The role of managers in implementing the homeworking policy is interesting given it was an expectation, and not subject to individual negotiation. Research by Batenburg and Peters (2005) suggests managers who supervise homeworkers need to know their employees will carry out their work effectively when they are ‘out of sight’. Therefore, managers may be forgiven for being worried about losing control over their employees and their work. It could be argued that by making the policy an expectation, and absolving managers from decision making, they would not feel concerned. However, if managers are used to their authority being based on spatial proximity and being able to see employees (Wiesenfeld et al., 1999), the challenges of managing homeworkers remotely can be addressed through support and training (Staples, Hulland & Higgins, 1999). It is therefore unsurprising that managers in this study were cautious about managing homeworkers, as the policy was introduced without additional training for managers. Research by Peters and Heusinkveld (2010) found managers to be particularly unsupportive of homework when the organisation fails to provide adequate training to manage virtual teams, as was the case in this research.
143
Managers in this study were expected to implement the homeworking policy whilst losing control over working hours and patterns. The study found managers were concerned about employees being out of sight, in common with the findings of Peters et al. (2014). In their study into the introduction of new working practices, they found changing organisational culture to one where a higher level of trust is required takes time, and managers may be uncomfortable with new working practices such as homeworking.
Homeworking can reduce a manager’s level of control as it removes the employee from the usual work environment and, as in this study, where everyone is expected to undertake some homeworking, may also remove the manager if they are homeworking. Managers may therefore ask, as Mokhtarian and Salomon (1996) did, if I cannot see my employees, how do I know they are working? For the managers in this study who were more relaxed about homeworking, the answer was to use output control strategies specifying what is to be accomplished and delivered, allowing decentralisation of work (Snell, 1992).
For some managers, the biggest adjustment was accepting the removal of their role as decision maker on homeworking requests. They felt their role had become redundant in terms of making decisions on homeworking, leaving them to cope with the consequences of dispersed teams, and struggling to schedule team meetings. The take-up of work-life policies within organisations can encounter barriers particularly in the form of actions by individual managers. For example, homeworking policies may be introduced but, as discovered, managers interpret them differently and act as gatekeepers of such programmes (Thompson, 2008; Collins et al., 2013), with reasons for rejecting requests including loss of control (Poelmans & Beham, 2008). In their study of the conceptualization of managers’ work-life policy decisions, Poelmans and Beham (2008) argue where work-life policies are not
144
mandatory, all the organisational efforts of designing, developing and implementing policies converge into a single discretionary decision by the manager. However, with the introduction of a policy which expects homeworking from all employees, the manager should no longer be the single decision point identified by Poelmans and Beham (2008). The need to balance competing priorities and make complex decisions based on multiple criteria (Powell & Greenhaus, 2010) is removed by the expectation of homeworking. This may explain why managers in this study recognised their role had changed and their power had diminished, and the removal of the complex decision making around homeworking requests ostensibly making life simpler.
For employees, the removal of decision making from line managers was less clear cut and brought with it concerns about fairness. Despite the homeworking policy, there emerged evidence of managers still acting as gatekeepers as described by Collins et al. (2013), leading to unjust outcomes for individuals and between individuals, prompting concerns about fairness across the organisation, with managers blamed for the inconsistency. Although a gap in the literature around organisations with expectations of homeworking, the restriction of homeworking by managers in this study supports Nadeem and Hendry (2003) who found managers exercising the same restrictions despite formal homeworking policies and guidance. Exercising power by refusing homeworking requests where homeworking is expected, suggests some managers may be reluctant to relinquish power and potentially increase the ambiguities around their status and authority as identified by Felstead et al. (2003). Continuing to refuse requests not only allows managers to act as gatekeepers exerting their authority over employees (Collins et al., 2013) but in this study, it also emphasises their confidence and authority by disregarding organisational edicts.
145
Employees seek to evaluate the fairness of decisions made by managers in terms of four factors - information provided, decision process, decision outcome and concern of the manager for the individual (Colquitt, 2001). Participants gave examples of managers refusing homeworking requests from individuals with medical issues or caring responsibilities despite the policy expectation. This appears to demonstrate a lack of concern for the individual, as suggested by Colquitt (2001). The lack of a decision process was a concern for some participants who suggested the organisation should be clearer about how decisions are made and provide basic rules, guidelines and a decision-making process. Participants acknowledged that even with a policy expectation of homeworking, decisions were still needed on patterns of homeworking and number of days. However, the concerns about fairness suggest a clearer decision process, information about decision making criteria, and a genuine concern from all managers for individuals may be required (Colquitt, 2001). As Lai et al. (2009) point out, when employees have different degrees of flexibility, comparisons are made with colleagues and fairness is questioned.
The results of this study show the feeling of entitlement was not restricted to the request for homeworking but also the pattern of homeworking. Managers reported some homeworkers wanting a pattern of homeworking which suited them regardless of the needs of the team. Others refused to come into the office on their usual homeworking day even if business need required it. A sense of entitlement is an important part of the employee-organisation relationship and where, for whatever reason, employees exhibit a high degree of entitlement this becomes a challenge for managers (Fisk, 2010). For example, moving from homeworking as an ad hoc arrangement to it becoming organisational policy can allow employees with entitlement beliefs to seek to maximise their personal outcomes by, for example, insisting on specific homeworking days. Tomlinson (2013) found because individuals respond to the world
146
as they perceive it, managers should clarify the basis on which sought after outcomes, such as homeworking, will be distributed. Although the organisation in this study communicated the policy, they did not seek feedback from employees on how the messaging around homeworking was understood. Tomlinson (2013) went on to suggest because employees have individual prejudices and biases, any communications should be ‘reality checked’ by assessing whether employees have interpreted and understood information correctly. The organisation in this study may have found it helpful to check employees understood the entitlement was to homeworking not specific days or working patterns. Fisk (2010) observes that many HR practitioners have reported a workforce increasingly exhibiting expectation of entitlement to job flexibility and duties. In this study the policy enshrines homeworking as a right but also portrays it as being beneficial for employees, which is not necessarily the case for everyone as the study shows. Those who find it beneficial may be in danger of taking homeworking for granted over time, with employees believing they deserve more for doing less, as recognised by Fisk (2010).