keeping up with the times. The Taylor Review is a start, but the journey needs to continue.

What happened to the life of leisure?

Today we see yet another report threatening that AI will replace our jobs. PWC estimate that around 30% of existing UK jobs could face automation over the next 15 years. The estimates may vary slightly by percentage and timescale, but they are all pointing in the same direction.

This report is more positive than others, claiming that new AI-related technologies will boost productivity and generate additional jobs elsewhere in the economy. Along with this they warn that income inequality may rise. They paint a scenario of 'haves' and 'have nots' with male workers being at greater potential risk of job automation than women, with education as the key differentiating factor for individual workers.

We have a world based on full time employment with people needing to work 5 days a week to maintain an acceptable standard of living. Despite the automation of jobs that we have seen so far, we are suffering from long hours working and high levels of stress. We have organisational cultures where the people who put in the long hours are seen as being 'loyal' and 'dedicated'. People who are 'flexible workers' or 'part timers' are still seen as less committed.

What happened to the life of leisure that was coming with all this automation? Robots and computers were going to do the boring work so humans were left to do the interesting stuff. We were all going to work for three days a week and have four day 'weekends' because productivity improved so much with using technology. We would all be sitting on a sunny beach even when we were working, because technology had freed us up from traditional work constraints.

The technology has done the reverse of what we expected. Instead of producing the relaxed environment where we can have enjoyable, healthy working lives, we are overloaded with hundreds of emails in our inbox and are stressed out trying to keep up. We are working 24/7, constantly looking  at our smartphones wherever we are. Our personal lives have been invaded, but don't blame the technology.

The problem lies with the way work is organised and the organisation cultures that encourage bad working practices. If we want people to have healthy balanced lives then we need jobs that deliver the 'life of leisure' promised by technology. As AI takes over more human work and there is less to go round, let's not have half the population stressed out working long hours and the other half unemployed.  Let's all have a sensible, satisfying amount of paid work in our lives and also have time for family, friends, hobbies, sports and a healthier lifestyle.

We need the older workers

The UK is running out of workers. According to the CIPD current employer plans suggest that we’ll need to fill 13.5 million job vacancies in the next ten years, but only 7 million young people will leave school and college. With fewer people entering the labour pool, it's critical for employers to be able to embrace talent and fill roles.

Andy Briggs, CEO of Aviva Life and the UK Government’s business champion for older workers has called for a million more older people to be in work by 2022. To address the widening skills gap, tackle age bias in work and enable people to stay in work longer, Mr Briggs is urging every UK employer to increase the number of workers aged 50-69 in the UK over the next five years.

Employers in the UK are no longer able to retire someone just because of their age but many are sticking with a traditional approach to the older workforce. Half of the people in a recent CIPD survey over the age of 55 said they would be working beyond 65. But only one in four employees think that their employer is meeting the employment needs of the over 65s. 

The CIPD is recommending five essential components that should form an organisation’s strategy to address the ageing workforce challenges:

1 Ensuring they have inclusive recruitment practices

2 Improving the capability of line managers to manage an age-diverse workforce

3 Investing in training and development that is based on potential, not age

4 Supporting employee health and well-being across demographics

5 Embracing the talent attraction and retention benefits of flexible working.

It seems that flexible/smart working is an ideal arrangement for this group of people who have talent and experience to give to their employers but no longer wish to be in fixed, full-time working arrangements.

The 'fatherhood penalty'

Following straight after the news about men working part time comes a report showing fathers are seeking more flexible employment.

The "Modern Families Index 2017" report has just been published by Working Families. In this they point to a 'flexibility gap'. Almost half of parents are not comfortable raising the issue of workload and hours with their employer. They identified  flexible working as a key way of getting a better balance, but many felt that they could not make use of it because of the nature of their job, manager’s attitude or workplace culture.

