« The Right Way to Go After an Internal Transfer | Main | Building Business Relationships Outside the Office -- with or Without the Drinking »
March 03, 2008
Workdays Should Be Based on Results -- Not Input
What if you told your boss that you planned to enjoy a three-hour lunch break on Monday, take in a matinee on Tuesday, go to an extended appointment at the hair salon on Wednesday, shop for a new car on Thursday morning and hit the local pub at 2:00 on Friday, but you also assured her that all of your work would absolutely, positively get done -- and with the same exceptional quality as ever.
Think she'd say, "Sure thing -- go for it!"?
Probably not -- but then, your company probably isn't following ROWE, the "Results-Only Work Environment" program devised by Cali Ressler and Jody Thompson, coauthors of the forthcoming book Why Work Sucks and How To Fix It.
"Cali & Jody," as they call themselves on their blog, contend that the workday shouldn't consist of the trappings of the traditional 9-to-5 schedule. In fact, they argue that employees shouldn't have schedules at all. Instead, they should be empowered to work whenever, wherever and however they want, "as long as business objectives are achieved."
Cali and Jody have already helped the retailer Best Buy implement ROWE, and they're on a mission to convert more organizations.
Valuing Output Over Input
I'm quickly becoming a fan of ROWE, which emphasizes output over input. As I see it, too many organizations are still stuck in the opposite model. They like to remind their employees that "results are the bottom line," all the while insisting those workers submit time cards each week (input) or burn part of a vacation day, because they visit the doctor during regular business hours. The result? Employees have to concern themselves just as much with being present and making sure they look busy as they do tending to their actual work responsibilities.
This isn't to suggest that ROWE would work in every industry. If you're an air traffic control officer or surgeon, being available and accountable at a precise hour (or minute or second, in many cases) is pretty damn important, and could mean the difference between life or death.
But in many professions (advertising? video game design? magazine editing?) does it really matter whether you complete your project at company headquarters at 3:00 on a Thursday afternoon or while sitting in your pajamas in your living room on a Wednesday morning? Should anyone care if you pop over to your kid's school in the middle of a weekday in between sessions of cranking out a design or proposal that helps your company land a big client?
It's time to throw out the Industrial Age model of tracking input and replace it with a system in which organizations trust employees to manage and devise their own workday -- as long as the work gets done.
Share this post: Digg, StumbleUpon, del.icio.us, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
Posted by Bryan on March 3, 2008 at 10:38 AM in The Daily Grind | Permalink | Comments (31) | TrackBack (0)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/8850/26732268
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Workdays Should Be Based on Results -- Not Input:
Comments
With realities like IBM pushing "collaboratories" and the fedgov adopting wikis at record pace, the ACI study positing that adoption of "broadband applications can achieve a net reduction of 1 billion tons of greenhouse gas over 10 years, which, if converted into energy saved, would constitute 11% of annual U.S. oil imports", it is clear that the impediment is that mid-management realizes that if they can reduce their work to goals (which is required for ROWE to work) they will, in all probability, be replaced by automation (software) and outsourcing. Shareholders must demand C-Suites be held accountable for continuing wasteful 1980's business practices -- until the "C's" get hit, the mid layers won't change.
Posted by: Ed Dodds | Mar 11, 2008 4:01:49 PM
Oh Boy!!! Where can I find a company in Toronto that utilizes ROWE????!!!!! All my life I've put in more time than needed and picked up extra work that needed to be done in my places of work. I've never stopped but boy! do I get irked when I am calling in late or for a day off and hear about how my hours start at 9 and/or end at 5, yadder, yadder. Never is there a mention of all the extra hours I've put in w/o pay or O/T! ROWE would be a perfect fit for me and allow me to not be so time crunched with my family and kids and my volunteer position with a youth group. You go girls! Bring it on! I'd have to say too that if I could switch up hours it would definitely mean more in the thanks/good job department.
