Slashdot Mirror
What Are Advantages/Disavantages To Flex Time?
achurch asks: "I work for a fairly large Japanese software company which runs most of its divisions on a fixed time schedule (i.e. 9:00am-5:30pm plus overtime). I happen to be in the one division that has a flex-time system, but I've been hearing rumors of late that the company is considering getting rid of that and putting us back on shift, too. My gut reaction to that is 'you do that, I quit,' but I'd like to put together a viable argument for maintaining/expanding flex here. So I'd like to get some opinions on why flex time is a Good Thing: What has flex done for you/your company? Why do you (or don't you) prefer flex to a fixed schedule? Reasons that appeal to management types would be especially helpful." I'm sure this question is one that is on quite a few minds out there. Have strong feelings about this either way, then please share them here.
I'm a single parent and I work flex: four 9's one week and four 9's and an 8 the next; I alternate two-day and three day weekends; she lives with me four days out of every two weeks when I have the three day weekend..
So the time that she lives with me I have three days off, one of which is a school day, and the fourth is also a school day and I work a branch office 10 mins from home, so it's like I'm at home anyway.
We've been doing this for twelve years and it's worked out pretty well.
One other deal: a flex schedule gives you an earlier start and/or a later stop time, which can *really* make a difference in the traffic volumes for at least part of your commute.
I work 7:00am to 4:30pm; my morning drives are a breeze because I'm an hour earlier than most people.
t_t_b
--
I think not; therefore I ain't®
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
As any good management team should know, employee morale is the single most important factor affecting productivity. Flexitime boosts morale, and hence is inherrently a good thing. Note, however, that completely flexible hours can actually lower productivity when team members don't choose overlapping hours, and thus don't communicate with each other as effectively. This is management's main argument against flexitime, but it's misguided. You can work around it by enforcing core hours (say 11:00 - 15:00) for a few (or for the paranoid, all) days a week.
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
Our regular business hours are 8AM-4PM, but we have room to vary that as needed. Also, our vacation time can be used in increments as small as 15 min. if need be. And we have a couple of telecommuters, too, in our claims department.
The way we handle flex time is on a department-by-department basis. As long as you have adequate coverage during the 8-4 timeframe (in the network group I define it as having at least two of my four staffers present during that time) when the bulk of the company works, you can work out other scheduled with your supervisor. But for my company, the typical flex shift is more like 7-3 or 9-5, though we do have people coming in to other areas of the company as early as 6AM.
Whether flex time works depends on the nature of the company. A software company or engineering shop will probably do better with flex time than an insurance company like mine does - but at the software company, for instance, the customer support reps need to work a fixed schedule - they need to be there when the customers normally call. So flex time doesn't work for everybody, all the time.
I do prefer the flexible schedule to what I had for scheduling at my old (and otherwise wonderful) company. At my job now I wale up at 6:30, go into work at around 7:30 and I usually work until 4-4:30 or so. It's no big deal since I live close by. At my old company I woke up at 5:30, hit the road by 7, and would get to work by 8:30. That sounds OK, except we had a culture there that drove people to stay until the last person finished the last job (it was a company that produced retail ads daily), so I usually left around 6-7PM. Or later. Even if I had no work to do. And I stayed because everyone else did too - it was a particularly harsh example of groupthink.
The insurance world is very easygoing by comparison.
- -Josh Turiel
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
Get used to it (or fill out your resume.) The less people understand what their staff is doing, the more they like to micro-manage.
I've run into micro-managers on both sides of the Atlantic in English, French and Spanish cultures. The Japanese are notorious followers and come from a risk averse culture given to intuitive leaps of genius about as often as glaciers.
Your environment is entering into a business stage called ossification. They will now focus on maintenance for lower cost with obsessive fixation. A few incompetent middle managers later and you will find it impossible to acquire tools you need to complete work which has to be done.
At some point, probably soon, they will have stripped themselves of the inventive people that would have helped them weather change.
Of course change is inevitable and you will be looking for work from the weaker bargining position of someone who is unemployed.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
If governments really did value the value of taxpayer's dollars, they would only allow companies to demand fixed-schedules only in exceptional circumstances. For example, teams that ABSOLUTELY need to be together to do their jobs, like assembly-line work.
But less and less work is assembly line work, and more and more intellectual work.
