Interviewing, Selecting, and the Lying Game

I know all there is to know about the lying game. I’ve had my share of the lying game!

That was cheesy, I know. Seriously though, from pretending to work, to pretending to like your job, to pretending to be interested in the job you’re interviewing for, appearances matter a lot within our current system. Like they say, appearances can be deceiving. As someone who’s been on both sides of the interviewing and selection process, I’ll share my thoughts on this issue and touch upon technological advances that may change the process of interviewing and candidate selection in the future.

Faking enthusiasm and interest in a job is an issue that spurs healthy debate. On the one hand people have learned that, with the job market being the way it is right now, you can’t be too picky. Many out there would agree that it’s important to “pull out all the stops” to get a job, any job, in order to put food on the table and keep a roof over your head. A friend told me that the “fake it until you make it” strategy sometimes works. He explained that an applicant might start off faking enthusiasm and interest when first interviewing for the job but then develop genuine enthusiasm and interest later down the road. “Alright,” I conceded, “However, what if you have two candidates: one is genuinely interested and the other is only acting interested. Wouldn’t you want a way to tell the the one who is genuine from the pretender?” His response was interesting. He stated that the one faking it is still attractive because people who are willing to bend and shape themselves in whatever manner to earn your approval are more easily molded.

Truth lies

Truth lies (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

If you’re anything like me however, you tend to resist social pressure to be untrue to yourself. Moreover, your wish to maintain your identity overrides your desire to flex your acting skills in interview situations. This is challenging in the face of loved ones trying to coerce you into saying the prescribed, correct lines in order to land that interview for the job that you don’t really want and live a life of normalcy. Somehow I just can’t bring myself to fake, “I believe in the mission and values of your organization!” with enthusiasm. The pressure to do so and the hoops you must jump in order to make a living often reminds me of this classic Star Trek scene:

My friend has a point. Longtime friends and loved ones as well as certain members of the Unification Church (who tried to recruit me during my college days) would attest to the fact that I’ve been anything but malleable. Despite my general unwillingness to bend and “put on a good show” however, there are times when I’ve wondered if someone who had more of a passion for the job I had taken would’ve been selected if I had not applied. All else being equal (e.g., knowledge, abilities, and skill-set), I can’t help but wish that the candidate who has more passion for the work is selected.

At this time, the process of interviewing and selecting the right person for the job remains largely subjective as Wendell Williams, founder and managing director of Scientific Selection, notes (in The Science of Hiring):

Although many managers who conduct numerous interviews say they are apt judges of character and abilities, “the truth is that many of them are the weak links in the hiring chain because they do not know how to conduct the kind of interviews that reveal a candidate’s suitability for a specific job,” Williams said.

Too many hiring managers rely on gut instincts to determine if a candidate is right for the job, a practice that has no place in effective recruiting and hiring,” added Williams.

There is a push to develop more scientific means of selection however. Advances in technology are promising more objective, scientifically valid selection tools. Synthetic Validity is being developed for this very purpose. Job simulations are another example. Moreover, just think about the possible applications of the following technologies:

    • As mentioned in this previous post, we’ll see the emergence of technologies that can track fluctuating changes in brains and bodies with respect to emotional reactions.
    • Face-reading software being developed promise to outperform people (Face-reading software to judge the mood of the masses)

Technology is a double-edged sword of course. As a strong privacy advocate, the potential for abuse of technologies that can read internal reactions is quite apparent to me. As we march forward into the future, we will have to establish the manner in which they should be used. For example, under what conditions does use of such technologies violate our notions of good discretion and responsibility? These are issues that we need to be discussing today.

P.S. This is for those who are unfamiliar with the song referenced at the beginning of this post.

Also, stay tuned for news about the upcoming Wednesday, May 22nd, 2013 video conference on enhancing collaboration of virtual teams!

These educational video conference series are geared towards organizational leaders wishing to learn more about improving collaboration and productivity through the use of online tools. Visit the Better Collaboration website or the Better Collaboration meetup page for more information!

