and Changes in Working Styles
I. Purpose of The Research
Recently in Japan, the trend of decreasing the number of working hours has progressed while at the same, the style or method of work has begun to exhibit different and interesting characteristics. As such, for this report, flextime, discretion as to the scheduling of one's own work (hereafter referred to as "discretionary scheduling"'), and the variable working hours system, (the aggregate of these three comprising the so-called 'flexibility of working hours') and how these are affecting changes in general working styles and habits is the object of focus for this report. Through individual surveys and case studies, this report discusses changes in the flexibility of working hours and how this phenomenon in turn is affecting changes in working style as well as the significance this holds for the individual employee.
II. Method of Research
(1) Case Studies
With the cooperation of the 21 industrial unions affiliated to Rengo(JTUC), information was collected from individual trade union representatives. The target was 56 companies which employ at least one of the systems among flextime, discretionary, and variable working hours system('variable' working hours system is a system which enables a company to adjust working hours during certain periods).
(2) Individual Surveys
With the cooperation of the aforementioned 56 companies and offices, questionnaires were distributed through trade unions and union members, who are applied systems of flextime, discretionary and variable working hours systems. These questionnaires were in turn sent directly to RIALS. 20 questionnaires per company, for a total of 1120, were distributed with a response of 609 individuals (54.4%). What follows is a summary of the results of this survey.
III. Summary of the Research Results
3.1 The Targeted System for Working Hours
The majority of companies utilize a flextime system
Regarding working hours systems in place for the 609 respondents, 83.3% indicated existence of a flextime system with core time, 4.6% utilize a flextime system without core time and 4.6% use a variable hours system while 7.6% make use of a discretionary system; an indication that in general most employees have some type of flextime system at their disposal.
Flexibility of working hours can be categorized into two main groups according to the purposes of their implementation:
(a) Flexibility for companies--by utilizing flexible labor hours, labor services can be adjusted according to labor force requirements of the enterprise at a given time.
(b) Flexibility for individuals--Individual employees are able to schedule their working hours according to a scheme that best suits and balances lifestyle and requirements for the job.
Moreover, while these serve as rationale for the implementation of a flexible working hours system, the relative weight of each varies depending on the system-flextime, discretionary, or variable, that is used. For instance, the variable hours system is more heavily weighted towards (a) while flextime and discretionary are more heavily weighted towards (b). For companies utilizing flextime and discretionary systems, individual employees can maintain variety in the rhythms of private life and work as the main portion of working hours control is left to the judgment of employees themselves, thus subjugating to some extent the degree of control a company is able to exercise over employees.
In this report, since the focus is on the flexibility of working hours for individuals, we will take up mainly issues regarding the flextime and discretionary systems.
3.2 Diffusion of Flexible Working Systems
While the systems are favored by most employees, degree of utilization varies by job category
Flexibility of working hours is favored by most employees. From the survey, 15.3% responded that they, "fully utilize" a flexible system which matches their lifestyle and working style. 50.2% indicated utilization "to some degree", forming a plurality of 65.5% of employees who use, at least to some extent, a flexible working hours system. On the other hand, 13.8% responded "it is difficult to say" while 17.9% indicated that they use these systems "hardly at all" and 3.8% marked "no use". The latter two figures comprise 21.7% of all respondents, a relatively low figure compared with the 65.5% who indicated at least some use. Comparing results by system, figure 1 shows percentages of those who "fully use" or "to some extent" utilize a flexible hours system, given that it is offered by the company. 67.7% use a flextime with core hours system, 46.4% use flextime with no core hours, 25.0% use a variable hours system, while 78.3% make use of a discretionary working hours system.
The degree of usage of variable labor hours systems differs according to characteristics of the work. As shown in figure 2, if we juxtapose "using" and "not using" responses with workplace environment, responses of "not using" were common for the following three groups: (1)Those who perform tasks outside their job responsibility for no special purpose; (2)those who have significant extra work that is unrelated to their own job; and (3)those who stay at the office late simply because others do. This demonstrates that in environments with such characteristics it is difficult for employees to utilize a flexible working hours system even if one is in place.
3.3 The Effect of Flexible Working Hours on the Overall Reduction of Working Hours for Employees
Flexible working hours systems contribute to overall reduction of working hours. However, if the flexible hours system is difficult for the employee to use, this effect is consequently lessened
Although 53.5% of the respondents answered 'no change', respondents answering 'significantly reduced' or 'reduced to some extent' combined for a total of 27.7% while those indicating that 'working hours increased' was only 4.8%. Thus, it can be said that flexibility in working hours generally contributes to a reduction in total hours worked. When we observe the percentage of respondents for whom working hours decreased (i.e. 'significantly reduced' or 'reduced to some extent'), those utilizing a flextime system with core hours is 29.8%, flextime with no core hours is at 17.9% while 28.6% use a variable working hours system, and those using a discretionary system stands at 10.9%.
Characteristics of both workplace environment and particular job seems to affect the degree to which working hours are reduced as a result of implementation of a flexible working hours system. In other words, if various obstacles to utilize flexible working hours arrangements are not removed from the workplace, flexible systems' effect on the reduction of working hours will be lessened.
3.4 Degree of Employee Satisfaction With the Current Working Hours System
Even if flexibility in working hours is introduced, the general degree of satisfaction amongst employees will not increase if the system is not used
The percentage of those who are satisfied with their working hours system stands at 49.3% (the sum of 'very satisfied' and 'generally satisfied') and that the unsatisfied group make up 30.7% of all respondents (the sum of unsatisfied in some way' and 'very unsatisfied'). Thus, the percentage of satisfied respondents is greater than that for the unsatisfied group. Examining those respondents in the satisfied group by working hours system types, 50.1% use flextime with core hours, 46.4% use flextime without core hours, 17.9% use a variable hours system, and 60.9% utilize a discretionary system.
It is natural that the degree of satisfaction with labor hours systems is affected by employee usage of that system. For those who indicated use of one of the labor hours systems, 64.2% noted satisfaction and 23.3% responded "unsatisfied". For those who are not using one of the three labor hours systems, only 22.0% said they are satisfied while the majority (51.5%) indicated they are "unsatisfied". In other words, to improve employee satisfaction, implementation of flexible working hours systems only is insufficient and companies must therefore also encourage their employees to use the systems effectively.
3.5 Flexible Working Hours and Changes in the Employee Appraisal System
The progress of flexible working hours systems necessitate a change in appraisal systems to evaluations based on performance, and to indications of standards for and areas of appraisalAs flexibility in working hours progresses towards flextime without core hours and to discretionary systems, appraisal methods will change accordingly. As for current changes in the appraisal system due to flexible hours programs, for a large number of employees who utilize flextime without core hours or a discretionary system, the appraisal process is carried out only through objective measures of personal job performance. Significantly, 57.1% of flextime without core hours system users and 60.9% of those utilizing discretionary systems indicated they were evaluated by personal performance criteria. Furthermore, these percentages are higher than the 31.6% of flextime with core hours users who also indicated appraisal by personal performance. Thus, as flexibility with regards to working hours increases, the tendency of appraisers to focus on objective performance criteria increases as well.
3.6 Significant Characteristics of Discretionary Systems
Under a discretionary system, the degree of personal management as to when and where to work increases, thus precipitating changes in both compensation and appraisal systems
The degree of flexibility in working hours varies with the system in place. However, from individual viewpoints, the most flexible system is one that allows individuals to decide for themselves as to when, where, and how their work is performed, i.e., a discretionary system.
Up to this point, only a limited number of corporations have adopted a discretionary system. Moreover, employees in those companies who are able to actually use the system is also limited as this type of system is currently in a trial phase that will continue to develop. Recently, an increasing number of both employees and corporations have indicated an interest in this system and as a result, the discretionary method is expected to continue to spread to a wide range of enterprises.
Regarding general flexibility, however, through the surveys, characteristics of employees currently utilizing a flexible system have been culled from the data .
Regarding the utilization of systems, 78.3% are currently using some type of system and 67.7% are making use of a flextime system. Significantly, the degree of satisfaction among employees as to their working hours system is over 10 percentage points higher with a discretionary system than with a flextime with core hours type.
With regards to choices among workplaces, 89.1% responded they are able to choose their place of work and among this group all indicated that they are able to work at home. With these two conditions in mind, under the discretionary system, the range of individual choice towards workplaces increases. However, from results of the case studies, not all of the choices for workplaces are dependent on personal desires, and in some cases even if companies allow for working at home, the frequency of this activity is quite regulated. For example, employees may be allowed to work at their home only three days a month.
Getting back to working hours systems, if a company makes use of a discretionary system, the overall productivity of employees, not simply the number of hours spent in the workplace, becomes a critical measurement and as such, appropriate compensation and appraisal systems adjustments should accompany a shift towards such a system. What follows is an overview of current appraisal and compensation characteristics as seen by employees in the workplace.
With respect to compensation, under the flextime with core hours system, overtime payments are made in addition to basic salary while under a discretionary system, users who are paid a fixed additional payment beyond basic salary comprises 71.7% of employees in that group. Moreover, for 28.3% of discretionary system users, payments in addition to base salary are made based on performance.
As for changes in appraisal systems noted by employees as a result of the implementation of a discretionary system, the following were regarded as most significant:
1. The degree to which they are evaluated by absolute criteria (30.4%)
2. The increased tendency by managers to use a positive point evaluation system (37.0%)
3. The tendency of managers to evaluate employees' actual performance, not simply the number of hours spent in the office (60.9%)
Similar comments were given regarding the question as to which areas of the current appraisal system should be raised for review, as employees indicated that they believe the use of (1)-(3), above, by mangers should increase. At the same time, a significantly large number of employees felt that training for evaluators (54.3%), review of evaluation standards and criteria (43.5%), and dissemination of information to employees on those standards and criteria (54.3%) are critical in the assurance of a proper performance evaluation process.
3.7 Suggestions For the Effective Utilization of Flexible Working Hours Systems
For more effective utilization, the following are helpful:(1) Increase the percentage of discretionary work(2) Develop employees' ability for self-management(3) Evaluate employees on performance while using clear criteria
Regarding prudent measures to be taken in order to better utilize the current flexible working hours system, employees pointed out most frequently the following items: Clarification of evaluation standards and work goals (40.9%); Clarification of requests from supervisors (27.1%); Improvement in management at all levels (25.5%); and Total control of a given task from beginning to end by one person (24.0%). In other words, this is a call for improvement in human resource systems with regards to job goals' clarification, review of performance evaluation systems, and the extension of the degree of discretionary work. Moreover, improvement in the ability and freedom to 'self-manage' was cited as an area in which many employees are increasingly aware.
In the case of discretionary system users, several significant characteristics relative to that system are apparent, the highest ranking of which is 'clarification of evaluation rules' at 60.9%. However, it is noted that this percentage is greater than the 'total' column figure by twenty points while the item with the next highest percentage for discretionary users, 'evaluator training' (39.1%), is not, significantly, in the second position in the 'total' column. The next most significant item cited by respondents is an increase in the number of tasks that can be 'performed by one person from beginning to end', at 34.8%, followed by 'increased authority of employees with respect to their jobs', at 28.3%.
This data indicates that, after the implementation of a clear and fair evaluation process, it is important for employees to expand and extend the degree of discretion towards their work. Indeed, although in the 'total' column the second highest-ranked item is 'the existence of clear orders from supervisors' (27.1%), in the 'discretionary' column, the percentage for the same item stands at merely 4.3%, an indication that under a discretionary system, one's working style is dependent upon personal task management.