Women Flexibility

Running head: WORKPLACE FLEXIBILITY 1

Women and Flexibility in the Workplace

[Author’s Name]

[University]

WORKPLACE FLEXIBILITY 2

Abstract

America is undergoing profound social and demographic changes. These changes the way

women work and balance their family and workplace obligations. This paper provides a brief

analysis of workplace flexibility and related issues. Why workplace flexibility is a social and

structural issue is discussed. The main factors affecting women’s flexibility in the workplace

are identified. Factors affecting women’s pay and future changes for women in the workplace

are evaluated.

Keywords: workplace flexibility, Kathleen Christensen, social, discrimination.


Women and Flexibility in the Workplace

America is undergoing a series of structural and demographic changes. These changes

greatly affect the way women balance their workplace and family obligations. More women

are entering the American labor force; simultaneously, working women are facing a number

of organizational challenges, which prevent them from accomplishing their workplace and

household tasks. In light of these changes, workplace flexibility is becoming a matter of

serious organizations’ concern. This is particularly the case of large companies, which

experience considerable pressures, trying to provide female employees with greater flexibility

in the workplace. Given the continuity of demographic and social changes, future

organizations will have to ensure more flexible workplace arrangements. Technology

advancements will allow for better workplace flexibility, leading organizations toward

greater efficiency, profitability, and sustained competitive advantage.

Workplace flexibility is an object of continued professional debate. As more women

are entering the American labor force, workplace flexibility is also becoming a matter of

organizations’ concern. Flexibility in the workplace is the central topic of Kathleen

Christensen’s, who treats workplace flexibility as a social and structural issue. Really,

flexibility in the workplace is a compound product of multiple social and structural changes

in the American society. From the social angle, the American way of life has undergone

serious social changes in the past thirty years (Christensen & Schneider, 2010). Women,

especially middle-class mothers, have entered and stayed in the labor force (Christensen &

Schneider, 2010). The prevailing majority of American families have two earners

(Christensen & Schneider, 2010). The number of single-parent and single-earner families

constantly increases (Christensen & Schneider, 2010). As a result, women need greater

flexibility, to manage their workplace and family obligations.


Structurally, the issue of workplace flexibility reflects and confirms the existing

mismatch between the social and demographic changes and the static nature of workplace

processes. Christensen and Schneider (2010) claims that the one-size-fits-all workplace, with

its full-time arrangements with linear career paths no longer fit in the changeable

demographic and social conditions in the U.S. The needs of the workforce are changing, but

the organization of the workplace in most organizations remains unchanged (Christensen &

Schneider, 2010). “American working parents and older workers are paying the price for this

structural mismatch and private sector employees in the United States, while slow to respond

to this mismatch, are creating opportunities for more flexibility in how work is organized”

(Christensen & Schneider, 2010, p.2). At the beginning of the 21st century nonflexible

workplace does not meet the needs of employees, especially women. The arithmetic of the

American family has changed, and only organizations which realize the importance of

workplace flexibility and provide flexible workplace arrangements can achieve greater

efficiency of operations and outperform their competitors.

A multitude of factors affects flexibility in the American workplace. Basically, large

companies face greater pressures to respond to workers’ flexibility concerns, than smaller

organizations (Blair-Roy & Wharton, 2002). This is mainly because, due to a greater number

of employees, large organizations cannot provide the range of workplace arrangements to

meet the unique needs of all workers. In the meantime, many employees, including female

employees, are either reluctant or fail to voice their flexibility concerns. Christensen (2011)

suggests that many people believe that workplace flexibility is a private problem, which has

little to do with the organization. They work hard to balance their family and career lives.

Yet, as the number of work-family problems increases, workplace flexibility gradually

becomes a public issue which each and every organization should address. Moreover, despite

the growing body of workplace flexibility research, many organizations still believe that


workplace flexibility is too costly and is not worth the effort (Christensen, 2011).

Organizations do not know how to implement and maintain flexibility in the workplace,

whereas many employees, too, do not ask for flexibility (Christensen, 2011). All these factors

make workplace flexibility an unachievable task.

