appendix 1 : employer questionnaire (dublin) · pdf filereference no. res-000-22-1574-a...

REFERENCE No. RES-000-22-1574-A

Appendix 1 : Employer questionnaire (Dublin) Work-life Balance / Flexible Working Research Project – Employer Questionnaire, Dublin

(administered online at: http://aljames.org.uk/survey/index.php?sid=94896&lang=en) This questionnaire survey is carried out as part of a 3 year research project entitled: Connecting Work-Life (Im)Balance to Learning and Innovation in Dynamic Regional Economies (Dublin and Cambridge) funded by the UK’s Economic and Social Research Council. The research is led by Dr Al James, Department of Geography, Queen Mary, University of London ([email protected] Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 2746) This questionnaire should take no more than 6 minutes to complete. Any information you provide will be used solely for statistical purposes and treated as strictly confidential. No information will be reported about individual companies. The research is conducted in line with academic ethics guidelines at Queen Mary, University of London. Thank you for your help.

Section I Firm Characteristics

I.1 When did your firm establish operations in Dublin? (year)

I.2 What is the size of your workforce in Dublin? I.3 What percentage of your Dublin workforce is engaged in R&D? % (approx)

Section II Competitive Performance

Questions refer to Dublin operations only II.1 What was your annual turnover in 2007? € (approx)

II.2 What was your annual turnover in 2004? € (approx)

Section III Workforce

Questions refer to Dublin operations only III.1 What proportion of your workforce was female in 2007? % (approx) III.2 What proportion of your workforce was female in 2004? % (approx) III.3 What was your workforce attrition rate in 2007? % (approx) III.4 What was your workforce attrition rate in 2004? % (approx)

29

To cite this output: James, Alan (2009). The Impacts of Work-Life Balance on Learning & Innovation in Regional Economies: Appendices ESRC End of Award Report, RES-000-22-1574-A. Swindon: ESRC


Section IV Work-life balance / flexible working arrangements

IV.1 What is the availability and take-up of different work-life balance arrangements within your firm?

Please select all relevant categories to your firm from the table below:

Flexible working / work-life balance arrangement Yes, available to employees

(check with X)

Numbers of Dublin staff who have used

in last 3 years (approx)

Flexitime Compressed hours (e.g. 5 days work in 4 days)

Annualised hours Working from home 1 or 2 days a week Working from home 3 or 4 days a week Part-time Term-time only working

Job sharing Subsidised childcare Childcare resource & referral service Maternity leave above statutory minimum Paternity leave above statutory minimum Workplace nursery Career break / sabbatical scheme Work-life balance counselling / training

Section V Impacts of flexible working / work-life balance

V.1 Using the scale provided, please indicate the impacts of the suite of flexible working arrangements

provided by your firm over the last 3 years. Please select the best answer for each of (a) to (f) and mark with an X.

Much

better Better No

change Worse Much

worse a. Productivity b. Female recruitment c. Retention of female employees post maternity leave d. Company image to potential employees e. Workforce diversity f. Workplace environment for learning and creativity Thank you very much indeed for your help with this research project. Research conducted by: Dr Al James, Dept of Geography, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/staff/jamesa.html

30



Appendix 2: selected summary data from regional employer surveys (May 2009)

Breakdown of survey sample: Cambridge: 76 companies Dublin: 74 companies employ 1618 workers locally employ 6450 workers locally total 2007 revenues: £114 million total 2007 revenues: €773 million (£713 million)

Table 2.1: employer provision of (formal) WLB arrangements

Category

Formal WLB arrangement Dublin

N=74

Cambridge

N=76

n % n % Flexible Work Arrangements

Flextime (flexible beginning / end time, sometimes with core hrs) Flexplace (work from home 1 or 2 days a week) Flexplace (work from home 3 or 4 days a week) Job sharing (one job undertaken by 2 or more persons) Annualised hours

54 55 26 7 6

73 74 35

9 8

46 44 40 3 8

61 58 53 4 11

Reduced Work Hours

Part-time work Compressed work weeks (total work hrs in 4 days rather than 5) Term-time working

36 23 6

49 31 8

45 22 7

59 29 9

Personal Leave

Extra-statutory maternity leave Extra-statutory paternity leave Career break / sabbatical

