Slashdot Mirror
Best Buy Institutes Extreme Flex Time
s31523 writes "The company I work at has a flex time policy where basically, you can come in and leave within a window of time, as long as you are in the office during 'core' hours (10am-2pm). Best Buy has gone extreme, they have completely banished traditional views of office hours. Citing a preference for results over time invested, the company has completely done away with schedules. No mandatory meetings. No impression-management hustles." From the article: "Another thing about this experiment: It wasn't imposed from the top down. It began as a covert guerrilla action that spread virally and eventually became a revolution. So secret was the operation that Chief Executive Brad Anderson only learned the details two years after it began transforming his company. Such bottom-up, stealth innovation is exactly the kind of thing Anderson encourages. The Best Buy chief aims to keep innovating even when something is ostensibly working. '[The 'results-only work environment'] was an idea born and nurtured by a handful of passionate employees,' he says. 'It wasn't created as the result of some edict.'" Sheesh. I work from home and even I have a schedule. Here's hoping it catches on.
or does it sound like the CEO was basically forced to go along with this idea or it would look like he was a victim of mutiny? I mean he already heads up a company where employee theft or "shrink" as they like to call it is extremely high. Given the chance I bet any employee of Best Buy would gladly stab anyone at the Top just to make a quick buck.
Good for them; it sounds like it's working out so far, and if the employees like it, then roll with it.
But, at the risk of sounding like one of the old fogeys the article talks about, it's not for me, and for the reasons those old fogeys mention.
a) I work better when at work. I don't like to work at home; one of the nice things about my 5 mile commute is that, if I have to get any significant work done "after hours," I can drive to the office and do it. My focus is better when I don't have my fiancee, my cats, my 360, my Wii, my stereo, my television, etc. around all tempting me to spend time with them, instead. Moreover, I don't want to be available for routine work 24/7 - I'm already "on call" for crises all the time, but it's with the understanding that I'm only to be bothered if it really is a crisis.
b) There is a value to meetings - at least, some of them. We'd all love to completely ditch the useless all staff meetings that are pretty much just a productivity black hole, but some meetings are valuable. In my office, we have one weekly meeting just of the technology team - it's a tight group and a focused meeting. It's on the schedule from 1:00 - 2:00, but we've only actually been in the meeting until 2:00 once since I've been here. We all have pretty specialized jobs, but they all inter-relate. I'm the DBA, for example, and Dave is the storage architect. It's good to touch base on a regular basis to keep up with what's going on outside our fairly narrow areas.
c) I'm not good on the phone. My hearing isn't what it could be, and I spend too much mental power on making sure I'm hearing what the other person is saying to really be processing well. Face to face, I can use rudimentary lip reading and body language to "fill in the gaps" without the mental effort.
This, of course, is just the way I work - for people who don't have my hangups, this is a great system. But I'd end up working somewhere else, most likely.
Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
But what if your customers were using this ROWE system. How would you cope?
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Businesses seem to underestimate the effect of unnecessary 9-5 on morale and productivity.
In my experience, 9-5 think is bull most of the time. I have had two jobs where 9-5 was mandated for spurious reasons even when other hours (or flex) had way more benefits. One job I had all the work was done 6am-2pm. There was literally nothing we were allowed to do after 2pm. But 9-5 was still mandated. I was so frustrated at our department being behind because I could not come in earlier, and bored because there was nothing to do after 2pm, that I finally left (to the dismay of several departments, so I'm told).
Another job it was only 9-5 because those who needed to be there 9-5 (e.g. customer service, shipping, etc.) weren't there 9-5. Of course, once the hours were mandated, those workers continued to do whatever they wanted to do, because the problem was a discipline problem, not a time problem. The mandated hours changed my commute from 30 minutes to 2.5 hours. I was not paid for those extra 12.5 hours each week, killing my enthusiasm for the work (and the time-consuming commute was not exactly a joy). I was no longer able to get work done while most people were out of the office, which hurt my productivity immensely. Even arriving and leaving a half an hour earlier would have cut an hour off my commute, but they were absolutely inflexible.
I've got flex in hours and location now. The focus is on getting the work done and I could not be more happy with my job, nor do I believe I have ever been more productive.
I'm posting this anonymously because I'd rather not have what I'm about to say get back to where I work:
I don't do jack shit at work.
I'm a beginning programmer at my place of business (a facility that's part of a Fortune 500 company). I manage and build small web applications for internal use. I'm given a general time table for when it needs to be done, and pick a date within that time table to have it done by. My projects are done on time, and usually have more useful features than intially requested. But I only work maybe four (on average) of the eight or so hours I have to be at work. The rest of the time is spent fiddling around on Slashdot and other places, while looking behind my back to make sure I'm not being watched.
Personally, I find it to be a complete waste of time. Sure, I could pick up some extra projects, or do some research on the side, or move my due dates up by weeks, but I don't see much of a future with this company (maybe two or three more years, at best), so I have no incentive. I would, however, work harder at work if I knew I wouldn't be there so long.
