Our language needs to catch up with our present-day work+life reality if we are to avoid misunderstandings. Part of the problem with the Obama Administration’s efforts is the language they are using.  “Family friendly,” and “balance” are outdated terms that aren’t used by most work life experts because we’ve learned that they don’t accurately describe reality.  Think about it, what exactly does “family-friendly” mean?  Does it mean mothers, or all parents?  Does it include people with eldercare responsibilities?  And what about people who consider their pets to be members of their family?  And what exactly does “friendly” look like?  What looks friendly to me might look very unfriendly to you.

It is much clearer to talk about a flexible work environment that allows people to manage their work and life in a way that meets their needs as well as the needs of the business.  Notice I didn’t say “balance.”  There is no balance, especially not in a global, 24/7 organization like the White House that’s dealing with a major recession and two wars.   So instead of saying the White House is “family-friendly,” President and Mrs. Obama could say, “we support giving people the flexibility they need to manage their important jobs with their responsibilities at home in the context of what it means to work in the White House.”

A leader can set the tone, but he or she can’t give us the answer because our realities are completely different. Kudos to the Obamas for setting the cultural tone related to work+life issues.  They freely talk about how they try to manage their work+life fit, which makes it okay for us all to discuss.  They encourage the use of laptops to support flexibility (only for parents so far, however, I would advise expanding to everyone as soon as possible), and they walk the talk in a way that works for them.  Unlike other aides and staff members, President Obama works from home when he is in the country which does allow him greater, spontaneous access to his family.

While others are still trying to figure out their fit, they report a number of “small wins” such as accompanying a daughter on a field trip, or seeing soccer games.  If I could give them all expert advice, it would be to keep focusing on those small, flexible, day-to-day victories.  They make a huge difference.

Some are making adjustments to accommodate realities of their high-powered jobs that can’t be changed.  In-laws and spouses are taking on more.  Additional support is being hired.  Babysitters are bringing babies to work for a visit.  It might not sound appealing to everyone, but all that matters is it works for them.

Admittedly, there are those that still have a way to go in terms of finding their White House work+life fit.  Nighttime school visits and sightseeing aren’t going to work long-term.  But, it’s only been seven months, so testing the waters is to be expected; however…

This is a big job with long hours and sometimes it isn’t going to work for everyone. As the article noted, these are “prestigious posts that offer a chance to make an impact and unparalleled access to the President at time of recession and war.”   And the work is never, ever going to be done.

These are smart people.  They knew what they were getting into. The United States Government is a global, always on, always changing entity that’s currently guiding a country under great stress. Not surprisingly, a couple of staff members have already decided that it wasn’t going to work and have resigned.  Maybe they have a child or parent with an unexpected special need.  Maybe their partner got a new job.  Or, maybe it just wasn’t what they wanted after all.  They tried and realized it wasn’t for them, which shouldn’t be an indictment of the entire effort.

While it might not be everyone’s definition of “family-friendly,” there’s no doubt that this White House is much more work+life fit aware and supportive than previous administrations.  Is it perfect?  No.  Will they need to keep innovating?  Of course.  A year ago, would we have seen so many male senior administration officials talking openly about their work+life fit challenges?  I don’t think so.  That’s progress to celebrate.

The Administration is trying to create a culture that gives everyone as much flexibility as possible to manage their fit.  But in the end, they all still work for the White House.  And for some, that’s a fit that’s just not going to work.

What do you think?  Do you feel the White House work-life efforts are hypocritical, or do you see them as helping us all make the flexible management of our individual work+life fit part of the day-to-day operating model?

Post this article to:

More than 230 years ago, ordinary citizens across the colonies printed and distributed the passionate words of “amateur” writers to shape public opinion and galvanize the independence movement virally. Like the Iranians, these colonial social media pioneers faced violent suppression from a powerful ruling class.  But their simple pamphlets proved to be even more powerful.  They offer hope not only to the courageous Iranians, but to anyone interested in harnessing the collective for change.

My grandmother first introduced me to the bravery of the American Revolution’s pamphleteers through stories about one of my ancestors, Samuel Loudon.  In addition to publishing the newspaper The New York Packet, he was part of the underground network that printed and distributed pro-independence pamphlets This included the a popular response to Thomas Paine’s Common Sense for which, legend has it, he was tarred and feathered.

This description of pamphleteering from 1940 by Homer Calkin for The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, could be about the blogs of today, “From the sixteenth to the eighteenth century the pamphlet was the chief instrument to carry one’s ideas to the public…The pamphlet, forerunner to the newspaper, was well adapted to this use because it was small and cheap and could reach ‘a larger audience than the orator in the House of Commons.’”

These childhood tales of how Samuel Loudon’s pamphlets changed the world may have helped me recognize the potential of blogging in early 2006 when I started my Work+Life Fit blog, way before most people even knew what a blog was.  At the time, I was frustrated.  For more than a decade, I’d been part of a vibrant, dynamic field that helped organizations and individuals partner to flexibly and creatively manage work and life.  Yet the broader world had no idea the field existed much less how our work could help them. I wanted to change that.

Almost four years later, both my original blog as well as my expert blog for Fast Company have exceeded my expectations in terms of helping to rethink work, life and business. Without fail, after every post, at least one person contacts me to say, “That made a difference.”  Huge.  And a few of my long time work+life colleagues have started excellent blogs including Families and Work Institute’s blog, Kathie Lingle’s Blog at the Alliance for Work Life Progress, and the Sloan Work and Family Network.  Further expanding the community.

Now, Twitter.  It’s been six months since I joined Twitter (@caliyost), and I’m equally as impressed by its power to share information, create community and drive change.  Tweeting for the pamphleteers of the Revolution would have meant printing and distributing eight to ten short 140 character statements daily.  Impossible.  But that’s what’s different about Twitter—it’s quick. It’s fast. It’s real-time.  It doesn’t replace the thoughtful, longer form writing of a blog post.  Twitter augments it by allowing you to: (Click here for more)

Post this article to:

“There have been four pandemics that we know about in some detail: 1889-92, 1918-20,, 1957-60 and 1968-70.  All four followed similar patterns:  in initial sporadic activity with local instances of high attack rates—just as H1N1 has behaved so far—followed four to eight months later by waves of widespread illness with 20 to 40 percent of the population sickened.  Subsequent waves followed as well.  In all four pandemics, lethality changed from wave to wave—sometimes increasing, sometimes decreasing.  It’s impossible to what will happen this time.”

If this pattern holds, some time between October, 2009 and February, 2010 we could face an even stronger more widespread epidemic.  Over the past month, I’ve been awestruck, in a creepy, skin-crawling way, by how fast the virus moved through one population, and then began to infect other grades and schools in the district as siblings and friends exposed one another.  I watched the challenges public officials, parents and doctors encountered as they grappled to coordinate a response.  It makes me very afraid for the next go round.  Here are a couple of the observations that surprised me:

It happens so quickly it’s hard to get in front of the outbreak. The first official notification that something was amiss in the school arrived via an email from the Superintendent on Monday, June 1st:  (Click here for more)

Post this article to:

Why have we not been more impatient for bold progress?  If that progress was our goal…life/work integration should be able to make more progress.   Lou Gerstner at the time said, “let’s focus on results…not face time”  people said that’s brilliant.  It was brilliant but it was a strategic mind who saw a need.

Now, Ted Childs sees two of six trends–1) ascendancy of women in labor force will be competitive advantage 2) work/life integration will define nations.   Shifting demographics will drive a response in public policy and business.  Companies still have control…but that is changing as governments recognize it in the country’s best interest to implement policies to address work/life issues.  Base line supports–child care, eldercare and flexibility–are now the baseline.

Leaders will have to look at game-changers that will make flexibility the way of operating/ change cultures.   Tool of effectiveness for workplaces that are able to compete.   Success will happen because of women.  Success will happen when reorient the workplace to make people successful; the people, not the leaders.

Ted is honoring Dana Friedman and Ellen Galinsky as co-founders of FWI (I am so proud at this moment to say I was a Senior Research Associate at FWI).  Now honoring the original founding board of directors of FWI.  Nine of original board members still serve today 20 years later.