24 10 14

32 14 19

9 7 5

12 9 7

Practical Help with Child Care

Employer-subsidised childcare Information referral service for childcare Workplace nursery

3 3 2

4 4 3

6 2 1

8 3 1

Other WLB counselling / training 11 15 3 4

Average WLB provision score (out of 15) 4 4

Table 2.2: correlating aggregate WLB provision with basic firm characteristics

(Pearsons 2 tailed)

Firm age Workforce size 2007 revenue % female workforce

Cambridge (N=76) -0.041 NS

0.218 NS -0.040 NS -0.038 NS

Dublin(N=74)

0.121 NS *0.285 p<0.05 0.078 NS

*0.293 p<0.05

All firms (N=150)

0.038 NS *0.242 p<0.01 0.067 NS 0.137 NS

31



Chart 2.1: uneven provision of WLB arrangements by IT employers

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

WLB PROVISION SCORE

TOTA

L FI

RM

S

Dublin firmsCambridge firmsAll firms

Table 2.3: Worker TAKE UP of employer provided formal WLB arrangements

Formal WLB arrangement Dublin

N=74

Cambridge

N=76

N firms where

available

Ave % workforce

take up

N firms where

available

Ave % workforce

take-up

Flextime (flexible beginning / end time, sometimes with core hrs) Flexplace (work from home 1 or 2 days a week) Flexplace (work from home 3 or 4 days a week) Job sharing (one job undertaken by 2 or more persons) Annualised hours

54 55 26 7 6

50 18 33 1.6 23

46 44 40 3 8

77 49 55 52 50

Part-time work Compressed work weeks (total work hrs in 4 days rather than 5) Term-time working

36 23 6

15 27 14

45 22 7

33 48 20

Extra-statutory maternity leave* Extra-statutory paternity leave** Career break / sabbatical

24 10 14

33 8 14

9 7 5

42 28 32

Employer-subsidised childcare Information referral service for childcare Workplace nursery

3 3 2

7 0 0

6 2 1

3 0 0

WLB counselling / training 11 14 3 67

*% take up calculated using companies’ female workforces only *% take up calculated using companies’ male workforces only

32



Table 2.4: Employer identified impacts of WLB provision on different

dimensions of LABOUR TURNOVER (hence access to external sources of embodied skills, knowledge, competencies)

Regional case Improved company image to potential recruits

Increased female

recruitment

Increased retention of women post

maternity leave

Increased workforce diversity

CAMBRIDGE (N=70) 62% 36% 42% 37%

DUBLIN (N=72) 63% 35% 57% 49%

CAM + DUB (N=142) 63% 36% 52% 44%

CAM + DUB (excluding firms with WLB provision scores less than 4 (mean average)) (N=86)

72%

45%

63%

44%

CAM + DUB excluding firms with zero scores for WLB take up (N=113)

62%

33% 52% 41%

Table 2.5: Employer identified BENEFITS of WLB provision for different dimensions of firm performance and innovative capacity

Regional case Increased

worker productivity

Increased female recruitment

(diversity of workforce

competencies)

Increased retention of women post

maternity leave


competencies)

Increased workforce diversity

Improved workplace for environment for learning and creativity

(based on an 80% subset of firms who responded to this Q)

CAM + DUB (N=142) 61%

36% 52% 44% 54%

CAM + DUB excluding firms with WLB provision scores less than 4 (mean average) (N=86)

69%

45%

63%

44%

56%

CAM + DUB excluding firms with zero scores for WLB take up (N=113)

59%

33%

52%

41%

51%

33



Table 2.6: Consistency of employer identified BENFITS of WLB for innovative capacity (2004-7) with MEASURED improvements in firms’ ‘revealed competitiveness’ (2004-7)

Measured change in firm performance (2004-7)

Employer identified benefit of WLB provision (2004-7):

Worker productivity

(£ revenue per head)

Revenue (£) % female workforce

Labour turnover

Increased worker productivity (N=78) +15 995 +302 563 --

--

Improved female worker recruitment (N=36) -- -- +9.2

-2.1

Improved retention of women post maternity leave (N=40) -- -- +5.3

-2.0

Increased workforce diversity (N=48) -- -- +3.6

--

Improved company image to potential recruits (N=76)