Twice the number of fathers compared to mothers believe  flexible workers are viewed as less committed and over double the number of fathers believe working flexibly will have a negative impact on their career. The report points out a 'fatherhood penalty' whereby men move into lower paid and lower quality work because they have become fathers.

47% of fathers agree they would like to downshift  into a less stressful job, reflecting the diffculty they face in reconciling work and home. Just under half of millennial fathers (46%) said they would be willing to take a pay cut to achieve a better work-life balance, vs. just over a third of fathers overall (38%).

So, maybe this survey helps to explain why more men are working part time. As the report concludes "Fathers want to be more involved with their children’s lives. Seven out of ten fathers would consider childcare before taking a new job or promotion. To tackle the motherhood penalty and prevent a
fatherhood penalty taking root, we need to end the zero sum game between career progression and family life."

Part Time Men - Good News?

Today we have had the news that the number of men working part time has grown rapidly. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has published a report saying that 20 years ago 1 in 20 men aged 20-55 worked part-time with low wages. Now it's 1 in 5.

So the Guardian puts this under the headline "Bleak trend ....is revealed". It seems that the growth of anything other than conventional full-time jobs is a bad thing. But, wait a minute. I thought we were moving into an era of equal opportunities where men were taking their fair share of child care responsibilities. Maybe this is a sign that dads are going part-time whilst mums are keeping up their full-time careers. That sounds like a good thing to me.

Long hours mean low productivity

The UK remains consistently near the top of the working hours league and well down the productivity table.  Maybe there is a connection?

A recent survey from Morgan McKinley showed that 84% of respondents work beyond their contracted hours. And it's not just the odd extra hour. 27% work between 6 and 9 hours more per week and a further 31% work 10 hours or more over their official working time.

The survey disproves the theory that these are all keen and willing workers putting in the extra time happily. Three quarters of them say they are obligated or very obligated to work the long hours. This reflects corporate cultures that are encouraging these work patterns.

Not surprisingly, 47% say the extra hours have a heavy impact on their work-life balance. Only 18% always take their full allocated lunch break and 34% never take a full break. 76% eat their lunch at their desk and just 6% use the time to take exercise.

But after a long day at the office it doesn't stop. 78% of respondents sometimes or always work from a mobile device after leaving the office at the end of the day. So employers should be benefiting from all the extra effort. However, only a third of those working extra hours feel they are more productive.

Maybe we need to move from presenteeism and low productivity to managing by output and results-based rewards. When asked 'What would make your working day easier?' the top answer (52%) was flexible working. Are leaders listening to this, or are they turning a blind eye to the problem and making it worse by setting a bad example themselves?

Mobile working will reach tipping point next year

The Work Foundation have just produced a fascinating report on mobile working. They have trawled through a wide range of existing literature and surveyed over 500 managers across the UK to build up a picture of the extent of mobile working today and the way it is headed over the next few years.

Their survey showed that mobile working was the norm by 2014 for over one third of the individual respondents and over one third of the organisations they worked in. Over half will have adopted this way of working by 2017 which is why they describe this as a 'tipping point' beyond which the phenomenon becomes unstoppable. They also predict that by 2020, 70% of both individuals and organisations will have adopted mobile working.

Over half of the managers surveyed said they get more done through mobile working. 49% said they felt trusted and 41% felt empowered. Interestingly, only 24% said they felt disconnected from their team. Three quarters of managers said implementing flexible working will be a challenge for their organisation, with 84% saying performance management changes will be needed and 82% citing the need for changes to employment terms and conditions.

The report lists improved productivity, employee well-being, talent acquisition & retention and reduced accommodation costs as clear reasons for businesses to embrace flexibility. However, survey respondents overwhelmingly identified the HR burden and manager challenges inherent in the transition.

Their advice in adopting a strategy for mobile working is that leadership is critical. Organisational culture is pivotal in addressing the barriers and trust is key to successful implementation. People policies need to change and careful planning is essential.