Amazing to hear board member Dee Topel to talk about how new the industry of work and life was 20 years ago and how innovative FWI was at the time.  “Our baby reaches maturity.”  Looking back on FWI accomplishments, the creative  meaningful work of the field is even more important than ever.

Honorees tonight:  Michael Carey, former VP of HR for Johnson & Johnson and original FWI Board member.  Douglas R. Conant, CEO and President. Campbell Soup; James S. Turley, Chairman & CEO of Ernst & Young; Michael I. Roth, CEO and Chairman of Interpublic Group; and Willie A. Deese, EVP and President, Merck Manufacturing Division.

J&J employee shares her experience of work/life supports that helped her manage her work and life as part of her introduction of Michael Carey prior to his award.  Recounts how flexibility at J&J allowed her to work while her premature son was in the hospital in NYC.  Then when her son came home, and then J&J took an unpaid leave to care for son.  Then he was enrolled in the J&J child care center.   Then  three years later son diagnosed with a latex and food allergy, but the staff at the center he was able to  stay at center.   All these years later, the College Coach supports at J&J have helped her now grown son attend college in the Fall.

(Dinner so taking a break…)  Update: I had to leave before the final CEO panel started; however, I am told their message was clear: Work+life strategies will be mission-critical in the coming years.

Post this article to:

Immersion Learning Experience — Conversation with Ellen Galinsky, President of FWI and Kaye Foster-Cheek, VP of HR of Johnson & Johnson

Discussion:  How Work Life Realities Changing for Men

How have organizations changed the marketing of flexibility so that men feel comfortable using it?

Example:  Sara Lee marketed flexibility through their younger employees/  Ernst & Young conducted a survey and found everyone wanted flexibility and emphasized the use of day-to-day flexibility for everyone

Now, dealing with jeopardy and risk of using flexibility in this economic environment:  Merck–distinguished from day-to-day and formal flexible work, a global survey found that men were more likely to take advantage of occasional flex now dealing with how to get more men involved and to make it more global.  So they are reaching out across organization and leveraging success stories of men using flexibility.  Target leaders and what are you seeing and what are your barriers. …JP Morgan Chase with regard to people be afraid of using flexibility, in two areas in finance the senior leadership initiated “Change One Thing” urging people to make a small change in how they are working.  It started in December and now they are following up to encourage more use

Back to National Study:  Fathers are experiencing more work-lif e conflict than mothers.

Moving on now to Aging Workforce and Challenges

Kaye Foster-Cheek:  There are difference in the generations, but there are  a lot of similarities.  J&J brings generations together to listen to each other.  Understand what we have in common versus what is different.  The economy is going to impact on progression in the labor market.  So it’s important to focus on what is similar.   For example, defined benefit pension plan is overwhelming appealing to the Gen-X and Gen-Y which was surprising.  The reason was the volatility in the market, but also the commitment the company is making to the employees.

Another interesting finding;  Gen-X, Gen-Y wanted flexibility beyond care giving, but also to find time to fit in volunteer activities

Kathy Lynch from Center for Aging  and Work at Boston College points out the need to look not only at generations but life-stage.

Question: Wondering if this has to do with differences if people are executives or not?  Executives just assume that this is the “way work is done.”  Look at National Study Data to determine if there is difference in the way manage people…Data finds there is no difference by level or generation in wanting flexibility to manage work and life.

One of the key variables is socio-economic and is key to opening flexibility up to all levels in the organization.  As we open up flexibility to everyone, this will mean more flexibility for lower-wage, non-executive workforce.   This will be one of the factors when thinking of flexibility as a business issue and not just something that nice companies do.

IBM–Executives are role-models, so glad that the data shows no difference between levels because executives in our company are setting the tone for the use of flexibility.  With regard to Millennials, they are just more vocal about asking…but we all want the same things across generations.  From an IBM perspective, we’ve used flexibility to facilitate flexibility.  In her team globally, 50% work from home, and don’t care where they are located.

Trend #4:  Elder care is growing

Trend #5:  Number of hours worked have grown.

Trend #6: Health rating improving for people under 30 / Minor problems with health increasing, and sleep problems are pervasive / one in five receive treatment for high blood pressure

J&J–really focusing on employee health.  Has a global tobacco free workplace and supports to help employees give up smoking and offer fitness centers and on-site clinics to help employees.  Comprehensive approach to health and wellness.  Measures that they track–tobacco, cholesterol–all improved.  Inactivity unfortunately is still a problem.

