
Photo by fdecomite
There’s one more aspect of the Results-Only Work Environment (ROWE) that I haven’t touched on yet. And that’s the idea that our jobs don’t require our presence during certain core hours.
This is definitely a controversial notion, even among people who like the idea of ROWE. If people aren’t all together at the same time, how can the team get any work done?
In my post ROWE Vs. TOWE, I made fun of a vice president who sent out an email saying that even though they don’t have enough work to do, everyone still needs to show up at 8:30 sharp. (The complaint wasn’t that people weren’t putting in enough hours, just that they weren’t starting right at 8:30.)
Dot at Deeper Issues commented:
“I say it depends on the business. If all the business’s clients start their day at 8:30, then 9:00 doesn’t work. Also, when people start being late, morale falls.
ROWE is an attractive concept to people who don’t like the 9-to-5, but it’s not for everyone. So many Internet entrepreneurs make the assumption that all employees are potential entrepreneurs, or at least are high-level white collar workers. If your job is answering your boss’s phone, for example, and your boss gets in at 8:30, then for you to arrive at 9:00 is going to mess up his day and possibly miss out on clients who call while he’s on the phone with someone else. If you’re the boss, on the other hand, it may matter less when you get in.”
Yes, it does depend on the job. If you’re performing open heart surgery, you need to be there at the same time as the patient and the rest of your team. There’s no way you can be effective by yourself. But I think this situation isn’t as common as we might think.
First, a slight detour. I had one job where they didn’t use ROWE by a long shot, but they did have an interesting way of dealing with time. This was a government contractor, and the government said we had to work exactly 8 hours a day, on average, for the month. We recorded our start and stop times to the nearest 15 minutes, and put our time in their time tracking application. If there were 21 working days in a month, we had to work exactly 168 hours for the month (21 * 8), though it didn’t have to be exactly 8 hours per day. It could be 7 one day and 9 the next.
They were strict about this. When you arrived at work on the last day of the month, if you had logged 163 hours and you needed 168 for the month, that meant you had to work exactly 5 hours that day, no more, no less. Even if people still needed you, you had to go home after your time was up. The company also had a rule that you had to start each day between 6:00 and 9:00 AM. It was OK to occasionally come in after 9, but you had to call first to let them know.
Do you think this system was good or bad? Take a minute to think about it before reading on.
Overall, I think this system was way better than average. One great thing it did was eliminating sludge. The term “sludge” comes from Why Work Sucks and How to Fix It by Cali Ressler and Jody Thompson. It means judging people by time. Like if you say “Nice of you to join us” if someone comes in after you, or “Leaving already?” if someone leaves before you, or if you brag “I was the first one in the office today!” Sludge reinforces the false connection between time and results, and it doesn’t help anyone.
At this company, there was no sludge, because everyone worked exactly the same number of hours (unless they used vacation time to cover a shortage). If you saw someone leaving at 1:00, no one would ever judge them for that, because they knew they were still putting in the same amount of time as everyone else. Either they had accumulated extra hours earlier in the month, or they’d make up the hours later in the month.
Not that time is a good way to measure performance, but at least the rules were clear. There was no wondering how long you’d have to stay in your chair with nothing to do in order to look good. The system also kept us from working too much (though there were times when I really wanted to work more).
But there were some bad things about this system. First of all, we had to start between 6 and 9. That’s a pretty huge range, and it worked great for me, but it’s clearly biased in favor of the early birds. A lot of people had a hard time getting in by 9. and were reprimanded for coming in even a few minutes late. I didn’t ask why they couldn’t get in by 9, because it was none of my business. If they had to take their kids to school or whatever, who cares if they came in at 9:05? (BTW, the window used to be 6:30 – 9:30 before they changed it. Some people never stopped grumbling about that.)
Another thing is that one of the managers required his team to work exactly 8 hours every day, because in his opinion no one can be effective for more than 8 hours a day. But his opinion of how people should work is irrelevant. For God’s sake, let your people decide what’s best for them! I can’t believe they let this manager destroy the benefit of the flexible time policy for the people unlucky enough to be on his team. It’s no different from deciding that your team won’t have health insurance or a 401(k), when the rest of the company does. The benefits should be the same for everyone, and not left to the mercy of your manager.
They were fairly close to a ROWE, at least on the time aspect. People would occasionally come in on the weekend, or stay late at night and then take off the next day. It was really great having that much flexibility (unless you had that particular manager, but let’s ignore him).
And yet, they still required people to come in between 6:00 and 9:00. That’s a wide enough range that you might as well get rid of it. Why chew people out for coming in at 9:05 or 5:55? Why would 5 minutes make a difference, when 3 hours in the opposite direction wouldn’t?
But wait, wouldn’t that destroy productivity? If they dropped the 6-9 rule, wouldn’t some people come in at 5:45, and some people come in at 10? Yup, they would. But the benefit people gained from having complete control over their schedule would more than offset any productivity loss. When people love being able to fit their job into their life, they’ll do whatever it takes to keep that job.