-- -- +4.2

-0.1

Better environment for learning and creativity (N=62) +44 635 +817 082 +4.0

-2.2

Table 2.7: Employer identified CONSTRAINTS of WLB provision for different dimensions of firm performance and innovative capacity

Regional case Decreased

worker productivity

Decreased female

recruitment


competencies)

Undermines retention of women post

maternity leave


competencies)

Undermines workforce diversity

Undermines workplace for environment for learning and creativity

(based on an 80% subset of firms who responded to this Q)

CAM + DUB (N=142)

5.5%

0%

2.6%

0.9%

2.5%

34



Table 2.8: (Non)consistency of employer identified CONSTRAINTS of WLB on innovative capacity (2004-7) with MEASURED changes in firms’ ‘revealed competitiveness’ (2004-7)

Measured change in firm performance (2004-7)

Employer identified constraint of WLB provision (2004-7):

Worker

productivity (£ revenue per head)

Revenue (£)

% female workforce

Labour

turnover

Decreased worker productivity (N=7) +91 411 +1 624 000 --

--

Undermines retention of women post maternity leave (N=2) -- -- +10

+40

Undermines workforce diversity (N=1) -- -- +30

--

Undermines workplace environment for learning and creativity (N=3) -12 000 +20 500 +10

+19

35



Appendix 3: IT worker survey questionnaire

Work-life Balance / Flexible Working Research Project – Worker Questionnaire administered online at: http://aljames.org.uk/survey/index.php?sid=66796&lang=en

This questionnaire survey is part of a 3 year research project that explores the impacts of work-life (im)balance on the performance of workers and firms in two high tech regional economies (Dublin and Cambridge). The project is led by Dr Al James, Dept of Geography, Queen Mary, University of London ([email protected] +44 (0)20 7882 2746) This questionnaire should take no more than 7 minutes to complete. Any information you provide will be used solely for statistical purposes and treated as strictly confidential. No information will be reported about individuals or companies. The research is conducted in line with research ethics guidelines at Queen Mary, University of London. Thank you for your help.

Section IA Personal Circumstances

Please mark relevant boxes with an X IA.1 Age

18-30 31-40 41-50 Over 50 IA.2 Gender Female male IA.3 Highest education qualification

High school Undergraduate Degree Masters Degree PhD IA.4 Town / city where you work: Dublin Cambridge Greater London Other

Section IB Responsibilities and Commitments Outside Work

IB.1 Partner’s employment N/A Part-time outside home Full time outside home Full time homemaker IB.2 Please indicate numbers of dependent children:

Pre-school age Full time primary education Secondary education None IB.3 Do you have anyone sick / elderly / disabled you look after or give special help to? Yes No

36



IB.4 Hours per week you spend on hobbies / sports / other extra-curricular interests? Hours per week (approx) hours Section II IT Employment History II.1 How long have you worked in the IT sector? Years Months II.2 How many different IT firms have you worked for during that period? II.3 What is your current job title? II.4 What is the name of your current employer? II.5 What is the nature of your current contract (permanent, temporary, other)? Section III Lived Experience of Work-Life ‘Balance’ III.1 How many hours did you work in your last ‘typical’ work week? hours III.2 How long is your daily commute (to and from work combined)? hours III.3 Please indicate (with an X) how frequently you experience the following work-life conflicts: Every

day At

least once a week

At least once a month

Rarely Never

Inability to relax & forget about work Difficulties fulfilling family responsibilities because of time spent working

Missing out on leisure time or hobbies Difficulties finding time to maintain friendships

Section IV Consequences of Using Preferred WLB Arrangements IV.1 What work-life balance arrangements have you used in your current company? Please select from the table below and mark relevant boxes with an X: Flexitime Employer subsidised childcare Compressed hours (e.g. 5 days work in 4 days) Childcare resource & referral service Annualised hours Maternity leave above statutory minimum Working from home 1 or 2 days a week Paternity leave above statutory minimum Working from home 3 or 4 days a week Workplace nursery Part-time Career break / sabbatical scheme Term-time only working Work-life balance counselling / training Job sharing