Whist none of these conclusions are a surprise, it's good to see a well researched report reinforcing the message that mobile working is here to stay and that organisations need to wake up to the fact that flexible forms of working are rapidly becoming the norm.

Zero Hours contracts - here to stay

The CIPD have recently issued a research report on zero-hours and short-hours contracts. It makes interesting reading. It should certainly be studied by all those people criticising these flexible working arrangements and calling for more legislation or even an outright ban.

The government's Labour Force Survey shows that the number of people on zero-hours contracts has almost tripled in less than three years. Although some of this may just be greater public awareness of these arrangements it does look like they are growing in popularity. And that is not just popularity with employers. Employees like them as well.

People who want to fit work around the rest of their lives appreciate the flexibility of these arrangements. Not surprisingly, they are more positive than other employees about their work-life balance. But they are also slightly more satisfied with their jobs and feel less pressured than employees on the whole. So, far from being exploited, they are happy with the arrangements.

The most common reason for using zero-hours contracts is 'to manage fluctuations in demand' (mentioned by 66% of employers). But this is closely followed by 'provide flexibility for the individual' (51%). This shows that these contracts are a way of delivering flexibility for the individual not just the organisation. And it's not all about saving money. Reducing costs is a specific objective for just 21% of employers.

The CIPD concludes: "An outright ban on zero-hours contracts could do more harm than good... Employers with little concern for their employees’ well-being could simply change contracts to
guarantee a very small minimum number of hours or replace zero- hours contracts with casual labour.
The best way to improve the working lives of the zero-hours contract workforce is to help employers understand why they need to develop flexible and fair working practices and how to implement them."

It seems that we have found a working relationship that works well for employers AND employees. It may be open to abuse, but let's not deny the majority the benefit of a flexible working relationship they enjoy, in order to curb the few cases of exploitation.

Webinars versus Seminars

It struck me as slightly ironic that I'm involved in organising a workshop, based in London, on the subject of agile and remote working. If we are now in the age of webinars instead of seminars and YouTube recordings instead of live presentations, why are we running a physical event. Why not a virtual one?

That made me think. Why do we go to football matches when you can get a better view on TV? Why do people go to the cinema when they can watch the film in the comfort of their home? Why go to the pub if you can get a beer out of the fridge?

It's all about socialising. We like sharing experiences with other people, chatting and enjoying their company. We can do some of this by social media but there is no substitute for face to face communications. Going out for a meal with someone else is a very different experience to sitting in a restaurant on your own, even though you get to enjoy the same food.

So a seminar/workshop/conference has to be a worthwhile experience for the participant, not just sitting and listening to speakers. I can do that by looking at TED talks on YouTube without leaving my desk or TV. I want to be able to interact with the other people in the room, sharing ideas and learning from each other. I often reckon the best parts of some events are the coffee and lunch breaks where you happen to meet someone interesting. But this shouldn't be down to accident, there should be interaction designed in.

When we thought about the kind of event we wanted to run in November we realised it had to be one that was a learning experience. We resisted the temptation to come up with a list of impressive sounding speakers and decided to run the day between three of us. We've kept the number of people to a maximum of 24 so we could give everyone a chance to contribute. And to give real individual attention we added a telephone follow-up session to help with action plans.

To find out more about this workshop go to http://bit.ly/WW241115. It's going to be unique!

Peter

Building a productive workforce

Productivity has been in the headlines recently. The government is trying to improve the performance of the country in the league tables and various bodies have come out with reports on how this can be achieved. One of them is ACAS.

Its 50 page report “Building Productivity in the UK” focuses on the workplace as the place where “the elements of productivity come together to deliver goods and services.’  They say “How businesses manage and organise their workforce has a huge influence on delivering the improvements that the country needs.” -very true!

This will be a key theme at the Wisework/Workpond workshop being run in November , “Building a high performance productive workforce”. (More information here).