Having everybody coming to work and leaving at the same time puts an extraordinary burden on the transportation infrastructure, the more so if the type of infrastructure is environmentally wasteful (such as cars). Roads have to be designed for their peak usage, peaks that only happen twice a day for a few hours, where their users waste their time stranded in traffic. Likewise, public transit users are crowded in vehicles that are always insufficient in numbers. I have seen bus and train systems where some vehicles make exactly a grand total of TWO trips a day. At $120,000 a bus or $2,000,000 an engine and $1,000,000 a car (10 car train = $12M), the bill gets kinda expensive pretty soon.
Some commuter railroads (LIRR) and bus operators (NJT) even employ ordinary people (who are specially trained to meet regulations) to drive buses and run trains to their "ordinary" work, because it is senseless to have drivers and engineers and conductors sit idle through the day, while the trains and buses crowd downtown terminals (or are expensively deadheaded back to suburbia, thus choking even more roads and rails).
Having people going/coming to work at different time would spread out the peak traffic throughout the day, allowing a much more efficient use of transportation infrastructure and facilities.
The oft-used argument that "presence is necessary for proper communication" is total bunk. It means that the companies are poorly organized, and the management is unable to communicate effectively. Physical meetings should be a last-resort solution, where e-mail, voice-mail, messaging and bulletin-board discussions have failed.
In fact, physical meetings are the hallmark of poor organizers, of people who don't have better to do with their time.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
I've worked with flex time and telecommuting, and had to make cases for both.
The advantages of flex time, I have found are:
1) Adaptability. One can work around various events, crises, etc. in a smoother manner.
2) Less Bureaucracy. Having to constantly clear things with supervisors, fill out forms, etc. wastes time.
3) More productive. Able to integrate all of one's life better, work is usually more productive - being able to take that extra two hours when you're on a roll, OR leave an hour early when there's nothing to do (and make it up when there is) makes your work time DO more.
4) Loyalty. Simply, flex time is something people appreciate.
5) Less sick time. I've found if people can adapt their hours, they can work around illness easier.
6) Less stress. This is always a good thing.
Well, that's what I've found.
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
1. Infrastrucure - 8-6 Hours
2. Sales - 8-5 Hours
3. Support - 8-6 Hours
4. Community Support - 8-5 Hours
In a "Non Silicon Valley Community" The above "Rules" still apply.
1. If your having problems with building maintenance, phone lines, networking, water pipes anything related to your busienss infrastructure you cant get support if your employees are coming in late or super early. Business's do have after hours, but if your relying on After hours, its costing you more then what flextime is worth!
2. Sales. No mattwer WHAT business you are in your selling something. There is no way to function sales outside of 8-5 mon-fri. Infact most sales are probably form 9-3 because the decision makers are busy before and after that time. Again, flextimt with 9-3 as required core hours could work, but not what slashdotters think is the normal flextime
3. Support - Going back to infrastructure. Business support, lawyers, legal departments, city officials, record keeps, anything that keeps your business going are only open during this finite window.
4. Community Support - Kind of covers everything. Most places only support businesses from 8-5, alot of places are zoned for one way or another, buses only work during peak hours in most towns, public transportation doesn't exist after 6 pm, whatever it is, most communities can't support a work day outside of 8-6.
That is just my opinion. I would *LOVE* flextime, but basically i work 96 hours a week myself so it doesn't matter anyhow. I'm off onsite Mon-Thursday and my flextime is friday and saturday and then back at the airport on Sunday.
Being a Consultnat flextime ticks me off since i have to show up for the early birds and stay through the late ones often sitting at the office for 12-14 hours before i even get to go to my hotel to work on reports, timecards and expenses.
Could possibly the flextime and ultimate support of the individual rather then the group or "team" be the demise of the dot coms? Every .com i've been at supported a team atmosphere from an outside point of view, but inside it was a dog eat dog world moreso then any typical corporate/established company with eastablish rules/policies and schedules.
I'm a contractor who specialized in short- to medium- term contracts, and despite having had many different clients, I've gotten flexi-hours at all my jobs in the last... um... four? jeez, I've lost count... lots of years.
