Recent research by the UK government found that jobs promoted with flexibility had a 30% uplift in applications. Our own studies with companies on the RoleMapper platform found that jobs designed and promoted with flexibility generate a 125% increase in female candidates and an 80% increase in quality of hiring (based on the CV-to-hire ratio).
And flexible job design for some organisations has help achieve 30% women in senior roles and reduced employee turnover 80%+.
Our 5 dimensions of flexible job design help determine the feasibility of whether certain flexible working patterns will work or not.
Dimension one: Location Dependency
This determines how dependent the role is on a particular physical location, or the importance of face to face communications at a physical location in order to receive and/or conduct the role effectively. This helps us to understand the impact of the role holder not being present in the workplace.
However, if you could ask managers; ‘can this role be available to work remotely going forward?’ they will give you their view, but Managers often have biases or personal preferences around how jobs and teams need to work.
So, to really understand if the role can be worked on this basis there are some specific questions that we could ask around the job itself that takes it away from personal preference or any bias that might exist.
Dimension two: Control over Workflow & Predictability
The second dimension determines what the flow of work look like for this role and how predictable it is. This helps us to understand the dynamics of the peaks and troughs, and also gives an idea of the level of control the individual might have over the flow of work, as well as whether there is any scope to flex the time in the role. Dimension three: Availability & Responsiveness How available and responsive does the role holder need to be when work comes in? What are the expectations of stakeholders and colleagues in terms of availability and responsiveness of the role holder? This helps understand the impact on absence from the role for any period of time.
Dimension four: Capability & Expertise
Here we are looking at what extent other people in the team have the capability and expertise required to deliver the role. Is it a completely unique role with only one person with the specific expertise to do it, or is it a role carried out by many people?
Looking at this dimension helps us to understand if there could be any option to consider other people to replace, cover or share or step up as a development opportunity if the role holder is absent for any period of time.
Dimension five: Segments of Work
Finally, the last dimension is looking at the segments of work in the role. All jobs should be able to be segmented into 4-5 key high level segments of work responsibilities.
Determining what the work segments are gives us a sense of how the job might be divided up and possibly split or shared between one or more people that might enable part-time working in say a job share or shift pattern working arrangement.
Setting-up a mechanism to help your managers assess the flexible job design dimensions for their roles. Embed a systematic approach to assessing job and team flexibility that takes into account all the variables that have an operational impact on varying ways to work flexibly in the role.
Helping identify, a systematic and consistent view of the viable working patterns that not only work for the employee but also work for the business and the team.
It also provides managers, teams and individuals with a roadmap of what flexible working patterns will work and which ones will be more challenging.
By applying the 5 dimensions to every role, every flexible working request, every job you design, you will be able to have a systematic, consistent approach to designing flexible working patterns.
In this article, we'll discuss some common flexible working pitfalls, and the steps organisations can take to avoid them.
The workplace we've gone, or are going back to, will now be very different. Business leaders now need to develop a vision of what their workplace should look like and design systemic, sustainable flexibility into their workforce.
The time to make that flexible working change is now. But the question is; how will you challenge the traditional thinking that still exist in organisations? How will you challenge this systematically at scale?
Now, there may well be a school of thought around letting this next wave of flexibility naturally take a more organic path. Let managers work with it and have ‘tailored’ conversations at employee level.
It is absolutely right that these conversations happen between employees and managers, but you need to beware the pitfalls of letting this pan out without a systematic approach.
Without question, the pandemic has hit parents with young children very hard indeed. However, many people who aren't parents also want increased flexibility for a whole range of reasons. If there is one thing this pandemic is revealing is that people are reflecting on what is important in their lives.
Despite this – and the right-to-request flexible working in the UK and other countries - there is still a tendency to view the need for flexible working as being exclusively for parents, or in some cases as a privilege for senior staff.
An inconsistent approach to how we respond to flexible working requests or the conversations we have around increased flexibility, can breed unhealthy friction in the workplace. It can also get you in a lot of hot water in how you justify one arrangement for one person but not for another. Access to commercially viable flexible working patterns should be open to all. Those with kids, those with elderly parents, those with a situation that requires them to take time away from work at short notice, and those who simply perform better when they have the freedom to manage their own time.
Flexible Working Pitfall #2: Diving in without a plan A key challenge for managers working with teams who have different variations of flexibility is how to manage individuals, workloads and communications across varying schedules and locations.
Different working patterns do require advanced planning and coordination of schedules, as well as team communications and collaboration.
Doing a bit of upfront planning around how to manage, and accommodate, varying work schedules and locations will pay dividends.
To help manage this, many employers put in place a model of core days and core hours during which everyone knows that the whole team will be available.
Co-located teams, where some might be working in the office and some working from home can also lead to challenges – be these perceived or real - about how the team communicates and collaborates effectively together.
If the manager is in the office, it will invariably be the case those working in the office will get more airtime and find it easier to collaborate and share information. Those at home risk missing out on the watercooler chats or informal corridor conversations. If you are not careful, this can also lead to more deep-rooted bias around perceived performance. Research has shown that where teams have co-located staff, it is often the case that homeworkers are more likely to be over-looked for the strategic projects and promotions than those more visible in the office.
Flexible Working Pitfall # 3: Increased flex without design Pitfall number three is a theme that really runs through pitfall 1 and 2 but needs to be pulled out separately as it’s a ‘biggie’.
Flexibility means different things to different people – you will have employees who want:
Pitfall 3 is what a lot of well-intentioned managers fall into it – that is agreeing to flexible working patterns without consideration for the job, its workload and deliverables or how the team needs to collaborate to get work done.
Agreeing to flex without considering the job design can do more damage than good
Where the flex has been agreed to help the individual but has been designed for and around the individual and not the role can lead to all sorts of issues.
But here is the big takeaway - not all flexible working options work for all roles. It has to work for the role, the team and the business as well as the employee. When flexible only goes one way – if there are too many boundaries or restrictions in place, flexible working can’t be what it’s supposed to be, flexible.
We have seen how this has tipped some managers over the edge and shifted them from the camp of being supportive of flexible working arrangements into the camp of it’s a nightmare and too difficult to manage.
It’s essential that as you start to increase the flexibility in your jobs, teams and workforce, you design and agree to viable working patterns that not only work for the employee but also work for the business and the team. By being aware of the flexible working pitfalls, you can make it work for everyone.
Interview bias has been a problem for some time. The interview process, if not managed correctly, leaves you wide open to biases that impact how you conduct the interview and the hiring decisions you make.
In the world of bias-academia, the “Halo or Horns” effect is a terms often used to describe specifically how “confirmatory bias” can manifest itself in the recruitment process - when an interviewer allows one strong point about the candidate to overshadow or have an effect on everything else.
For instance, knowing they used to work at a particular company might be looked upon favourably. Everything the applicant says during the interview is seen in this light: "well, she left out an important part of the answer to that question, but, she must know it, she used to work at X company”.
The "horns" effect is just the opposite - allowing one weak point to influence everything else. And then there is the “mini-me” bias, where we have an unconscious tendency to favour those who remind us of ourselves. This can result in managers favouring a candidate because they are similar to themselves rather than because they are the best person for the job.
Structured interviews help debias decision making
So how do you stop this happening? Bias training? Yes, good idea, it at least makes you aware. But training alone will not make a systemic shift - it is very difficult to be consciously conscious of our unconscious biases every single minute of the interview.
There has been lots of research into interviewing and in particular what types of interview best reduce interview bias. Structured interviews have been found to be considerably more effective than unstructured interviews.
Clarity on requirements is the key to structured interviewing; what you are assessing – the requirements - and ensuring the criteria you are assessing for are inclusive and have been reviewed for bias.
Ultimately, to ensure your structured interview is inclusive you only want to be assessing the absolute essential criteria required to perform well in the job, desirable criteria are not discussed.