Posted by: Shawn G | Mar 11, 2008 4:10:40 PM
Wouldn't we all love this type of environment? Wait a minute. What happens to the fabric of the office when cooworkers' needs must be put on hold because you are not there--"again." Flexibility is great, but for businesses that require interaction among employees,this much freedom might be too much of a good thing.
Posted by: Ruth | Mar 11, 2008 5:17:38 PM
It is trying to convert an employee into a consultant. A consultant is self-employed, works whatever hours they think is necessary, and charges a fee for whatever the market will bear.
I think it is lunacy to make employees act like self-employed consultants without the commensurate benefits (and risks) of self-employment (especially when the employees are in a union). If the employee wants the same freedom as a self-employed consultant, then that employee should quit the job and come back as a consultant. The pay is much higher, the freedom much greater, no union feather-bedding. Self-employment is the harshest test of one's true worth to society.
Posted by: JD Smith | Mar 11, 2008 11:01:20 PM
This is a great idea. Why make someone come into work at such limited hours when we are so different. As long as it gets done and applying these principals the work would get done and better. Now we just need to implement recess for health reasons and higher productivity.
Posted by: vicky | Mar 11, 2008 11:10:39 PM
This sure sounds like a great idea, EXCEPT that if management notices that you complete tasks faster than average, they will be inclined to put more work into your "IN" box. I'm sure that this would also apply to the sales representative who exceeds goals every time. Management will decide that the numbers are too low, and place some extraordinary goal the next time sales numbers are measured. I sure would like to find a company that follows the visionary (and sometimes thought of Utopian) ROWE system of Management, and pays well too!
Posted by: Stuart | Mar 11, 2008 11:26:51 PM
I've thought this for a long time. There was in the 30's a genius who could do in 1.5 hours what took most people eight. It was tedious soul sucking work for most of the people but somehow he could offload it to the automatic part of his brain and just zone out for 1.5 hours while he did it. He began leaving earlier and earlier finally showing up at 7:30 and leaving at nine just when most of the people were arriving. He was chastised and threatened for this behavior, but he brought the focus back onto his work. He asked his bosses if there was any dissatisfaction with his work. No, they said. He asked if the quantity of his work was adequate. Oh yes, they said, your daily output quantity is exceptional. He asked if they were unhappy to pay him the same amount as the other employees to do the same amount of work they did. Well no not really. What's the problem, well A the other employees are jealous and B, just think how much work you could get done in eight hours. His answer: Tell the other employees to learn to work as fast as I do and as for B, he said you can't pay me that much and anyway I only do this to pay the rent so I can spend my time doing what *I* want. They let him continue to do it.
Posted by: C. Dick | Mar 12, 2008 12:47:38 AM
I am a former Employee of C & S Wholesale Grocers, Inc. I was salaried. We had to be there for a set schedule of 8 to 5 or later depending on the day. A one hour lunch was required, and made up part of the 9 hour day. If all your work was done by 2 PM you could not leave even if salaried. They didn't follow ROWE and the attitude of the group of employees was anything but positive. ROWE would have made life a lot better back then, but you had to be there for 9 hours, even if you didn't take lunch at all. Needles to say it lead to more breaks, trips to the bathroom, trips to the snack machine, and looking busier or slowing the pace down so you could leave on time and not start a project that you could not leave in the middle of.
I would greatly enjoy working full time for a company that follows ROWE. I would still follow a schedule but if the atmosphere is right I am willing to work over and until the job is done so the deadline is met.
Posted by: C&S_EE | Mar 12, 2008 8:01:17 AM
It is false that "ROWE", or at any rate, measuring performance by an appropriate indicator of PRODUCTION, will not work in every organization and every job. It will.
The mis-understanding (which is facilitated by the "ROWE" authors' own mis-understanding of the fundamental truth, which has long been known and for which they are trying to take credit) is that "ROWE", or its equivalent has anything direct to do with the hours you work, or where you do the work. What IS true, is that EVERY job has a statistic which measures what that post is supposed to contribute to the organization. (A statistic is the change (negative or positive or no change) between an earlier time and a later time.) A receptionist's main statistic might be "number of calls answered and properly routed". An air traffic controller's main statistic might be "number of planes properly routed" (which cannot be done at home, hence the requirement that in order to do it, he or she must be in the control tower on time and during a specific time period. A salesman will have several statistics, one of which may be "number of cold calls", another may be "number of sales made".