In my case, "flexi hours" means I have a regular schedule, but it's not 9-5, and if I won't be in on my regular schedule I give some warning. My big thing is never, ever having to regularly be on a client site before 10am. I have a couple of reasons for wanting this -- I hate rush hour commutes, for one -- but I am very able to give my clients a big reason for them to want me to have flexi hours:
Funny, but they all are completely enthusiastic about my working 10am-6+pm.
I'm always surprized that other people don't have as strong a sense of time-of-day (independent of light) as I do. Surely I'm not the only person whose productivity varies on a strict schedule. I would think that any company would be eager to make sure the hours of employee time they get always fall in each employees most productive periods.
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
Yes, you are right there. -- Another glass of champagne?
My wife and I have arranged our schedules so that she drops our son at the bus stop in the morning and I pick him up in the afternoon. We don't have to have him in wrap-around daycare. That saves us thousands of dollars a year. Needless to say, working somewhere where I couldn't do that would effectively be a pay cut.
Because our company allows flex time, but requires a manager's approval, it gives those of us using it a strong incentive to demonstrate that it isn't impacting our work. Several years ago, I was the team leader for a team that included one employee on flex time and another who was telecommuting. After we started that arrangement, our team communication improved. We made extensive use of e-mail to keep each other informed. That e-mail was a better record of important communication than any notes we might have taken in meetings.
I can't speak for the rest of that team, but I started treating e-mail as an immeadiate priority. Before that, I had occasionally decided that some e-mail late in the day could be left until the following day. But when I knew that two of my coworkers would see my replies either later that evening or early the following morning because of there work hours, I started extended them the consideration of being sure that I sent my replies right away.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
As a manager, I'll give my management perspective :->
In our organization communcation is actually enhanced through the use of flex-time. We have offices in NY, California, Brazil, New Zealand, and Australia, and clients in the US and Europe. With all these timezones, it is to our great benefit to allow people to come in to their office at odd hours when they are working with people in another office - and since the people who work with each other can change depending on the project being done and thus what groups need to interact, it isn't the case that we can just have different shifts to handle this.
We also have part-time telecommuting privledges, which not only gives people some time to work quietly and alone on difficult technical problems, but also people who live far away can spend some commute time each week on work, and also in the office we can share desks between people who come in 2-3 days a week on different days (important to us because we're in NY city where space is hard to find and rents are high once you find it).
However, the argument onion2k makes about "doing what you like when you like to do it" is also pretty compelling - at least in our organization where about 80% or more of the staff really like their jobs a lot. People are genuinely more productive at their personal peak hours of the day, and we have people who do their best work when they come in at 6am, and others who would rather show up at 11am and work until past midnight. We just require that people who work on the same project overlap in work times at least 4 hours each day. Those employees who are not as in love with their jobs, or who have displayed less of an ability to work well alone, or who have to meet with clients - they do get some time restrictions placed on them, but even then, with some flexibility (say, come in between 8:30am and 10:30am, except if meetings dictate otherwise, and stay at least 8 hours, and no telecommuting unless working over 40 hours in the week... as an example)
Managing people on flexible schedules, even ones that minimally overlap with your own, is not so bad if they actually respond to e-mails and produce measurable results in their work. As a software engineering organization our company has a pretty easy time telling whether or not projects are being completed and people are being productive, especially since our managers are technical and can distinguish an employee who is not really working from one who has run up against an unforseen technical difficulty.
So, if your managers are up to it both emotionally and in terms of knowledge of their work to allow for judging performance fairly, then flex-time (and part-time telecommuting) can be really great...
o/~ we are pissed, we are pissed, we have to resist... o/~ - ec8or
I agree -- I'm another who's most productive early in the morning, but by around 3-4pm, I usually just barely manage to stay awake (if I have to). A second point is, flextime tends to mean (intrapersonally) "stay until the job is done, or this part of it; or until nothing more CAN be done on it," whereas inflexible scheduling tends to lead to clockwatching.
I used to tell a very low-level, barely trained, young clerical worker who served as librarian in my documentation department that he could leave early if all the work was done. He never misused that permission; sometimes, he would ask if he could leave early on a specific day although he was waiting to file papers he knew would arrive later, but he always said he'd be in early the next morning to do it.
Before this young man began to work for me, he had been in danger of being fired in the messenger department, where he was the clerk also. He turned into an exemplary employee, I believe, because I gave him every opportunity to feel he was in complete control over how he worked. He even took the initiative in setting up useful control systems, learning to use the PC's (which were new then), and making suggestions to benefit the documentation department or programmers.