What companies are NOT doing well–Question raised: employers have been allowed to insert ourselves into employees life with technology. So is that one of the reasons that people are not as healthy?

Kellogg has summer work hours from approximately May to November where Friday afternoon off if completed their work to a supervisor’s satisfaction.  Has changed companies culture.

(NOTE:  Ellen used Work-Life Fit, to describe outcome on a slide–Yeah! So glad they are not using balance)

The Immersion Learning Experience is wrapping up…moving to cocktail hour before the dinner presentation where Legacy Awards will be announced.  (Click here for live post from dinner)

Post this article to:

To answer these questions, Work+Life Fit, Inc. partnered with BDO Seidman LLP to co-sponsor the first ever CFO Perspectives on Work-Life Flexibility study.  This national telephone survey of a random sample of 100 top CFOs at companies with at least 5,000 employees was conducted by an independent research firm in May, 2008.  I’m so pleased that the peer reviewed World at Work Journal chose to publish the article I wrote about the results and their implications entitled, “CFOs See Business Impacts of Work-Life Flexibility, But They Can’t Execute for Strategic Benefit,” in the most recent issue.

The publication of the article and the important insights the CFOs offered couldn’t come at a better time.  Eighteen months ago global corporate line leadership had a chance to use a broad range of work+life flexibility strategies to respond to the brewing economic crisis, and for the most part they didn’t.  Early on, they missed the opportunity to consider how they could reduce costs and sustain revenue by being more flexible in where, when and how the business and employees operated.  Specifically, they overlooked how to use a combination of flexible scheduling, compressed workweeks, furloughs, sabbaticals, telecommuting, reduced schedules, and job sharing to help employees become more productive, reduce labor costs while minimizing layoffs, cut real estate overhead, lower operating expenses, as well as improve and expand customer service.  This was a costly and unnecessary oversight that we can’t afford to repeat.

The key findings from the CFO survey outlined in the World at Work Journal article offer guidance into what we can leverage and do differently to make work+life flexibility a more integral part of both the short-term and long-term decision-making process:  (Click here for more)

Post this article to:

• The Congressional Budget Office’s projected a jobless rate of 10% in 2010, and
• During the week of May 16th, “the total number of people collecting benefits rose to 6.66 million, a record reading for a 16th straight week, and a sign companies are still not hiring.”

Historically, jobs lag behind a recovery as employers wait until the last possible moment to ensure the rebound is sustained.  As a recent Hewitt Associates study of 518 HR leaders found, even though most believe an upturn will start by year-end, many are “contemplating additional cuts.”

In other words, we are not out of the woods in terms of layoffs; therefore, it’s a perfect time to revisit flexible downsizing strategies to minimize job cuts.  As I’ve pointed out for more than a year in numerous posts (20 Reasons to Promote Flexible Alternatives to Layoffs) , reduced schedules/salaries, furloughs, unpaid vacation, job sharing, sabbaticals, telecommuting and compressed workweeks allow companies to manage labor and operating costs without having to let as many people go (for specific examples check out the recently updated Downsizing Flexibility Champions Honor Roll).  If a recovery is starting to simmer, it makes even more sense to try to hang on to your people, rather than scrambling for talent when business begins to pick up.

According to a recent Watson Wyatt survey, U.S. employers increased their use of reduced workweeks and mandatory furloughs; however, as with any innovative approach to tackling a problem, there are challenges to the wisdom of these flexible alternatives.

Concern #1:  Employees won’t go for it.
When I started writing about flexible downsizing to reduce job cuts in early 2008, the first response was, “Sounds good, but employees won’t go for it.”  So, I decided to find out by including questions in our nationally-representative 2009 Work+Life Fit Reality Check survey of full-time employees conducted by Opinion Research Corp at the end of March (+/- 4% margin of error).