"ROWE" is, with these corrections made, in effect, simply a confused and incomplete re-statement of the management policies developed by L. Ron Hubbard in order to run and organize the Church of Scientology. Of course, Hubbard wasn't the first to realize that PRODUCTION is the only rational basis upon which to manage an organization. Nevertheless, there is nothing new or unique about ROWE. It simply restates what Hubbard, in particular, first wrote 50 years, or so, ago.
Posted by: Scott - Washington, D.C. | Mar 12, 2008 8:08:37 AM
Thank you for articulating something I've been thinking about for a long time. I know people are going to disagree with me, but I think the same "output" model should be used when thinking about work dress- it shouldnt' matter at all, as long as you are getting the job done well!
Posted by: Rachel | Mar 12, 2008 8:22:35 AM
Nonsense! If you are paid for a day, you work the day as traditionally defined. I am not an employer but rather an employee that resents the work place being converted to high school. This is not Europe. We work in this country!
The interpretation of your theory from the employer point of view is that either they are not giving enough work assignments and will therfore provide more. If there are no additional assignments, perhaps they don't need the employee and their function can be absorbed.
Posted by: Steven Moschell | Mar 12, 2008 9:13:59 AM
The bottom line is you work for the employer not the other way around, so if you don't want to work the hours specified by the folks paying your salary just quit. Go work for McDonalds they usually let the rest of the kids work whatever hours they want, they just hire more minimum wagers to fill in the spaces.
Posted by: Mike | Mar 12, 2008 9:32:50 AM
Instead of Rowe, I think more workplaces should incorporate real teamwork. So if you're a genius who could finish your work in half the time as others, you should stay and help your co-workers. And give them tips on how to work more efficiently. Companies should pay for co-workers to go and hang out for half a day like bowling or something fun to build relationships so that going to work is something they look forward to because they have friends there. And not just do these things once a month, but do them once a week. And have them bring their families too so everybody could get to know each other. Then if an employee had to leave early for their kid's play or something, people would understand. The employee could make up the hours the next day.
Posted by: Nancy Yang | Mar 12, 2008 9:52:29 AM
I've tried this both ways with my staff as well as myself. First, there are some jobs where being present is a part of the job (phone support, button-presser-for-nukes) but "knowledge-work" is something that transcends 9-5. In IT, servers never sleep and routers prefer to do their worst deeds at 2AM. When I allowed the staff to take care of their projects as long as they met their project plans, they worked MORE. They did so because they felt empowered, not watched like hawks with Timex watches.
As far as meetings etc, schedule them a day ahead and people make meetings. Or, they get on the phone, or Skype or any number of connectivity technologies.
The control-freak need for presenteeism is a great way to scare off your best and brightest. So, keep crushing their souls, I'll take the best ones when they fly the coop.
On the comment on dress codes. I think that casual is fine. People whould be comfortable. If you're not client-facing, I dont see an issue but with a few rules:
1. No open-toed shoes for dudes. Thats just nasty. Case closed
2. Keep the ratty tee shirts at home. At least wear a nice tee, other people have to view you...
3. All genders- keep the manky beach flips flops and birks at home. Black foot mung isn't particularly nice to look at.
4. No PJs, sweat-pants or general sleeping/gym-wear. Especially is you just a) got up or b) are fresh from the gym.
Posted by: Lionel Felix | Mar 12, 2008 9:57:17 AM
You have got to be kidding me!!! If you want to be of ROWE, there is always jobs that will let you stay at home and work. Then you won't have to complain about not being able to do things because you have all the time to do it, you just have to have everything done on time. I worked in the health profession since I was 20 and I have never known of a job that will let you leave and do other things and then come back. If you got a doctors appointment that's fine just as long as you come back to work. My DON used to tell us that if you wanted to do things outside of the job besides your job then you have no business being there so you might as well clock out and not come back.
