July 6, 2009
Billy Jean King once made a comment on the stresses and strains of tennis in which she remarked that “pressure is a privilege”. She was indicating that pressure is a crucial ingredient for achieving peak performance in the game, and that those who can harness and cope with it effectively usually end up winning. I think we saw a great example of that in the men’s final at Wimbledon yesterday as Roger Federer defended five set points, when he was already one set down, to come back and win his record-breaking 15th major. Time and time again he has shown an ability to cope better than his opponents when the pressure is on – and that is to take nothing away from Andy Roddick who did a great job of handling the strain of playing the world’s best on the biggest stage in tennis. This battle of wills was what led to such an enthralling final.
Another example of the constructive power of pressure from the last two weeks has been the performances of an astonishing young man, Andy Murray, who had to endure enormous expectation in every match as he moved towards the semi-finals. You could see his determination and drive to not only compete, but also to draw on his reserves of energy and grit when seemingly down and out – especially against Warwinka. Yes, he was driven by his own need to achieve, but also by the fans who have supported and nurtured him throughout the tournament. Rather than suffer the ‘expectational’ stress of many of his Brit predecessors, he seems to thrive when he knows that the fans are there to help and support him—indeed he encourages them to do so by his gestures. When he does this it creates pressure for him to deliver what they want – victory! Like Billy Jean King he craves the pressure to help him perform at his highest level.
There are many people out there in the wider world of work who perennially experience excessive pressure – and they could learn a great deal from Andy Murray. First, by understanding that it is partly up to ‘you’ to cope with what happens to you in life. We all have a responsibility to do whatever we can to cope and sometimes we have to ‘dig deep’ to handle what is thrown at us at work or in life more generally. Second, we can draw on the support of our colleagues at work, our friends, neighbours and relatives at home. Tennis players have strong support networks around them – e.g. ‘Team Murray’ – so it pays to think about who is in ‘Team You’. We can only cope with so much alone time, and at some stage we all need the strength, love and support of others to go that extra mile – to cope with excessive pressure, to deal with that bully at work, to handle that unusually heavy workload, to cope with the fear of losing a job or the worry about a child’s health problem.
The trick is knowing when and how to use the pressure as a source of energy and motivation and when to acknowledge that it is excessive and that you need to replenish your resources. There is a fine line between peak performance and burn-out and you alone can work out where your line is – indeed, you have to look actively to find it.
Leave a Comment » | 
Personal Resilience, Productivity, Stress, pressure | Tagged: excessive pressure, performance, pressure, strain, Stress | 
Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
June 26, 2009
I recently read an interesting article by Hamish McCrae in The Independent newspaper which discussed the growing chasm between the public and private sectors. The author claims that it is now at its widest since the 1970s – jobs are being lost daily in the private sector (e.g. Total, LDV Vans, C&G), while we have seen strikes and pay disputes rather than redundancies in the public sector.
The key point was that a major divide between the sectors can hardly be good for the UK’s economic recovery. ‘Resources and productivity’ are cited as two key areas of difference, but three others are also highlighted – pensions, pay and job security. In terms of both pay and pensions the private sector has been hit harder but, as demonstrated by the examples above, it is job security that is perhaps the area where we see the biggest differences between the two sectors. This caught my attention because of the likely impact on the well-being and engagement of staff.
Hamish McCrae makes the point ‘the entire burden of recession in terms of job losses has been carried by the private sector’. In principle, creating and safeguarding public sector jobs during an economic crisis seems sensible (it’s certainly Obama’s chosen approach to recovery), but if this is at the expense of the sector where the vast majority of UK workers earn a living (23,596,000 vs. 5,783,000 in the public sector) the recovery of the whole economy may be at risk.
From a psychological perspective, perceiving that your job is secure is one of the nine major determinants of employee well-being and engagement. It stands to reason that if the majority of the UK’s workers feel that the security of their jobs is under threat, there will be a negative impact on their well-being, and by extension, their productivity & performance. The government has had to make tough choices over the last 18 months, but this may be just one of several unfortunate and unintentionally divisive side-effects. It’s true to say that the government can’t be expected to ensure that we all feel secure in our jobs the whole of the time, but they do create the economic playing field for business and have a responsibility for keeping it relatively level. That said, private sector organisations also have to take responsibility for keeping well-being and motivation levels up during these uncertain times – looking after those that remain after redundancies.