37



IV.2 Please rank the following TYPES of flexible working arrangements from most (1) to least (4) useful in helping you juggle most effectively your responsibilities and interests at home and work: Flexibility of when I work Reduced total weekly work hours Flexibility of where I work Assistance with caring for family

Section V Impacts of flexible working / work-life balance provision

V.1 HOME WORKING: Using the scale provided, please indicate any problems that you have experienced

due to you and / or your colleagues regularly working from home (mark with an X):

Problems of home working? Not an issue

Minor problem

Significant problem

Major problem

a. Undermines group problem solving ability b. Limits spontaneous informal interactions with colleagues c. Difficulties scheduling meetings with customers V.2 REDUCED HOURS: Using the scale provided, please indicate any problems that you have experienced

due to you and / or your colleagues working reduced hours (i.e. anything less than the ‘traditional 5 day work week’) (mark with an X):

Problems of reduced hours? Not an

issue Minor problem

Significant problem

Major problem

a. Undermines group problem solving ability b. Limits spontaneous informal interactions with colleagues c. Difficulties scheduling meetings with customers V.3 Overall, what are the benefits of your employer providing you with flexible working arrangements to help

you and your colleagues juggle your responsibilities, interests and commitments at home and work?

Benefits of WLB provision? Not an issue

Minor problem

Significant problem

Major problem

I am less stressed at work I have a greater enthusiasm for my work I can think more creatively at work

Section VI Job Mobility and Work-Life Balance

VI.1 How useful to you were the flexible working / work-life balance arrangements provided by your previous IT employer? Very useful Useful Not very useful Inadequate VI.2 If they were less than useful, how significant was that in your decision to leave your previous employer?

38



Very important Important Not very important Irrelevant VI.3 How important was good flexible working / work-life balance provision in your decision to move to your current employer? Very important Important Not very important Irrelevant Thank you very much indeed for your help with this research project. Research conducted by: Dr Al James, Dept of Geography, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/staff/jamesa.html

39



Appendix 4: selected summary data from IT worker survey (May 2009)

Table 4.1: identifying significant WLB cohorts in worker survey sample

Dependents

Children (all ages)

Children pre-school

Children primary school

Children secondary school

No

children

Care for someone

sick / disabled

Women (N=153) Single Partner works full time outside home Partner works part-time outside home Partner full-time homemaker

18 39 3 1

10 25 1 0

8 12 0 1

5 10 3 0

40 49 1 1

9 10 1 0

Men (N=9) Single Partner works full time outside home Partner works part-time outside home Partner full-time homemaker

2 2 0 1

2 2 0 1

1 0 0 1

1 0 0 0

2 0 1 0

0 0 0 0

Table 4.2: frequencies of work-life conflicts by selected cohort / region

Cohort

Conflict (% workers experiencing with weekly or daily frequency) Single

women with dependent children

Women with dependent children, partner works full time outside home

Women caring for someone

sick / disabled

Single women no dependent children

Cambridge

ALL workers

Dublin

ALL workers

Inability to relax and forget about work 61 77 70 77 59 77

Difficulties fulfilling family responsibilities because of work

56 64 70 41 37 46

Missing out on leisure time or hobbies

61

79

75

62

53

64

Difficulties finding time to maintain friendships

28

72

60

56

42

51

Breakdown of survey sample:

227 questionnaires submitted; 162 complete (153 females + 9 males)

Cambridge region: 83 Greater Dublin: 39 UK SE: 38

40



Table 4.3: daily combined commutes (source of everyday work-life conflict)

Less than 1

hr / day 1 hr / day 2hrs /

day 3hrs / day

4hrs / day

5hrs per day

Cambridge (N=83) 30%

18%

41%

5%

2%

0%

Dublin(N=39)

44% 18% 18% 13% 3% 3%

Table 4.4: worker mobility in response to uneven WLB provision by employers

Cohort

% non-movers (excluded from subsequent calculations)

Ave emp Tenure (yrs)

WLB arrangements provided by previous employer not useful (%)

PUSH Inadequate WLB provision in previous firm v/important factor in decision to leave (%)

PULL Good WLB provision v/important factor in decision to move to current firm (%)

