Towards fewer ‘disembodied workers’

Flexible work is ideally beneficial for both employer and for employees and we need to remember that it cuts both ways, or we risk producing disembodied workers, writes Kate Kearins.

DO YOU TAKE your full self to work – or are you a ‘ disembodied worker'? When you are at work, do you stop being a mother or father, or daughter or son, home-maker or helpful neighbour or someone with a wider community focus? Do you just get on with the job at hand and leave family/ home/community issues to be dealt with after hours?

The late Joan Acker's concept of the ‘ disembodied worker'sometimes seen as the ‘ ideal worker' - refers to someone totally dedicated to work with no responsibilities for family care. Personally, I think it's probably less fun than it sounds.

There are suggestions from some commentators that the ‘ disembodied worker' tends to resemble male rather than female workers. And further, that this disembodiment has pernicious effects on a large proportion of the working population who do have care responsibilities ( be they male or female workers, younger or older). People with care responsibilities can get factored out of organisational decisions, rather than accommodated or worked with to find a mutually effective way through.

The image of the ‘ disembodied' worker can reinforce the idea that men or others without care responsibilities might seem more obvious picks for leadership roles. The research goes even further, showing that in reinforcing and reproducing gender stereotypes and gendered organisations we risk embedding the idea that female workers might be considered less competent, less dedicated to organisational objectives and less promotable. We see the effect in many quarters.

Simply put, the concept of the ‘ disembodied worker' can have unfortunate implications for workers and for all of us as managers. I have some very good colleagues – academic experts in gender and diversity – who remind me in palpable terms what some of these implications are. They play out in important and in more routine ways.

Breakfast meetings or early starts don't generally suit many people with childcare or school drop- off responsibilities, for example. Evening functions and work assignments cut into family time and time when community responsibilities might be played out.

Then there is the ‘ invisible' work many employees do at home, early mornings, nights and weekends – often to meet important work deadlines – that can be overlooked when time out is wanted during the working day to attend to care responsibilities. More than likely, medical and school appointments, meeting the builder, the maintenance person, etc, can only be done during the ‘ working' day. Many workers don't have someone else at home – or who they can bring in at short notice – to help out.

Flexible work is ideally beneficial for both parties, offering flexibility for employer and for employees. We need to remember that it cuts both ways, or we risk producing disembodied workers.

Our own role-modelling as managers is important. Working all day and all night at the office, and having others feel guilty for leaving before us, is so not okay on a whole lot of levels.

Allowing space at work for talking about the realities of family and care issues and how they impact is a much more positive approach. The bottom-line is that unless we allow people to bring more of their whole selves to work, we risk not attracting, engaging and retaining the talented and caring staff that winning organisations most need. Kate Kearins is professor of management, and deputy dean at Auckland University of Technology’s Faculty of Business, Economics and Law.