My point is, flextime is just one of the many options managers can offer to encourage employees to take responsibility and initiative for their own work. "Core hours" which everyone puts in together, on certain days (weekly or as needed), or every day, should take care of any problems scheduling meetings, training, etc.
I've seen flextime from the perspective of a worker bee and a manager. I believe there is nothing more demeaning or less productive to a manager or an employee than having to play the roles of school teacher and tardy student. If the company sets hard time rules, a manager is expected to enforce them and it can create all kinds of relationship problems, second guessing and bitterness. Flextime lowers everyones stress level.
Disadvantages? There aren't any. Once flextime is instituted, people very quickly sort themselves into early and late arrivers with a few in between. We're creatures of habit and once the commuting patterns are set, individuals come in at about the same time everyday, so it's easy to adapt.
- A)understand what their employees do to the point that they trust them to do it without supervision, and
- B)the ability of the office to "survive" without a "techie" around.
The success of flex time really depends on the competency of the manager, which in turn is affected by the programmer/techie/person on flex time. If the programmer is really forthcoming with explanations and ideas, updates and information, than flex time stops being a problem. To wit, the information flows both ways --"I'm not in till 11 tommorow"
"Well hang on, I have a meeting at 9, can you give me 10 minutes before you leave today?"
Flex time will work, but only if information flows from both sides, I realize that some managers are worse than others and that there are whole companies whose management needs to be revamped altogether, but the fact remains, the road to flex time is a slippery slope, and you're not going to get very far charging up it without planning.
It's all about trust, and you can't develop trust through an "us vs. them" mentality. Your manager may be a moron, but you're not. Explain in painful detail what you're doing. And always have a partner in crime to fill in for "panic" situations. Flex time is not a right, and I get the general sense that that's the popular opinion. In the same way that people must be coached through new technologies being adapted into the work place (intranets anyone?) so must people be coached into a new system of the "business day." There are a lot of 9-5'ers who have done it that way for years. This one isn't just going to get handed to ya.
---------- You are not the contents of your sig.:-p
The programmers here (and some other staff) are on a policy that basically says "as long as you're doing your work, we don't care if you come in".
:)
I'll tell you first hand - when I work at home, I get twice as much work done, I've been known to work at home for >70hrs a week. (and really, actually working
They're trying to abolish it (due to a new union getting it's fingers in the mix), but, it's not going to happen. If any argument, the fact taht I just stated above about my work ethic and the others' similar ethics will definately invalidate anything.
The best places that I've worked for have policies like this... Now that I'm starting to gather enough experience to where I can start having a little more impact on where I'm employed, I don't think I'll accept a job that doesn't have a policy like this.
I had a job where I was on a fixed schedule about a year ago, I eventually ended up quitting on the spot because I was tired of having to get up every morning at 6am to sit on my ass for 4 hours doing nothing (and more often than not falling asleep out of boredom). I don't have a problem with this schedule normally, but not when I'm in a chair 8 hours a day. I had no problem working hours like this when I worked at a convenience store some years ago.
I can show up at 3pm at my current job and no argument. I'm pretty sure upper management doesn't like it (mainly because they have to come in early), but they deal with it, because I bust my ass.
The other option is salary, which is great as long as it doesn't come with a "you still gotta be here from this time to that time" order.
To put it best, your programmers work best when they're comfortable. Make your thinkers comfortable and they will think more for you.
Generally, if you have good staff, your programmers are also better at managing themselves than anyone in upper management can do.
'Good' programmers have the drive to code and learn regardless of someone telling them how to do it. A good manager (like mine, and the one at my last job, which, obviously, are both programmers as well) knows that I'm going to do it my way regardless of what he says and stays the fuck out of my way.
He also knows, that he's going to get a higher quality of work out of me for doing that.
I would explain to your whomever that you are simply more productive when you are able to modify your own hours, and generally hint at a relocation in employment if he's not interested in listening.
Talk to the other employees about it, and get a petition signed. This has worked in our office, as none of us are quiet about opinions in the workplace -- this works very well with the right management.
The wrong management, IMHO, shoudln't be signing your checks. If you can't find a place that accomodates your needs, the tech world is too big now to waste away your life busting your ass for someone who really lets it know they don't give a shit about you.
