4.3 Discussion

Meg O'Leary, senior manager at PriceWaterhouseCoopers, exemplifies the rising class of virtual knowledge workers of the future. Rather than commute to an office, Ms. O'Leary does her job from her home and has done so since 1998. Figure 4.3.1 illustrates a typical day in her life.

5:00–6:00 Arise and prepare for global teleconference call
6:00–9:00 Participate in global teleconference call
9:00–11:00 Read, listen, and respond to e-mail and voice-mail
11:00–12:00 Write proposal with team from NC, CAN, and DC
12:00–12:30 Have lunch with daughter
12:30–2:00 Test conference software with vendor and clients
2:00–3:30 Join all-hands call re: IPO/merger and forecast
3:30–5:00 Debrief with colleague and prep for late-night
5:00–8:00 Spend time with family
8:00–10:00 Call with Hong Kong and wrap-up day's business

Figure 4.3.1: A Day in the Life of Meg O'Leary

The new style of work environment described by O'Leary affords both better and worse work-life balance. On the one hand, it is easy to have lunch with the family and never miss dinner. On the other hand, the tenuous boundary between work and home means longer hours and a feeling of never being far from work. Being a virtual worker means never having to face an ugly commute in snarled traffic, but it also means never having a reason to leave the house for days on end. O'Leary also lamented her dependence on technology—one of Boston's infamous Nor'easter storms can knock out telecommunications and disrupt her work.

Ms. O'Leary's work schedule also shows an important point about globalization: working in multiple time zones forces workers to expand their workdays to overlap with the workdays of global colleagues. Boeing CEO Phil Condit had noted how important round-the-clock, round-the-world knowledge work has become for his company. Boeing uses such practices both for design work and for rapid response to project proposals. Because of telecommunications, knowledge work has the potential to bring people together in ways that the industrial revolution never did. Global knowledge work practices bring people from different countries to work directly with each other. While the industrial revolution brought the people from the country into the cities, the information revolution will bring the people of all countries together.

Working in globally distributed teams makes face time difficult even for workers who don't telecommute. Nonetheless, telecommuting brings additional challenges to workers. "Being a high-performer doesn't require you to see and be seen," O'Leary said, "but it is isolating." She recalled a time where she realized that she had not left the home for an entire week as she moved from "downstairs" family time to "upstairs" work time throughout the days.

The autonomy and nature of telecommuting work also demands constant learning, but there is little programmed professional development time. "You're doing it on your own," Ms. O'Leary said.

Finally, working in virtual teams brings great opportunities to demonstrate leadership by stepping forward and managing projects, but there is little opportunity to interact with role models or see them in action.

When asked what a company can do to enable work that promotes a work-life balance, O'Leary said that the key is for the company to create a culture that supports the balance. "It has to be the culture, not just paying lip service to the concept," Ms. O'Leary said. "There can't be a huge discrepancy between practice and philosophy. At PWC, working from home is not seen as a career-limiting move. It's not seen as not being committed to the organization. That is what has kept me with PWC."

Ms. O'Leary offered two additional suggestions to companies. First, companies should provide opportunities for growth and development, to keep employees engaged. Second, companies should focus on outcomes, not process. "I do project work and complete my projects. The company doesn't need to know when the work gets done, just that it gets done and that clients are happy." This approach requires to trust employers that employees will complete their work and exceed expectations on client service.

Thus, the employer-employee relationship is very different at PWC, going beyond McGregor's Theory Y. The company is based more on trust than on command-and-control. Workers are judged on their ability to fulfill the commitments that they make to each other. Colleagues and the company measure people by the quality of their results rather than the quantity of their hours on the clock. Complex, unscripted project work—in contrast to routinized piecework—requires a flexible work environment.

SAS Institute, the world's largest privately held software company, exemplifies a corporate culture based on trust and flexibility. The example of SAS illustrates how a $1.2 billion company can do well financially by doing right for its 9,000 employees. SAS CEO Dr. James Goodnight noted that when "95 percent of a company's assets drive out the front gate every night, the CEO must see to it that they return the following day." A trust-based environment, onsite healthcare, recreation facilities, and good equitable pay structures help get people to return.

