Offering employees the chance to wo

Offering employees the chance to work fewer hours can benefit both the individual and the company. Individuals can benefit through feeling they have more control over their lives, and more time for personal, life-enhancing interests and activities. The company can benefit through having more flexibility to deal with troughs and peaks in demand. It can cut the time employees work without having to resort to redundancies. Moreover, employees who spend less time at work are often more productive and creative than those who work longer hours. Despite these advantages, only a small proportion of employees take advantage of reduced working hours when they are available. The introduction of reduced-hours working has wide implications for companies, from performance review to promotion, and from seniority policies to scheduling. Neither side should enter an agreement lightly, and both sides must be committed to making it work.

Both flexible working and work–life balance are important contemporary agendas within organizations and could have both positive and negative consequences.

Many organizations use to look ways for reducing their costs and streamlining their operations. Many companies are trying to have a check so that they could look at ways of reducing payrolls as company’s payroll is typically its biggest cost base. Most of the companies are formulating strategies to avoid redundancies within their organizations. As such, there is a renewed interest in workforce flexibility and how this could provide employees with more personal time and reduce costs for employers.

In the situations when organizations have to perform staff cut, some staff use to see this as the opportunity to hone and develop new skills and demonstrate their capacity and capability for career progression. Hence, it is important to understand the concept of work-life balance as it means differently for different people. Also, it depends on the level of the hierarchy of organizations of which they are part of, i.e., an employer and an employee have different perspectives on the flexibility in work and in the work-life balance.

Other employees find the increased workload to be stressful and also consider it as detrimental to the balance in their work and life. People are becoming more stressed and their health and wellbeing may be at more risk, especially in those organizations, where job security is threatened and/or employees use to carry extra workload. Generally, people use to work for longer duration in workplaces where workload is higher.

Q- Do you agree with Juliet Bourke that the use of flexibility has moved away from its original paradigm?

Ans- Earlier there was a war for talent acquisition, now employers are reluctant for this investment to be shown the door in some business sectors. Instead of that, they are now focusing on reduced work week, part time work and work arrangements with increased flexibility such that they could retain their staff. So, some employers are now doing inevitable reductions in staff as this leads to an opportunity to redesign their roles and new ways of doing jobs could be found out and employees could simultaneously maintain their work-life balance by working more flexibly.

Juliet Bourke is not entirely comfortable with where the “reshaped” argument for flexibility is heading. While workplace flexibility could reduce overheads and boost productivity, she is concerned that the point of workplace flexibility has shifted – and not for the better.

According to Bourke, flexibility is now about getting of more out of fewer people instead of the previous paradigm and she is afraid of the unintended consequences of this line of thinking. This was presented by her during the launch of a website (www.workplaceflexibility.com.au) which is used to assist companies in developing flexible work practices.

Also, employers could visualize the economic crisis as the time of using flexibility as an opportunity in nasty ways. They might reduce the working hours of employees when they are not needed and could put an extra workload on other staff which have to work longer, which would lead to an increased workload. So, flexibility could not ensure that it is the win-win situation for employee and employer both in most of the situations.

Although, only benefit that was requested universally – both vertically and horizontally across organizations to support work/life balance – was flexibility.In some organizations, for accommodating new requirements, business should develop sustained solutions for flexible working andutilize job redesign.

There might be situations in which demand from clients could decrease as a result of downturn. In response to this decrease, people could reduce work hours through flexible work arrangements and could improve their work life balance. A key element of this strategy includes comprehensive programs for employee flexibility and employee assistance and it would help to develop a diverse, adaptive and high-performing workforce able to meet current and future business needs. Voluntary flexible work and leave options could be provided to avoid redundancies and wages and salaries could be paid accordingly. But, in some organizations, whether there is a strong culture around work/life balance or not, redundancies are inevitable. However, where executives have seen and recognized the benefits that accrue from work/life strategies, it is more likely that senior managers and leaders would explore alternative ways to work as a way to reduce costs and minimize redundancies. Executives know that they need staff that are engaged and committed if they are to continue to be profitable. A culture delivers higher levels of employee engagement if it is supportive of work/life balance for its employees. Flexibility is also about more effective and efficient ways of working for all employees, regardless of whether they work part or full-time (Martin, 2015).

Whereas, in case of natural attrition, redeployment and flexible work practices, most of the reductions come, whenever the downturn is there and employees have to remain agile in such situations. In future duration, economy might pick up and the talent acquisition could be again in demand. Also, employees have a sense that they should have to work harder and sometimes longer in a downturn. But, sometimes there is huge impact on engagement, which is pivotal to discretionary effort and productivity. It’s hard to have an engaged workforce if they’re resentful. Even in the short term, that drive to get more out of less is not always productive. So at a time when you need high levels of engagement, you could find yourself operating a business with low levels of engagement.

