|
Sue
Shellenbarger, the Wall Street Journal’s award-winning columnist
who writes weekly on “Work and Family,” has talked to thousands
of people and written years of copy about the “work/life balance”
in today’s society. “So what’s the role of the ‘new learning’ in
any of that?” we asked. “Great question; interesting to think about!”
she kindly responded—and agreed to talk with us for this issue of
LiNE Zine. Following are excerpts of our conversation at the end
of May.
Manville:
Sue, you’ve made a name for yourself writing for the Journal about
work and family and, to some degree, the search for “balance.” Before
we start on the question of learning in that equation, perhaps you
can summarize some of the major “work/life” trends you’ve been seeing.
Shellenbarger:
I think one big trend is simply the erosion of boundaries between
work and family. Technology is assisting this of course with increased
use of cell phones and computer technology that allows us to work
anytime, anywhere.
The second trend I think would be a growing resistance across the
board, among all levels of the work force, to encroachments on personal
time due to high expectations for overtime. I think people in general
are placing a higher value on leading a balanced life and are pushing
back against the demands of work.
A third is probably a greater recognition on the part of employers
that a work/life balance of employees can, at least to some degree,
play a role in building profit. A growing number of internal studies
by companies show that a satisfied employee leads to a satisfied
customer, which in turn improves profit. We will see more employers
measuring employee morale improvement as an indicator of future
profit.
Manville:
You mentioned in your column last week some further themes about
growing expectations of workers for respect, autonomy and flexibility
in the workplace. That’s part of the story too, no?
Shellenbarger:
Absolutely.
Manville:
Okay, well, if these themes characterize today’s new workplace,
what’s the place of learning and how does it fit with the life balance?
We know that workers are also expecting professional development,
and that’s a key part of the value proposition to join this versus
another employer—so-called “employability” and resume-building.
Is the quest for development complementary to, or additive to, the
work/life balance? Is there a zero-sum game where companies have
to make a choice between balance and development?
Shellenbarger:
Ideally they fit together. In an ideal world the company will be
skillful enough in integrating training and learning time into the
work day—building it into the HR plan so that it can be done without
upsetting the existing equilibrium between work and life. But that
isn't always the case. I think, for many exempt jobs, workplace
learning is okay and encouraged; but professional, managerial types
are spending more time learning at home, reading the books, hitting
the Internet at night, trying to catch up with trends in their field—and
that’s something they’re expected to do, or want to do. Clearly,
it's a trade-off. People have a yen for balance, but they also want
to gain skills. They want the promise of improved jobs in the
future. As long as the promise of gain is there, many people will
spend their personal time learning. That's part of life.
But
it’s trickier when you talk about the lower-paid workers, people
who have more rigid hours and not as clear rewards for learning
outside the job. When companies make learning new things a requirement
of the job and then expect people to do it on their own time, it
becomes a burden and an imposition.
Manville:
This is one of the interesting debates. A lot of companies are putting
in place elearning and the ability to learn off and on the job as
well as encouraging people to do so at home. Ford Motor Company
rolled out computers and free Internet connectivity to all its work
force, obviously with some expectation that there’d be a lot more
learning done off premises, at home. I don’t know how much they
actually require—but some expectation is there. Or put another way,
they’re enabling people with the resources to do more at home.
So,
is this a good thing? Who's the enemy here? Is there a work/life
balance problem with this kind of empowerment?
Shellenbarger:
Well, as long as you assume that companies are not trying to deliberately
exploit their workforce—and I don’t think most of them are consciously
trying to do that—the real culprit is our own ambition. You know,
“I've met the enemy and it's me.” The problem is our own internal
inability to draw boundaries in these times.
The
fundamental barrier in most jobs is mental. If you have elearning
at hand in the workplace and at home, day by day, night by night,
and if you're ambitious, then you need to learn where to draw the
work/life balance line. When do you stop working? That is a real
struggle when weighing your short-term desire for balance against
your long-term desire for advancement.
I
think we will evolve in this regard. The next generation of the
workforce will be much better able to draw boundaries—and do so
by defining their values and goals up front. Those of us who are
baby boomers are not particularly good at that. We are not used
to setting limits.
I
see people struggling with this all the time. I talk to couples
and hear one spouse saying “I can't stand my husband (or wife) being
on the Internet or on the software every night, or cracking the
computer books—it is driving me nuts!” But then she or he goes on
to say, “Yet I can't argue because I know he or she is doing it
for the family.” It is a real unresolved tension. I don't see a
solution soon, not until we get another generation of workers into
place.
Manville:
Well, as a baby-boomer myself, I’m all too familiar with the philosophy
of “wanting it all” and not willing to pay for or accept the trade-offs.
I sometimes feel that the third parties—the employers, here—get
too much blame for what’s our own unwillingness to accept responsibility.
Shellenbarger:
There is another factor at work here, especially if we are talking
about the managerial and professional sector. Our generation grew
up in a very crowded time. There were ten, twenty, thirty, a hundred
applicants for every desirable opening. We were a big generation.
And we learned to just over-achieve. We learned that we had to do
more than what was asked in order to get anywhere. I think that’s
less true with non-professionals. With hourly workers, there’s much
more of a danger of exploitation. I want to stress that it’s different
when a company demands that kind of person to learn new skills for
a job on his/her own time.
Manville:
I’m not sure the “ambition” and “get ahead” motivation doesn’t apply
to all workers today. One of the themes we hear about in the learning
business is the similar erosion of boundaries between learning and
work. Work is increasingly about learning and vice versa—it’s not
something separate, nor is training something separate off in some
special department.