I would take a 10k-20k salary hit for a better work environment, but that's just me.
-Erik-
Pro: you get to take a day off occasionally.
Con: that day is usually coincident with a day another co-worker needs your: help, expertise, advice, signature, presence in a meeting/etc.
I guess we are all living in a high-tech world where you don't need to be anywhere physically to get work done. Unfortunately, that is something that often only works in theory. When you are working with a group of other people you need to be there to work with (or for) them. I realize that there are jobs that can largely be done independently and only require group meetings when certain milestones are achieved, but many jobs involve working in groups, and consulting with people in those groups.
How many people have been at a meeting that went nowhere because "someone" was "taking thier day". Don't get me wrong. I am all in favour of flexible work schedules and in a well organized operation this would probably lead to happier and more productive employees, but this freedom has to be tempered with responsibility. It would be nice if flex-days were not taken on days when inter-departmental meetings were taking place, or during times when that person is a central figure on a project. It is important to realize that when you are gone, everyone who needs you is screwed (unless you spend the day answering email and phone calls, which defeats the purpose of taking the day off).
My suggestion (or feeling anyway) is that a four day week (every two weeks) is a good idea but that everyone should take thier flex-day at the same time (so a particular workgroup might agree to take every second Friday off when possible).
--8<--
--8<--
Flex time wasn't helping morale, as people would be frustrated and resentful at someone who wasn't around when they needed them.
Possibly in a less interactive, modular, environment, where programmers can go off and code in a vacuum for a week, it would work. For anything which requires a lot of team interaction, and changes in direction to meet the market on a regular basis, it's dangerous, IMO...
-me
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
Better known as flexi-time here in the UK where I work, flex-time's key benefit is allowing workers to do what they like when they like doing it. I'm an early office person. I do some of my best work before 9am when the hordes arrive.
The main arguement against flex-time is that of communication. You can't exactly talk to someone at 5:15pm if they clock off at 5:00pm on the dot everyday. It depends on your job. If you have to talk to people all day long then theres a real arguement for keeping you in the office at times you're going to be needed. Difficult to argue against common sense. But, conversely, if you're someone that is able to get on with your job on your own without the distractions of things like late meetings, then its a preferable situation to have you doing your very best work at the time you prefer to be doing it.
As with everything I suppose, look at it from the managers perspective too, once you can grasp their view its much easier to argue against it.
http://twitter.com/onion2k
My compeny has an 80 hour flex period. I don't know how common it is, but I think it's great.
Pairs of weeks are identified (a Week 1 and a Week 2). You can work extra in Week 1 and carry those hours over to Week 2 and take that time off. You can also take hours off in Week 1 and then work those extra hours in Week 2. Essentially, I charge hours over 40 to the 80 hour flex account and credit myself hours when under 40 hours. After the two weeks, the balnace must be zero.
Flex time can also be done within a week as typically done. [strong]tsetem[/strong] lists good reasons. It's hard for me to get overtime, so this is helpful if I'm meeting a deadline, I can take that time off the following week.
It makes it easier to spend time with family, run errands, doctor's appointments, etc.
There is a problem as well. If I work extra the first week, and then have to meet a deadline, I lose those extra hours.
In addition, if you are approved for overtime, you can't use the 80 hour flex time (only within the same week). That's becuase I have to donate 5 hours each week before being paid overtime.
I think flex time is great. It improves moral, and improves business since employees and be flexible with their work hours.
I have to add that I work in an engineering firm, so there isn't consistent customer contact. Some departments elect to not approve flex time, giving managers some say in what works best for their department.
~afniv
"Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
~afniv
"Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
Richard von Weizs
We started out on total flex time, which basically meant that we both worked whenever we could, but with no particular stipulation about the hours. This worked out pretty well because A) it was just the two of us and B) there was a lot of work to be done that we both had a personal investment in. Sometimes we would fall into these cycles where one week, every day would be 9-6ish, the next week would be 11-8ish, the next week would be 1(PM) to 10ish, and so on - sometimes we went all the way around the clock back to 9-6!
As we got more clients and had to do more client interaction, we found it wasn't feasible to make come in the office at 1 PM and expect to be able to make all the needed calls, run all the needed errands, etc. before other businesses closed, and still be professional about it. So we set some loosely defined hours of 9ish to 5ish that we both pretty much followed. That was also a happy time.
