Creating a Culture of Work-Family Balance within Businesses (VI)
(New Woman, 2007-01-25)
PART
II: WHAT BUSINESSES CAN DO TO CREATE A CULTURE OF
WORK-FAMILY BALANCE AND WHY IT IS IN THEIR BEST INTERESTS
TO DO SO (continuation)
Work-family balance benefits businesses making them more
profitable and competitive
a. Improved recruitment and retention of employees
The Business
Case for Work-Life Balance, a document published by Human Resources
and Social Development Canada in 2005 had the following to
say about the importance work-family balance options play in recruiting
and retaining employees:
In the Executive View Study conducted
by Canadian Facts and sponsored by The Globe and Mail,
1850 CEOs and business leaders were asked "What issues about
your business are most likely to keep you awake at
night?" Interestingly, the most common response was not profitability or
competition but the demands of attracting, training and retaining staff.
Seventy-one per cent of leaders anticipate problems in retaining skilled
workers.
As a result of the competition for talent, the ageing
workforce and the shrinking of the labour pool, companies have
seen their recruitment costs rise dramatically. Estimates from human resource
professionals and consultants indicate that to recruit a new staff
member it costs them between two and four times the
annual salary for the position.
When employees are dissatisfied with their
work experience they leave. Organizations see experience and knowledge walk
out the door and down the road to their competitors.
Consequently, more than ever, employers are recognizing the need to
offer more than just "a job". Prospective employees are looking
for a company that recognizes their commitments both inside and
outside the workplace. As a result, work-life programs and policies
are considered as tools for companies seeking to recruit and
retain skilled employees.
In the PriceWaterhouseCoopers 1999 International Student Survey, 57%
of students stated that work-life balance is their primary goal,
and don’t believe this competes with long-term career development and
personal growth goals.
In AONs Canada @ Work 2000 a growing
number of respondents (29%) rank work-life balance as the first
or second most important factor in taking a job. The
good news is that over 69% indicate that their organization
had demonstrated increased efforts over the last year to support
work-life employee needs.
Alliance for Marriage published in its 2005 Annual
Report that work-family balance options are the most effective incentives
for attracting top candidates, second only to salary. Among the
work-family balance initiatives cited as the most effective recruiting tools,
especially for women, were:
1. offering flexible schedules 2. offering part-time positions 3.
possibilities of telecommuting 4. family health-care benefits
b. Reducing Absenteeism
The Business Case
for Work-Life Balance makes the following argument as to how
incorporating work-family balance options can reduce absenteeism:
The Conference Board of
Canada’s Survey of Canadian Workers on Work-Life Balance (1999), found
that twice as many Canadians reported moderate to high levels
of stress as a result of trying to balance their
work and home lives, a sharp increase compared to 1989
(46.2 percent in 1999; 26.7 percent in 1989). These stress
levels are reflected in health problems and absences. Respondents who
report a high degree of stress in balancing work and
family life also report missing an average of 7.2 days
of work while those who report very little stress in
balancing work and family have missed, on average, only 3.6
days.
Statistics Canada: Work Absence Rates, 1987-1998, (Analytic Report No. 10)
states that Canadian workers lost an average of 5.7 days
in 1998; women averaged 6.7 days lost, while men were
absent for 4.9 days. The presence of children, especially pre-school
children, was a primary indicator of time lost: employees with
pre-schoolers lost an average of 6.4 days, compared to 5.6
days for employees without children. The ageing workforce also contributed
to increasing absenteeism. Workers between 55 and 64 are absent
for an average of 6.9 days per year, while all
age groups combined report an average of 5.7 days.
According to
the Watson Wyatt: Staying @ Work Study (September 2000), a
survey of large employers in the US, short-term absences have
doubled in the last three years.
Another study found that
flexible schedules which gave employees more control and did not
require line manager authorization were more effective at reducing absenteeism.
(1) This point is particularly important since it reflects
the reality that oftentimes workers do not feel they have
the support of their immediate superiors on issues of work-family
balance. Thus, even when work-family balance policies exist, they can
often remain unused as the workers do not feel that
taking advantage of them will bring about a positive response
from their employers, but might rather reflect negatively upon them
as workers and endanger their present or future career within
the company.
c. Enhanced commitment, morale and productivity
The managers’ perceptions
of the effects of work-life policies on commitment are often
positive. Interviews with managers in 83 organizations which had some
work-life policies revealed that 68% thought that motivation and/or commitment
had increased as result of them […](2). Employees who report
that they have achieved work-life balance are more satisfied and
more willing to ‘go the extra mile’ for their employers.
It
is important to remember that oftentimes, an employee’s “productivity and
commitment” is understood to mean the number of hours spent
at the office: “face time”, bodies in seats, “all-nighters.” In
his book Forced Labor, Brian Robertson makes the following observation
about how unproductive this false concept of productivity actually can
be:
An argument could be made that, as longer hours become
the norm in one profession after another, the incentive to
use time productively declines. When the workday has clearly defined
limit—self-imposed—a sense of urgency is lent to accomplishing one’s work,
and time is used to the best possible advantage in
the interest of getting the job done promptly and efficiently.
[…] If, on the other hand, there are no external
constraints on the amount of time one spends at work
and employees are rewarded for staying late rather than for
working hard in the limited time they are there, office
hours tend to become vague and indefinite, and work expands
to fill—and kill—the time. […] When employers increasingly equate physical
presence on the job with a high degree of company
loyalty, a professional attitude, and the capacity to work hard,
the effect is often to encourage employees to draw out
their work, or to spend long periods of time on
nonessential tasks for fear of being seen as having nothing
pressing to do. (3)
--------
(1) J. Pierce and J. Newstrom “The Role
of Emloyers in Addressing the Needs of Employed Parents”, Journal
of Occupational Behaviour, Vol. 4, p. 247-262, 1983
(2) S. Wise,
Employment Research Institute of Napier University, Work-life Balance Literature and
Research Review, p. 24
(3) Roberston, B., Forced Labor, What’s Wrong
with Balancing Work and Family, Spence Publishing Company, Dallas, 2002,
pp. 78-79
Creating a Culture of Work-Family Balance within Businesses (III) ( New Woman, 2006-12-21 )
Creating a Culture of Work-Family Balance within Businesses (II) ( New Woman, 2006-12-14 )
Creating a Culture of Work-Family Balance within Businesses (I) ( New Woman, 2006-11-30 )
Words of Tom Wappel (Liberal MP) Defending Traditional Marriage in Canadian House of Commons ( Tom Wappel, LifeSiteNews.com, 2006-11-24 )
What's up with British youth? ( Carolyn Moynihan, www.mercatornet.com, 2006-11-24 )