"Structured interviews are one of the best tools we have to identify the strongest job candidates." Dr Melissa Harrell, People Analytics Team, Google.
In summary, without a structured interview process, managers may well fall foul to their unconscious biases in their interpretation, assessment and selection of talent. But if the requirements you are assessing have not been rigorously assessed for interview bias, or potential to exclude talent, then all your efforts may well be in vain.
The biases unconsciously baked into the job requirements in your job descriptions could potentially be helping you to screen out the best, most creative and diverse people in the market.
Break interview bias with intelligent job design
So, how do you ensure requirements are inclusive? At the point when we define these requirements. It’s when we design our jobs and create our job descriptions. It is the process of designing a job and creating a job description where you determine the screening and assessment criteria for prospective candidates.
By adopting an intelligent job design approach you connect the dots with your inclusive job description, your inclusive requirements and your inclusive structured interview process.
At the point of when you are creating your jobs – whether for job profiling, job description creation, job advert creation – you design your requirements inclusively and ensure that they feed into a structured interview, closing the loop and debiasing the process.
By focusing on pure technical vs soft skills we are baking bias into the process and possibly missing out on talent.
From our experience, when managers are asked: “what screening criteria is important for this role?” they, more often than not, do a quick shortcut and tend to emphasise the “technical skills” required in the role.
Technical skills give a level of control for managers and recruiters to screen candidates in or out of the process. They actually make the job of screening candidates a lot easier.
Focusing on technical vs soft skills favours men over women
LinkedIn found that Men, on average, tend to list three more skills on their LinkedIn profiles than women, and are more likely to list the “in-demand” skills on their profile than women.
The research found that, women are more likely to actively showcase their soft skills on their LinkedIn profile, whereas men tend to showcase their tech skills. And given that people with 5+ skills on their LinkedIn profile are messaged up to 31 x more by hirers, it’s no wonder why more men are identified for shortlists than women.
In general, women favour job adverts that bring out the soft skills requirements in a role, such as team-work, collaboration, communications.
Many roles only emphasise the technical vs soft skills, but 92% of hiring managers say they believe soft skills to be more important than hard skills. When asked the question: “what does high performance look like in this role? What does good look like?” more often that not they tend to emphasise the soft skills
However, when pressed for time - and to help shortcut the process - technical bias kicks in and managers resort back to focusing on the technical skills on their job description.
Break technical bias with intelligent job design
In summary, technical skills may well be essential requirements for role but it’s the soft skills that will determine high performance and attract a wider pool of diverse talent.
So, how do we make a shift in these biases?
We need to look at where we define these technical and soft skills requirements in the first place. It’s when we design our jobs and create our job descriptions.
By adopting an intelligent job design approach you can challenge the essential skills requirements.
Wherever this process may happen in the business – job profiling, job description creation, job advert creation, screening and interviewing – you can ensure a good balance of technical and soft skills are designed, promoted, screened and hired for.
Updated June 2022
One area where we see a considerable level of hidden hiring bias is level of education, or to coin the phrase created by social psychologists, “Educationism”.
Researchers found clear evidence that educated people are implicitly biased against the less educated. To explain this using the language of the ‘bias-academics’, we all form part of different “in-groups” - social groups to which a person psychologically identifies as being a member.
Our unconscious biases cause us to make decisions in favour of individuals in our in-groups to the detriment of others. Educationism can manifest itself unconsciously, and also sometimes overtly within the recruitment process.
We often see managers listing a specific level of education or qualification requirements in their job descriptions, when the reality is that it’s not required.
Understandably, specifying a degree can often be a comfort blanket for managers to ensure a baseline of education and knowledge, and it definitely makes the screening process easier for recruiters: if you don’t have the qualification, you don’t make the short-list.
A degree requirement is not a good indicator of candidate ability. But is a degree qualification really an indicator of a candidate’s ability to perform well in the role? Not according to Google. Prasad Setty, VP People Analytics at Google said that “for years, candidates were screened according to SAT scores and college grade-point averages, metrics favored by its founders”.