Of course, this could all switch around if the private sector starts to recover and public sector budgets are slashed in order to recover the money that was required to stem the financial crisis. Perceptions of job security could swing from one extreme to another in both sectors, and that would hardly bode well for creating a stable new economy characterised by productive and trusting relationships between the sectors. This situation may need to be actively managed as the next 18 months unfold.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/hamish-mcrae/hamish-mcrae-the-growing-publicprivate-divide-1701051.html
2 Comments | 
Engagement, Private Sector, Productivity, Public Sector, Well-being | Tagged: Hamish McCrae, job security, performance, Private Sector, Productivity, Public Sector, The Independent, well-being and engagement | 
Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
June 24, 2009
The recent Britain’s Got Talent final should be a warning sign for all us about the impact of exceptional and excessive pressure on our health and well-being. Susan Boyle was lifted from obscurity and placed ‘front of stage’ both nationally and internationally – all in the space of a few short months and with all the media hype and frenzy that attends celebrity. Her performances were outstanding, but her preparation for what was about to happen to her seemed to be minimal – it was just assumed that becoming a celebrity was a good thing and that there would be no problems. Judging by the outcome, the support she was given was also inadequate.
Most people are not as talented as Susan and few of us will be foisted into the limelight as quickly, but for many of us in jobs which are intrinsically stressful, overloaded, family-unfriendly and demanding the lack of help and support can have similar consequences.
In the recent government Foresight programme on Mental Capital and Wellbeing (www.foresight.gov.uk), it was highlighted by the Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health that the annual costs of workplace stress to the UK economy were £25.9b per annum in terms of sickness absence, presenteeism (turning up to work but contributing little, if any, added value) and labour turnover. This doesn’t even include the roughly £5 Billion in the year for mental health-related incapacity benefit!
It is the fundamental responsibility of employers to look after the health and well-being of their employees – indeed, they have a legal duty of care to do so. It is also the responsibility of the individual themselves to take sensible steps to ensure that pressure does not turn to stress. Our support networks – at work and in life – are there to help us to make the right decisions in this respect and to cope when the balance is threatened. But we must also remember that there is often a cost to success – the cost to one’s personal health, to one’s family, friends and relationships, as well as to the job and organisation. Susan’s success and then collapse reminds us (and her) that balance between work and life is what we all need rather than aiming for success at all costs. That’s not just during these times, but it was ever thus as these lines from Shelley’s poem “Ode to the West Wind” highlights:
“Oh, lift me as a wave, a leaf, a cloud!
I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed!”
Leave a Comment » | 
Personal Resilience, Stress, Talent, Well-being, pressure | 
Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
June 8, 2009
As the pressure builds on Prime Minister Gordon Brown, following high profile resignations and poor results in the local and European elections, he must be wondering where it all went wrong. It’s no secret that Gordon Brown waited for over ten years for his chance to take on his dream job – that of Prime Minister – and that must have involved a lot of thinking, anticipation and building up expectations about what it would be like. I wonder whether the experience of the last year or so has lived up to those expectations. Has he actually enjoyed the experience, and has it fulfilled him in the way that he perhaps thought it would?
There may be a lesson for us all here about getting very single-minded and determined about our goals. No one is saying there’s anything wrong with having clear goals, and being determined about hitting them, but I think some balance is required here. Having a rigid life plan (‘I must be doing this by then’) seldom pans out the way we think, and it’s important that we maintain some flexibility and, maybe more importantly, some realism about our goals.
There is also value in having a broad range of goals – having several objectives that are important to you, stops one becoming too dominant and blinkering your view of the world. It reminds you that other things and people matter, helping you to maintain balance in your life. It also means that you are likely to be interacting with a broad range of people, rather than being confined within a tight circle dedicated to a single mission. This gives you access to more perspectives, and more sources of support to draw on when times are tough. There are certainly parallels with Gordon Brown’s current situation here – he must be suffering, as the wider party start to desert him and his platform of support starts to appear too narrow to sustain his position.
So, yes, aim high; set ambitious life and career goals for yourself – but tinge them with realism, see the bigger picture and don’t make the mistake of making your life about just one achievement!
Leave a Comment » | Leadership, Well-being | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
June 4, 2009
My colleague Ben Moss recently wrote an article for the Public Servant Magazine’s Management Clinic discussing the latest research findings reported by TUC who have estimated that 5.24 million people in the UK put in extra work worth a staggering £26.9bn during 2008. This equates to each employee missing out on an average of £5000 of pay per year – a lot of money by any standards, especially in these times!
Obviously the amount of overtime worked is at the discretion of each employee and depends both on how much people need the extra money and how committed they are to the business. But at a time when jobs are on the line and the threat of redundancy hangs in the air, I wonder whether employees are simply putting in more and more face time to look committed and indispensable, rather than working at their full potential.
I think a lot of employees will be tempted to do just that – putting in more hours to show their bosses that they’re working hard in the hope that this extra effort and commitment will be noted and their jobs will remain secure if the company has to reduce the size of its workforce. But paradoxically these extra hours can actually have negative consequences for the business over time, because when a person works over a sensible amount of hours they actually become less productive and the extra input is potentially wasted. That’s ‘Presenteeism’!
Striking the right balance of working extra hours is both the employer’s and the employee’s responsibility. Employees have to think carefully about why they’re staying late – is it because they have an important deadline to meet or because they feel their livelihood is at risk? And employers also have a responsibility to help their people feel secure by clearly communicating what’s expected from them, while guarding against perennial work overload at the expense of productivity.
It’s great if a company can create a culture where employees, when necessary, are flexible enough to work longer hours to get the job done. It shows employees are committed to the goals and success of the business, but as Ben says in his article employers and their employees must remember that “presence does not equal productivity”.
Read Ben’s full article at my University Spin off company’s website http://www.robertsoncooper.com/Resources/documents/PublicServant-Feb2009.pdf
Leave a Comment » | Productivity | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
May 29, 2009
It’s been a month of contrasting fortunes in the airline industry as Virgin Atlantic announced a significant rise in profits, while British Airways (BA) announced the biggest loss since the company was privatised in 1987. In this scenario, it is Virgin’s story that is remarkable because BA’s results are largely reflective of a more general downward trend in the airline sector – driven by high fuel costs, the weak pound and lower traveller numbers.
In media terms, and in line with the personality of its famous President, Sir Richard Branson, Virgin is often portrayed as the major carrier that is professional, but fun: staff are happy and, in turn, they project that feeling to customers. And with these results nothing is set to change – Virgin’s workforce have just received their annual bonuses at a time when such things have all but disappeared in the private sector. You have to applaud what Virgin has achieved in these economic conditions – but it’s not luck or coincidence. Despite paying out to reward staff’s efforts and the results they have achieved during tough times, Virgin have put a freeze on pay for all staff this year (including senior management), successfully ‘hedged’ fuel by buying when it was cheap and stopped expanding their plane fleet in 2006 in anticipation of the economic slowdown. These kind of strategic decisions, many of which were taken before the economy collapsed, are what have safeguarded profits and jobs now.
Virgin is operating in the same market and economic conditions as other major airlines – but they have been successful by being proactive in terms of the business decisions they have made and the way that they have treated their staff. Imagine how different it must feel to be a member of the Virgin Atlantic workforce this week compared with working for their competitors. At Virgin, bosses are thanking staff financially for great results while Willy Walsh, the Chief Executive of BA reflected more accurately what working in the rest of the airline industry feels like right now when he publicly said that he sees “no signs of recovery anywhere”. This was in the same week that he grabbed the headlines by offering to work throughout July for free as a gesture to show that he is willing to share the pain with his staff, who have just been asked to consider the option of taking unpaid leave or working part-time in an effort to cut costs.
Virgin Atlantic is a perfect example of how bosses in the big companies can earn their money and protect the well-being and job security of their often huge workforces. The strategic decisions made by senior management in any company have to work for both the business and staff alike if success is to be sustained during good times or bad.
BA Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/business/8062844.stm
Virgin Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/business/8067640.stm
Leave a Comment » | Leadership, Management, Well-being | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
May 26, 2009
This month Councillors and developers in Sheffield have being defending their decision to invest nearly £100,000 of public money on installing a full size helter skelter in office buildings designed for creative and media companies. In the current climate, and with politicians under the spotlight for frivolous spending, it’s perhaps not surprising that this decision has been questioned.
The move has been defended as being a good example of risk-taking designed to inspire the creative companies and their visitors who come to work in the Electric Works building. The experience, which is not open to the general public, has been described as the equivalent to having a coffee or screen break – a rare opportunity for employees to refresh themselves by taking the ‘exhilarating’ ride to the ground floor. In many ways, I can empathise with this argument – we all need to be inspired and the physical space in which we work really matters in this respect; especially in the creative industries.
I suspect that the uproar is as much bad timing as anything else – if the helter skelter had been unveiled during the good times the planners, architects and Councillors in Sheffield would have been roundly applauded for such an innovation. And if the offices were packed to the rafters with successful and buoyant creative businesses, rather than being only 20% occupied during a recession it would all look very different. But now that we are in a much more austere economic environment the project has been condemned by opposition politicians, the media and small business owners. In reality, the planning decisions that allocated the funding for this building were almost certainly made before the credit crunch set in, so it does seem somewhat harsh to condemn the whole thing retrospectively.
It’s important to see the positives in these kinds of innovations – the publicity it has brought to the city of Sheffield; the continuing regeneration of an industrial city; the inspiration and motivation it can bring to workers now and in future when things get better. Does your working environment matter to you? Look around you – is it inspiring or stultifying? Would you like to see your own Helter Skelter or even just a new coat of paint on the walls?
You can read Yorkshire Post’s coverage of this story at: http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/100000-of-public-money-to.5242403.jp
Leave a Comment » | Engagement, Leadership, Productivity, Well-being | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
May 21, 2009
Lancaster University’s Centre for Organizational Health and Well Being recently commissioned a YouGov Survey to ask a national sample of 2250 employed people in a range of jobs about ‘presenteeism’ – the habit of staying at work unproductively so that it looks like you are working hard. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the results showed that British workers are spending more time at work in attempts to safeguard their jobs during this recession.