Another Look at Employment Gaps, Responsibility, and Objectivity

“They just think that you might have a problem with drugs or alcohol,” a friend explained, “They don’t want to hire someone with that sort of problem.” So, employment gaps carry a negative stigma even though people have a wide variety of reasons for taking a few years off here and there. Due to the recession, potential employers have become more understanding as more people have them now, so I hear. However, well-meaning friends and relatives will urge you to cover them up with some story if you don’t already have a conventionally acceptable excuse to take a break. You can also gauge how much of a concern employment gaps are to those that have them by conducting an Internet search on how to explain them.

One thing I’ve noticed about myself is that the older I become, the harder it is for others to (1) scare me about the consequences of diverging from the conventional life-path and (2) convince me that so-called “mistakes” are embarrassing. Yep, I’m not embarrassed about my own employment gaps and I’m going to explain why as well as make a case for changing how we think about this issue. Must the acquisition of skills and experience be observed by an employer in order to count?

Rethinking the View on Employment Gaps

Odds are, during an employment gap, you were doing more than just eating, sleeping, and eliminating. Why shouldn’t the experiences and skills acquired informally from classes, other people, self-employment, or learning on your own count? If you enjoy learning on your own as much as I do, you’ll find that it’s even pretty easy to learn the basics of using new software programs by tapping into the various tutorials available on the Internet. Search engines are your friends. Search, “how to use [name of program]” or “tutorials for [name of program]” and you’ll see.

Also, let’s face it. There are times when you learn more during an employment gap than you learn performing the same tasks and fulfilling the same duties over and over again in an employment situation (until someone finally notices and grants you additional responsibilities). That’s why some of us experience workplace boredom.

Furthermore, at least in my geographic region specifically (California), previous employers don’t give a lot of information about you in order to guard against lawsuits. I’ve received this human resources policy memo within organizations as an employee and as someone who has called employers for reference checks on job applicants. The prevailing policy is that employers stick to confirming (1) that you were an employee and (2) the dates and time you were employed there. So, at least over here, accessible information has become more superficial.

Rethinking the View on Choices and Responsibility

The adage, “With freedom comes great responsibility” is so true! Living without a steady paycheck greatly tests your ability to be financially responsible, and some people do just fine. When I look back on my life-path, I can see why it’s diverged with respect to those who either like or are compelled by circumstance (e.g., having dependents, a mortgage, or student loan, etc.) to buy things all the time. Our priorities are different. I have loved ones who love shopping, and I’m not passing judgment on them. We’re just “wired” differently and this extends to the differing need and value we place on continuous employment.

I’ve met women who’ve bought several hundred pairs of expensive shoes. When I see something like this, I always try to calculate how much free time this can buy. This has been my mentality ever since I was a young girl, and the reason why I almost always came home from the mall empty-handed. My iron-fisted saving habit carried over into adulthood and eventually earned some good-natured ribbing from peers during college for being so against carrying a credit card balance! I was no fun to shop with as I was always thinking about the free time that the money could buy.

However, the unspoken rule seems to be that you can spend your hard earned money on anything you want but funding your own “sabbaticals” will raise eyebrows (even if you spent that time developing yourself). By the way, I’m definitely not rich. I’m just a severe penny-pincher. Ultimately, when friends or family express concern with my choice, a couple of questions come to mind: Isn’t buying my own free time a legitimate purchase? Why do I have to make excuses for this?

A Call for Objectivity

In Why Managing Sucks and How to Fix It, Cali Ressler and Jody Thompson made a case for competency-based education. This would allow students to earn credits by demonstrating mastery of skills and knowledge rather than forcing students to “do time” in a uniform manner. People vary according to the amount of time and repetition they need to master various skills. By focusing on results, students can learn at their own pace while not compelling other students to take the same amount of time. This takes the focus off how, when (including time duration), and where students acquired skills and knowledge.

