Navigating Rocky Business Waters
The best way to navigate rocky business waters is with flexibility: expert opinion.
The best way to navigate rocky business waters is with flexibility: expert opinion.
The current economic crisis is forcing workplace experts to articulate a new argument for flexibility, and they are responding with varying degrees of comfort. Whilst the crisis presents an opportunity for mental stretching – and perhaps to trade in the well worn argument that the primary value of flexibility rests in its marketing value (ie the ability to attract and retain talent) – there are queries about where the "reshaped" argument for flexibility is heading and whether there might be unpalatable consequences. In particular, whether in our rush to use flexibility as a way to reduce overheads (eg capital and people costs) we are creating a monster (eg even more pressure on those left behind to work harder).
The old and new pitch
In these times of job loss, pitching flexibility as a way to attract and retain talent is missing the mark. So a new "flexibility" argument is getting a run – and this argument emphasises the benefits of flexibility in terms of reducing overheads and boosting productivity. The new argument highlights the ways in which flexibility can reduce fixed costs (eg real estate costs by enabling staff to work from home), reduce staff associated costs (eg by offering unpaid periods of leave or part-time hours), and increase outputs (eg by enabling staff to be more focussed and fresh and therefore more efficient and creative).
Where will the new pitch go to?
A strong body of research supports the link between flexibility and those business outcomes, but query whether the new "flexibility paradigm" has shifted to something a little negative – ie flexibility is now about how we get more out of fewer people. And what are the unintended consequences of this line of thinking? Will employers see the economic crisis as an opportunity to push flexibility in ‘nasty' ways, eg to reduce an employee's hours when that is not needed or to make staff work even longer? Have HR practitioners/business leaders done enough to embed a "win/win", or "mutual respect" approach, to ensure that employment practices will benefit both employers and employees?
Get over it
Does it really matter anyway about the "right" motivation for flexibility? At the end of the day if the economic crisis offers a stimulus for managers to get more comfortable with flexibility, then so be it. That comfort (and those implementation skills) will remain when the economic crisis has passed – and the case for flexibility will have gained a greater level of mainstream acceptance. In this regard the current economic crisis could do for flexibility what the Second World War did for women's increased levels of workforce participation (both during and after) – ie break down attitudinal barriers to "talent" and doing work differently.
Where to now?
Perhaps it is just the shift itself which is causing workplace experts a level of discomfort? It might be hard to let go (or at least upgrade) the attract/retain argument for flexibility given that it has created interest amongst business leaders in a tight labour market. But as more and more businesses are reaching for flexibility as a way to navigate these rocky economic waters – workplace experts have to come up to speed quickly and meet those needs. What these organizations now need is good advice on how to make their interest in flexibility a reality. And fast.
Juliet Bourke (BA, LLB, LLM Hons) is a partner at Aequus Partners. Juliet participated in the 2020 Summit and has received numerous awards for her leadership and achievements. Drawing on their knowledge of psychology, law and management, Aequus Partners launched an initiative to provide free information and resources on implementing workplace flexibility. Visit www.workplaceflexibility.com.au
