Making Time for Family, Fun Takes, Well, Work
Most people want to cut down on work and take more time for family and fun--or so they say. But if workers actually were granted the chance to change tomorrow, experts agree, many wouldn’t do it.
Despite a widespread desire among the American work force to toil less, human resources consultants and behaviorists say deep-seated emotional and cultural impediments conspire to keep many would-be “leisurati” shackled to their cubicles and workstations well beyond the standard eight-hour workday.
“People think they want to work less,” said Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, professor of psychology at the University of Chicago. “But sometimes they worry free time isn’t going to be as much fun as they thought.”
Fear of boredom is just one emotion in a tempestuous cocktail of internal doubts and demons that fuels many workaholics, experts say, and keeps them from pursuing quality family lives, rewarding hobbies and just plain relaxation. Other obstacles can include guilt at even the thought of working less and shame at the possibility of being perceived as a loafer.
“Emotions tend to control our behavior much more than we’d like them to,” UCLA psychiatrist Mark Goulston said. “If you’re afraid you’re not working enough, that’s going to get in the way of achieving balance.”
Goulston and others, however, say there is hope for those driven too far by their work ethic. With determination and creativity, the work-weary can break the ties that bind them too snugly to their livelihoods and strike a peaceful balance between work and other pursuits.
According to a study by New York-based Families and Work Institute, the vast majority of American workers would like nothing better.
A 1997 survey found that 64% of employees wished they could work fewer hours a week--a 17% increase in the number of similar respondents in 1992. The same study also found that the average workweek had risen to 47.1 hours, compared with 43.6 in 1977.
Figures like those should come as no surprise to many who have watched the communications revolution of the last decade broaden markets beyond national boundaries and, at the same time, link workers more directly to their jobs--and bosses--than at any time in history.
“The global economy has made work a 24-hour enterprise for many people,” Families and Work Institute President Ellen Galinsky said.
Chuck Raben, vice chair of Delta Consulting Group, agrees.
“Information and communications technology has accelerated the pace of business and raised the bar on performance standards,” said Raben, who specializes in helping companies handle structural and strategic changes during mergers. “The expectation for functioning at that level has increased, and people are expected to be ‘virtually’ available all the time.”
That same expectation also lies at the heart of the turmoil many feel when they consider scaling back the time they devote to work, Raben said. “The standard of going above and beyond at your job keeps getting higher and higher, and it’s hard to push back because of that.”
Indeed, part of the reason many feel the compulsion to stay at their office after 5 p.m. is because their bosses and co-workers are also still there, Galinsky said. “There is the feeling that your commitment is measured by your presence,” she said. “We have not been able to move away from the notion that presence equals productivity.”
Presence is also often commensurate with a person’s standing in the workplace, according to Vicki Robin, president of the New Roadmaps Foundation.
“Working less is often taken to mean you’re a failure, that somehow you didn’t make it,” said Robin, whose Seattle-based organization counsels people on simplifying their lives. “People can lose status that way, and status is a big thing for us. Losing status means losing the potential to get what you believe you need for the future.”
Losing status, Delta Consulting’s Raben said, can also have very real consequences. “These people may not be considered for promotion because they could be perceived as not willing to give 150%. Bosses are not going to be picking the future leaders from people who don’t want to work very hard.”
In addition, Raben said, people can also be conflicted by a sense of obligation to their businesses and co-workers and subordinate their own goals in favor of the group’s goals. For many people, he said, their reputation as a clutch player on a corporate team is a crucial part of their identities. “It’s hard to break the norms established by a group,” Raben said.
Goulston agrees: “Oftentimes people who have trouble balancing their lives have trouble putting themselves first.”
But beyond the pull of group dynamics at the office, Csikszentmihalyi said, may be a fear of group interaction at home. Longtime workaholics often become estranged from their families and can worry that spending more time with them will be awkward and difficult. “Many people don’t know what to do with their families,” Csikszentmihalyi said. “They have a real hard time having fun with their families.
“You have to work at making home life as interesting as can be. You can’t expect it to miraculously be a barrel of fun. Otherwise you could end up as a couch potato feeling worse.”
To avoid that fate, Csikszentmihalyi and others recommend that people figure out exactly what they want to do with their free time before making the decision to pursue it.
“It has to start with an understanding of your life goals,” Raben said. “You have to know what’s important to you. If you’re confused about that, you can’t make a good decision.”
Allison Levin, a consultant with PricewaterhouseCooper accounting in Chicago, decided nine years ago that she wanted to spend more time with her newborn twins.
“I didn’t see a way to live that manic consultant lifestyle any more,” she said. “I wasn’t just leaving two cats at home in the morning, I was leaving two kids.”
Ultimately, Levin asked to have her workweek pared back to three days and to her surprise, her supervisors and even co-workers agreed. It wasn’t without trepidation, however, that she broached the subject.
“I had a fear that I’d lose my professional status,” she said. “That I’d be viewed as a second-class consultant and passed over for choice projects. But I wasn’t. I was able to keep my career track on an upward slope.”
In fact, Levin was made a full partner at the firm last year.
“My husband got so jealous of my schedule that he’s started taking one day off now,” she said.