Here are some more points from the ACAS report:
In 2013, UK productivity was an estimated 17% lower than the G7 average
And…
Ineffective management is estimated to cost UK businesses over £19billion per year on lost working hours
But…
Employees reporting higher levels of control over their work had high levels of job related contentment, enthusiasm and satisfaction
And…
Best practice management development can result in a 23% increase in organisational performance

So it seems that giving people more autonomy over their working practices is likely to improve their productivity. This comes out in numerous case studies and on research into engagement. Since this is what management gurus have been saying for the last 50 years it should come as no surprise.

Making this happen is the challenge.  Getting managers to change their habits from ‘command and control’ to ‘trust and empower’ isn’t always easy. The workshop in November will tackle this by helping the participants build an action plan for their own organisation and they will get follow-on support after the event.

Let’s hope this adds a small contribution to the productivity drive for the UK as a whole.

Reinventing Work for the Digital Age

I recently had the pleasure of speaking in Boston at the USA launch of a new book “Reinventing the Company in the Digital Age”. The book was put together by the Spanish bank, BBVA as part of their Open Mind project (see https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/)

This was a great opportunity to reflect on how organisations are changing “in the Digital Age”. It’s easy to think of this as just being the impact of technology on the way we carry out our tasks. In fact the Digital Age is as much a social change as it is a technological revolution in the way we work.

Take the example of social media. This has revolutionised the way some people communicate with their friends and colleagues. They share views, express opinions, join in discussions, send congratulations and celebrate life’s achievements without the physical constraints of the “Analogue Age”. They are using the internet to cut through the barriers of time and distance to share experiences with others and make real friends.

So it’s hardly surprising to find that the “Facebook Generation” are much more comfortable than their predecessors in expressing their views through blogs, discussion forums and video clips. They can see the benefits in these being available to a wide audience instantly and being a lasting resource. Compare this with the traditional business meeting with its constraints of time and place. The digital alternative wins out much of the time.

Yet many organisations see social media as a waste of time and insist on cramming everyone’s diaries with inefficient face-to-face meetings. Sometimes, maybe, there is a need to get people together in the same room, but for many business decisions and sharing of opinions there is a better digital alternative.

We are also now living in the age of ‘Skype’ video conversations.  I’m amazed at the number of people who use Skype in their personal lives but never use videoconferencing at work. Whilst Skype is free and easy to use, the view on video meetings in the office is still that it’s complicated and expensive. So, again, we have a generation of people living in the digital age at home and turning the clock back when they go in to the office.

So “reinventing the company” has to include radical changes to the way work is performed in the digital age.  Not just to use the technology more effectively, but also to keep up with the expectations of the new generation of digital natives. For business to succeed it needs to engage with this workforce, and it won’t do it using out-dated ways of working.

Another step towards Future Work

I'm writing this blog on December 1^st, the day the new regime of Shared Parental Leave came into effect in the UK. Employment legislation now recognises that fathers and mothers can share responsibility for caring for a new baby. This is a period of 50 weeks, in addition to the 2 weeks of paternity leave, which means a father can potentially take a whole year off to look after a new baby whilst the mother goes back to work.

This is another sign that the old assumptions about flexible working are no longer valid. Since professional women are now quite likely to be earning more than their male partners, there are economic pressures for fathers to take a major share of the parental leave whilst the mothers return to their careers. Since July this year, UK legislation has also recognised that it’s not just parents who want to work flexibly. Now all employees have equal rights to request flexible working and employers cannot discriminate on gender or parental grounds when considering a request.

These changes mean that employers need to be more prepared than ever to manage flexible workers. However, there is mounting evidence that many companies have not planned for the new world of agile working. In particular, there are still many organisations that don’t allow people to work from home, or from any remote location, because they are unsure how to make it happen.

To provide guidance on remote working, the Telework Association is planning to update the Telework Handbook. This will give practical advice to companies and individuals wanting to set up remote working schemes and will contain up-to-date examples of how it can be done. The project is being funded through the crowd-funding website Kickstarter and can be found at http://kck.st/1FzFuu0.