We found that 9 out 10 full-time employees said they would be willing to accept a change or reduction in their schedule, or take a pay cut to avoid layoffs. Here’s the breakdown of the specific flexible downsizing options from which respondents could choose (there was no statistically significant difference between men and women):

78%     Four-day workweek, but the same amount of hours worked
59%     Add additional unpaid vacation days to the year
59%     Take one to two weeks unpaid leave, known as a furlough
48%     Share your job with another individual
47%     Reduced hours with reduced pay
41%     Work on a project basis as a contractor
41%     A pay cut, but the same amount of hours worked
31%     Take a month or more unpaid sabbatical
5%       None of these

Are people going to jump for joy when their schedule changes or if they make less money?  No, that’s unrealistic. But, I find there’s a pragmatic understanding that these are extraordinary times.  And most people, perhaps begrudgingly, will make trade-offs to keep their jobs. One conclusion from the data is that not everyone is interested in the same option.  Therefore, organizations might want to include a broad range of cost saving flexibility in any downsizing strategy and let managers and employees choose the options that work best for the individual and the business.

Concern #2:  You don’t save money and you will lose your top talent, therefore, the answer is to cut poor performers.

(Click here for more)

Post this article to:

Notice I didn’t say “slow” lane, because no self-respecting high-achiever ever wants to admit to being in the slow lane.  But the slower lane…perhaps.   In theory, it may not sound bad at all, until you look back over into the fast lane.  What’s happening?  Someone is passing you by.  That can be very difficult.  But sometimes we have no choice.

The all or nothing, all work or no work, fast lane/stop at the side of the road mentality doesn’t reflect today’s work+life fit reality especially in this economy.  As we found in the 2009 Work+Life Fit Reality Check, a majority said they are less likely to leave the workforce to care for children or aging parents, and a majority now plan to do some type of paid work in retirement.  Taken together, we have to honestly examine what a shift into the “slower” lane involves, since it will mean something different for each of us.

Grey’s Anatomy’s Dr. Miranda Bailey Painfully Redefines Success…

The season finale of Grey’s Anatomy unexpectedly granted my wish for more examples of shifts into the slower lane.  Chief Resident, Dr. Miranda Bailey made the painful move out of the fast lane by turning down a prestigious fellowship for the less demanding position of general surgeon.  This well written and acted episode accurately depicted the conflicting considerations and emotions behind her decision.

For those of you who are not Grey’s Anatomy fans, here’s Dr. Bailey’s backstory:  Season after season, Dr. Bailey continued her determined ascent up the ladder.  She overcame professional setbacks, even if that meant periodically showing up at the hospital with her young son, William, in tow.  Although her marriage to her husband Tucker struggled, it had seemed to be back on track.

As Chief Resident, she had to choose an area of specialization.  While she liked general surgery, midway through the season it seemed she’d found her true passion as a pediatric surgeon.  She began to pursue a prestigious fellowship for two additional years of training, which would keep her in the fast lane.

But when Dr. Bailey receives the news she’d won the fellowship, she goes to the hospital’s Chief of Staff, Dr. Richard Webber. She asks him if there is still an opening for her as a general surgeon.  He says there is but admits he’s confused.  He’d supported her for the fellowship because he thought it was what she wanted, and with that she confesses, “It is, but Tucker said if I took the fellowship our marriage was over.  I need the consistency of a general surgeon’s schedule to be home at night as much as possible.”  She goes on to say that she’s decided to leave her husband anyway because that’s no way to have a marriage, and she catches her breath as she concludes, “I am now a single mother, and need to be home for my son…”

And then there’s the reaction of Dr. Arizona Robbins, the doctor who sponsored her, “You don’t turn down a fellowship like this!” Her response symbolizes the toughest part of pulling into the slower lane–the outside voices telling you what you “should,” “ought,” and “can’t” do.

So how does being a general surgeon put you in the slower lane?”  For Dr. Bailey, turning down that fellowship meant she had to redefine success.  She settled for a position she enjoys and will give her the work+life fit she needs right now, but it isn’t her passion and doesn’t have the same prestige.   To her mind and perhaps in the minds of her colleagues, Miranda Bailey is in the slower lane.

How I missed seeing Michelle Obama speak….

Actively managing your work+life fit and consciously redefining success doesn’t just happen at major life reset points, like a divorce or potential promotion.  It’s something we do on a daily basis, and it never gets easier…even for me.