This is the way I see it: If a person is paid salary, why do they have to be there for exactly 40 hours a week? If they can do all of their work in 20 hours, why force them to stick around? If an employee has more freedom to choose when they come and go, they'll have higher moral and thus better work output because they feel they have more control over their job and life (and they would). If they wanted to take a Friday off to see a kid at their sports game, they wouldn't have to worry about filling out forms or requesting time off- they just make sure their work is done the first four days, and inform people they'll be gone the fifth.
Obviously, this kind of situation wouldn't work for all industries. Sales reps, for instance, would probably need to be in during certain hours so they can work with other companies and customers that still do the 9-5 shtick.
But in this age where information can be shared instantly, where cell phones allow us to be reached almost anywhere and laptops to work from a range of places, why should we be constrained to one desk for a specified set of time if we can be as, if not more, productive without those chains?
I hope this experiment works.
...as a contractor. So I am not on the ROWE program, but most of the full-timers I work with are. It seems to work pretty well for them. Most people are in the office most days anyway. Typically if people take advantage of it they get in late or leave early or whatever. But they still have work to do, and many times that work is best done in the office. There are still plenty of meetings and lots of collaboration. And, when people are out, they're usually available by phone or email. So, to all the naysayers who think this is a terrible idea, you're pretty much wrong.
HOWEVER...
most of the FTE's basically just spend their days either going to meetings, preparing for meetings, or recapping meetings anyway. Lots of the actual "work" is passed on to contractors, so it really doesn't matter if the FTE's are around or not.
Same here.
I hated rigid schedules to the point that I quit and started my own company. I saw it as an obsolete business model. My office building choice was primarily based on proximity to public transit. I wanted to be located directly adjacent to a BART station http://www.bart.gov/
I am paying a premium price for it, but it takes cars off the road and gives people some extra time during commute to actually be productive rather than wasting time in traffic. In the long run, this will probably create a headache for me as I am not aware of campus sized space directly adjacent to the station. As we grow, we'll be covering BART expenses for employees as a benefit. See http://www.commutercheck.com/
Leonid S. Knyshov
Find me on Quora
What would ruin the system for me is not having coworkers available when you need them. Say what you want about the 9-5 grind, but at least you know your coworker will be there when you need them. (unless they are sick or on vacation, of course). With flex time, especially "extreme" flex time, work is often delayed because so and so doesn't come in until noon or they can't finish a project with you because they leave at 2pm.
That said, it sure would be nice if more companies adopted this so that traffic wouldn't be so concentrated at certain times of the day.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
As a person who is a salesperson for a IT VAR (our product line is FAR more diverse than best buy), I have to say, you have a rather defeatist attitude. My customers would not only expect me to know enough about everything we sell to configure it, but to be able to make sure that they have something that's right over the phone. The first time. Every time.
No, it isn't easy, but with a diligent amount of study, a good attitude, patience, and a fair understanding of how to use the internet to find what you're looking for, it's really not that bad.
Then again, some people have trouble programming their VCR. I think that's the main reason that your customers might be concerned. Not because they don't know that *YOU* fix computers, but the don't if the the guy behind the desk knows a damned thing. It's like taking you car to Jiffy Lube for an engine rebuild.
of course the slackers aren't going to produce more. They will simply be fired for not being productive. that's the beauty of a results-based system.
This has been my philosophy for years. I once worked for a company where I did more real work in 6 hours than every other employee did in 2 days. The owner of the company still felt that I was cheating him if I wasn't at work for the whole 8 hours despite my results and productivity. There was never a situation that required me to be there when I wasn't And I had remote access. The owner of the company's response to my productivity was to pile on more work and force me to punch a clock.
I have since had several other similar experiences.
the bottom line is, I'm paid to do a job. what does it matter what hours I keep as long as I'm productive and available?
Corporations are locked into this 9-5 mentality. That has bred the clockwatcher.
Clockwatchers generally keep their jobs because the do the bare minimum.
It's always the productive employees who get shit on. Moving to a results-based system means the clockwatchers will have to do more or get fired. This is a win-win situation.
The early-birds get to come in at the butt-crack of dawn and get a jump on things. while the productive people can walk in at the crack of 10 or 11 and do all their work in 5 or 6 hours and go home. Some employees might even opt to work later if their work isn't critical to business hours.
Now, I'm lucky enough to have my own business. My customers see me on my schedule. It's great.
They're using their grammar skills there.
It doesn't matter if Best Buy pays for the results. Who cares if someone spends the hours or doesn't? You got results, you got paid. You, as Best Buy, are willing to pay for some amount of results.
This reminds me of a story I heard about the first accountant to try Visicalc. His reacton was somethng like "This is great - now I can do my entire week's work in an afternoon, and spend the rest of the week with my wife and kids". We all know how that worked out.
If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets