Bio: Ms. Lingle serves as Director of AWLP (Alliance for Work-Life Progress), the professional association of work-life practitioners and a wide variety of other professionals who specialize in creating strategy or providing services that help people navigate the turbulent waters of work-life conflict.

Prior to her current position, she served as National Work-Life Director at KPMG LLP where she had primary responsibility for creating and implementing workplace strategies that support the work/life effectiveness of KPMG’s 18,000 U.S. firm members. She was chief architect of the Work Environment Initiative, which has provided direction for the firm’s multi-year culture change initiative.

Prior to KPMG, she spent six years as a management consultant, including KPMG’s World Class HR consulting practice and several years as an organization effectiveness consultant at Watson Wyatt Worldwide. Before joining KPMG, she was Director of Work/Life Training at the Families and Work Institute (FWI) in New York, where she assisted in the design and delivery of work/life training for managers at both First Horizon National Bank (formerly First Tennessee) and Chase Manhattan (now

J.P. Morgan Chase).  While at FWI, Ms. Lingle oversaw the project management of a three-year evaluation study of Johnson & Johnson’s work/family initiatives, the results of which were published by the Institute in 1993.

She has spent over a dozen years as director of various corporate marketing and sales functions, including the strategic business planning function at Applied Data Research, once the largest independent developer of IBM mainframe software outside of IBM itself. Ms. Lingle is a member of the Conference Board’s Work/Life Leadership Council, of which she served as co-chair for several years. She is a member of the Executive Committee for Work-Life and Women’s Initiatives of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), and has served on the Steering Committee of the Boston College Work/Life Roundtable.

She served in the Peace Corps in South America, speaks Spanish, and has lived in Spain, France, Chile, Venezuela, and England. She earned a B.A. in Diplomacy and World Affairs at Occidental College in Los Angeles, and holds an M.S. in Child Development and Family Systems (now “Human Ecology”) from Ohio State University.

Editors Note: The Sloan Network recently spoke with Kathie Lingle, Director of Alliance for Work Life Progress. AWLP’s mission is “To provide premier professional membership services to individuals and organizations that are focused on creating healthy work environments that value people and support personal life and family issues. We are committed to the development and advancement of the field of work-life effectiveness and promote these issues through publications, forums and professional development strategies.”

In this interview, Kathie shares her perceptions of workplace flexibility based on her experience as a work-life practitioner and a business executive. She discusses how workplace flexibility often is confused with the tools that support it (e.g. flexible work options), the components/characteristics of workplace flexibility, and how it can influence organizational effectiveness.

Visit the Alliance for Work-Life Progress website at http://www.awlp.org/

See also Graphic: Flexible Work Arrangements and Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Retention, and Work-Family Interference in 2002 and Additional Resources Related to Workplace Flexibility

An Interview with Kathie Lingle, Director of Alliance for Work-Life Progress

Pitt-Catsouphes: How do you define the term workplace flexibility?

Lingle: Workplace flexibility is a large, complex notion that often gets confused with the tools that support it, especially flexible scheduling. It is so deeply rooted in core beliefs about the nature of people and of work that it has become the conundrum of the work-life portfolio. By that I mean that it beguiles and entices at the same time that it eludes our grasp. Here is the dilemma: Flexibility is one of the most powerful drivers of retention and engagement today, it has no fixed cost; it is the work-life initiative most sought after by employees (especially top performers); it is empirically linked to higher levels of productivity, resilience and shareholder value; it is ubiquitous within “employers of choice” who are significantly more profitable than their more rigid peer group; hundreds (if not thousands) of companies have policies and tools to support it; it continues to be a predominant topic at all three national work-life conferences – YET achieving workplace flexibility is the most difficult task the work-life professional engages in, and success often requires an organization to reinvent its culture. For it can only thrive where trust and respect for the whole person are in abundant supply. Alas, those values are not yet widespread. Fundamentally, it is a business strategy that recognizes flexibility in a holistic sense as a powerful enabler to achieve the increasing speed, nimbleness, innovation and creativity demanded by customers in the 21st century.

Flexibility practices are a response to the psychological desire for what Robert Karasek (specialist in the psychosocial aspects of work and work redesign processes) describes as job autonomy – an optimal sense of control over one’s job and working conditions. Karasek’s research has shown that job control lowers stress and even health risks, while increasing job performance. This virtuous cycle of positive business outcomes is what gives workplace flexibility its power,

and has led to the implementation of workplace flexibility as a talent management philosophy that takes a long-range perspective on acquiring, developing, motivating, retaining and managing human capital.

Pitt-Catsouphes: What is human capital from a flexibility perspective?

Lingle: Human capital implies that people (the workforce) are an asset, a form of capital that deserves investment and continual stewardship like all other forms of capital available to an organization. Almost all senior leadership teams assert that people are their most important asset, but many fewer behave as if that were true. Instead, it is more common to focus on the cost side of the ledger when it comes to people, since that is where traditional accounting principles teach us to look. By contrast, a human capital approach to management takes a more balanced approach, seeking new ways of maximizing organizational performance by listening and responding to what it is that employees genuinely need to be successful. Over the past several years, a growing body of empirical evidence points to flexibility as one of those universal needs.

Pitt-Catsouphes: Could you explain how the workforce values of today are different from the workforce values of the past?

Lingle: The ideal worker of the past was a man who put work before everything else in life. One of the most significant changes in the workforce over the past decade is the rise in the proportion of “dual-centric” workers – women as well as men -- who are able to shift their priorities fluidly between work and personal responsibilities. Research from Families and Work Institute suggests that dual-centric workers are mentally and physically healthier, more productive, more satisfied, and are less likely to feel overworked than their work-primary colleagues.

However, the old definition of the ideal worker is proving difficult to eradicate. It is not uncommon to have three or four generations co-existing within one enterprise today, each one operating under differing assumptions about the nature of work and its proper place in the scheme of things.

Pitt-Catsouphes: What are additional tools that can support workplace flexibility?

Lingle: Workplace flexibility requires the application of a number of tools as well as very specific linkages with a variety of other existing HR and business systems in order to be successful. The scope of this work is often underestimated, which in my experience is another reason why the implementation of workplace flexibility doesn’t always go smoothly or meet initial expectations. It takes time and attention to myriad details.

Some of the tools I am referring to are:

• Flexibility needs/readiness assessment
• Flexibility training for senior leadership, HR professionals, supervisors and employees
• Flexible career management practices
• Job analysis/job descriptions
• Flexible scheduling

The systems, policies and/or processes that need to be re-engineered or retrofitted to support workplace flexibility include:

• Decision-making cycle times/authority (these always require “de-layering” to support a flexible, nimble workplace)
• Performance management system
• Human resource information system (technology)
• Absenteeism, time-tracking, scheduling, headcount and other relevant policies and practices that weren’t originally designed to account for less than full-time or virtual work
• Operations and facilities practices (these often control how information can be distributed to employees within buildings; HVAC policies can be out of synch with 24 X 7 staffing policies, etc.)
• Continual work redesign/streamlining

Pitt-Catsouphes: How are the workplace assumptions of dual-centric workers related to human capital and workplace flexibility?

Lingle: Flexibility is especially important to dual-centric workers because they require support and respect for the new ways they are working. People work an average of one month more today than their parents did two decades ago, and three quarters of them have no one at home during the day to take care of the household. In return, they expect reciprocity in the form of greater flexibility as they juggle the demands of work, family, and the chores that arise in both domains. They understand (sometimes better than their supervisors) that modern technology allows work to be done from virtually anywhere at any time, so they may be more impatient with rigid practices. These new workplace realities require new ways of managing, responding, and motivating.

What we do know is that employers who collaborate with their employees to adopt flexible workplace practices can have very positive results. Furthermore, the evidence shows that workers are more attracted to organizations with flexibility policies, there are higher retention rates, higher productivity levels, and workers are healthier in general.

Pitt-Catsouphes: If research supports the positive outcomes of workplace flexibility, why aren’t more organizations implementing these kinds of policies?

Lingle: That’s the question I ask myself every day, because it’s so obvious to those of us in the work-life profession that the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks.

The obstacles distill down to fear (of change, of new ways of working, of loss of control over the workforce), lack of trust, lack of specific skills training, a reliance on extrinsic rewards (money, power), and the prevalence of a number of strongly-held myths and misconceptions about empowering employees with flexibility that today’s overwhelming preponderance of data and empirical evidence to the contrary sometimes can’t shake. [Maybe use an analogy? If you tried to convince me with a lot of facts that spiders are good for me and I should welcome them into my house with enthusiasm for all the good that would ensue, you would find me similarly unreceptive, because I have spent my entire life being terrified of spiders and the harm they are sure to cause.]

Pitt-Catsouphes: What can we learn from organizations that have supported workplace flexibility?

Lingle: There are so many positive case studies today that it would take another column in your newsletter to document them all. Let me conclude with some verifying evidence that comes from outside the work-life field, lest your audience accuse me of being self-serving by focusing exclusively on our own industry’s findings.

Watson Wyatt’s research that is described in the book Human Capital Edge by Ira Kay and Bruce Pfau, links over 40 specific human capital practices to shareholder value. These individual practices were then clustered into larger patterns which were evaluated by their overall contribution to shareholder value. One of these clusters is labeled “creating a collegial, flexible work environment.” It is composed of 8 discreet human capital practices, one of which has to do with providing enough flexibility to balance personal and professional demands. The entire cluster was shown to contribute 9% to shareholder value, which ranked it second overall, after “total rewards and accountability.” What is striking is the fact that this individual flexibility practice by itself contributes more than any other (except one) to the bottom line. This speaks volumes about the power of flexibility in today’s workplace.

Contact Kathie at klingle@awlp.org.

Work-Family Book

Leveraging the New Human Capital: Adaptive Strategies, Results Achieved, and Stories of Transformation (by Burud & Tumolo, Davies-Black Publishing, 2004)

By Sandy Burud, Ph.D.

Our book identifies powerful core beliefs that are behind how organizations manage people. It suggests these deeply held, unarticulated beliefs about business, people, and work are a primary source of the resistance we often encounter as we attempt change. The good news is that it’s possible to recognize, re-examine and change these beliefs and therefore change organizational behavior.

The book also presents a new framework for defining work-life, asserting that the work-life agenda is as integral to managing people as human capital. It explores what it means when humans have replaced other forms of capital as the driver of organizational results. When the contributions that are uniquely human create advantage (the ability to have and share knowledge, to create and to have relationships), managing people as whole and unique individuals is essential to organizational performance. In the Industrial Era standardization, synchronization and centralization were essential to success – everything done in the same way, at the same time, and in the same place. Nine-to-five work schedules, one size fits all policies, and work done at a central location made perfect sense. These ‘right ways of doing things’ are deeply embedded in our work cultures. But in the Knowledge Era, when uniqueness, customization, and mobility are the cornerstone of success, these old notions are outdated and even dangerous.

The book offers a set of principles suited to this new era, which are the basis for human capital-oriented work cultures. One particularly relevant to Kathy Lingle’s interview is individuality, which must replace standardization as an operating principle. Individuality results in practices that are customized, instead of standardized. We have chosen the term customization, instead of flexibility, because flexibility -- as in ‘flexible work schedules’-- although conceptually correct, has taken on a distorted meaning. It has often come to mean exchanging one fixed schedule with another. Instead we suggest customized work schedules, customized work locations, and customized career paths – that vary over time and across individuals. The bigger point is that this new operating principle is a requirement if businesses are to accomplish their business goals. Sure, it recognizes a structural shift in the work force (to what we call a ‘dual-focus’ work force, that manages two major responsibilities at once). But it also is the principle that will yield a customized response to customers and the marketplace, which is what business survival depends on today.

About Sandy Burud, Ph.D.

Sandy Burud, Ph.D., is a Visiting Scholar at the Peter F. Drucker and Mashotoshi Ito School of Management at the Claremont Graduate University in Claremont, California and a consultant on human capital and work-life. Her latest book, Leveraging the New Human Capital: Adaptive Strategies, Results Achieved, and Stories of Transformation (Burud & Tumolo, Davies-Black Publishing, 2004) received the 2004 Outstanding Book of the Year Award from the Academy of Human Resource Development, a global academy of HRD scholars. The research for the book, which redefines work-life in the context of human capital and includes a synthesis of over 500 studies of the impact of human capital management practices on organizational performance, was funded by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. Dr. Burud has spent more than twenty-five years in the work-life field as a consultant and researcher. She co-authored an earlier book: Employer-Supported Child Care: Investing in Human Resources (1984), based on national study of child care as an emerging employee benefit. As President of the Alliance for Work-Life Progress, she led the effort to create a professional certification for work-life practitioners. She holds a Ph.D. from Claremont Graduate University.

Sandy can be reached at sandy@burud.org or 626-256-3423.