Archive for March, 2014

Flexible vs Structured Working

blog flexiAs my work pattern enters another period of change I find myself comparing the pros and cons of flexible vs structured working. I have a good bit of experience at both extremes as well as with various hybrid versions that fall somewhere in between, and I continue to battle with which is better and, indeed, whether one even is better than the other.

For the sake of this post I’ll be comparing the two extremes – flexible working hours do not necessarily mean working from home, just as rigid working hours don’t necessarily mean being in an office; however my personal opinion is that, combined, they epitomise two polarised ways of working so I’ll be talking about them in this context.

I’ve always enjoyed (funnily enough…) the flexibility of flexible work patterns. I am disciplined enough to happily work from home without any issues, and in several of my jobs it’s been about delivering a project rather than being present at particular times or for a particular number of hours. These roles have not required me to be on site or available to provide a service but instead mean I’m in the office and working when I need to be, and am not when I’m not.

I often find working from home more efficient compared to being in the office, particularly when I have something specific to get written/designed/whatever. Though I enjoy interaction with colleagues, personal relationships can sometimes be distracting and it’s not difficult to get sidetracked by chit-chat or pulled into meetings without a certain amount of discipline. A flexible work pattern also means you can have the plumber round for a boiler service at most any time, or you can pop out during the day to run some errands without feeling guilty or have it impact your working hours, because some work can be completed regardless of whether it’s 2pm or 2am. That flexibility does take discipline but is really useful. I don’t have a family so working at 9pm doesn’t really impact my life in any major way but clearly it’s not for everyone.

And for every positive there is inevitably a negative. With flexible working I, without a shadow of a doubt, put in more hours than I would if I had a more rigid work pattern. You find yourself checking and replying to emails at all times, regardless of the hour or whether it’s the weekend (or even whether you’re on holiday in some instances). And lunch breaks? What are lunch breaks? On busy days I can go 12hrs straight with barely a bathroom break, and that isn’t healthy – not for your sanity and not for your body. Flexible work patterns can mean that no time is really sacred – what you gain in flexibility you lose in dedicated downtime. Working from home can also be isolating and it’s hard to build relationships or retain any kind of team spirit from a distance. I have also worked in roles where I’ve been able to take as much annual leave as I desire. But as great as that sounds I personally always found myself taking less than I might have otherwise. That said, one challenge to this is that you need less when you don’t have to take time off to hang around for tradesmen and so on, but I don’t think that that’s the whole reason. So that’s some of the pay-offs, but the higher price worth it for the myriad benefits gained elsewhere?

So what about structured work patterns? Well, even with a healthy dose of overtime thrown in, on the whole you have a much clearer demarcation of what is work time and what is personal time, and that’s a powerful tool for switching off. The social aspect can enhance the quality of your work as well – the information, feedback or quick questions discussed with colleagues are invaluable, as is knowing when and where you can find someone to physically pop by and resolve a problem or make a decision in person. Conversations are inevitably much more straightforward than the often sensitive wording an email requires when you don’t have the body language and facial expressions to back it up. For some people, structured work patterns are the only option and this absolutely makes sense if you’re in, for example, a customer service role. Regardless of where you are based, in order to ensure sufficient service, staff need to be present. I’m on the fence about whether structured working increases your chances of a lunch break – in my experience they still get missed fairly regularly, however at least you have more of an option to take one and are more inclined to factor a little free time into your diary.

Structured working is a nightmare for all those bits and bobs though. The guilt people often feel about having to take a couple of hours off to go to the doctors/dentist can lead to the excessive making up of hours, and annual leave is frittered all so you can sit at home for half a day waiting for that pesky electrician to arrive. Unless you have a long lunch break or are based particularly close to some decent shopping, popping out to pick up some emergency supplies has to wait until after work as well. And forget having anything delivered to your home by courier – you either need a Saturday delivery or a kindly neighbour. Preferably one who never leaves the house…

Does the cost of either option outweigh the benefits? Well that’s a very personal question. Everyone’s circumstances are different and what’s right for one isn’t necessarily right for another. Although it’s becoming increasingly popular I do think it’s a shame more companies don’t embrace a more flexible culture where employees can choose what is right for them. But I’ve seen it not work and I understand the concerns and the risks.

And what’s the right option for me? Actually, writing this blog has helped me realise that my preference is a hybrid. I think neither extreme is ideal but a combination of the two can give you the best of both worlds and provides a healthy dose of variety. I find flexible working sometimes puts my personal life on hold altogether and working from home all the time is very isolating. Equally I often feel quite constrained being stuck in an office all day and the distractions really get to me sometimes to the point where I just want to be by myself. But to be honest I’m pretty flexible and will suck it up whatever’s thrown at me. My work pattern seems to change constantly anyway so there’s never an opportunity to get bored 🙂

Advertisements

MOOC Update

blog 3Well, here we are, one month on from my original MOOC post (which you can read here) and I know you’re all just DYING to hear how I’m getting on! It’s been a mixed bag so far, for a variety of reasons, so here’s a quick update to let you know where I’m currently at:

At present I am signed up for three MOOCs (I added a third on becoming a more confident trainer, also from Open 2 Study, which seemed manageable at the time…) and have commenced work on all of them.

One of my biggest challenge at present is time. Time is something I just don’t seem to have enough of when it comes to MOOCs! Alongside my MOOCs I am also doing another Level 4 qualification which, because it has a deadline and I’m paying for it, takes precedent every time. I’m also working funny hours and have had a slew of other commitments to attend to. So, honestly, it’s been harder than I thought to keep up with them all. Three was definitely too many! I’m not concerned about the Microeconomics one – it’s nice and flexible so I can pick it up at my leisure, but I already missed the week 2 assessment deadline on the other two. I honestly don’t get the deadlines – they are pesky and completely pointless! The Open 2 Study two are both reasonably low maintenance – though they’re supposed to be four hours a week they’re probably nearer two if you have half a brain. But the time constraints are really irritating as a week is no time at all if you’re busy. And, though it’s not much time, it’s not helped by the fact that they are…

Boring! Oh. My. God. The Open 2 Study ones are so incredibly boring that I literally dread watching them. Where Saylor really go for a variety of teaching styles and materials, Open 2 Study go for nothing but video with some optional reading (why not make it mandatory?) Saylor are also very factual and to the point with their information; they explain things thoroughly and then back up the information with anecdotes and real world examples. Open 2 Study on the other hand just have someone talking at you. There’s some use of anecdotes on the Trainer course, but pretty much just lists of information on the Project Management one. And everything is delivered very slowly and precisely and in an incredibly dull manner. I take nothing away from the content (which is solid in all cases), but the structure is completely disengaging to me personally.

I have a multi-modal learning style (you can find out what yours is here) with a slight preference for reading/writing and kinaesthetics. It’s no surprise really – I’m a person who loves variety in all areas of their life so why should learning be different? It’s disappointing though that the organisations providing some of these courses are not utilising a wider range of teaching styles – particularly considering Open 2 Study is backed by Open Universities Australia (like the OU in the UK). Though I’m not a qualified teacher/trainer (something I’m working at changing), I regularly deliver courses myself and even I, with my fairly basic and self-taught knowledge, understand that you have to use variety in teaching methods if you want to engage your students.

So how am I feeling about it all a month on? A little disillusioned if I’m honest. I had heard prior to starting that they are a mixed bag, and that’s to be expected when you consider the different levels they’re working at, the different audiences they’re targeting, and the huge range of topics they are covering, but I still feel a little let down. If you’re going to do something then you ought to do it properly or not at all in my opinion. My feelings for the two providers are incredibly polarised – I am actively missing my Microeconomics course and can’t wait to get back to it once my paid course is complete, but I honestly doubt whether I’m going to be able to sit through another six-plus hours a piece of the Open 2 Study ones. I suspect I will become a drop-out statistic of the Trainer course but will just about hang on in there with Project Management. Doing so, however, will not be pleasant.

As it stands with Microeconomics, I have a bigger and more complex goal at present. Presuming I can see the course through to completion, my aim is to go on to complete the complementary Macroeconomics course and also one on maths or stats. Then, if I’m feeling particularly ambitious and that way inclined, what I would really love to do is to undertake a paid-for economics diploma for graduates. This would not only provide some proper recognition for my (not insubstantial) learning, but it would also be incredibly interesting to see how the two courses compare in terms of content, teaching, and so on. But that’s all pie in the sky for now – there’s a long way to go before I reach that point and for now it’s just a dream!

In the meantime, watch this space! I’ll write another update in a month or so to let you know how it all turned out. Maybe I’ll be in a better mood about MOOCs by then… 🙂


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 46 other followers

About Me

Over ten years’ recruitment, employability, HR and sales experience in both the private and public sectors. I've worked in construction recruitment, FMCG headhunting, and in higher education on the employability agenda.

Click on my picture for more information.

My Tweets