This competency-based system can be extended to hiring for jobs where skills can similarly be demonstrated. Emphasis on testing for skills, abilities, and knowledge or requiring presentation of a portfolio would lend objectivity to assessing whether or not someone who appears short on number of years of work experience can perform the work or not. My call for objectivity isn’t intended to “ding” the people who have been continuously employed without a break. However, it makes sense to put some emphasis on comparing people’s performance regardless of differences in employment history timelines.

Thankfully, there are employers who will check out job applicants with employment gaps if everything else looks good. Ok, so they’ll want to confirm that I don’t have a drug or alcohol problem. There are others out there who still avoid candidates with gaps altogether however. I just tell myself that it would be hard to work for someone who’s not going to be open-minded anyway.

Independent Thinkers Need Not Apply

Creativity

Creativity (Photo credit: Mediocre2010)



An issue recently came up with regard to describing oneself as an “independent thinker” on one’s resumé. One of my contacts in Human Resources advised me that this is generally construed as someone who doesn’t follow directions or is resistant to feedback from a supervisor. (I’m guessing that synonyms such as “autonomous” aren’t any better.) However, wherever I look, I see organizations that are interested in innovation as a matter of survival in today’s hyper-competitive world. Hence, I also keep seeing demand for workers who can contribute a fresh outlook and think creatively.

Let’s examine the definition of creativity here. I agree with this one from Dictionary.com: the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.; originality, progressiveness, or imagination. More? According to Robert J. Sternberg¹:

A focus on the nature of the creative person considers more general intellectual habits, such as openness, levels of ideation, autonomy, expertise, exploratory behavior and so on. A focus on place considers the circumstances in which creativity flourishes, such as degrees of autonomy, access to resources and the nature of gatekeepers. Creative lifestyles are characterized by nonconforming attitudes and behaviors as well as flexibility.

Or how about this?

Some researchers have taken a social-personality approach to the measurement of creativity. In these studies, personality traits such as independence of judgement, self-confidence, attraction to complexity, aesthetic orientation and risk-taking are used as measures of the creativity of individuals (Strenberg, R.J. & Lubart, T. I. 1999)².

As far as I can tell, creativity requires independent thinking. This is part of the package. To want an employee who can contribute creative ideas but yet be amenable to micromanagement seems contradictory to me. It makes as much sense as saying, “I want a man who’s assertive and takes charge but acquiesces to my demands!” Uhh, hello?!

So here’s my burning question: Just how much creativity do managers hope to eke out of someone who prefers to be told what to do? Humor me, please?!

I know I can just state that I am a “creative thinker” instead but, somewhere along the way, someone is going to be frustrated that I’m an independent thinker as well. Oh snap! How did THAT happen! For the most part people realize that, when we are talking about romantic relationships, the very same trait that is attractive is also, at some point, the source of conflict. If you want the benefits, you also have to accept the drawbacks. That said, there is always a certain amount of compromise for anyone entering into a relationship with an employer as an employee as well. However, if organizational leaders wish to maximize benefits from employing creative individuals then the necessary conditions to unleash all of their potential must be created as well. By allowing greater autonomy for high-performance, innovative workers, organizational leaders and managers will enjoy greater results.

Organizations such as Google have figured this out. When will hiring managers of many other organizations seeking to innovate learn to accept this common wisdom? It is my hope that, as organizational survival demands the types of skills that technology cannot, at this time, replicate (such as creativity) that hiring managers will learn to embrace the whole creative person.

¹Sternberg, Robert J. (2009). Jaime A. Perkins, Dan Moneypenny, Wilson Co. ed. Cognitive Psychology. CENGAGE Learning. p. 468.

² Sternberg, R. J.; Lubart, T. I. (1999). “The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms”. In ed. Sternberg, R. J.. Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press.

A Looking Busy Coach! Plus, Who Pretends to Work and Why?

