Are Flexible Work Policies Bad For Business? A Reading List for Managers

The new CEO of Yahoo, Marissa Mayer, has been making the news in the last few months for her strong work ethic.  Her decision to take a two-week maternity leave after being at the company for only a few months (and perhaps as a new employee she was not entitled to full maternity leave) left many mothers concerned that she was setting back progress for women in the workplace, while others cheered that at least a woman was showing that it's possible to be a new parent and CEO of a major company.  Fortunately for her, she was able to build a nursery at work at her own expense so that she could be with her newborn at work, a luxury few, if any, of her Yahoo colleagues likely have the option to enjoy.

Just this past weekend, we find out that she is now eliminating the option of working from home for Yahoo employees.  This is already setting off a firestorm of reactions among bloggers, including Julie Ryan Evans at CafeMom who says the move is "a big slap in the face of working parents."  On FastCompany, Cali Yost describes the move as "raising the veil...to expose and challenge the misguided, faulty reasoning many leaders follow when they decide to revoke their support for flexible work."  She argues that companies that pull the plug on flexible work policies are really responding to their own lack of foresight into setting up work-from-home programs with appropriate support and monitoring, and may be passing the blame for the company's failing onto work strategies that have nothing to do with their woes.  Still others raise the point that working from home may negatively impact one's chance of a promotion.

When setting up work policies, it is important for leadership to be aware of the characteristics of their workforce.  If everyone at the company has a very high paying job and can build their own work-nursery, then perhaps working from home does not make sense.  But for the majority of people, having the flexibility to work from home, even part time, can make an enormous difference in their lives, leading to lower turnover, higher job satisfaction, and less distraction on the job.  Not to mention higher productivity.

Here is a reading list I'd recommend for learning more about the right way to do flexible work policies, which is really what this debate should be about.

1. The Time Bind: When Work Becomes Home and Home Becomes Work by Arlie Hochschild.  This is a classic book that describes the work/life balance experiences of employees at a large national company.  The company had a very generous flexible work policy that no one was using, and Hochschild explains why.  This book illustrates the importance of company culture as well as the crucial role of upper management in supporting such policies if they are to be successful.
2. Workforce of One: Revolutionizing Talent Management Through Customization by Susan Cantrell and David Smith.  This book helps managers understand the value of customized work policies that take into account the specific motivations of their employees as well as business demands.  It also offers tools to develop one's own customized workforce strategy that conceptualizes employees as customers.  It's a nontraditional way of thinking about human resources management that values people and productivity.
3. The Time Divide: Work, Family, and Gender Inequality by Jerry Jacobs and Kathleen Gerson.  Another great book on work/family tensions and workplace structures.
4. Opting Out?: Why Women Really Quit Careers and Head Home by Pamela Stone.  Stone interviews women who have chosen to leave the workforce to understand how workforce policies can be problematic for working parents.  She offers solutions for organizations seeking to retain these high-performing employees.

What do you think of this list?  What other books would you add?

Women, Technology, and Stereotype Threat

It's no secret that women are underrepresented in the tech world.  With a smaller proportion of women receiving computer and information science degrees in 2009 than in 1985 (it went from 37% women in 1985 down to 18% in 2009!), the future for women in computer science looks bleak.  A recent article on the Women 2.0 blog by Christian Fernandez highlighted the lack of female representation in computer science courses in universities, with women representing only 10-20% of students graduating with computer science degrees, despite some programs starting with a 50/50 gender ratio.  He attributes this to women feeling intimidated by a hostile environment that leaves them feeling inadequate.

The sociological term for this phenomenon is called "stereotype threat," and it means that the individual (woman in this case), being part of society, recognizes that there is a negative stereotype about them. In this case, the stereotype is that women are not as good as men at technical stuff.  Because they recognize this, they become anxious that they will inadvertently confirm the stereotype.  In response, they behave in certain ways that can undermine their success, or, they may overcompensate for what they think will be a negative reaction by working harder than everyone else.  In the first case, they are faced with failure, and in the second, with burnout.  Sociologists have studied this phenomenon in great detail when it comes to racial stereortypes.

But stereotype threat is also a concept that tends to blame the victim.  By saying that women's worries about confirming negative stereotypes are causing them to drop out and feel inadequate, we are missing out on the importance of the social context in contributing to women's under-representation in technology.  In particular, Fernandez's report that women felt the environment in computer science courses was "hostile" towards women, indicates that this is not just about how these women feel about themselves and their abilities.

The context and culture of the university (or workplace) are critical in creating this hostile environment.  This includes things like whether women are in leadership positions, whether the work is structured as competitive or collaborative, and whether efforts are made to highlight the contributions of minorities and ensure they are included in activities.  Thus, it is one thing to prepare young women for university-level coursework, but it is altogether another to create an environment in which they can thrive without gender being an issue.


What's the solution?
Universities and high schools need to place an emphasis on structuring the work environment in a way that doesn't privilege the status quo.  For example, women may feel isolated from the community of computer science students if study or work groups are divided by gender.  Providing opportunities for more interaction among students in a non-competitive environment may help to bring down some of the barriers women face in these programs.  Young women may also be looking for role models, and either bringing in guest lecturers or hiring more female faculty members would provide young women with an opportunity to learn from those who have been there before them.

Why does this matter for startups?
In industries where there are few minorities, like women in tech, it's important to be aware of ways you may be alienating those who are not typical of your industry.  For example, while Beer Fridays can be a great team spirit-building time for small companies, they may also exclude those who choose not to drink alcohol, or who feel obligated to drink alcohol when they'd prefer not to.  This is something that women think about because they are physically smaller and cannot process as much alcohol as men, so two beers for a petite woman could make her quite tipsy while a 200 pound man would barely notice it.  Because of this, some women or people who do not drink alcohol, may remove themselves from otherwise fun group activities.  So try to make your events as open and welcoming to all kinds of people in your business.

What else can universities or businesses do support gender equality in computer science and technology programs?