Say I came in at 6:30 (which was my usual time), and I started working on something, and I noticed that someone had done something that didn’t look right, so I wanted to ask them about it. If they didn’t come in until 10, wouldn’t that be a problem? Well yeah, it would. But it would also be a problem if they came in at 9 (or 8, or 7).
There will always be times when you’d like to have access to someone who isn’t there. But what’s the solution? Make everyone get to work at exactly the same time? Is it worth pissing off the employees just to have better overlap? (BTW, notice that “poor overlap” means the same thing as “broad coverage.”)
Besides, there’s no way you can eliminate this problem. What if someone’s taking a vacation day, or sick, or at lunch, or in a meeting? How can you ensure that everyone is always there? Should everyone live in the same house and sleep in the same big bed?
I haven’t worked in a ROWE, but according to Why Work Sucks and How to Fix It, the employees figure out how to handle situations when someone isn’t there. Since they all love their jobs, they work together to ensure that the work gets done. They act like they have a vested interest in the company, instead of just punching a time card.
When you know you can’t assume that someone will be there whenever you need them, you plan ahead to make sure there won’t be any problems. You also make sure you make effective use of the time you do have with them. In a TOWE (Time-Only Work Environment), if you’re judged by time and everyone’s in their chair all day long, why not just chat with them all day? But in a ROWE, you wouldn’t do that because it negatively impacts results, and results are what you care about.
This is all according to that book, and I can’t say from experience that it really does all work out. But when I worked at that company and came in at 6:30, I did sometimes need someone who wouldn’t come in until 9:00 (if they were even there that day). So what did I do? I worked on something else until they came in. Maybe I sent them an email, or maybe I just spoke to them later. But no one should be unable to get any work done just because a particular person isn’t there. Only bad management could allow that to happen.
There have been times when I haven’t been allowed to take a day off when I was sick, on the grounds that they just needed me too much. But if I was really so critical that the company couldn’t function without me, they should have been paying me a lot more.
OK, now we’re done with the detour, and back to Dot’s comments.
“I say it depends on the business.”
Like I said before, I agree. There are some cases where ROWE won’t work. But there are many more where it will.
“If all the business’s clients start their day at 8:30, then 9:00 doesn’t work.”
I disagree. In most cases, the clients don’t have any reason to care what time the employees get there. For one thing, many employees will have absolutely no interaction with the clients. Another thing is that the nature of the work probably doesn’t require constant real-time interaction.
When I lived in New Jersey, I worked with some people in the U.K. But even though they were 5 hours ahead of us, no one considered moving our schedules 5 hours ahead to match theirs, because it just didn’t matter. There was some overlap in our days, and there was also email and voicemail. That was more than enough.
“Also, when people start being late, morale falls.”
Yes, it does. But why? Because of sludge; judging people by time. If someone comes in at a time that we consider late, we think that they’re not getting their work done. But how do we know that? Why do we think that someone’s arrival time is connected to their performance?
I’m writing this post at 1 AM. Is that “early” or “late,” or does it not matter?
Another thing is that if we see someone coming in at 9:05, we might think, “No fair! If he’s not going to get yelled at, then I should be allowed to come in at 9:05 too!” Yes, you should! You’re an adult, and you’re perfectly capable of determining your own schedule. If people were judged by results instead of by time, you’d trust other people to determine their schedule as well.
“If your job is answering your boss’s phone, for example, and your boss gets in at 8:30, then for you to arrive at 9:00 is going to mess up his day and possibly miss out on clients who call while he’s on the phone with someone else.”
This is where we go back to that idea of the team working together to make sure the work gets done, regardless of who is where at any given time. Answering the phone is a skill and not everyone can do it right, but it’s not like only one person in the whole company can do it.
At that company I mentioned before, there was one person who generally answered the phone. But the 6:00 – 9:00 window applied to her, and she was free to pick her own start time. If she wasn’t the first one in, or she wasn’t the last one to leave, there were some other people who would take on the responsibility of answering the phone.
One day we had two feet of snow, and the plows had to push it all into one lane, making that lane unusable. And this is an area with tons of traffic on a normal day, so it took me three hours to get to work. When I got there, I found that the person answering the phone wasn’t one of the regular people. Someone else had stepped up, even though it wasn’t her assigned job. That’s what happens when people work together with a focus on results.
In the worst case, a call could possibly have gone to voicemail. So what? You can call them back. It’s not such a terrifying apocalypse that it warrants forcing everyone to get to work at the same time.
Are there consequences to not having everyone available all the time? Of course. But you can’t have everyone available all the time, no matter what you do. And if you treat people like adults, letting them choose the schedule that works best for them, a funny thing happens. People actually like their jobs. So they do what it takes to make sure the work gets done. And when employees are motivated, the payoff for the company is tremendous.




Hi Hunter – I’m a big fan of ROWE – Cali and Jody are right here in my Minneapolis area back yard. I believe a big reason folks turn to entrepreneurial activities is because they need ROWE and that’s the only way they’re going to get it.
I agree with your reasoning on client expectations and how you can meet them without having to be in the office. I’ve experimented even further with ROWE in my own company in efforts to work remotely and those experiments have been very successful.