Still not convinced that there is a pretending-to-work phenomenon? To follow-up on my previous post, They need to see you there to know that you are working… Not!,  this post explores answers to who is likely to pretend to work and why. After digging deeper on the Internet for more information on this topic, I discovered a unique coaching service catering to employees at the website Looking Busy: 50 Ways to Look Busy at Work Even When You’re Not.

According to this website, Looking Busy coach, Jay Schorr has over 15 years of experience looking busy at work and is in demand by both employees interested in learning how to look busy and by managers interested in identifying “looking busy” behavior. Now curious, I emailed him to inquire if he is currently coaching and asked how he came to the realization that his service would be helpful to many people. The answer is, yes, he is currently coaching. Moreover, Jay Schorr’s response addresses why it behooves employees to act busy:

In a tough economy, jobs are not only hard to come by, they are hard to keep.  Layoffs, cutbacks and outsourcing all have made it imperative for workers to do everything they can to make it look like they’re invaluable to their employers.  That means going to extraordinary lengths to maximize productivity (or at least to look like you’re maximizing productivity!) every minute in the workplace.  And that’s not always easy when there’s the inevitable idle or down time.

As America’s Looking Busy Coach, it is my job to help Americans keep their jobs by looking busy at work … even when they’re not.  Bosses like nothing better than to see their workers hard at work, or at least appear to be hard at work.

Here is Looking Busy coach, Drew Sattee, demonstrating this coaching service to CBS Sunday morning news viewers:
What I extrapolated from this is that, as long as managers manage more by sight than by results (hence emphasizing employees’ physical presence and appearances), it is advantageous for employees to act busy regardless of whether or not they are busy. Those of us who are genuinely busy but less expressive, calm, and unflappable should take note!

To my surprise, I have a hard time convincing people that a good contingent of the workforce 1) pretends to work and 2) are disengaged. Employee engagement reports show considerable variation with regard to the proportion of engaged versus disengaged workers. However, it seems safe to say that about two-thirds of the workforce is not engaged. According to the June 2009 issue of Research Works: Partnership for Workplace Mental Health, only 1 out of 5 employees are highly engaged. The international trends are, by the way, quite interesting (p. 4): Mexico (40%) and Brazil (31%) had the highest percentage of their workforce who were highly engaged, followed by the United States (21%) and Canada (17%), with Europe (11%) and Asia (7%) having the lowest levels of employee engagement. However, this Right Management report puts it at 1 out of every 3 workers being engaged (with a graph of country differences on page 5) and this 2012 Global Workforce Study by Towers Watson agrees, stating that 35% of the workforce is highly engaged.

Although there very well may be situations where engaged employees need to resort to looking busy during down times, my personal experience leads me to think that engaged employees are more apt to try coming up with activities that add value to their organization in their down time when compared to disengaged employees. Thus, I suspect that there is overlap between the pretending-to-work and employee disengagement phenomena. Now, I do believe disengaged employees are trying to hang on to their jobs as well, otherwise why even pretend to work?

What leads to disengagement in the first place, however, is a mismatch between the employee and various aspects of the job (e.g., the employees’ role, tasks, working conditions, or values). So under this condition, trying to power through at a job that is ill-suited for a person leads to burnout and, hence, disengagement. This is something that I think most people can understand. Just take some time to think about what kind of work energizes you and what kind of work drains you. Also think about people you know who would love to do something that you hate to do and vice versa. For myself, I enjoy researching as well as thinking in-depth and writing about issues I find interesting, but I hate mundane housework type tasks (e.g. it looks like I’m playing Jenga with dishes in my kitchen sink).

Finally, managers who discover “looking busy” behavior and find out that an employee is disengaged should first check and see if the employee can be re-engaged. Strike up a conversation to see if there is a way to adjust the work situation to be more suitable and motivating. This could involve redesigning the job to whatever extent possible. If the problem can be fixed, it will save the organization the expense of recruiting, hiring, and training another. Here is an example of the type of conversation a manager may want to have with the employee:

Tips for Employees Requesting an Alternative Work Arrangement

During a conversation about employee engagement consulting and promoting alternative work arrangements someone once asked me, “How does any of this help people? How can any employee use this information or call in consultants to help improve their working conditions?” My conversation partner asserted that a consulting business didn’t seem very helpful overall as employees have to wait around for leaders to decide to change everything around of their own accord. Back then, I was also under the impression that this kind of change tends not to happen from the bottom up.