More specifically, 66% said that over the past few months they were coming in earlier and staying later at work; 45% said that they were ‘playing it safe at work and keeping their head down’ and 41% were reporting a more negative atmosphere in the workplace. These figures suggest that the ‘recession workplace’ has become more self-protective – with less team building, longer working hours to show commitment and people going to unnecessary meetings to put in ‘face time’. This presenteeism and self-protective behaviour is the last thing that most workplaces need at the moment, but it is understandable when you consider the amount of pressure on job security.
It is important for managers and business leaders to understand this dynamic – and most importantly, to address it directly. The best managers recognise unproductive presenteeism in their team members when they see it and then have the ‘difficult conversation’ to find appropriate interventions. The intervention could take many forms – but at its heart has to be an open and honest discussion based on behavioural evidence. It should acknowledge what the manager has observed and gives the employee the chance to explain it. In this context, the manager will inevitably have an opportunity to re-state expectations about time spent in the office and re-emphasise the importance of deliverables and of quality versus quantity of work. After the conversation the employee feels ‘reset’ and supported, safe in the knowledge that it will not be a lack of hours worked that will cause his/her job to become insecure.
These one-to-one conversations need to be supported by better communication from on-high, designed to make people feel more secure and acknowledge that a long hours culture is counterproductive to the health and wellbeing of the individual and to the company’s performance.
The good news from the Centre’s report is that 54% of the sample said that their relationships were unaffected by the economic downturn, possibly because during a recession most people realize how important the family and personal relationships are and want to protect them at all costs. However, this is in direct contrast to recent statistics from Relate – the relationship counselling service – that reported an increase in relationship problems. So this is not an area we should take for granted. If this recession has done nothing else, it provides the opportunity for us to re-consider our value systems – what work should be about; the importance of relationships versus materialism; how we can be successful in business without being greedy and the importance of living a balanced life.
Leave a Comment » | Management, Productivity, Well-being | Tagged: Lancaster University’s Centre for Organizational Health and Well Being, presenteeism, recession, unproductive presenteeism, YouGov | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
May 18, 2009
The ‘second home allowance’ and other fringe benefits that MPs receive have been making the news headlines on a daily basis over the last few weeks. The Prime Minister himself has made a public apology and the system of allowances and perks is now under review. It seems like a crackdown on these benefits is inevitable – if only to prevent more embarrassing revelations. So do perks and benefits make a difference to how people see their jobs – and in particular, do they make a difference to how hard people work? If so, the baby may be on its way out with the bath water!
The government are not alone however, as British Airways (BA) recently made the news by putting forward 32 cost-saving proposals, many of which were about reducing staff benefits. The proposals apparently include cutting annual leave by two days and decreasing the number of night’s layover in foreign cities. Obviously, BA staff are likely to resist these changes, but the company seems to be signalling a belief that such benefits are not particularly important in motivating staff or driving overall performance.
Perhaps management in many organisations now feel that such benefits are just not affordable any more – and only have a marginal impact anyway. Or perhaps, they feel that they might be of some importance when people are considering a new job but that once in the role people just become accustomed to the benefits and they lose their motivational impact. Another view is that they start to see perks as something that they are actually entitled to rather than being discretionary – this would mean considerable affront if these things were suddenly removed. So setting aside bonuses and other direct financial rewards, do benefits serve a long-term motivating purpose or are they something that we can easily dispense with when times are tough? Both the government and BA may soon get emphatic answers to these questions from their respective workforces!
Leave a Comment » | Motivation, reward and recognition | Tagged: government, motivating staff, Motivation, performance, perks and benefits | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
May 7, 2009
We are now well into the Easter / May public holiday period and I’ve been thinking about the benefits, or otherwise, of holidays. To bring myself up-to-date I took a quick look at the most recent review article that I could find to see what’s known about holidays and the effect they have on us. The thing that caught my eye was a finding that the beneficial impact of holidays seems to last for about three weeks – perhaps longer than I would have guessed! There also seems to be some evidence that longer breaks are better for us than shorter ones – but a couple of well-regarded researchers also suggested that five three-day weekends would be better than a one week holiday.
What is for certain is that holidays provide us with relief from the daily pressure of work in a way that an evening or a weekend can’t. They enable us to replenish our ‘well-being reservoir’ and to re-energise – if you come back from a holiday feeling worse than when you left then something is going very wrong! I’m not sure about whether longer or shorter holidays are better for us – perhaps it depends on the nature of your job and the kind of person that you are? What do you think? What are the pros and cons of long or short breaks from work?
2 Comments | Well-being | Tagged: Holidays, well-being reservior | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
