Can HR ‘Think Different’?
Posted by
This week we tackle a wider strategic problem for society – a bit of HR futurology. What are the assumptions about work that we are so close to, that we now don’t see them anymore? What blinkers are we wearing that are limiting our vision of what can be achieved? If you’re interested in challenging the status quo – read on!
In the context of HR futurology, it was interesting to see Apple in the news recently, with a new HR policy. For those who haven’t run across it, Apple is prepared to fund the (substantial) cost of freezing the eggs of female employees, so that they can time having their family to fit in with their career. This has received mixed reactions – but Apple is no stranger to mixed reactions. The company’s slogan is Think Different.
The trouble is, freezing women’s eggs is not really an example of Think Different. It’s not redefining the problem. It’s coming up with creative solutions for the same persistent problem that others are working on. How to enable women to progress in the same way as men to all decision-making levels. But it’s still trying to solve the symptom, not the root cause. This approach still views the problem as ‘How do we get women to succeed, in a world of work designed over decades by men, for men?’.
The root cause of the symptom (women aren’t equally represented at all decision making levels) is that the way work is organised, does not function well in a world where both parents spend much of their time at work, and want to drive careers.
If you want to Think Different, you need to think about that root cause.
At the most fundamental level, what is the most critical requirement for any society to be highly successful? I contend that it is that the society has children and that these children are raised in a way that releases their individual talents to contribute to that society. Why do our work organisations, in a world where the huge majority are dual career households, act in a vacuum where babies don’t exist?
Why do we regard the current way work is organised as being fixed, and women’s biology to be the factor that is manipulable?
The current assumptions about work have only existed for a short historical period – 100 – 150 years. So what are these assumptions that we have to address in order to truly Think Different?
Assumption 1. All work comes parcelled in chunks called ‘jobs’ that require 35-40 hours each week, 52 weeks of the year (with 4-5 weeks holiday).
This is patently false. Someone said to me recently – “The trouble with job sharing is that there are only a limited number of people who are seeking to work 2-3 days a week, who you could pair up with.” This illustrates the assumption in operation rather nicely. If you strip away the ‘jobs assumption’ – what could work look like? Perhaps work could be parcelled out in a number of responsibility chunks of different sizes and shapes? You could have a world in which anyone, male or female would contract themselves for one or more key chunks of responsibility. Challenging work parcels can lead to thinking differently. For example, we already have one of our employees who typically works a pattern of half an hour before 8, 4 hours 8-1, with an hour or so in the evening and a few hours at weekends. In the school holidays, her work pattern changes. Work is wrapped around the prime need of society – the raising of children.
Assumption 2. All work comes in one solid chunk called a career. It follows a chunk called education, and precedes a chunk called retirement.
If we started challenging this assumption, we might start to wonder about how taking 6 years out of work in a 40-50 year career should have such a dramatic impact on careers. In my own case, it wasn’t taking time out to have kids that held me back, it was that in the first 15 years of my career I constantly thought I’d be having kids in 5 years time. I didn’t have a 40-year perspective. How would talent management operate differently, if we thought about both genders in terms of how they can maximise their whole career, with fast track streaks and resting periods, with the opportunity for sabbaticals or further education? We already fund holiday pay by setting aside a small amount of working hours pay which is taken while people aren’t actually working. What if that also funded 6 years not in work in any career, freeing up men as well as women? How about if we assumed that everyone would take 6-10 years of ‘other content’ in their lives, and planned our organisations around this? How many men would take years off to be with their kids, if that was the norm? How many people approaching retirement would opt for a gentle decrease of their career rather than an abrupt end?
Assumption 3. It’s important to measure input.
All punctuality, absenteeism and holiday tracking is based on this assumption. Why do we feel the need to count the number of hours someone works? Surely what is actually important is your output? Some people can produce double the output in half the time. I rejoice to see Google introducing policies like their famed half-day to work on anything you choose – which fosters initiative and adding value. Now they have also introduced Limitless Holidays. Essentially, if you meet your targets, the number of days you attend work or are away from work is your own business. It’s Google that is Thinking Different, not Apple! Focusing on outputs has been key for me, as I function on surges of creativity. I can’t force it to come by sitting at a desk from 9-5. I can’t put it on the back burner when inspiration strikes at 3 in the morning and my brain is bubbling with ideas, and words and thoughts just flow out of me. (I’ve tried going back to sleep. When I wake in the morning, that perfect moment of synergy has disappeared. Now I go with the flow.)
When you truly Think Different about the future of work, you discover that the problems you should be trying to solve are different. They are things like – what new skills do managers need, to start defining jobs in terms of responsibilities and outputs rather than number of hours worked? How do we rethink talent management to take a long-term perspective, and mix up work with ‘other content’? How do we free up men to take time out from their career without unconscious bias operating to their detriment? Payroll needs to be rebuilt from the ground up, to cope with multiple employment patterns. But surely in the Information Revolution it isn’t impossible to design software that would make this easy?
Until we accept that dual career families, and babies, are a reality which requires an integrated solution, we will be constantly trying to fix an ailing, not fit for purpose work machine by freezing women’s eggs. We’ll be worrying about the growth of supercities like London, with the transport headaches and housing crises it causes – because we haven’t realised that the reason London is growing is because it’s one of the few places where dual career couples BOTH have a wealth of career options without moving their family house every 2 years.
The good news, is that HR can be the architects of the future – if only we have the strategic insight in our own small backyard, to start challenging out-of-date assumptions.