Contrary to our beliefs, The Custom-Fit Workplace: Choose When, Where, and How to Work and Boost Your Bottom Line, states that more employees than managers or leaders initiate new flexible work arrangement programs. Although, as depicted in these accounts of employee-initiated programs, the arrangement tends to be for the individual employee concerned rather than an organization-wide makeover.

The Custom-Fit Workplace

Throughout The Custom-Fit Workplace, authors Joan Blades and Nanette Fondas provide detailed, qualitative accounts of employees successfully negotiating with their managers to implement such programs. That said, this book emphasizes hope and inspirational stories and does not provide quantitative information about the number of negotiations that succeed out of the number attempted.  Moreover, all of the cases involve employees with a track record of providing value to their organization rather than employees who are new or performing below satisfaction.

Finally, the authors provide helpful guidelines on crafting an alternative work arrangement proposal and successfully negotiating the program’s terms with their manager. They also provide a specific, comprehensive (5-paged) template for a Babies-At-Work program covering the terms, policy, eligibility requirements, and liability concerns. If you would like to propose an alternative work arrangement program (e.g., flexible hours, virtual work, contract work, or Babies-At-Work), prepare your request as a formal, professional document that addresses the following:

  • Highlight how the program will add value to the organization (as it should be a win-win solution)
  • Provide a detailed plan that shows how you will get your work done
  • Establish a trial period and an end date for evaluation (in order to provide an opportunity for the other party to evaluate and end the program if it doesn’t work out well)¹

In sum, showing that you sought out a solution that benefits the business should help make your proposal more palatable to your manager or leader. With that thought, I’ll have to get my daily brain activity imaged so prospective employers will see the extent of hyperproductivity they miss out on when I can’t work predominantly at night!

¹Paraphrased from The Custom-Fit Workplace: Choose When, Where, and How to Work and Boost Your Bottom Line by Joan Blades and Nanette Fondas (p. 54). Original source: James Johnson’s presentation, “Talent Troubles: How to Attract and Keep Good People and Control Costs, ” April 22, 2008

Link

There are a number of benefits to teleworking that may already be familiar to you because they are reiterated time and time again. However, I will quickly summarize them for those who are new to this subject matter:

For employees who can telework and work well this way:

  • Can save thousands of dollars annually that would otherwise go towards gas and office clothes
  • Improves work-life balance by freeing up 1-2 hours (or more for those who commute even further) so that employees have the option to get right to work instead of wasting time in rush hour traffic as well as being able to get necessary errands done without a hassle (e.g., picking up kids from daycare/school)
  • Under a Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) where work can be done anywhere, anytime as long as the work is done on time, employees can lead a healthier lifestyle by not having to stay sedentary for 8-10 hour time blocks (includes commute time). See Frederick Pilot’s blog, Health Insurance Crisis, to understand how this correlates with the rising cost of health care as well as to obtain status reports about this crisis.

For employers:

  • Reduces real estate costs (for the physical space itself as well as additional costs of maintenance and utilities)
  • A more decentralized workforce allows business to continue during emergencies such as natural disasters, terrorist attacks, etc.
  • Employees who are well-suited to telework are more engaged and productive working from wherever they want, instead of at the office, which adds to the bottom line
  • When recruiting, employers can hire the best people for the job regardless of their geographic location
  • Having this option for employees enjoy more freedom and flexibility at work improves recruitment and retention, reducing the cost of turnover

For environmental conditions:

  • Less congestion for those who must travel to work as well as reduces wear and tear on deteriorating freeway infrastructure from having so many people utlizing it during rush hour
  • Although there’s some debate over whether or not teleworking employees make up for not having to commute to an office by driving elsewhere, a reduced need to build additional office building space and expand freeways does mean a decreased carbon footprint
  • The more we can curtail the growth of our freeways and buildings as our population grows, the more space we leave for wildlife

Upon mentioning the benefits listed above in my conversations with people, I get a range of reactions. Sometimes it’s disbelief – as if I were just talking about the benefits of teleportation.  Sometimes it’s a “Gee that would be great!” followed by moving onto another conversation topic. At other times it is resistance because people are used to the Industrial Age work arrangement and/or love the face-to-face, social aspect of a centralized office. However, as dog owners are not hard to find in the United States, when I begin asking how long people’s dogs have to wait before they can eliminate their waste, reactions change. Yes, there are obedient dogs that wait 9-10 and even 14 hours on a particularly bad day for their owners to come home and let them out.  I’m speculating that the 14 hour figure represents overtime work and/or some event on the freeway (perhaps an accident) that has slowed traffic down to an unusual pace. They are most probably coping by not drinking enough water during the day. Just how many of us can live this kind of lifestyle for 8-10 hours a day, 5 days a week? One dog owner told me that this is why she thinks her dog developed bladder stones some years later.

Let’s remember that a great many people (apartment/condominium dwellers and those who don’t have fenced in yards) can’t just leave their dogs outside. Additionally, although people can send their children to daycare or school and have their aging or disabled family members stay in some type of “home,” daycare for dogs isn’t prevalent for some obvious reasons. For example, there would be some amount of chaos as new, unfamiliar dogs arrive and intermingle. So, as many would say, it’s better to surrender your pets to someone else who can take better care of them if you cannot. However, I think that what I’m talking about is going on in great numbers (considering the number of people who work in the traditional, 8-hour day arrangement and the number of dog owners). Also, the possibility of a telework arrangement now presents an obvious solution.

To those whose jobs aren’t conducive to remote work or who benefit from the traditional, centralized work arrangement, be supportive of the option to telework anyway. You never know. This may increase the chances that one of your trustworthy teleworking coworkers or neighbors can help out during a break.

I don’t own a dog, but my parrot, Nikita, does not wait in her cage for 8+ hours to be let out. She’s out playing on her parrot play-station nearby or sitting on my shoulder while I work. She’s pretty quiet and not distracting. As I’ve fulfilled my responsibility to give her as much of a natural life as possible, I can work happily. I totally understand why most people want to have that steady paycheck that comes with regular employment. I just hope that more employers out there will see the wisdom of the Information Age working arrangement and take steps towards increasing flexibility and freedom to benefit us all.

Below are links for pet owners who work from home and need a little help with reducing distractions:

Telework Exchange

Bark Busters Home Dog Training

Mass Career Customization: Aligning The Workplace With Today’s Nontraditional Workforce

Before delving into Mass Career Customization, I’d like to address a paper titled The Hidden Work In Virtual Work (click to download). It describes the high personal costs some remote workers have borne while trying to achieve work-life balance and maintain professional connections. I imagine that this paper can scare many away from the prospect of telework. However, note the limitations of this study. Like any good researcher, Heimrich Schwartz describes the methodology for collecting data. This study was based on information gathered from twenty-three informants who were recruited from the researchers’ social network. Therefore, like most qualitative studies, this study has a low sample size. Furthermore, participants were not randomly selected. Having drawn from their own personal network, participants are more likely to share similarities than if drawn from a pool that represents all remote workers. It is quite possible that their recruitment method did not capture the experiences of successful remote workers who thrive under this working condition.