But, after extensive analysis into high performance and retention, they found that “numbers and grades alone did not prove to spell success at Google and are no longer used as important hiring criteria”
Further research backs up Google’s conclusion. A recent study into employers who switched to hiring university educated graduates over previously hired high-school grads, found no improvement in the quality of work, performance, productivity or revenue with the upgrade in education level.
We are starting to see more of a shift to skills based hiring, however. Harvard Business Review and Emsi Burning Glass analysed more than 51 million jobs posted between 2017 - 2020, and they found that employers are indeed resetting degree requirements in a wide variety of roles, especially for middle-skill positions. There is still a long way to go, but it's clear there is a growing shift in the need for specific qualifications.
Educationalism screens out potential high-performing candidates
There are undoubtedly roles where qualifications are essential. But there is a strong argument that says a degree should only really be a requirement for a specialised position, like a doctor or lawyer or for specialist subjects where in-depth knowledge is required that can only be gained through study or extensive training.
By specifying requirements for a specific degree, where none is necessary, you are baking bias into the process and blocking prospective high-potential candidates. You just need to look at the stats to understand the impact this might have.
In the US, 34% of the population has a Bachelors degree, less than the UK (27%). So, if you are specifying the requirement for a degree and screening on this in your recruitment process, then you are actively EXCLUDING over 66% of the population. Such as individuals who did not have the opportunity go to university - or who chose not to – but who might have worked their way up the career ladder and be perfect for the role.
“My best software developers do not have a degree in computer science, one has an Arts Degree and the other a Degree in Ceramics” (RoleMapper User)
Imagine if you overlay this with a request for a specific degree like computer science, where only 18% are STEM majors. You've missed out on that talented software engineer who took a circuitous route after studying Arts or Ceramics.
Recently, a RoleMapper user had a ‘bias-flag’ on a job description for a customer support engineer that had a requirement for a Masters in Computer Science. A Masters? To do a support role? Really…?
In the US, only 13% have a masters qualification. If you are asking for a Masters, that’s 87% excluded from your shortlist. It’s often done without thinking, “this is what we’ve always asked for”.
There has been a big push towards apprentice schemes and encouraging people to head straight into work and gain experience from the ground up. Going forward, post-COVID, we may see a decline in university attendance with candidates preferring to head straight into the workplace. So, the concept of Educationism bias in your recruitment process will only have an increased impact on your ability to attract talent.
Break Educationism bias with intelligent job design
In summary, degree and technical qualifications may be appropriate requirements for some roles but for the majority they are not.
If you are posting positions that require a degree where it is not absolutely essential, it may well be costing you the best, most creative and diverse people in the market.
How do you make a shift and eliminate these biases? You need to go back to where you define these requirements in the first place. It’s when we design our jobs and create our job descriptions. By adopting an intelligent inclusive job design and recruitment approach you can challenge the requirement for a degree or specific qualifications.
Wherever this process may happen in the business – job profiling, job description creation, job advert creation, screening and interviewing – you ensure only the essential criteria required to perform well in the role are promoted, screened and hired.
We frequently come across organisations who are trying to solve the job description conundrum. Those organisations who know, or have heard, that job descriptions have the potential to unlock talent and diversity.
However, when we ask them; “tell me about how job descriptions are created in your organisation? Who owns this process” We are often met with a laugh and a comment along the lines of “Ha, well now that’s a question!”
More often than not, the process of job design and creating job descriptions is a bit all over the place with no one clear owner. In many organisations it is a process that crosses multiple functions - with each group wanting different outcomes from the job description.
For example, some companies have a reward function who use job descriptions for grading and benchmarking. Managers create job descriptions to help them define and build out their teams.
At the end of the process is recruitment who try to do their best at translating hundreds of different versions of job descriptions into content that will be appealing to the outside world.