Also,
I think we need to figure in the whole element of time-shifting
and flex-time, for example, people seeking schedules more adapted
to their personal preferences. You hear cases like “I want to be
able to see my kid play Little League, and I'm willing to work at
night to make up for it.” Learning has to figure into that kind
of flex time and time shifting too.
Shellenbarger:
Well it’s a great point, and a fascinating one. This image just
popped into my mind of this dad with a cell phone on the soccer
field and an Internet hookup in his lap and he's watching his kid
and reviewing some learning tools on his laptop and has his cell
phone in hand at the same time. I have a headache just thinking
about it! But I also know it can be done. I see plenty of people
with their laptops in the bleachers at sports events.
Manville:
But let me press you here. Would you say that, all things being
equal, all learning ought to be done on the job?
Shellenbarger:
No. I think there should be time made for some learning on the job.
But here again there is a delicate equilibrium. Some should also
be done on your own time. If learning helps advance your skills
for a new and better job, or a promotion, or if it benefits you
in some broader sense, you ought to be willing to do it on “off
hours.”
If
I'm not learning something every day, I feel I'm not living fully.
And I think people are redefining success to include both personal
and professional learning.
Manville:
Let's tackle the technology question. How, in your view, is
technology shaping the work/life balance, beyond the obvious theme
of “anywhere, anytime”? Can you reflect a bit more on this, and
the learning challenge?
Shellenbarger:
I’ve written about the impact of technology in about five different
columns of mine. In every case, I found that the role of technology
depends on the intention of the user. I've tried to look at whether
technology enhances business or family relationships—whether it
gets in their way. I've tried to look at whether technology enables
better work/life balance or interferes with it and I found again
and again that the intention of the user precedes the answer. We
are greatly empowered by technology to draw our lives as we want
them—but if we are confused about our priorities and our values,
then we are going to end up in a boundaryless world.
Manville:
So this ties back to your earlier perspective—one needs to have
one’s values and priorities aligned before starting to play with
the fire of technology.
Shellenbarger:
That's one way to say it.
Manville:
In any of your many interviews have you ever thought or heard about
learning as a family oriented activity? Most discussions about
at-home learning center on the idea of the individual sitting alone
at his or her computer. What about the rest of the family? Are any
companies trying to provide skills and learning for spouses or children
to better support the ties between the company and the employee?
Shellenbarger:
Ah, what a great idea. I think the opportunity is there but I don't
know any company that's doing that. I know maybe a dozen families,
from my limited perspective as a reporter, who are making learning
a family group activity. And technology is clearly part of the story.
I know one family that worked together to network their home. The
teenage son and the dad were sort of playing off each other's skills
and goading each other along to learn from each other; meanwhile
the daughter and mom were downloading music from the Internet until
they had developed a family system of shareware, networking music
that they would play for each other. The way kids are more familiar
with technology, and are increasingly teaching their parents…there’s
some kind of opportunity for group learning here that companies
could capitalize on.
Manville:
Well we could go back to a sort of medieval model in which father
and children are all working together to learn the same craft.
Shellenbarger:
I love that image. I know a couple in Portland Oregon who formed
an international Internet business in their garage, and juggled
the business with raising their kids and also involved the kids
in the business itself. They built a little cottage industry, kind
of like the new family farm of the Millennium I think we're going
to see much more of that.
Other
families bring together work and home in some interesting ways;
for example, a software designer who's constantly networking with
his colleagues at work and then his kids pick up tips and ideas
that they pass on to other family members and friends. We can imagine
the family as a sort of crucible of technological creativity and
innovation. Not much has been written or said about that. A lot
is going on though.
Manville:
Sue, any summary reflections or thoughts about family, work and
learning? What does the future hold? What should learning providers,
professionals, and industry players be thinking about?
Shellenbarger:
Well the key word is “integrate.” Learning professionals need to
think of ways to integrate learning into family lifestyles and look
for ways to provide families with some of the same learning opportunities
that they are providing to the worker. And to think in the holistic
terms that learning is a value for the family and not just the individual.
We
also tend to forget that part of the American work ethic is self
betterment and professional betterment. Work/life balance is not
opposed to learning. People need to integrate it within their own
work/life balance. They can see, or should be helped to see,
that if they learn more they’ll make a better living for their family
and will be a better parent. Given the opportunities of technology
now, it's a pretty exciting time.
Sue
Shellenbarger is a columnist and news editor for The Wall Street Journal. She originated
and writes the "Work and Family" column that appears most
Wednesdays on the front page of the Journal's Marketplace section.
In 2000, she was awarded the National Society of Newspaper Columnists’
first-place prize in the general interest category and a Missouri
Lifestyles Journalism Award in the best short feature category.
She is also the author of Work
& Family: Essays from the 'Work and Family' Column of the Wall
Street Journal.
Brook
Manville is Publisher of LiNE Zine and Chief Learning Officer of
Saba. He can be reached at brook@linezine.com.
VBMSS071001GR
Copyright
(c) 2000-2004 LiNE Zine (www.linezine.com)
LiNE
Zine retains the copyright in all of the material on these web pages
as a collective work under copyright laws. You may not republish,
redistribute or exploit in any manner any material from these pages
without the express consent of LiNE Zine and the author. Contact
linezine@agelesslearner.com
for reprints and permissions. You may, however, download or print
copyrighted material for your individual and non-commercial use
|