There is no discounting the fact that not everyone can or wants to work remotely, and it’s important to point out all the problems – whether potential or real. I have not found any telework advocates who think that everyone should work this way. In fact, they make it clear that this is a choice and is contingent upon an individual’s ability to work and keep a balanced life in this arrangement. I envision that determination as to who becomes a teleworker or not is, in large part, a self-selection process as people, through both good and bad experiences, choose their occupation based on their likes and dislikes which are a function of their own traits and characteristics. Some jobs can be performed remotely while others can’t. Many telework advocates are also clear that management needs to look out for those who are struggling and provide a way to transition back to the office if necessary. Thus, it is important to bring attention to cases so that such disastrous situations can be prevented or resolved. As it turns out, possible solutions are not far behind.

Upon reading Mass Career Customization by Cathleen Benko and Anne Weisberg of Deloitte LLP, I realized that we may yet find ways to support people who want to work remotely but struggle at it. In fact, the authors describe how this system, which gives employees control over multiple facets of their job, can be used in conjunction with telework. With Mass Career Customization (MCC) employees can adjust the pace, workload, location/schedule, and role according to their needs throughout their career. This book takes you through the process of implementing MCC (from how to make a business case for it and get buy-in from key people in the organization to running it) and provides detailed case studies of a few organizations that have successfully incorporated it. Organizations enjoy benefits such as improved recruitment and retention of talent, increased levels of employee satisfaction and engagement, and a clear, honest account of human capital resources.

Benko and Weisberg point out how much more realistic it is to view people’s investments in their career as a sine wave. During the course of life there are times when personal or family needs predominate. At other times, people are more career driven. In contrast to the traditional family structure where men worked 40 hours a week while women spent all of their time taking care of the home, children, and other non-work related duties, the vast majority now have to juggle work and family resulting in this ebb and flow of investment in career. Thus, most organizations are still geared towards a way of life that has all but vanished. This change in family structure, shortage of skilled knowledge workers, increased number of women in the workforce, nontraditional expectations of Generation X and Y workers, and impact of technology have converged. To thrive, organizations would do best to accommodate by incorporating a more flexible system. The authors thoroughly explain why MCC is superior to current flexible work arrangements (FWA). FWAs fail to serve employees’ needs because they are point, rather than systemic, solutions. For example, an employee goes on maternity leave and then is expected to work the same way she did prior to her leave of absence. Under MCC, this change in her life would still be considered so that she has the option to dial down on various aspects of her job as needed. That said, the authors point out that MCC is about more than work-life balance; it’s about career-life fit.

Back to the issue of cases in which telework destroyed work-life balance for some workers. By pinpointing such problems telework critics have provided a great service because, upon realizing these problems, we can develop appropriate solutions. Although people who know me would describe me as very self-disciplined and great at maintaining strong boundaries, I have experienced how unpleasant it can be for work and life to bleed into each other myself (having contrasted my experiences managing the pace and workload at the undergraduate, masters, and doctoral level), so I am quite sympathetic to the people in Shwartz’s study. It dawned on me, however, that even for self-disciplined people, increasing pace or workload makes it more difficult to separate work and life. At some point, even the most self-disciplined would suffer. If there is a valuable employee who wants to work remotely but handles it better at some point lower than 100% pace or workload AND does not require or want to be fully dialed up, then why not consider it?

It is important to discuss, debate, and be wary of any way our creations might turn on us. At this point however, marching us all back into Industrial Age workplace practices does not sound like a viable option. There are already people thriving as remote workers. With some imagination and innovation, we may well come up with systems to support those who want to work remotely but struggle with it. The great plethora of ideas and inventions we have developed to solve our problems throughout the history of mankind never ceases to amaze me.  Thus, I am quite optimistic that we can troubleshoot the problems Shwartz brought up. In closing, here is my favorite quote from Mass Career Customization (page 148): We tend to walk into the future backward, perhaps wanting to go in a new direction but not realizing that we are defining the new direction relative to our past experiences.

The Virtual Manager: Cutting-Edge Solutions to Hiring, Managing, Motivating, and Engaging Mobile Employees

If you are looking for a guide to managing a virtual workforce that expands upon human resources procedures beginning from hiring the right people, to helping them succeed in a virtual position, to helping someone transition back onsite if the arrangement doesn’t work out, The Virtual Manager by Kevin Sheridan does exactly that. This book opens up with a thorough explanation of the advantages of having a virtual workforce (e.g., the business case – enhancing the ability to recruit and retain talent as well as increasing worker productivity). However, it also addresses the inherent challenges of effective communication.