As corporations look to increase sales and save on costs to ensure profitability, there’s an expectation that people would do what needs to be done – and that’s to get the results. This would impact on people and the amount of time required doing this.This trend is especially prevalent in multinationals, which have regional offices. As companies are teleconferencing more to save on travel costs, this requires employees to be on call more often across different time zones (Richmond, 2013).

Unless structural efficiencies are put in place and job roles redesigned following a redundancy program, companies could hamstring themselves as they seek to do more with less. While it is well established that talented employees are significantly more productive and profitable, there could a fine line between stretch goals and burnout even for talented performers.

So, we could say that flexibility has moved from its original paradigm to an extent which is necessary and inevitable. Pros and cons are associated with it, and proper management could lead to proper efficient workforce who has work-life balance.

Results (Thai) 1:

จึงมีโอกาสที่จะทำงานน้อยชั่วโมงพนักงานได้รับประโยชน์ทั้งบุคคลและบริษัท บุคคลได้รับประโยชน์ผ่านความรู้สึกที่ได้ควบคุมชีวิตของพวกเขาเพิ่มเติม และเวลามากขึ้นสำหรับสถานที่ส่วนบุคคล เสริม สร้างชีวิตและกิจกรรม บริษัทได้รับประโยชน์ โดยมีความยืดหยุ่นมากขึ้นเพื่อจัดการกับ troughs และยอดความต้องการ ก็สามารถตัดเวลาที่พนักงานทำงาน โดยไม่ต้องหันไป redundancies นอกจากนี้ พนักงานที่ใช้เวลาน้อยในการทำงานมักขึ้นผลิต และสร้างสรรค์กว่าผู้ที่ทำงานในชั่วโมงที่ยาว แม้ มีข้อดีเหล่านี้ เฉพาะสัดส่วนขนาดเล็กของพนักงานใช้ประโยชน์จากชั่วโมงการทำงานลดลงเมื่อมี แนะนำการลดชั่วโมงการทำงานมีผลกระทบกว้างสำหรับบริษัท จากประสิทธิภาพการทำงานที่ตรวจสอบโปรโมชั่น และอายุงานนโยบายการวางแผน ไม่ด้านควรป้อนข้อตกลงเล็กน้อย และทั้งสองฝ่ายต้องมุ่งมั่นที่จะทำให้การทำงานทำงานแบบยืดหยุ่นและสมดุล – ชีวิตการทำงานเป็นวาระสำคัญร่วมสมัยภายในองค์กร และอาจมีผลกระทบทั้งบวก และลบMany organizations use to look ways for reducing their costs and streamlining their operations. Many companies are trying to have a check so that they could look at ways of reducing payrolls as company’s payroll is typically its biggest cost base. Most of the companies are formulating strategies to avoid redundancies within their organizations. As such, there is a renewed interest in workforce flexibility and how this could provide employees with more personal time and reduce costs for employers.In the situations when organizations have to perform staff cut, some staff use to see this as the opportunity to hone and develop new skills and demonstrate their capacity and capability for career progression. Hence, it is important to understand the concept of work-life balance as it means differently for different people. Also, it depends on the level of the hierarchy of organizations of which they are part of, i.e., an employer and an employee have different perspectives on the flexibility in work and in the work-life balance.Other employees find the increased workload to be stressful and also consider it as detrimental to the balance in their work and life. People are becoming more stressed and their health and wellbeing may be at more risk, especially in those organizations, where job security is threatened and/or employees use to carry extra workload. Generally, people use to work for longer duration in workplaces where workload is higher.Q- Do you agree with Juliet Bourke that the use of flexibility has moved away from its original paradigm?Ans- Earlier there was a war for talent acquisition, now employers are reluctant for this investment to be shown the door in some business sectors. Instead of that, they are now focusing on reduced work week, part time work and work arrangements with increased flexibility such that they could retain their staff. So, some employers are now doing inevitable reductions in staff as this leads to an opportunity to redesign their roles and new ways of doing jobs could be found out and employees could simultaneously maintain their work-life balance by working more flexibly.Juliet Bourke is not entirely comfortable with where the “reshaped” argument for flexibility is heading. While workplace flexibility could reduce overheads and boost productivity, she is concerned that the point of workplace flexibility has shifted – and not for the better.According to Bourke, flexibility is now about getting of more out of fewer people instead of the previous paradigm and she is afraid of the unintended consequences of this line of thinking. This was presented by her during the launch of a website (www.workplaceflexibility.com.au) which is used to assist companies in developing flexible work practices.Also, employers could visualize the economic crisis as the time of using flexibility as an opportunity in nasty ways. They might reduce the working hours of employees when they are not needed and could put an extra workload on other staff which have to work longer, which would lead to an increased workload. So, flexibility could not ensure that it is the win-win situation for employee and employer both in most of the situations.
Although, only benefit that was requested universally – both vertically and horizontally across organizations to support work/life balance – was flexibility.In some organizations, for accommodating new requirements, business should develop sustained solutions for flexible working andutilize job redesign.