And I agreed with her 100%. Also, it's not fair to the other coworkers who have to do your job and theirs too because you would rather get a facial, work out at the gym, or go buy the griceries on company time not to mention their time as well.
Posted by: Dyshonda | Mar 12, 2008 10:51:06 AM
I can't wait until more organizations adopt some of the aspects of "ROWE", then balancing life and work will be easier. It may be something for employers to think about as the workforce diminishes and finding good employees becomes more difficult. For me personally, I feel that my skills, knowledge, abilities, and dependability are exactly what employers want, but working a 9-5 role or rotating shifts (such as air traffic control) dosen't leave enough time for the important aspects of a healthy and enjoyable life, such as daily exercise at the ideal time (mid-morning or early afternoon), time for childen's school events, time for preparing evening meals at a reasonable dinner hour vs. being too exhausted from being at the office all day, time for volunteer work and giving back to the community, and numerous other things that life has to offer. Sounds like the "ROWE" plan offers some valid options for business.
Posted by: Barbara | Mar 12, 2008 12:26:11 PM
I haven't done any research into ROWE, this is new to me, but after reading some of the discussion a few points jump to mind. First off, if you want a job that gives the freedom to work whenever you want to they are out there. Many employers want people there should something come up a body is there to handle it. Where I currently work we were accountable to complete 2 projects a week, which 9 times out of 10 was achievable, I just grabbed the concept better than many others and was pumping out 4-5 a week. Should I have been able to leave after the 2nd one was done? I wish. There's ways to make the best of it. But if freedom is what you want the careers are there.
Take retail for instance, having been in retail management for 8 yrs and the move into the corporate world was an eye opener for me. Yeah, I love no nights or weekends, but I miss that. I enjoy the day off during the week. The ability to get things done in the AM. The flexibility to work 8-12 leave and come back and work 6-10 or something like that. Most places are fine with that because as a manager you work it out with the other managers. They scratch your back, you scratch theirs.
As for the dress code issue that came up. My biggest pet peeve is that employers let women wear casual skirts or capris. Where is the justice that a man cannot wear either shorts or capris. Suck it up and deal with it.
Finally if you don't like where you are leave. No one is holding a gun to your head to work at that location. You will be replaced, so the employer makes out and you will be happier. We're on this planet to live, society has made it a requirement to work in order to live. Never interchange those words. You work to live, not live to work. That alludes to the prior post that if you would rather do something not at work, leave and don't come back. Who in their right mind wants to do nothing else but work? Where do family and friends come in? Travel and Culture? Please, find me 1 person that works and has no desire to do something else.
Posted by: Jon Curtis | Mar 12, 2008 12:35:55 PM
I am getting ready to start a new career.
Far different from my last position of 10 years.
I will be required to be on the computer most of the day inputting data, faxing, follow up, office supply ordering while also attending the needs of three other heads.
I was the administrative assistant for one person & felt as if I was drowning (a small company consisted of owner & me)
any insight from others to help my day go smoother??
Posted by: Denise | Mar 12, 2008 1:34:35 PM
Rachel [writing above] seems to miss very key points and I think she is very far off the mark.
One of the potential very great benefits of ROWE-style employment is that it allows people to manage their lives more effectively and productively.
For example, situationally it could enormously sensible for someone to transact personal affairs on a given afternoon and pick up work in the early evening when they have a "second wind". There are many scenarios that I could describe to give concrete examples to support this notion.
The result: the employee enjoys greater quality of life, and the employer enjoys greater productivity. All at exactly the same pay scale that was in place before using ROWE-like approaches.
The potential social and economic benefits to our society are absolutely enormous.
(I'm writing of jobs that don't actually inherently require "time coverage" or common assembly at a common time. Mature adults can judge the difference.)