% workers valid response 100 100 85 93 87

DUB + CAM All workers (N=122) Women only (N=115) Working mothers only (N=45)

19 19 16

3.5 3.6 3.8

41 39 36

33 30 39

65 65 76

(REST UK) (N=38)

(26) (3.3) (48) (36) (68)

41



Table 4.5: quality of mobile embodied knowledge I (Cambridge + Dublin, N=115)

Category

Most common examples

N %

Senior managers Director, CEO, Managing Director 17 15

Technical managers Project Manager, Services Manager, IT Director, Product Development Manager

33

29

Technical engineer Software Engineer, Developer, Tester, Web Producer, Designer, System administrator

47

41

Research Research Associate, Business Analyst 12 10

Human resources

HR Systems Administrator, HR Coordinator

2 2

Marketing Marketing Manager, Marketing, Business Communications Executive

5 4

Other

Academic

4 3

(Male cohort: Director, Solutions Architect, Software Engineer, Software

Engineer, Web Developer, Software Engineer, Technical Support)

Table 4.6: quality of mobile embodied knowledge II (Cambridge + Dublin, N=122)

Highest educational qualification

High school

cert

Undergrad degree

Masters

PhD

N % % % %

Mean

accumulated experience

(years in IT)

Accumulated experience

(companies)

All workers Mobile workers Mobile workers motivated by WLB (push and / or pull) Working mothers motivated by WLB (push and /or pull)

122 99

55

26

6 5 5 0

43 43

42

42

41 42

40

46

10 10

11

25

11.3 yrs 12.0 yrs

11.2 yrs

11.7 yrs

3.4 3.9

4.2

4.5

42



Appendix 5: In-depth interviews: research participant sample

Targeted cohort

Job roles included in cohort sample

Examples of diversity of responsibilities, interests & commitments outside the workplace

Research participants’ employers

Female participants Founder & CEO Director of Software Devt Directors of Marketing Sales Manager IT Engineers

Working parents with young families Dublin: 7 interviews with working mothers + 7 interviews with working fathers Cambridge: 9 interviews with working mothers + 3 interviews with working fathers

Male participants Chief Executive Officer Chief Technology Officer, Software Engineers, Computer Programmers

School run, relieving the nanny, attendance at school sports events, parent-teacher meetings, running a Cub Scout group, charity fund raising, home schooling

Dublin: 7 multinational IT companies (over 250 employees)… … & 5 indigenous IT SMEs Cambridge: 4 multinational IT companies (over 250 employees) …and 8 locally founded SMEs

Workers with ‘non-traditional’ work-life balance requirements Dublin: 9 interviews Cambridge: 10 interviews

Developer, Software Development Lead, Chief Technology Officer, Chief Executive Officer, Software Engineers

Choral singing, acting, international travel, further study, sports, outdoor pursuits, gym, care for horses, labour organising

Dublin: 6 different IT companies Cambridge: 10 different IT companies

HR Managers delegated with coordinating workplace WLB programmes (many of whom are also working parents themselves) Dublin: 7 interviews Cambridge: 1 interview

7 HR managers (including 1 male) with responsibilities for over 1500 IT workers in Dublin 1 HR manager in a Cambridge SME

Dublin: 7 different IT companies (predominantly large multinationals) Cambridge: 1 SME

Industry watchers with a WLB interest Dublin: 10 interviews Cambridge: 5 interviews

Trade union representatives, economic development officials, government officers, media correspondents, female IT labour organisers

Irish Equality Authority, SIPTU, Irish Congress of Trade Unions, Irish WLB Network, Irish Business Employers Confederation, National Centre for Partnership and Performance, Economic and Social Research Institute, Irish Times, Girl Geeks, Womenintechnology

43



Appendix 6: Publication, dissemination and other project activities Organised conference / workshop sessions: ‘Gendered (Im)mobilities of Learning I and II’. Double session organized by Al James and Sarah Hall (University

of Nottingham), co-sponsored by the Economic Geography Specialty Group and Geographic Perspectives on Women Specialty Group, 2009 Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, 23-28 March 2009, Las Vegas.