Understanding definitions is the first step to making the change
Essentially, these organisations are correct in thinking that job descriptions are important. We at RoleMapper say that they sit at the epicentre of an organisations ability to attract, recruit and retain talent. But if you attempt to embed and scale a change to your job descriptions, without systematically changing how the process works, you will be left chasing your tail.
The start of any change initiative, no matter how big or small, should always starts with a vision of the future, defining the change and a view of the current state.
We thought it would be helpful to clarify a few definitions around the whole area of job descriptions. We hope these will help you articulate and identify the change you need to make in your organisation to enable great inclusive job descriptions.
The process of designing the role
Job design is the process of actually designing a role. It is the process by which organisations define and divide the tasks that need to be done in order to carry out the work or service that needs to be delivered.
The Job design process helps determine responsibilities, accountabilities, deliverables and decision-making within the role. It also helps define inputs, outputs and interactions of the role, the key factors that influence the role, as well as how, where and when it must be performed.
Job design brings all these elements together to configure and create roles that motivate an employee to deliver the job successfully or attracts prospective candidate applications.
The output of the job design process
A job description is an internal document that provides all the detail about a role. It is a critical tool that describes the purpose, responsibilities, activities and outputs of a role. It helps us define the knowledge, skills, experience and capabilities that a person will need to enable successful delivery.
It might include reporting lines, where it sits in the hierarchy, grading etc. To create an effective job description, however, it’s important to go through the ‘job design’ process. You might not know it – you might just think you are putting your ideas down on a page - but that’s what it is, you are designing a job.
A job description is a feeder into a job advert. It is where we define the content that can be translated into a job adverts for the external marketplace, and defines the screening and assessment criteria for prospective candidates.
A job description describes what the candidate does for you; a job advert should focus on what you can do for them.
JOB ADVERT
A job description tells, a job advert sells!
A Job advert is another output of the job design process. It is a re-scripted shorter, copy-written sales version of the job description to sell the role and company to prospective candidates.
A job advert translates the essential elements of a job description, along with any additional unique selling points, and compelling copy, that can be used to sell the role through various advertising channels.
The objective of a job advert is to be a sales tool to attract the widest possible pool of appropriate candidates. A job advert needs to market the organisation and the position in a positive way. It has to grab a potential candidate’s interest to encourage them to find out more.
Many organisations struggle to translate their job descriptions into job adverts. Failing to distinguish between a job description and a job advert can cause all sorts of challenges because the aim of each is different.
A consistent approach to job design is the key to creating great job descriptions and job adverts
So, job design is the process, job descriptions and job adverts are the outputs. To make a systematic change to your job descriptions or your job adverts, you need to go back and address the job design process.
How you create your job description – the job design process, the levers you have in place within this process - is absolutely key to how you attract, recruit, retain and progress talent.
The challenge that many organisations face is what happens when the job design process doesn’t exist. Or, if it does, it’s inconsistent.
Some companies go straight to the end product or job advert and try to improve the language and copy. While this is definitely helpful, it is only putting a sticking-plaster on the problem and solving a small part of what needs to be addressed.
Without a consistent, inclusive approach to how you design your jobs you will continue to struggle to make a systematic change to your job descriptions and job adverts, as well as your organisation’s ability to attract and retain talent.
If you want to make sure that all your jobs are designed and promoted inclusively. If you want to embed systematic change. You need to focus on the job design process.
In this article, we look at the importance of inclusive job descriptions and why it's time for organisations to think more carefully about inclusivity. An inclusive job is crucial in today’s workplace.
Not only is COVID-19 changing the workplace narrative around flexible working, but it is also giving organisations breathing space to re-assess hiring strategies and look at how they can reboot and refocus, especially when it comes to driving talent and diversity in inclusive job postings.
Businesses spend around $5bn worldwide on talent attraction, and $8bn attracting more diverse talent. However, there appears to be a disconnect between spend and acquisition because one of the biggest challenges to improving diversity is actually getting applicants through the door for inclusive job roles.
