Our
relationship with work is becoming increasingly unhealthy. Levels of
burnout and stress are at all-time highs. Even before the pandemic, the
World Health Organization called stress the “health epidemic of the 21st
century.” What is a major source of that stress? Our jobs. Microsoft
has conducted
several studies
analyzing keystroke data and the use of its collaboration software
Teams chat feature. Results reveal two disturbing trends: compared with
pre-pandemic, during Covid, we were much more likely to work in the
evenings, typically in the hours before bedtime, and the number of work
messages sent and received on the weekends increased by 200%. Now, three
years later, the patterns that emerged in a crisis have been
normalized.
When
work shifted to home, the boundary lines were blurred, and we’ve grown
used to this new, casual surplus of work in the same way anyone gets
stuck in a bad habit. What’s even worse is that this increased workload,
connectivity to work, and altered communication patterns have been
tacked on to our existing schedules, meaning we are working longer and
staying more tethered to work than ever before. The harsh reality is
this: Overwork is at an all-time high, and the new world of work is only
making it worse.
In
industrial psychology we use the inelegant term “workaholism” to
describe this phenomenon. Workaholism is not someone who works a lot of
hours necessarily — in fact there’s only
a weak correlation
between number of hours worked and problematic “overwork” or
workaholism. Instead, the term refers to a deleterious inability to
disconnect from work. When work dominates your thoughts and your
activities, to the detriment of other aspects of your life,
relationships, and health, you are displaying workaholic tendencies.
Note this is not a clinical diagnosis — it’s not in the DSM — but the
literature on it is deep and convincing. Workaholism is detrimental to
both people who may experience it and the organizations they work for,
organizations which often unwittingly are fostering it.
When
talking to organizations about workaholism — and how they may be
enabling it — I’ve heard every excuse you can imagine, multiple times.
In an organization with an overwork culture, it’s natural and not all
that surprising. For one, the company has succeeded using this approach.
Why change it? For another, what I’m suggesting is that it doesn’t work
as well as one might think, and the organization ought to change. Given
everything we know about organizational culture and how difficult it is
to change it, resistance is natural — expected even.
If
you don’t want to be one of these organizations, something needs to
change. And despite the default responses you have about why change
won’t work for you or how your people can sustain the pace, it’s not
true — and the alternative to your current modus operandi is not as bad
as you think.
Once
you’ve acknowledged that change is needed, you’ll need to create a plan
for how you’ll overcome a culture of workaholism. Below is a three-step
process to start.
Step 1: Assess Your Company’s Baseline Level of Overwork and Its Origins
Figure
out where your starting point is by assessing the level of your
organization’s overwork culture and who is perpetuating it. What you do
next will depend on where your baseline is. Borrowing a concept from
training and organizational change literatures, I recommend starting
with a needs assessment. This helps to identify areas in need of change,
assesses how much support (or resistance) there is to the change
initiative, and allows for a comprehensive understanding of training
needs at multiple levels of analysis.
There are many frameworks for needs assessments you could adopt. In general, they attempt to answer two key questions:
- What are the areas in need of change?
- What kind of support is there for making this change happen?
The
assessment should be handled by people with experience doing them — for
example, professionals who have been trained in change management.
Relationships with top-level managers in the organization need to be
established. Some of these managers will react with fear or resistance,
so the better the relationship, the higher the likelihood that the
results of the assessment will be received.
If
people feel threatened by the change and aren’t reassured that they are
protected from retribution, the initiative is destined to fail. The
overwork culture assessment should target three levels: the
organizational level, the job level, and the personal level. This
assessment will reveal what is driving the culture of overwork, how the
structure of jobs is driving workaholism, what are the characteristics
of individuals who get recognized and rewarded, if those qualities
reinforce an overwork culture, and how people feel about their work and
the company.
At
the end of the assessment, you’ll know just how deeply overwork is
entrenched in your culture and, crucially, where some of the key drivers
are coming from. In some organizations, it may be almost exclusively
driven by leadership. Others may have let technology foster an always-on
workforce. Others will focus on job design and HR structures. Surveys
and interviews are likely to expose physical and mental health issues
and team dysfunctions, driven by workaholism, that you simply weren’t
aware were present in the organization.
Step 2: Plan for Incremental Change by Targeting Places Where Change Will Be Most Effective Soonest
At
this point, the worst thing you could do as an organization is to say,
“We’re going to get rid of our overwork culture and eliminate
workaholism.” Change doesn’t work that way. It will be a long process of
incremental improvements. The key is that the assessment will tell you
where to focus first. Where is change going to be both most possible and
most effective?