The last three weeks my schedule has included more than the usual amount of travel (thus, the light blogging).  When I committed to the opportunities that took me to Boston, Chicago and then Lexington, Kentucky I knew there would be very little room for any last minute additions to my work+life fit—personal or professional.  Then I got an invitation to attend the Corporate Voices for Working Families conference in Washington DC.

The conference sounded wonderful, and I knew many of my favorite work+life industry colleagues would be there.  But looking at my calendar I saw that if I attended the conference I would have to fly from Chicago to Washington and be away for the last two days of my older daughter’s statewide standardized tests.  Because these tests partially influence her placement in Junior High School next year, she was more nervous than usual.  So I declined the conference invitation in order to be home.

I was disappointed, but happy with my decision, until the first day of the conference when I received an email from one of the attendees telling me about Michelle Obama’s fabulous speech! Michelle Obama?! Yes, Michelle Obama delivered an unannounced speech at the conference that I had consciously chosen not to attend!  (Click here to read the post by Ellen Galinsky of Families and Work Institute about her meeting with the First Lady).

I spent the rest of the day reading articles and blog posts about her speech.   I found myself thinking of what it must have been like for my “fast lane” colleagues who attended the conference to hear her speak about a subject many of us have spent more than 15 years studying and promoting.   Had I missed a once in a lifetime opportunity?  What had I done?  But all of my doubts were erased when I put my daughter to bed that night and she said, “Mom thanks for being here.  It made me feel better in my tests.”  I’d said no to the conference, pulled into the slower lane, missed Michelle Obama, and made the right decision.

Maybe I’ll see Michelle Obama another time, and maybe Dr. Miranda Bailey will get that fellowship in a couple of years.  But we both actively managed our work+life fit and redefined success in a way that worked best for us, for our jobs and our personal realities at a given point in time.  There’s no right answer.  Today, we pulled into the “slower” lane, as we defined it.  The next time the decision may be to put our blinker on and pull back into the fast lane again.  It’s not all or nothing…as hard as that may be sometimes.

How many lanes are in your work+life fit highway?  Have you even pulled into the slower lane as you define it, either by choice or circumstance?  What did that look like and what did it involve?

Post this article to:

My recent conversation with a female MBA student at one of the top business schools provides a perfect example.  She called to interview me for the student newspaper and wanted some tips for women MBAs about how to manage their work and life after they got out of school.  My first tip—“Realize that managing work and life isn’t just an issue for women.  In fact, men report higher levels of work-life conflict.”  Not surprisingly, she responded, “What? Really?” It wasn’t until I showed her the results of the NSCW, and she confirmed the findings with male MBA students that she began to understand how outdated her assumptions were.

Here are other highlights from the NSCW that together create a snapshot of today’s work-life reality.  As you read, ask yourself, does the picture below inform the way:
•    I think about and talk about work-life issues (even if different than my own circumstances)?
•    My manager/employer thinks about, talks about, and addresses work-life issues?
•    The media presents work-life issues?
•    The government addresses work-life issues?

Reality #1: Women and men under 29 years old are equally likely to want jobs with greater responsibility, which was not the case in the past when men were more likely to report wanting more responsibility.

Reality #2: Women under 29 years old with children are no less likely than women without children to want jobs with more responsibility, which was not the case in the past when women with children were less likely to want jobs with more responsibility.

Reality #3: Women’s labor force participation continues to increase, with 71% of mothers with children under the age of 18 working in 2007.  In 2005-2006, women earned a majority of all bachelor’s degrees (58%) and master’s degrees (60%).

Reality #4: 79% of married employees are part of a dual-earner couple (up from 66% in 1977).  In 2008, women contributed 44% of the annual dual-earner family income, up from 39% in 1997, which makes the loss of their jobs even more detrimental.

Reality #5: For the first time in 2008, the percentage of men and women who agree with the statement that “it’s better for all involved if the man earns the money and the woman takes care of the home and children” was inconsequential and not significantly different (42% of men and 39% of women in 2008, versus 74% of men and 52% of women in 1977).