‘Everyday Geographies of Work-Life(Im)Balance’. Session organized by Al James and co-sponsored by the

Economic Geography Specialty Group and Geographic Perspectives on Women Specialty Group, 2007 Annual Conference of the Association of American Geographers, San Francisco, 17 – 21 April 2007.

‘Work-life Balance: Empowering Women in IT?’. Roundtable discussion organised by Al James and Sarah Blow

(Girl Geeks), London Girl Geeks 3rd Anniversary Dinner, Google London HQ, August 28 2008. Available online at: http://blip.tv/file/1334292. See also: http://londongirlgeekdinners.co.uk/page/3/

Presentations at academic conferences, departmental seminars and workshops: ‘(Overcoming) gendered work-life conflict as a barrier to learning and innovation in high tech regions’. Invited

paper to be presented to The Stavanger Innovation Summit: Transforming City Regions, Norway 15-16 June 2009.

‘Learning, innovation and work-life balance: sustaining high tech regional economies’. Paper accepted for

presentation to the 3rd Nordic Geographers Meeting, Turku, Finland, 8-11 June 2009. ‘Reconsidering knowledge spillovers in high tech regional economies: work-life ‘balance’, care and gendered worker

(im)mobilities’. Paper presented to the Regional Studies Annual Conference 2009, Leuven, Belgium, 5-9 April 2009.

‘Work-life (im)balance and gendered worker mobilities: reconsidering knowledge spillovers in high tech regional

economies’. Paper presented in ‘Gendered (Im)mobilities of Learning I’, 2009 Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, 23-28 March 2009, Las Vegas.

‘Work-life balance: challenges and solutions in IT’. Presentation to the London Girl Geeks, Google London

(Empowering Women in IT), London, August 28 2008. ‘Work-life (im)balance and its workplace consequences in the Knowledge Economy: working parents in the IT

sector (Dublin, Ireland and Cambridge, UK)’. Paper presented to MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, 8 July 2008.

‘Work-life conflict, innovation and learning: everyday experiences of working parents in Dublin and Cambridge’s IT

clusters’. Paper presented to the Annual Conference of the Royal Geographical Society with the Institute of British Geographers 2007, RGS, London 29 August - 1 September 2007.

‘Repositioning the ‘business case’ for work-life balance geographically: everyday worker experiences in Dublin’s IT

cluster’. Paper presented in ‘Everyday Geographies of Work-Life(Im)Balance’, 2007 Annual Conference of the Association of American Geographers, San Francisco, 17 – 21 April 2007.

‘Connecting work-life balance to learning and innovation in regional economies: Dublin and Cambridge’s IT

clusters’. Paper presented in ‘Economic Geographies of Ireland’s Post-Celtic Tiger Industrial Economy’ session, 2006 Annual Conference of Irish Geographers University College Dublin, 5-7 May 2006.

44



Sole authored journal articles: ‘Gendered geographies of high tech regional economies’. Geography Compass 2(1): 176-98. ‘Work-life (im)‘balance’ and its consequences for everyday learning and innovation in the New Economy: evidence

from the Irish IT sector’. Paper currently under review by Gender, Place and Culture (submitted February 2008).

‘Work-life balance, care and gendered worker (im)mobilities: reconsidering knowledge spillovers in regional

economies’. Draft paper in progress for submission to Journal of Economic Geography, June 2009. ‘Learning, innovation and work-life ‘balance’: sustaining high tech regional economies’. Draft paper in progress for

submission to Regional Studies, summer 2009. ‘Researching feminist economic geographies of work-life ‘balance’: some methodological considerations’. Planned

paper for submission to Environment and Planning A, autumn 2009.

Participation in Athena SWAN Award bids (for the improvement of women’s participation and progression in science, engineering & technology in higher education and research in the UK):

Queen Mary University of London 2007 self-assessment team for Athena SWAN Charter (focus on culture change, work-life balance, reducing gender inequalities in the University): QMUL won a bronze award

Cambridge University 2005 self-assessment team for Athena SWAN Charter (focus on culture change, work-life balance, reducing gender inequalities in the University): Cambridge won a bronze award

45


appendix 1 : employer questionnaire (dublin) · pdf filereference no. res-000-22-1574-a...

Documents