So, what’s the problem here?
The answer lies mainly in inclusive job descriptions. More often than not, when it comes to defining or creating a role, it’s usually a manual process of getting the words out and putting content on a page, which then gets replicated in a job advert for an inclusive job.
However, when you look at the patterns and behaviours of potential candidates looking at a job description, there’s a gap between communication and action, which gets wider if you’re struggling to attract more diverse employees for inclusive job positions.
We look at the all too common mistakes and give you pointers on how to get inclusive job descriptions and inclusive recruitment right.
Readability and Language
Six seconds.
This is the length of time candidates usually spend reviewing a job description. Combine this with the fact that, for 70%, it’s the first time they’re engaging with your brand; getting the language and layout right for an inclusive job is crucial.
As with anything online, people tend to skim read, which means copy needs to be short, sharp, and to the point. If a job description is too difficult to read and a candidate is ‘wading’ through words, they will be less likely to apply for an inclusive job.
Try and keep sentences to around 17 words to help keep people engaged. Research has shown that job descriptions perform well at around 700 words in length; clear headings and bullet points allow candidates to get a quick summary or key elements of the role.
Responsibilities
We’ve all seen job descriptions with a never-ending list of responsibilities, and although the sentiment is to communicate as much about the role as possible, it can turn potential candidates off from applying to an inclusive job.
Quite simply, if a job description is not clear and succinct, people will not apply for an inclusive job.
There isn’t an organisation out there that doesn’t have its own jargon and internal 'workspeak', but as we all know from experience, it takes time to learn the language and feel confident to use it within the workplace.
With that in mind, imagine how a potential candidate feels when reading a job description littered with internal jargon or complex language? Remember, that for 70% of applicants it’s their first experience of your organisation and brand.
Clarity is key to ensuring an inclusive job description.
Requirements
For most job descriptions, 60% of the requirements outlined aren’t necessarily essential. It’s human nature to want to throw in as much as possible and hope a point resonates with a candidate, but non-essential elements can actually exclude quality candidates from inclusive job applications.
This may seem like a contradiction, but when you start to analyse behaviours it becomes clear that less really is more in an inclusive job context.
Women won’t apply for a role if they don’t meet 80 – 100% of the criteria, and if there are too many requirements, this can also have an adverse effect on applicants for inclusive jobs.
Specifying years of experience or a degree-level education can also block high-quality candidates for inclusive job roles. Even if it is framed as a ‘nice-to-have’.
Many people read the word ‘desirable’ in a job description as ‘essential’, so through the use of one word – although with good intent - you’ve immediately eliminated a pool of talent for inclusive job opportunities.
Flexible Working
Organisations can no longer ignore the issue of flexible working. For candidates, it is the No.1 key benefit that will attract them to a role, especially an inclusive job.
Prior to the COVID-19 outbreak, 80% of candidates sought homeworking in a role, and 45% a part-time arrangement. These figures will only increase once recruitment returns to normal - it’s now almost non-negotiable in an inclusive job description, so it's important to be prepared.
For those departments that may be working on reduced budgets post-lockdown, 50% of people would prefer flexible working over a salary increase, which means a flex arrangement could be an immediate hiring solution for inclusive jobs.
Brand and Value Proposition
We spend around a third of our lives at work, so it’s little surprise organisational culture, brand personality, and people are crucial elements for candidates when considering an inclusive job.
It's important to bring out these key points and bring the role to life. Just think; for any career-minded person, a new role needs to be challenging and highly rewarding. Otherwise, why would they apply for an inclusive job?
If a role is dynamic and fast-moving with an organisation that has a great teamwork ethos, then communicate these points. This is what attracts talent to inclusive jobs.
How Rolemapper can help
If you’re looking to re-assess hiring strategies and really focus on driving talent and diversity, then RoleMapper can help your business create inclusive job descriptions that resonate with the right audience.