Realistically, a ROWE-like environment may not be immediately suitable for everyone because some people have low maturity and lower life skills and need "parenting" from their employers.
Rachel really gets it backwards very badly: the 9-5 structured work environment puts people into the role of children who must be supervised. Rachel's old work model is the real "high school" that is designed for children [or adults who are treated like children] who need structure because they cannot structure and manage themselves like adults.
ROWE is for adults who have learned the skills of managing themselves responsibly.
When I think of the number of *people* who are trained to work 9-5, who are mentally conditioned and trained to live with a "me vs. the boss who MAKES me work" mindset, and who are effectively denied the freedom to productively manage their own daily lives by this old mindset, it is saddening.
Perhaps some people who currently work 9-5 would learn new life skills and grow up when placed into a ROWE environment. I feel tempted to speculate that there would be some social benefits above and beyond the other benefits I mentioned.
Now Ruth says "self-employment is the harshest test of one's true worth to society" and apparently argues against ROWE environments for employees. Why? Perhaps Ruth is arguing that there should be no such thing as traditional "employment" and that everyone should be viewed as self-employed. But let's assume that this isn't her point and that she still believes in an "employment" relationship. In this case, if organizations see fit to compensate someone for becoming part of and contributing to a team productively why on earth does Ruth interpret this as "lunacy"? What does it matter to Ruth that an "employee" is paid for being productive rather than for warming a chair?
I suppose that for people who like being paid for warming chairs, ROWE will be unattractive, but on the other hand there shouldn't be too much cause for worry because there probably will always be some inherently chair-warming jobs to which they could apply themselves.
ROWE is not only a concept who's time has come, I think it's a bit overdue.
Posted by: Tom | Mar 12, 2008 1:39:07 PM
This is an interesting concept because it reinforces the idea that the more things change the more they stay the same. I've been involved in the technology industry as an engineer, a manager, a vice president, general manager, corporate trainer and now as a trainer of soft skills to engineers, and throughout my career I've always used ROWE, though I've never labeled it. "My phrase was, you can go to the beach for all the care, just get the job done when you say you will." Now it's being touted as a new way of managing.
There are plenty of organizations that work with the ROWE philosophy and plenty that don't. It will probably always be that way. Not just because of industry specific requirements but also because there are managers that are too insecure to let their direct reports function according to the ROWE philosophy and some who are willing to use ROWE.
Here are your some approaches...If you are a direct report and you want a ROWE environment...
First, you can find managers that manage according to ROWE. It's one approach and it puts the power of your work environment in somebody else's hands. Not my preference.
Second, you can take some control of your own work environment and situation. The way you do that is you realize that trust and your work situation is all dependent on communication. If you communicate with your manager directly and openly and you attempt to understand what your manager wants to control and why you can begin to deliver what your manager is attempting to make happen while having more freedom. This is also a way to avoid being micro-managed. When I coach engineers I tell them to find out what their manager is attempting to accomplish and monitor when they aren't using what is called ROWE in this blog. Then together we figure out a way to give that to the manager while providing more freedom to the engineer. Invariably it works out well. I'm currently coaching an engineer who started giving weekly status reports to his manager (seemingly a reduction in freedom) and his manager was so pleased that he now gives the engineer much more freedom in other areas and the engineer now feels much more in control of his work and his processes. He has now taken much more control of his work life, gained much more freedom, by actually giving the manager what he wanted instead of fighting him and, in this process, the engineer has lead the manager closer to the ROWE philosophy without anyone even knowing.
If you are already a manager here are my suggestions...
Get really clear what you want from your direct reports. Is it results, is is control, is it something else. Whatever it is, get really clear on what is important to you, what it is, and why it is.
Then ask if your current approach to getting it is working? If you are not using some form of ROWE you are probably fighting with your direct reports to get what you want.
Is there a better way? If your not getting what you want, then try something different. More than likely, giving your direct reports more power in certain areas while holding on to other areas can work better than what you are currently doing that isn't getting you the results you want.