The key is work/life INTEGRATION, not balance, though everyone and their brother seems to be striving for balance. Balance implies something should be taken away from something and given to another. Why not just aim for seamless meshing? Is work so crappy that it needs to be separated from the rest of what we do? That’s what trying to balance implies to me – like the scales of justice or something.
Anyway, although you’re preaching to the choir with me, I’m happy you’re looking at this issue and promoting it.
Betsy Wuebker´s last blog post..EVERY VALLEY SHALL BE EXALTED . . .
If the “9to5″ world had been ROWE focused when I was in it, I might have stayed instead of jumping into my own business. I love the idea of Results-based work. To me, it just makes sense.
Alex Fayle | Someday Syndrome´s last blog post..The First Step is Getting Off the Floor: Naomi Dunford Interview
Wow Hunter, you always touch the subjects closest to me… How is that??
Anyway, I have some personal experience on this subject. I have been a Network Admin for many years (way too many, feeling old) and this is a real pain in the ass.
— Off Topic – If this were Walmart, get here on time – –
Now, I had to work on 30+ servers and we have to deal with all sorts of options. This was a health care organization, so downtime is not an option. We had to schedule all maintenance and security updates (along with testing all patches on QA servers first). This would need to be done in the middle of the night, so I would have to work all night twice a month. The next day I was supposed to be in at 8am! My boss thought that if the Manager (ME) was not in on time, then my employees would not respect me. I told him that I had a deal with my employees that on this day I would come in at 10, and work later.
Anyway, long story short, I was docked pay for being late and I never did those updates again. I decided to start taking the systems down during the day (my working hours). This pissed everyone off in the company, including the CEO, and we have to move back to our scheduled maintenance, and I was able to come in at 10.
We decided to start a schedule for the IT team.. My secretary and one tech was in by 8am, the second tech was in at 9 and I came in at 10 every day. WE were now able to cover all the hours in a day, and more with everyone being happy.
I have so much more, just don’t want to clog up your comments…
Jim Gaudet´s last blog post..This is Way too Personal…
I love the ROWE gals!
I started communicating with Cali & Jody at my previous job and loved their message of results only.
Currently, and ironically, I am now working for a time tracking company that helps companies keep track of their employees time & attendance. Now, this could totally go against the grain of ROWE’s philosophy of “if you are getting your work done, who cares when you are doing it”. Totally true, but there are exceptions of results only when it comes to hourly labor workers. Our best customers are freelancers and construction companies that have to invoice for their time, which will make them more accountable to their clients which will lead to more trust and more jobs.
Hello & great job Cali & Jody! You are doing Corporate America a great service and letting them know that work is no longer a 8-5 job! Thank you!
-jen
Jen Harris´s last blog post..Children’s Stories and Productivity
I’m lucky enough to work in a ROWE (although no one ever says it that way and this is the first time I’ve seen the acronym). Everyone in my team gets in a their usual time – which varies from 7am to 10am. Sometimes people are later than usual; when that happens, they let the team know.
Most people work an (approximately) 8 hour day ( assume!), but that’s not tracked because we all know the work will get done. Sometimes there are late hours. Sometimes people leave early for an appointment or child’s activity r because they have a headache.
Most of the people in the team work at least one day a week from home; several of us work from home two days a week. Those who don’t, chose not to because they feel that they are more productive in the office environment.
This is the most flexible work environment I’ve ever been in and I relish it. The office is 45 minutes (by car if traffic is light) from my house. I take a train/shuttle combination. The commute isn’t fun but it’s only 3 days a week. The job (good) co-workers, and flexible schedule make it something I hope to keep for as long as possible.
Vicki´s last blog post..What Advice Would You Give? (Part 2)
I have to admit, I have not read the “Why Work Sucks and How to Fix It ” book. But I really liked some of the points your brought up.
I have long been an advocate of a hybrid kind of workplace where core business hours AND results were considered in the formula for workday flexibility. Granted I have never worked in manufacturing or other production-only environments, but with knowledge workers my favorite hybrid setup always worked. I believe in hiring people who are smart enough to work together and deliver results to their customers. Startups within companies is something I am a big fan of and that helps people in creating flexibility for themselves collaboratively.
These all concepts are not new, just more businesses need to pilot them and try them. Employee retention is such a big headache these days. We also cry about escalating costs. Well… this workday flexibility perks cost almost nothing (unless we put telecommuting into the mix). Why not try to figure out how to make that work for you? I have lead business operations in companies where we gave our teams flexibility and the result was better morale and higher dedication to our firms.
Just my 2 cents.
Apolinaras Sinkevicius
Apolinaras “Apollo” Sinkevicius´s last blog post..If your staff does not get it, neither will the customer!
I’ve been lucky that my manager always focused on results over time — so value-based vs. time-based.
The first few years it sucked. Eventually I realized I had to timebox my week and find a way to flow value. Then I found the magic of life balance and how liberating it was too figure out new ways to get more effective and amplify impact.
J.D. Meier´s last blog post..My Favorite Personal Development Books
@ J.D., yes, I’d consider you lucky to work in a value-based environment. As you observed firsthand, you have to figure out a new way to work, but ultimately it’s better for everyone.