Like other books on telework I’ve read, Sheridan then explains the traits and characteristics of people who are likely to succeed as virtual employees. I agree with much of what he says here. However, in the section on interviewing, he states that successful candidates would indicate that they “expect to keep normal business hours,” (p. 64) and that an answer such as “I work best at night” (p.65) is a red flag. This is an issue that I would like to have explained further so that this can be reconciled with the section on working hours towards the end of the book (pp. 192-193). In this latter section, Sheridan makes it clear that it would be ideal to allow employees to work when they are the most productive (as long as other conditions of employment such as having to interact directly with customers is not impacted). This is followed by his support for having a Results-Only Work Environment (such that productivity rather than hours worked is important) especially where a remote work system is concerned.

Sheridan emphasizes that managers need to look out for perceptions of unfairness among onsite staff and ensure that fairness with regard to policies and procedures (e.g., how would salaries be adjusted, due to change in cost of living, if a virtual employee relocates). However, by having employees understand that working offsite is a privilege that can be revoked (p. 68) a scenario is set up in which employees may then come to view onsite work as beneath offsite work as other telework authors have cautioned. Yes, there should be a procedure in place to reinstate employees back onsite if the arrangement does not work out, but perhaps “privilege” isn’t the right word.

Despite the inconsistencies noted, The Virtual Manager, is still a great guide for thinking about human resources policies and procedures. Sheridan demonstrates great understanding of employee engagement and distinguishes this from employee satisfaction. “Satisfaction is contentment with the organization, whereas engagement is taking the initiative to make the organization exceptional” (p. 78). Moreover, he understands why engagement is of utmost importance where virtual employees are concerned.

The Engagement Equation: Leadership Strategies for an Inspired Workforce

In The Engagement Equation: Leadership Strategies for an Inspired Workforce, authors Christopher Rice, Fraser Marlow, and Mary Ann Masarech provide a thorough guide for organizational leaders interested in improving work engagement. At the outset, they establish that engagement is a unique construct that is distinguishable from satisfaction, motivation, and commitment. Furthermore, employee engagement is an individualized equation expressed as the combination of maximum satisfaction for the individual and maximum contribution for the organization. From there, they discuss particular industries (e.g., where there is a high degree of interaction with customers) in which employee engagement particularly impacts results. Additionally, the authors caution against assuming measures that have increased engagement in one geographic region would similarly increase engagement in another.

A discussion about building a culture that supports engagement follows. The importance of helping employees identify their strengths, weaknesses, and needs in order to ensure job-fit, culture-fit, and suitable working conditions is highlighted.  Providing career coaching and development services also goes a long way to help employees envision a career that mutually addresses the needs of both individuals and the organization.

Finally, The Engagement Equation covers possible pitfalls of implementing strategies to increase engagement. First, the authors warn that maintaining a high engagement culture is an ongoing effort. In other words, sporadic interventions here and there will not create the results desired. Secondly, organizational leaders, managers, down to everyone in the organization must be on board and responsible for their own engagement level. It takes engaged individuals to foster a culture of engagement. Finally, leaders must be prepared to follow through with an action plan in a timely manner once the initial engagement level assessment is taken. The authors caution against utilizing an engagement survey and not following-up with action as the interest in increasing engagement may then come across as disingenuous leading to even higher levels of employee disengagement. Alternative means of making the initial engagement assessment are provided.

It is difficult to provide an adequate summary of all the useful points made in this book. It provides a clear, comprehensive, and practical guideline for beginning and continuing an action plan to foster a culture of engagement. Furthermore, it will dispel some preconceived notions of how implementation of such a program should proceed (e.g., the assumption that it is most beneficial to start assessment with an employee engagement survey).