Here are two questions I always ask my direct reports. "How do you want to be managed? If I managed you the way you wanted, how would I do that?" It's a great question, and it will begin a dialogue that will let you know what your direct report is expecting and how you can get the control you want without going overboard.
Effectively managing and leading people, especially engineers and technologists, is a big topic. I hope I've contributed some to the dialogue here.
Be well,
Steven Cerri
www.stevencerri.com
Posted by: Steven Cerri | Mar 12, 2008 2:17:06 PM
ROWE sounds cool, but it wont work for every position. Take my Factory exp. for example. Obviously a factory, you have to be there on time. And i was, for the most part 10-15 minutes early (the occasional sick day, car failure, ect.). And i got an ear full every time i was stepping foot in the door right as the bell rang, instead of at my post. Even though it took the product 10 minutes to reach my end of the line. I would use this time to turn on, check, and maintain my equipment (witch took a total of about 2 minutes). The rest of the time i was trying to look busy. So even if ROWE doesn't work in your workplace, in the very least the time you are scheduled to be there should be based on the time you are actually required to start work. There should be some leeway in some cases. After all I was often the last one in the building being at the end of the line.
Posted by: James | Mar 12, 2008 5:38:40 PM
I never knew there was a name (ROWE) to describe how I have been working for the past 17 years via medical transcribing at night in the "Golden Triangle" of Beverly Hills. I am a night-owl (to put it mildly) and there is very little traffic when I choose to go to work. It takes me about 12 minutes to drive to work (4.5 miles) and parking is never a problem. I charge a flat weekly fee for my work, show up anytime that the office is closed (my choice, not theirs), and I get full health insurance and a week of vacation time despite officially working only 15 hours a week. Most evenings I work about 60-90 minutes, but I am slightly addicted to computer solitaire so I'm actually in the office longer. The uniformed cleaning crews are very, very nice and know to do our office first so as not to disturb me later.
In no way am I a "consultant." I am a highly skilled employee.
All kinds of ROWE jobs are out there. You just have to create them. Twice I have turned ordinary day transcribing jobs into long-term night jobs - after they got to know me and knew I was absolutely reliable and trustworthy. One I stayed at 9 years (with a full salary including health ins. and full vacation benefits) and the current one is described above. I was able to go to a community college and take tons of graphic classes by day, take care of my aged parents, and still work.
Now I spend my days building a freelance sign-painting biz while earning a salary at night.
ROWE rules!
Posted by: Susan | Mar 12, 2008 9:07:43 PM
if your just an ordinary employee it would work. trust me!
Posted by: charles | Mar 13, 2008 2:16:48 AM
For any naysayers, they must not have worked in a flexible environment before. I previously worked for the Federal Government in an administrative capacity. The majority of my job required me to be there during the "core business hours." However, I had some control of my start time (between 6:30 and 9:00) and my end time (between 3:00 and 5:30). Within that structure, I could come in at 6:30, leave at 5:30, and take a 3 hour lunch. But, most employees worked fairly traditional hours except on those days that they needed to tend to other things such as doctor appointments. We had further flexibility in that we could work 8 9-hr days, 1 8-hr day, and have one day off every other week. So, it was easy enough to schedule personal things that could only be done M-F between the hours of 8:00-5:00 on those days that we had off. This did require some discussion on the front-end in terms of coordinating schedules so that we had office coverage at all times, but since everyone enjoyed the benefits, there was no balking. While this isn't exactly ROWE, it just demonstrates how thinking outside the traditional workday setting can lead to high levels of production, while maintaining a happy workforce. We actually cut down on absenteeism, and the workplace had a different, more positive energy. So, while what is defined as ROWE here, may not suit every business environment, there are things that can implemented to empower employees and potentially conserve energy/resources at the same time. Just a little food for thought.
Posted by: Heather | Mar 13, 2008 5:33:57 AM
I currently work fulltime for a human service agency that touted it's need for 'flexible work schedules' to accomodate their requirement that we meet with families based on their availability - and that sometimes meant after 5pm or before 8am. I was really happy to find a place that would allow me the freedom to make my own schedule based on the needs of the families I worked with and empowered us to manage our own time.
