
Our 8–5 Culture is Killing Our Chances at a Diverse Workforce
Why changing the way we structure our day may eliminate the problem of attracting and retaining minorities in the engineering industry.
Workplace diversity is a hot topic today, and has been making headlines in international media in recent weeks. Since the publication of several research papers in the past decade linking diversity to increased business performance, many high profile companies have made concerted efforts to increase the diversity of their workforce through training and recruiting tactics.
It makes sense: if you work with people different than you, different ideas will come to the table. These ideas can help sell products to a more diverse customer base, offer different service offerings, and keep one step ahead of the competition.
As a female millennial, I am a ‘minority’ in the engineering profession, and I am often approached by colleagues for insight into how my company can attract and retain more young women.
But are we looking at this problem in the wrong way?
What if, instead of asking ‘how can we attract a more diverse workforce?’ we ask ‘what is it about our industry that is unattractive to minorities?’?
Working in this industry has allowed me to travel the world, meet new people, and it has exposed me to some complex environmental and social problems- all attractive traits to a female millennial. However, I am conscious of the fact that my lifestyle will not always allow me to take on an international assignment, spend months at a time on site, or even just spend 8 hours in the office Monday — Friday.
My contract states that my standard working hours are from 7:30 am — 4:30 pm, I must record at least 40 hours per week, I can take 20 days personal leave per year and I am expected to work in the office. This is pretty typical for my industry… but is it necessary? If the goal for the engineering industry is productivity and economic success, do staff need to work 8 hour days, 5 days a week and within a centralized office?
The 8 hour day, 5 day a week model (8–5 model) has nothing to do with how long a human can concentrate or is productive. In fact, it stems from the industrial revolution, where factories were required to run 24/7. In 1914, Ford Motor Company cut the working day from 10–16 hours a day (two separate shifts) to 8 (three shifts), and from 7 days a week to 5. Despite finding that workers are more productive working fewer hours 100 years ago, nothing has progressed in the structure of our working days. Furthermore, recent research and books such as the ‘4-hour Workweek’ by Tim Ferris suggest that the productive work that we do in a normal 8 hour day in the office can be condensed to 2–3 hours.
The 8–5 model restricts many people from entering or reentering into the workplace. Primary caregivers, people with disabilities or people not wanting to travel great distances to work are unable to sustain a healthy work-life balance, and are essentially ‘pushed-out’ of the workforce.
One remedy to the 8–5 model is a ‘flexible work arrangement’ within an office.
The term ‘Flexible Working Arrangements’ (FWA) can refer to part time work, compressed hours, working from home, annualized hours, job sharing or any other non-traditional working arrangement. Countless research has linked these arrangements to increased productivity, happier, healthier workers and cost savings across a broad range of industries. Many companies have adopted flexible working as a result of their increasing international presence. Procter and Gamble Co. (P&G) have encouraged teams to pick their own hours to facilitate team work across multiple time zones. Furthermore, working in this manner is becoming increasingly easier with the rise in technological advances such as video calls and instant messaging.
If FWA’s are implemented within a team, a number of benefits will ensue for both management and staff. By allowing staff to determine when and where they work, facilities will be used more efficiently (lowering overheads with less office space being required), work can be scheduled across longer portions of the day (providing a more robust service offering to clients or customers), and recruiting and retaining key staff and minorities will become easier. Staff can avoid the rush hour commute, have more control over their time off, work around their other commitments (for instance: being able to provide primary care to a child), and schedule work around their most productive time.
According to the Canadian Human Resources Council (HR Council), the key to implementing a successful FWA is to provide staff with clear expectations, and maintaining a high level of communication. Management need to be clear on what ‘success’ is within their team (for me it is utilization- but more on that later), and staff need clear goals and expectations in order to remain engaged and productive. The HR Council warns that sometimes staff that are ‘out of sight’ can often become ‘out of mind’ so structured communications and regular check ins are essential in making a FWA successful.
Despite the risks that FWA’s could possibly impose, the potential gains to a company outweigh these. By implementing FWA, companies can not only scale down on overheads, but they will attract and retain a more diverse workforce, increasing business performance.
If the engineering industry is serious about attracting a diverse workforce, it needs to rethink traditional ways of working. Everyone is different, and everybody has different goals for their career and work-life balance. By embracing a flexible working culture, companies will have a better chance of attracting and retaining a more diverse workforce, and in turn, will find their staff happier, healthier and more productive.
As for me, I am OK with the 8–5 model now (but wouldn’t mind working from my local cafe in the morning to avoid Houston rush-hour!), but when it comes time for a life change (such as furthering my studies) I would be more confident in my ability to stay with my current company if FWA were implemented.
