One of the things I find the most frustrating in a work environment is when people are paid a salary, yet think hourly. "Thinking hourly" results in work schedules that have all kinds of contortions in them, like short lunches, early arrival, early departure, time out of the office, and the largely ineffective "work from home."
I personally prefer people take normal lunch hours, for example, and take at least some of their lunches with coworkers, especially coworkers that don't do the exact same job. That's the kind of thing that can spark new ideas, new enthusiasm, awareness of a bigger picture, and so on. People thinking hourly often shorten their lunch hour to a lunch half-hour or even less, then eat at their desk, all in an effort to thereafter leave early.
Of course, not everyone cares about their job enough to want to minimize their actual hours. Plenty of people only go to work to get the check and get out. I happen to not be one of those - I love my job and it's an important part of my life. I respect the point of view of those where it's not that way.
The real kicker, though, is when bonus time comes and the hourly thinker is surprised or angry that he doesn't get one. Hourly thinking also results in a clear exchange of labor for money. A person very careful to only give the exact amount of arranged labor should only receive the exact amount of arranged pay. Bonuses should be in recognition of something more from the employee.
I wonder how many people approach their jobs with hourly thinking and how many don't.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I completely agree with your assessment of the hourly thinkers -- and unfortunately, my admin is one of them. She takes a short lunch, arrives much earlier than the rest of us do (actually I think she doesn't -- but she pretends like she always does so she can leave early), etc. I wonder whether she realizes how much time she wastes in a day -- the dozens of people who stop by her office to chat, her numerous phone calls to family members -- can she possibly think she "works" an eight hour day? Perhaps I should point her to Steve Pavlina's site -- http://www.stevepavlina.com/articles/triple-your-personal-productivity.htm (and yes, thank you for telling me about Steve Pavlina's site).
Ah, but this works two ways. What about the manager who dutifully counts hours as a proxy for productivity. Does the employee who takes 80 hours to produce 40 hours of product deserve a bonus?
It appears that salaried employees now expect to put in 60 to 80 hours a week on the job. That prompts the question of how that job is defined: hours worked or product created? If hours worked (or at least present) is the measure, then should that not be stated in the employment contract? Or is it simply a way to drive employees to doing two jobs for the price of one?
If you are really working all morning, you probably need that lunch break to recharge for the afternoon. Cross pollination of ideas may be a great way to do that. But what happens after you put in a solid afternoon? Another "lunch" break? Work from home and email your spouse, who may be working on the other end of the sofa?
I think your comment deserves more thought about what is measured and how work that you enjoy can drain your energy to the point where productivity declines as hours go up.
I definitely see product created as far more important than hours worked. My assertion, however, is that those that think hourly and take significant liberties with their presence are unlikely to be as concerned about product created and are not contributing in the ways that could be described as "exceeding expectations."
The person that works 80 hours but accomplishes 40 hours worth of work is also only meeting expectations. The key, of course, is getting those expectations documented and holding employees accountable to measures other than a set number of hours.
To that end, one of the projects I'm working on at my company (with staff involvement) is to define the roles at the company and set expectations for what each role should deliver. It's not something that exists today, which makes it very hard to do evaluations. That's a necessary step in feeling comfortable that both employees and company are getting a good deal.
What about a 'salary thinker' who doesn't get things like bonuses for extra hours and effort and caring about the project and end product? You say "A person very careful to only give the exact amount of arranged labor should only receive the exact amount of arranged pay. Bonuses should be in recognition of something more from the employee." but what of the employee who goes above and beyond and gets no bonuses or recognition? Its a two way street, I think. I also think that a company that rewards extra effort and acheivement both in bonuses and other forms of recognition are more likely to produce that kind of behavior in their employees.
Post a Comment