Then I got a new manager. Who doesn't have a clue when it comes to ROWE principles. Not only am I supposed to be spending most of my work time face-to-face working directly with families in their homes but at the same time I'm also supposed to be completing paperwork from the office (even though we can access email & our files via the internet from home), using the office phone to make my phone calls (so she can 'supervise' my work) and providing clinical coverage for the unit should anyone call with an emergency and not be able to reach their own coordinator (something that SHE technically as the Supervisor should be providing). Sadly, she hasn't even instructed the secretary to call us on our work cellphones if any emergencies come up so that we can get on with the business of connecting with our 'clients' until we need to provide coverage in that emergency situation.
Needless to say, when an organization isn't even using the technology it has to promote a ROWE environment and it's main function requires FLEXIBILITY in employees's schedules in order to get the RESULTS they are pushing for - it makes absolutely no sense at all to encourage managers to go in an opposite direction when supposedly 'motivating' employees to do their best for the company.
But all they see is that *my* productivity has dried up (because my motivation to be there has been sucked dry) & I'm not meeting my goals - not that my manager's style is blocking my ability to get my job done & I'm having to work three times harder because of the restrictions she has placed on a) my schedule b) my work process & how I work BEST and c) her own insecurities about how she can add value to my process to justify her decisions.
Fortunately, I have found another ROWE environment that does encourage me to use my strengths and do whatever I need to do my job from wherever I am and it encourages me to connect with other 'free spirits' who want to balance their work lives with their personal lives and have a quality of life that makes life worth living. They encourage lifelong learning and enjoying your work as much as you enjoy your family time and personal time and they are truly a Results-Oriented Work Environment. You can check them out at http://www.EVENTuresTravelAndMore.Info
Posted by: Lyn | Mar 13, 2008 10:29:36 PM
So, where are you when the change orders come in? What are you doing with the sub-sub-contractor isn't performing according to specs and your boss has heard about it from an angry customer? Are you going to be visible when the VP comes through your department looking to bring someone onto a high-level task force? Outputs matter, but they aren't the only thing that determines your success. The career ladder starts with technical work that is well-defined and finite -- the kind of stuff that you can say, "Well, I've done the work, I'll knock off for a couple of hours." But the upper levels are about poorly defined acitivities (in fact, your job becomes defining them, for yourself and for others) -- the kind that have you waking up at 3 a.m. in panic over what you missed or in excitement about the great idea that hit you in your sleep. At that point, you need to be able to find people, and to be available to others. Who are you going to pick for the new, exciting, career-building work? The people you can find.
Posted by: Jon | Mar 14, 2008 7:04:22 AM
The conversation and the posts are fascinating.
FULL DISCLOSURE: I am Cali and Jody's agent and stand to benefit if their book WHY WORK SUCKS AND HOW TO FIX IT takes off.
My advice: Read there book. Not for my benefit or theirs, but because no one has ever encapsulated, in one place, what a ROWE is, how it works, what the objections are, the challenges presented, etc. It has never all been in one place for people to read about. For $16 or $17 on Amazon.com, I personally think it is worth the investment. (I have also read their book seven times, at various stages, and think i am uniquly positioned to recommend it.)
I have been living and breathing ROWE for the past year, and as a self-employed business owner, I used my new-found focus on RESULTS to escape the Minnesota winter weather and spent 6 weeks in Mexico.
I was never more happy, fulfilled and productive, b/c my clients got what they wanted/needed and I got to have a life. I still worked hard, but the focus wasn't on the quantity of hours, rather the outcomes and the balance i acheived with my wife and daughter was out of this world.
I've come to know lots of Best Buy employees at Corporate. Ask them what they think if ROWE. They will spill their guts and tell you how it has changed their life for the better, allowed them balance, and made their teams stronger than ever.