Reality #6: In 2008, 73% of respondents either strongly or somewhat agreed that “a mother who works outside the home can have just as good a relationship with her children as a mother who does not work,” a big increase from 58% in 1977. Interestingly, even though a majority of men agreed with the statement in 2008 (67%), they do still lag behind the women (80%).

Reality #7: Employed fathers are spending significantly more time with their children under 13 than they did in 1977, with millennial fathers reporting the biggest increase.  Men are also:
•    Taking more responsibility for the care of the children (49% say they take more or equal share of care in 2008, versus 41% in 1992)
•    Doing more or an equal share of the cooking (56% of men in 2008, versus 34% in 1992)
•    Doing more or an equal share of the house cleaning (53% of men in 2008 versus 40% in 1992).

Reality #8: Not surprisingly, “Men’s reported level of work-life conflict has risen significantly from 34% in 1977 to 45% in 2008, while women’s work-life conflict has increased less dramatically and not significantly: from 34% in 1977 to 39% in 2008.” And the level of conflict is even higher for dual-earner fathers, with 59% experiencing some or a lot of conflict in 2008, versus 45% of dual-earner mothers.

What did you think?  Does the reality outlined above inform the way:
•    You think about and talk about work-life issues?
•    Your manager/employer thinks about, talks about, and addresses work-life issues?
•    The media presents work-life issues?
•    The government addresses work-life issues?

I think we have a long way to go before the perceptions and the debate related to work-life issues on all of these levels matches reality.  Hopefully, the NSCW will help close the gap. What do you think?

A couple of interesting work-life resources/opportunities:

1. Work & Family Life is a monthly, cost-effective magazine that companies and organizations can distribute to their employees.  Work & Family Life is full of great work-life related information (click here to view a recent issue).  For more information contact the publisher, Dr. Susan Ginsburg at workfam@aol.com or 1-800-278-2579
2. Are you a mom interested in sharing what it was like to transition from working woman to working mom?  FWO Consulting is conducting a national online survey of moms to learn more about this often challenging change.  To learn more about FWO and the survey, go to http://www.fwoconsulting.com/.   Another resource for women transitioning to motherhood is provided by Rachel Egan at Maternity Transitions www.rachelegan.com.

Post this article to:

• How to make it really work for everyone, individuals and employers, in boom and doom periods and
• Why flexibility is important for both employee work+life fit but also the day-to-day operation of the business.

Before we move forward, it’s important to note that these results are based on a telephone survey of 757 full-time employed adults, sponsored by Work+Life Fit, Inc. and conducted by Opinion Research Corporation.  With a margin of error of +/- 4 percent, this means that 95 out of 100 times the results would be within the +/- 4% if the total population were interviewed.

Flexibility in How, When and Where Work is Done is Here to Stay—“If” Flex is no longer the question

• 98% of respondents indicated they currently have work life flexibility.
• 81% of respondents indicated the amount of flexibility they currently have either increased or stayed the same from this time last year.
• 85% said the flexibility opportunities at their company either increased or stayed the same last year.
• 85% reported there was either an increase or no change in the likelihood they would use work life flexibility with the increase in the amount of layoffs at companies.

As Kathie Lingle, Executive Director of Alliance for Work-Life Progress commented in response to these findings, “Workplace flexibility has repeatedly demonstrated a remarkably tenacious streak during previous economic downturns. Erroneously labeled ‘soft’ by the uninformed, flexibility practices appear to be holding their own in these particularly tough times.  Flexibility requires little to no monetary investment because at its core, it’s a management philosophy.  It may morph and adapt, but it will most definitely survive.”

Understandably, these findings about the resilience of flexibility are somewhat counter-intuitive in the face of the worst recession in a lifetime. I have heard , “I find those results hard to believe given that we are hearing anecdotally that people are afraid to ask for anything.”  Let’s think about how we defined work life flexibility in the survey: “Having flexibility in when, where and how you work.  It allows you to flexibly allocate time and energy between your work life and personal life.”

To me this says that people do have flexibility, but perhaps it’s not exactly the flexibility they would want (we will talk more about this in a minute).  For example, someone may want to reduce their schedule, and they haven’t pursued it, but they do have day-to-day flexibility or the ability to telecommute…(Click here for more)

Post this article to: