Part timers?

A few months ago, I was watching a programme on Dutch television. One of the guests was a sociologist, who made a survey on gender diversity; to be more specific - the state of women in top management positions. She presented her new book and some of the conclusions were discussed. My very own experiences in a Dutch environment has given me some materials for comparison - especially in the setting of Central Europe - but suddenly it made me realise one typically Dutch specific.

Unlike in many other countries, there are relatively more women at management positions. So has Sweden, you could argue. Right, but with a slight difference - which even never occurred to me: Dutch women seemed more content in management positions than their Swedish counterparts and the reason was; Dutch businesses offer the opportunity to work part-time. Not referring to the receptionist, working only in the afternoon. Indeed part-time for management functions. 

I shall not elaborate the gender topic per sé but what I found more striking is the given that the deadly myth, that part-time working kills one's career, seems not to be completely true and perhaps should be reconsidered as a whole. Worthwhile to think, why we have so many cases of burn-out? - managers having worked (more than) full-time seem to have landed at a limit only around their forties - even though they should still be able to perform another twenty more years... 

We focus too much time on short-term profits, which is proving frequently as failure; getting maximum yields, squeezing out all possible resources, but hardly have a feeling for the long-term strategic stability, which is the only assurance for business continuation. A more comfortable work-environment creates an additional loyalty of employees, which is another valuable asset, if not vital.

Part-time work could be rather a healthier concept to a more effective career than we have assumed till now.

Home office

"When in Rome, do as the Romans do" a song by Billy Joel, based on a popular saying. The meaning of the proverb is quite clear, I think. Yet, as having lived in various countries, my activities in the CEE region give me a certain culture shock. Even though, modern technology has brought the whole globe closer together, and business practices either from California, Hong-Kong or Malta are not so distant any longer, some differences in practices are still apparent. 

Commuting to work is a bothersome part of your day. Perhaps in most cases inevitable, yet it depends, whether that is an absolute truth. The Dutch government, for examples, for years faced urgent problems regarding the overly crowded highways, causing every morning hundreds of miles of traffic jams. The problem is not merely an "annoying feeling" of being stuck and coming late to work by a couple of minutes. Economically, it is a drain of several billions of Euros on a yearly basis. Challenges of a crowded country, where space (for infrastructure) is relatively scarce.

One of incentives given to employers by the state was to encourage working from home. Not necessarily full time, but one or two days, would made a considerable difference. Not only diminishing traffic jams - and thus the fluency of the supply chain is less obstructed - but equally the CO2 emissions of exhaust fumes is reduced.

The Dutch have a widely accepted working from home concept. When discussing this in Slovakia e.g., this is still regarded very exceptional - only for the CEO, or suspecting the employee is lazily dodging his job. The contrary is true; in practice, the home-worker will be relieved from wasting his time and gasoline in a traffic jam, feeling less stressed, perhaps be even less disturbed by his colleagues - continuously barging into his office. Less stress and better focused (Sitting in the office a number of hours, is never a proof of being productive all the time).

My own experience with home-working is very positive and I can highly recommend to implement it. But as with everything, it takes time before society accepts a new trend. It certainly improves your work-life balance (another subject to write about).

Networking... or notworking

Business in the old days used to be a bit different - though the principles should have been, generally speaking, similar. Let us imagine an ancient Greek market-place, where local goods were traded (olives, sheep, cloth and the usual stuff). A merchant would sell his products, for which there was a certain demand, and accordingly he expected a price to be paid, such that he could subsist. Even in this most crudest form of business under the warm Mediterranean sun of those days, the main core of doing business was ... mutual trust. A buyer not trusting the quality of the olives would not buy them. Even if the merchant were to fake being trustworthy and the consumer found out later, the reputation of the merchant would put him out of business. Clear enough.

Nowadays, we send mailings, deal with online marketing, including blogging in order to present our merchandise to potential clients. But one of the intriguing tools for doing business are networking platforms like LinkedIn, MySpace, Facebook, Xing and the like. On a daily basis, I do wonder, what in fact people expect from them. I shall briefly describe my feelings regarding LinkedIn:

One can find one's potential contact either by group membership (e.g. belonging to European IT Consultants, of UK HR Professionals) or by regional searches (all CFOs within 15 miles of your residence). Up to the user... so it seems. 

While I have miraculously found ex-colleagues, whom I worked with ages ago, and it was nice to re-connect, I have gained some very interesting contacts of people, who have an added value either because they give essential contribution to discussions, some provide a lead. In some cases, I wonder, what the objective is.

Unfortunately, there is a whole host of users, who simply seem to acquire as many contacts as possible (prestige i.e. status?), but when sending a short message to actively communicate, there is no response. Most annoying are people, who 'portray' themselves as being open to business contacts, then suddenly turn your application down with "I don't know the person", giving the applicant a bad reputation of being a kind of a spammer.

This comes back then to the Greek market place. Perhaps as if because of all these hi-tech gadgets and tools, business (people) seem to have forgotten about the "trust-aspect". If users on social networks behave in such a way, which does hardly do any good to mutual trust, it gives not only a clear signal what kind of business people they are, it also pollutes the place. Communication is the only tool to create that trust. Without it I don't know what you want, they do not know what I want, so what's the use of linking? But are they really lacking true interest, or is the quantity of contacts simply an overkill of information, which they're no longer able to handle?

In my case, from time to time I filter my contacts - those who seem only link-collectors with no demonstrated interest for communication shall be eliminated. Simple as that. Never mind the 500+, 1000+, or more champions.
Meanwhile, when writing this article, I got a craving for Greek olives. Cheers!

Business in the old days used to be a bit different - though the principles should have been, generally speaking, similar. Let us imagine an ancient Greek market-place, where local goods were traded (olives, sheep, cloth and the usual stuff). A merchant would sell his products, for which there was a certain demand, and accordingly he expected a price to be paid, such that he could subsist. Even in this most crudest form of business under the warm Mediterranean sun of those days, the main core of doing business was ... mutual trust. A buyer not trusting the quality of the olives would not buy them. Even if the merchant were to fake being trustworthy and the consumer found out later, the reputation of the merchant would put him out of business. Clear enough. Nowadays, we send mailings, deal with online marketing, including blogging in order to present our merchandise to potential clients. But one of the intriguing tools for doing business are networking platforms like LinkedIn, MySpace, Facebook, Xing and the like. On a daily basis, I do wonder, what in fact people expect from them. I shall briefly describe my feelings regarding LinkedIn: One can find one's potential contact either by group membership (e.g. belonging to European IT Consultants, of UK HR Professionals) or by regional searches (all CFOs within 15 miles of your residence). Up to the user... so it seems. While I have miraculously found ex-colleagues, whom I worked with ages ago, and it was nice to re-connect, I have gained some very interesting contacts of people, who have an added value either because they give essential contribution to discussions, some provide a lead. In some cases, I wonder, what the objective is. Unfortunately, there is a whole host of users, who simply seem to acquire as many contacts as possible (prestige i.e. status?), but when sending a short message to actively communicate, there is no response. Most annoying are people, who 'portray' themselves as being open to business contacts, then suddenly turn your application down with "I don't know the person", giving the applicant a bad reputation of being a kind of a spammer. This comes back then to the Greek market place. If users on social networks behave in such a way, which does hardly do any good to mutual trust, it gives a clear signal what kind of business people they are. But are they really lacking true interest, or is the quantity of contacts simply an overkill of information, which they're no longer able to handle. In my case, from time to time I filter my contacts - those who seem only link-collectors with no demonstrated interest for communication shall be eliminated. Simple as that. Never mind the 500+, 1000+, or more champions.

Business in the old days used to be a bit different - though the principles should have been, generally speaking, similar. Let us imagine an ancient Greek market-place, where local goods were traded (olives, sheep, cloth and the usual stuff). A merchant would sell his products, for which there was a certain demand, and accordingly he expected a price to be paid, such that he could subsist. Even in this most crudest form of business under the warm Mediterranean sun of those days, the main core of doing business was ... mutual trust. A buyer not trusting the quality of the olives would not buy them. Even if the merchant were to fake being trustworthy and the consumer found out later, the reputation of the merchant would put him out of business. Clear enough. Nowadays, we send mailings, deal with online marketing, including blogging in order to present our merchandise to potential clients. But one of the intriguing tools for doing business are networking platforms like LinkedIn, MySpace, Facebook, Xing and the like. On a daily basis, I do wonder, what in fact people expect from them. I shall briefly describe my feelings regarding LinkedIn: One can find one's potential contact either by group membership (e.g. belonging to European IT Consultants, of UK HR Professionals) or by regional searches (all CFOs within 15 miles of your residence). Up to the user... so it seems. While I have miraculously found ex-colleagues, whom I worked with ages ago, and it was nice to re-connect, I have gained some very interesting contacts of people, who have an added value either because they give essential contribution to discussions, some provide a lead. In some cases, I wonder, what the objective is. Unfortunately, there is a whole host of users, who simply seem to acquire as many contacts as possible (prestige i.e. status?), but when sending a short message to actively communicate, there is no response. Most annoying are people, who 'portray' themselves as being open to business contacts, then suddenly turn your application down with "I don't know the person", giving the applicant a bad reputation of being a kind of a spammer. This comes back then to the Greek market place. If users on social networks behave in such a way, which does hardly do any good to mutual trust, it gives a clear signal what kind of business people they are. But are they really lacking true interest, or is the quantity of contacts simply an overkill of information, which they're no longer able to handle. In my case, from time to time I filter my contacts - those who seem only link-collectors with no demonstrated interest for communication shall be eliminated. Simple as that. Never mind the 500+, 1000+, or more champions.