I hope all of you, who made these very insightful, valid and perceptive comments, will keep following ROWE.
It will be worth it, I promise!
John P. Larson
Bright House
www.caliandjody.com
Posted by: John Larson | Mar 18, 2008 4:34:09 PM
I once worked for a pizza place and I was the opening *dish wash boy*. Duties were clear, dining room clean (floors, buffet & tables), clean plates out on the bar, bathroom clean and then finish any dishes in the sink. I was always more than done before we opened. So much more done that I was allowed to watch some tv and drink a coke in the back for almost half an hour.
On days that I was 15-20 minutes late, I still got all of my work done before we opened. Maybe 3 times I was not 100% done at open time and those were due to a really messed up day or being late on a messed up day.
Anyway, my boss was almost screaming mad at me when I was 5 minutes late, even though I had to sit around for half an hour before opening. My point is, what was the big deal? If I am late then that is less money they pay me to sit around. The work was the same *done*.
To make this story even better, after lunch, the boss would send me home early when I still had 1-2 sinks of plates to wash, he would say that he was trying to keep his over head down. If you are trying to keep your over head down, quit making me sit in the break room for half an hour before open time.
Now that I run my own business, I run it the way I want to run it and if that means I work a nice 8am-5pm or if I work till 2am, whatever, as long as things are done right and on time.
So that is what I do. I get the work done and take care of my life responsibilities at the same time. Lunch with a friend for 3 hours, cool. 3:30AM and I'm still going at it, cool.
This model would not work for everyone and the bigger the company the less it works for everyone. SO it is really something that the big boss has to decide what is best to do.
Depending on what kind of work you do and how codependent the other workers are with you, I'd say go for it.
Cause to me, 5 minutes late yet everything is done ahead of time is less over head.
Sitting on your thumb for half an hour pushes over head up.
Sending someone home to make up for that half hour of thumb sitting is bull crap when you are going to push that work load over onto the next shift coming on in a couple hours.
If you are going to be a manager, then do it smartly not shoddy!
Posted by: Sauder D Archer | Mar 20, 2008 8:10:08 PM
Just read the topic. And regarding the input versus results, the focus should change throughout the entire North American work-force. Grand results would happen if incentive was placed within certian corporations, companies, businesses, and other career related markets. The youth culture has seen enough "bubble-gum" commericals and package deals for Fed-Ex and UPS, that the structure/system has imploded. Because of the wrong target audience. But oh, well.
There is no incentive for the students of today or managers, customer service representatives, market analysts, sales associates, chief executive officers, etc. Results would happen if a deal was made. A verbal contract, a written contract, a verbal agreement, basic communication skills.
Posted by: mike | Mar 24, 2008 5:58:24 AM
Good post. I agree with your assessment of ROWE, including its industry limitations. I work for a nonprofit that helps small businesses build better work environments, Winning Workplaces, and some of the top small firms we've honored, such as Communispace Corp. in Massachusetts, have done a great job of establishing work/life balance as a cultural tenet and following through in real-world implementation of the practice. It's not unheard of for employees to work 3- or 4-day work weeks and non 9-5 hours as long as their duties are fulfilled.
Posted by: Mark | Mar 26, 2008 2:02:02 PM
I believe that ROWE has many possible postivie outcomes...but as mentioned, it is not feasible to enact it in all workforces. For careers where one simply has a quota to meet, ROWE could be very helpful. So long as the condtitions are clearly set out (meeting a certain quota daily or weekly) giving employees the flexablity to do the work when they are most able, could in fact increase productivity. If, for example, and employee has a child who is in a play during they day, if they had to miss it for work, their quota may not be met even though they worked the full day. Whereas, if they knew ahead of time that if they got a certain amount of work done by the time the play started they could leave, a lot more would probably get done. On the flipside of that however, certain careers, such as a department store, where a certain number of people are required to be available at a time, ROWE could be counterproductive.But I do believe in certain situations it would be positive.
Posted by: Amanda | Apr 7, 2008 2:24:58 PM