For these efforts, SAS is ranked third on Fortune magazine's "Best Places to Work in America" rankings. With 3 percent employee turnover—compared to the 20 percent figure common to the software industry—SAS saves an estimated $75 million per year by not having to acquire replacement workers. "We would rather pay our employees than pay headhunters," Goodnight said. Such practices mean that new employees want to join SAS. The company enjoys first pick among the very best workers, getting some 200 applicants for each job posting. Finally, he stressed that strong employee loyalty drives higher customer loyalty. Workers that stay with the company form lasting relationships with the company's customers; retaining employees helps retain customers.

The low turnover ratio at SAS prompted an audience member to ask whether low turnover impeded innovation, thereby creating an inbred corporate culture. Goodnight answered that SAS uses internal mobility to create a strong flow of ideas, rather than using a revolving door of entering and departing employees. Workers at SAS work on a project basis, and they can move freely about the company. Unlike a traditional hierarchical manufacturing company, SAS lets workers move in and out of linear career development paths. Moreover, the company is still growing—getting fresh new workers as it expands. With its commitment to the long-term, SAS is even hiring during the economic downturn in the software and technology sector. The company is foregoing short-term profits to hire very skilled workers who were laid off in the crash of the technology sector.

Dr. Peter Senge suggested that people should question their assumptions about corporate and government practice and about the developed world's entire way of life. Assumptions are embedded in the language that we use. Under McGregor's transition from Theory X to Theory Y, people shifted from being a labor "cost" to being a corporate "asset." Yet, Senge questioned even the language of calling people "assets" or "resources." He noted that the definition of a resource is "something standing ready, waiting to be used." Kofi Annan spoke of the need to move from talking about balance sheets (with their lists of categorized assets) to a more people-focused perspective. In moving beyond McGregor's Theory Y, leaders need new ways of thinking about the unique relationship and mutual responsibilities between employers and employees. This new model would move away from the assumption that employees are assets that can be bought, depreciated, and disposed.

Dr. Senge also suggested that, because of sustainability, the entire industrial revolution is a giant bubble, not unlike the dot-com bubble. We don't see it yet because the industrial revolution's bubble has not yet popped. People do not see the bubble-like nature of current practice because of the most insidious feature of bubbles—they look so good to those inside them, until they pop. Those inside see nothing but growth and good times. Those outside see how the bubble has overstepped rational bounds and is bound to pop. Just as the dot-com bubble was not sustainable, the rapacious resource consumption patterns of the industrial revolution are not sustainable. Senge noted that the average American needs, literally, a ton of resources per week to support their lifestyle. Few believe that everyone in the world can reasonably attain the resource consumption patterns of the developed world. Thus, he echoed Kofi Annan's concern about those outside the affluent circle (or bubble) of the major industrial nations—"15 percent of the people having 95 percent of the goodies" is not sustainable.

All three panelists commented on the need for education reforms, especially at the lower educational levels. For Jim Goodnight, the issue was that the old model of education presumed that the student was destined for the manufacturing world. He noted that it is clear that the U.S. will, and must, leave behind its manufacturing past and embrace the world of knowledge work. Rote learning of preconceived answers will not work in the coming age. Toward this, both Meg O'Leary and Peter Senge noted the need for teaching thinking skills to twenty-first century global citizens. As the nature of O'Leary's telecommuting workstyle shows, managers and employees alike need a better understanding of work-life balance and how to work in cross-functional, cross-cultural teams.

In summarizing the panel, Dr. Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld noted the classic dilemma of change: how do new practices prove themselves to the adherents of old practices while breaking the molds of those practices? Peter Senge noted that the transition beyond McGregor is but 5 percent complete and quoted Dee Hock (founder of Visa International) in foreseeing an era of massive institutional failure, filled with crisis and retrenchment. Fortunately, the engine of new venture creation provides a mechanism for transitioning to new practices (in the private sector, at least).

Dr. Cutcher-Gershenfeld also commented on the gap between policies and practices: many companies and civic leaders espouse enlightened viewpoints but fail to follow them with action. Unfortunately, the drive for short-term results outweighs the goal of long-term sustainability. Yet companies can bridge the gap between short-term results and long-term ethics. In her presentation, Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina argued that even without compassion, companies can see that it is in their long-term best interests to create a sustainable long-term future. Currently, only 10 percent of the world can afford HP's products. Thus, working toward a long-term better future for everyone presents tremendous opportunities for growth for all companies.