There might be situations in which demand from clients could decrease as a result of downturn. In response to this decrease, people could reduce work hours through flexible work arrangements and could improve their work life balance. A key element of this strategy includes comprehensive programs for employee flexibility and employee assistance and it would help to develop a diverse, adaptive and high-performing workforce able to meet current and future business needs. Voluntary flexible work and leave options could be provided to avoid redundancies and wages and salaries could be paid accordingly. But, in some organizations, whether there is a strong culture around work/life balance or not, redundancies are inevitable. However, where executives have seen and recognized the benefits that accrue from work/life strategies, it is more likely that senior managers and leaders would explore alternative ways to work as a way to reduce costs and minimize redundancies. Executives know that they need staff that are engaged and committed if they are to continue to be profitable. A culture delivers higher levels of employee engagement if it is supportive of work/life balance for its employees. Flexibility is also about more effective and efficient ways of working for all employees, regardless of whether they work part or full-time (Martin, 2015).

Whereas, in case of natural attrition, redeployment and flexible work practices, most of the reductions come, whenever the downturn is there and employees have to remain agile in such situations. In future duration, economy might pick up and the talent acquisition could be again in demand. Also, employees have a sense that they should have to work harder and sometimes longer in a downturn. But, sometimes there is huge impact on engagement, which is pivotal to discretionary effort and productivity. It’s hard to have an engaged workforce if they’re resentful. Even in the short term, that drive to get more out of less is not always productive. So at a time when you need high levels of engagement, you could find yourself operating a business with low levels of engagement.

As corporations look to increase sales and save on costs to ensure profitability, there’s an expectation that people would do what needs to be done – and that’s to get the results. This would impact on people and the amount of time required doing this.This trend is especially prevalent in multinationals, which have regional offices. As companies are teleconferencing more to save on travel costs, this requires employees to be on call more often across different time zones (Richmond, 2013).

Unless structural efficiencies are put in place and job roles redesigned following a redundancy program, companies could hamstring themselves as they seek to do more with less. While it is well established that talented employees are significantly more productive and profitable, there could a fine line between stretch goals and burnout even for talented performers.

So, we could say that flexibility has moved from its original paradigm to an extent which is necessary and inevitable. Pros and cons are associated with it, and proper management could lead to proper efficient workforce who has work-life balance.

Results (Thai) 3:

ให้พนักงานได้ทำงานเวลาที่น้อยลงได้ประโยชน์ทั้งบุคคล และบริษัท บุคคลที่สามารถได้รับประโยชน์ผ่านความรู้สึกที่พวกเขามีการควบคุมที่มากกว่าชีวิตของพวกเขา และเวลามากขึ้นสำหรับบุคคล , ชีวิตที่ส่งเสริมความสนใจและกิจกรรม บริษัทสามารถได้รับประโยชน์ผ่านมีความยืดหยุ่นมากขึ้นเพื่อจัดการกับรางน้ำ และหุบในความต้องการมันสามารถตัดเวลาการทำงานพนักงานโดยไม่ต้องรีสอร์ทเพื่อซ้อน . ทั้งนี้ พนักงานที่ใช้เวลาน้อยลงในการทำงานมักจะมากขึ้นและสร้างสรรค์กว่าพวกที่ชั่วโมงทำงานอีกต่อไป แม้จะมีข้อดีเหล่านี้ มีเพียงส่วนน้อยของพนักงานที่ใช้ประโยชน์จากการลดเวลาทำงาน เมื่อมีการลดชั่วโมงการทำงานมีผลกระทบกว้างสำหรับ บริษัท จากการพิจารณาผลงานเพื่อส่งเสริมการขาย และจากนโยบายอาวุโสเพื่อการตั้งเวลา ทั้งสองฝ่ายควรระบุข้อตกลงง่ายๆ และทั้งสองฝ่ายจะต้องมุ่งมั่นที่จะทำให้มันทำงาน .

ทั้งสองทำงานที่ยืดหยุ่นและสมดุลชีวิตและงานที่มีวาระร่วมสมัยที่สำคัญภายในองค์กรและอาจมีผลทั้งทางบวกและทางลบ

หลายองค์กรใช้ เพื่อดูแนวทางการลดค่าใช้จ่ายของพวกเขาและเพรียวลมการดำเนินงานของพวกเขาหลาย บริษัท กำลังพยายามที่จะมีการตรวจสอบเพื่อให้พวกเขาสามารถดูวิธีการลดอีกอย่างเงินเดือนของ บริษัท โดยทั่วไปฐานต้นทุนที่ใหญ่ที่สุด ส่วนใหญ่ของ บริษัท มีการกำหนดยุทธศาสตร์เพื่อหลีกเลี่ยงซ้อนภายในองค์กรของพวกเขา เช่น