Katey Klippel makes a point of keeping her smartphone in her bag when she returns home from a hard day at the management consulting firm where she works in Washington.
That way, she can better practice what her employer preaches and stop checking her e-mails after hours.
“Before, I would take my computer home,” Klippel, 26, said. “I would pull up my e-mails to check things, or knock off a few extra e-mails while watching TV or cooking dinner. I don’t do that anymore.”
With technological progress shaking up the work-life balance like never before, some employers are taking action.
In September, Klippel’s employer, The Advisory Board Company, imposed an “e-mail moratorium” over the three-day Labor Day weekend on its 1,850 employees from the top brass down.
“I found myself looking at my iPhone and ready to respond, but I told myself, ‘No, let it go,’” said chief executive Robert Musslewhite, who has since issued guidelines to curb after-hours e-mailing.
E-mail has no doubt helped to speed up communication, but Musslewhite sees a “growing sentiment” that its growth has crossed a stage where it is now cutting into productivity.
“That’s the part we really want to tackle,” he said. “There’s some part of e-mail that has gone too far and that is now impeding productivity.”
The Advisory Board’s guidelines seem sensible enough, such as limiting the number of addresses of any given e-mail, summing up the message in the subject line, and opting for instant messaging.
Juggling e-mails or taking phone calls after hours adds up to an extra month-and-a-half of work every year, according to a study by software developer Good Technology.
Outside the US, some major corporations such as French IT services group Atos have virtually banned e-mailing once employees have clocked out for the day.
“There is a growing sentiment that e-mail is not very productive, and actually decreases productivity,” said Gwanhoo Lee, an associate professor of information technology at American University in Washington.
“A typical manager receives hundreds of e-mails a day, and that consumes a substantial amount of work hours,” he says.
Some organizations are trying to move away from e-mail in favor of instant messaging or social media, added Lee, who has worked with several major corporations.
Nevertheless, “many organizations are still expecting their employees to check their e-mails even over the weekend or when out of town,” he said.
According to a study by the Society for Human Resource Management, hardly one company in five has an e-mail policy — and out of those, only one in four aims to strike a balance between professional and private lives.
Judith Glaser, founder of consulting firm Benchmark Communications, said many employees are consumed by e-mails because they are driven by a need to feel part of an organization.
Workers not copied on an e-mail, she said, may suspect an indirect signal from their bosses that “you are not important anymore in the decision process,” she said.
The secret is to discuss the expectations of each employee and enable them to plan to take time off, free of e-mail, “without being stressed,” she said.
For Klippel, the ability to draw a firm line between her working and personal life has been a very positive change. Now she can go out with friends or cook dinner without interruption.
“If you’re sending e-mails in the middle of the night, people start to worry about you,” she said. “It’s encouragement for you to shut down.”
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
From the Iran war and nuclear weapons to tariffs and artificial intelligence, the agenda for this week’s Beijing summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is packed. Xi would almost certainly bring up Taiwan, if only to demonstrate his inflexibility on the matter. However, no one needs to meet with Xi face-to-face to understand his stance. A visit to the National Museum of China in Beijing — in particular, the “Road to Rejuvenation” exhibition, which chronicles the rise and rule of the Chinese Communist Party — might be even more revealing. Xi took the members
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on Friday used their legislative majority to push their version of a special defense budget bill to fund the purchase of US military equipment, with the combined spending capped at NT$780 billion (US$24.78 billion). The bill, which fell short of the Executive Yuan’s NT$1.25 trillion request, was passed by a 59-0 margin with 48 abstentions in the 113-seat legislature. KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), who reportedly met with TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) for a private meeting before holding a joint post-vote news conference, was said to have mobilized her
RSS