We recently hired an employee, and that changes everything. Unless employees are extremely self directed and have a significant investment in what they're doing, I think the need to have someone around to answer questions and provide some guidance when appropriate. It wouldn't work at all to have a 3 (or 4, or 5, or more) person company where everyone comes in at their leisure and just hopes that the tasks that require 2 or more people to be present at one time would get done. So now we have pretty standard 9-5 hours, with a policy that it's fine if you're out of the office for a while or if you want to vary those hours, just make sure to give some notice, and make sure to make up any lost time somehow.
I agree with other posters that the hours should depend on what kind of company it is, what kind of people are working there, and what the needs for interaction with the outside world require.
Our company is on Flex time with mandatory core hours from 9-3. This basically means you must be in the plant between 9am & 3pm, but you can arrive at 6:30 & leave at 3, or show up at 9am & leave at 5:30. But those 6 hours you must be in plant so meetings can be held, & business can be done
*) Reduced use in PTO (personal time off). You can have a Dr. appointment early in the morning or late in the afternoon & not use that time off
*) Don't have to be stressed over making it in at a given time. You don't have to cuss over traffic being bad & showing up at 9:10, while your boss is bitching that you showed up late
*) Reduced micro-management. Managers don't have to stand around and see when you come in & go just to make sure that you show up by 9am
*) Good for early risers/late risers. I'm usually into work by 6:30 so I can get out while there is still sunlight. Ok, during the summer there is sunlight, but still. It's nice to go for bike rides & do something outside after work to blow off steam.
*) Can increase support coverage. I work in IT as well, and people in my department work from as early as 5:30 in the morning (don't know how) to as late as 5:30-6pm in the evening. So by having flextime, employees can come & go as they need or want, and can stagger the coverage in a department or area.
*) Employee moral/perks. In this day and age where Tech workers are hard to come by, they should be treated more like gold. If they do decide to take away flex-time, quit & work for someplace that does have flex-time unless you really really really like what you are doing. I wouldn't give up flex-time, I won't give up the option of wearing blue jeans. If my company takes that away, there are at least 5 other companies in the are that still offer these perks and are hiring. Your company should also be concerned about keeping their employees happy. I seriously doubt you are the only one that would consider walking if flex-time disappears.
Those are some of the big reasons I see for flex time. It doesn't just help the employees but the company as well. It helps keep the company competitive, by offering a perk that really won't cost the company much if anything.
#include "std_disclaimer.h"
I can get more work done between 8am and 10am some days than I can get done in the *entire* rest of the day. I realise some people here will be saying "Oh my god! How can you even get up before 6pm? I can only code at night, etc etc.", and that's rather my point - I'm not one of those people, and if I was, I'd be working different hours. If I couldn't start work until 9 (hey, if I dont get to go home until 5.30 I'm *not* starting early, except for special events of course) - then I've lost a lot of productive time. By the afternoon, I've had lunch, some days I might as well just take a nap, because I can't get anything clever done. Afternoon is when I surf the web, patch up documentation, and play with new software.
I can "work" all day - I can sit at my desk and do stuff, but when it comes to those insightful rushes of productive time, when the ideas are flowing, and code is pouring from my fingertips - those times I can't just decide to produce "on demand". If my employer wants them (and of course they do), they better be letting me work so that I'm here when the muse visits. Otherwise I'm just another drone, plodding along...
my 0.02,
Mike.
Tales from behind the Lagom Curtain
As the general manager of a medium sized ecommerce company in my country, i wouldn't accept anything BUT flex time. my reasons:
1- not everyone is productive during the same hours of the day, and noone is productive all day long. basically by giving employees the ability to choose their schedule, productivity tends to go up.
2- by basing work requirements on deliverables, instead of hours, individual tend to take more responsibility for their job thus resulting in much more creative solutions and higher quality results
3- we do not meet. if we need to comunicate, we chat, email, call or leave post-it notes on each other desks. once you have an automated system where you can assign and retreive tasks, the need to meet is reduced to a few occasious where you can usually just conference call the parties and discuss, wherever they are.
4- higher employee retention and overall satisfaction
there is a downside for flex time though, employees tend to work much more due to the fact that management usually assumes that flextime means you're ther 24/7.
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.