At
this stage, the most important things to do are to clearly identify the
purpose and goals of the trial, build trust, carefully outline what the
trial period will involve, and clearly communicate the plan to all key
constituents.
First,
identify the purpose and goals of the trial. Your purpose will be
shaped by the data you have gathered and analyzed as part of your
assessment. When examining your organization’s baseline levels of
overwork culture, it may become clear that pursuing goals such as a
four-day workweek is not possible. In these cases, the goal may need to
be something smaller — what researchers Leslie Perlow and her team
call
“micro adjustments to the work practices” — such as changing guidelines
around email communication during nonwork time or on weekends.
Trust
can come only if culture change efforts involve input from all
employees—it cannot come from the top down. I To help build this trust,
Harvard Business School professor John Kotter recommends
building a “guiding coalition”
— a group of individuals from all levels of the organization who are
passionate about the change initiative and are respected by their peers.
Second,
carefully outline the trial experiment. In my conversations with
leaders designing experiments, a couple of things stand out. The first
is to resist overthinking to the point that the plan becomes too complex
to carry out. Approach the process with an experimental mindset,
knowing that you will adapt as you go. Set a concrete start and end
date. Identify the scope of the trial — in other words, which team(s)
will be involved in the initial trials and how this will be rolled out
over time. And be sure to collect pretrial data on anything you’ll be
assessing at the conclusion of the trial.
For
example, if your purpose is to decrease employee burnout, then make
sure to assess burnout before the employees even catch wind of the trial
(so you can conduct more accurate pre-post comparisons). I highly
recommend utilizing the help of experts anytime you are gathering
employee survey data.
Clearly
communicate the plan and keep the conversation going. It’s not enough
to simply tell key stakeholders, “Look, we’re going to fix our
workaholic culture with a new initiative.” You must communicate
specifics of your effort and what you’re hoping to accomplish with each
experiment. Communication should also not be top down — frequent two-way
communication is essential. Seek input from your employees before,
during, and after the trial experiment. Make sure you are listening and
responding to their concerns.
Step 3: Execute the Trial Experiment, Learn, and Iterate
With
a plan in place, it’s time to execute. Contrary to what you might want
to do, you shouldn’t announce major changes; you shouldn’t even suggest
that you’ve “figured it out.” Start small and meet people where they
are. Limit the number of changes you take on and their scope. You may
start with one team or department. Or one geography. And make sure you
are constantly taking the temperature of employees about the change
initiatives. Avoid being ambiguous in your execution. When people aren’t
certain about what is happening, they will become risk avoidant and
fall back into old patterns.
Say
one of your change experiments is to require email signatures that say,
“Don’t feel pressured to respond to this in non-work hours.” That seems
good, but it remains ambiguous. It doesn’t say “Don’t respond.” And
what if it’s from a boss? It might be interpreted like one of those
“voluntary” get-togethers that people informally know is actually
mandatory. Perhaps the experiment shows that people kept responding to
emails despite this. The next step may be to change the language to
something like “Do not respond after work hours,” or to even set up
rules that prevent emails from being delivered at certain hours.
. . .
I’ve
offered many starting points for implementing these changes above. And
still, I know there will be resistance at the organizational level, as I
laid out at the beginning. Despite evidence to the contrary, some
leaders and organizations will not be able to easily escape their work
devotion schema to see how counterproductive it is to encourage
workaholism. They won’t be able to draw the connections between flagging
performance and their focus on a 24-7 culture. They won’t see how the
effects of workaholism create turnover costs, health-care costs, and
productivity costs. Most of all they won’t believe that they can get the
same output— indeed, better output—from fewer hours and less
connectivity. It’s just not intuitive.
But
it’s true. The research is clear. Work cultures that enable overwork
are suboptimal. The Covid-19 pandemic was a major development in our
realization that the work devotion schema may need adjusting. The
success of four-day workweek trials was another. More and more
organizations see the value of changing their workaholic culture. You
can, too. No more excuses.
Was this article helpful? Connect with me.
Follow The SUN (AYINRIN), Follow the light. Be bless. I am His Magnificence, The Crown, Kabiesi Ebo Afin!Ebo Afin Kabiesi! His Magnificence Oloja Elejio Oba Olofin Pele Joshua Obasa De Medici Osangangan broad-daylight natural blood line 100% Royalty The God, LLB Hons, BL, Warlord, Bonafide King of Ile Ife kingdom and Bonafide King of Ijero Kingdom, Number 1 Sun worshiper in the Whole World.I'm His Magnificence the Crown. Follow the light.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.