SON SON
Rules in the workplace. Without them we’d have anarchy. Or would we? According to an article by Dr Travis Bradbury in the Huffington Post most companies fall into the trap of instigating morale sapping rules for every employee based upon the inconsiderate actions of a small minority of transgressors. Hardly seems fair does it?
Anyway, in this article, Dr B has outlined nine dumb directives and I have featured my top six…
1. Banning use of social platforms – now I think we would all accept the need to restrict access to some of the more (shall we say) ‘unsavoury’ sites available on the internet but why do some companies insist upon stopping access to the likes of LinkedIn, Facebook and Snap? The commonly held belief is that social media stifles efficiency but there is a counter-argument that these platforms are incredibly useful tools in the work environment – for example scoping someones profile whilst checking them out as a potential employee or downloading an image for a presentation. And anyway, we are resourceful beasts and if our access is blocked at work we will inevitably utilise our trusty smartphones as the interface instead.
2. Totally inflexible working hours – In my article ‘Working 9 to 5 is no way to make a living’ I wrote about why Netflix and Virgin have dispensed with the traditional 9 to 5 working practice and introduced fully flexible working hours and vacations. As Sir Richard Branson puts it:
“the focus should be on how much people get done rather than how much time they spend on it”
So if that’s the case then why do some companies and/or bosses insist upon totally rigid working hours? Dr B talks about the injustice of being pilloried for turning up to work 5 minutes late despite the fact that you regularly work evenings, weekends and even when on vacation. He goes on to say:
“if you have employees who will fake a death to miss a day’s work, what does that say about your company?”
3. Excruciating E-mail Policies – now personally I’ve not come across this particular imposition but seemingly some companies are starting to introduce software that prevents employees sending emails unless it falls into a pre-approved list of topics. Travis and I agree that this is simply a matter of ‘trust’ – again I mentioned this in my 9 to 5 piece where I quoted senior analyst Sam Stern from Forrester Research on the matter:
“if you trust and empower people and give them a chance to rise to the higher expectations, the vast majority of people are able to do it”
To be honest, why would you even bother hiring someone if you don’t trust them especially for sending something as basic as an email?
4. Stopping the use of Smartphones – a clear cut example of the original premise of this piece, where the inconsiderate actions of the few adversely affect the majority. Just because a few chatty Cathy’s and blabbering Bobs can’t stay off their phones for more than five minutes doesn’t mean that the rest of us should have to suffer.