Women experience the lack of workplace flexibility; simultaneously, gender gaps in

earnings continue to persist. The gender pay gap is usually associated with differences in

men’s and women’s skills and qualifications: women are believed to lack skills and

knowledge needed to pursue the main organizational goals (Blau & Kahn, 2000). Women

devote themselves to family obligations and tasks; for this reason, they cannot accumulate

labor experience to grow professionally (Blau & Kahn, 2000). There is the general consensus

that “women anticipate shorter and more discontinuous work lives, they have lower

incentives to invest in market-oriented formal education and on-the-job training” (Blau &

Kahn, 2000, p.80). Here, the gap in pay is integrally linked to flexibility in the workplace, as

the latter could give women better chances to accumulate experience and skills. Workplace

flexibility may help women and organizations reduce the gap in pay, but human capital is not

the only factor affecting salaries. Many women intentionally avoid jobs that require extensive

skills and knowledge, whereas employers are reluctant to hire women for challenging

positions (Blau & Kahn, 2000). Here, labor market discrimination is a significant factor of

gender pay gaps. Discrimination comes in a number of forms, mostly due to the

discriminatory conceptions and tastes of employers (Blau & Kahn, 2000). Many employers

keep to a misleading belief that women are less productive than their male colleagues; in the

meantime, the lack of employment opportunities do not allow women showing and realizing

their productivity potential. Finally, wage structure can be responsible for persistent pay gaps

in U.S. organizations (Blau & Kahn, 2000).


The future holds a promise to offer greater flexibility of workplace arrangements for

women. Organizations are coming to realize the value of workplace flexibility and its

implications for growth and profitability. Flexibility in the workplace can become an

effective defensive response to business and market uncertainties (Sanchez et al., 2007). In

the meantime, technologies provide greater workplace flexibility: teleworking, part-time

workplace arrangements, and freelancing are becoming part of organizations’ routines.

Moreover, workplace flexibility can readily become the source of organizations’ competitive

advantage: in case of female workers, flexibility in the workplace allows hiring and retaining

the most prospective staff. The intensity of competition constantly increases, and

organizations want to reduce their costs. In the next 10 years, women may be able to find jobs

and workplace arrangements that meet their family and career needs. Everything depends on

whether or not organizations are willing to address the existing structural mismatch.

Conclusion

Workplace flexibility is an object of continued professional debate. As more women

are entering the American labor force, workplace flexibility is also becoming a matter of

organizations’ concern. Flexibility in the workplace is a compound product of multiple social

and structural changes in the American society. Workplace flexibility is a structural issue, as

it reflects and confirms the existing mismatch between social changes and the static nature of

workplace processes. Workplace flexibility is subject to numerous influences; many

organizations believe that flexibility in the workplace is too costly to afford. Simultaneously,

gender gaps in earnings continue to persist. Women are claimed to lack sufficient knowledge

and skills; but how can women grow professionally, if organizations do not allow them to

balance their workplace obligations with family tasks? The future holds a promise to offer

greater flexibility of workplace arrangements for women. Organizations are coming to realize

the value of workplace flexibility and its implications for growth and profitability.


Technology advancements will allow for better workplace flexibility, leading organizations

toward greater efficiency, profitability, and sustained competitive advantage.


References

Blair-Loy, M. & Wharton, A.S. (2002). Employees’ use of work-family policies and the

workplace social context. Social Forces, 80(3), 813-845.

Blau, F.D. & Kahn, L.M. (2000). Gender differences in pay. The Journal of Economic

Perspectives, 14(4), 75-99.

Christensen, K.E. (2011). Building a grassroots movement: Taking workplace flexibility from

private to public. Huffington Post. Retrieved from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathleen-e-christensen/workplace-

flexibility_b_1021717.html

Christensen, K. & Schneider, B.L. (2010). Workplace flexibility: Realigning 20th-century jobs

for a 21st century workforce. Cornell University Press.

Sanchez, A.M., Perez, M.P., Carnicer, P.L. & Iimenez, M. (2007). Teleworking and

workplace flexibility: A study of impact on firm performance. Personnel Review,

36(1), 42-64.

Documents

Women Flexibility