A global tech company believes RoleMapper reduces the time it takes to produce an inclusive job description by 50%.
As an intelligent learning platform, RoleMapper helps organisations create and scale consistent best practices for inclusive jobs.
Not only does it reduce the time it takes to create inclusive job descriptions, but it also removes bias, shifts manager mindsets, and supports a more inclusive organisational culture.
When it comes to attracting and retaining talent, there has never been a better time to get your house in order, really nail inclusive job descriptions, and keep your organisation ahead of the competition.
About RoleMapper
The RoleMapper platform has a range of modules that adhere to all requirements and enables you to debias roles, job ads, and descriptions, access data-led insights, and practice good governance with a range of reporting features for inclusive jobs.
With RoleMapper, businesses are able to digitise, standardise, optimise, connect, and manage job families, libraries, ads, and recruitment practices for inclusive jobs.
If you’re looking to improve compliance across the enterprise, why not book a demo and find out how we can help your organisation with inclusive jobs.
It’s been a fast-moving unpredictable time, especially for UK business, but what we do know is that flexible working is now more of a necessity than a nice-to-have. And, although the transition to homeworking has happened very quickly, it’s now time to take a longer-term view on how this way of working is going to shape-up in the future.
Barclays and WPP have both announced they are now looking to de-centralise and that flexible roles will be the norm post-lockdown, with corporate offices or headquarters a thing of the past.
For employees and the UK workforce, this change has been a long time coming with flexible working having always been a key priority:
• 81% are looking for some form of homeworking when choosing their next employer
• 45% would ideally like a part-time working pattern in their next role
• 50% find it more attractive than a 10% salary increase
However, the new normal isn’t simply about working from home, it’s about managing people, budgets and the types and styles of flexibility that is required.
Financial belts will be tightened, and teams will need clarity on roles and responsibilities, so it’s more important than ever to be clear on the flexibility you need across the enterprise.
We take a look at how flexible job design can help you determine the type of flexibility you and your teams need more effectively, so you can get your workforce back up and running as seamlessly as possible.
Lockdown has meant we’ve all had to feel our way through the transition to home working, but a lot of the norms and conventions have been put to one side in favour of a ‘let’s see how it works’ approach.
However, longer-term, this isn’t really sustainable. With employees set to spend less time in the office, previous responsibilities may no longer be relevant outside of the workplace, and certain roles may now require different levels of responsibility.
It’s also going to be vital to factor in employee concerns around commuting, as well as workplace social distancing policies, which will mean reducing headcount in the office with hot desking no longer a viable option.
A key mistake made by many organisations is to agree to reduce an employee’s days or hours, renegotiate salary and then believe that flexibility has been successfully implemented. Unfortunately, that is not flexible working: it is more akin to asking an employee to do a fulltime job in less time.
This approach can alter the dynamic across teams. The employee may feel they’ve been set-up to fail while colleagues might feel overstretched by having to take up the slack, which creates resentment.
It’s also important to note that communicating flexibility is also an area prone to pitfalls. There can be a disconnect between what is communicated versus what is understood in a newly defined role, so clarity is crucial.
Rolling-out a flexible working plan or strategy does mean a mindset shift and does mean redefining roles to be more effective for this way of working.
Flexible job design allows you to create clear, effective and measurable job descriptions, so that all parties, namely the employee and manager, have clear goals and objectives.
So how do you design a flexible role?
When it comes to redefining job descriptions, there are a range of elements that need to be assessed before agreeing the type of flex an employee requires.
Some roles are such that an individual needs to be in the office or at a specific site or location. Think about how this can be adjusted to allow for remote working. This will also allow you to get a clearer picture on location dependent employees, which could prove useful when assessing social distancing desk policies.
This focuses on stakeholder responsibility and the exact nature of the flexible role. It’s important here to assess whether the job maintains the same level of work that follows the same patterns or deadlines, or whether it is more interchangeable on a weekly or monthly basis.
Does that stakeholder need to be team-facing at all times? If so, how quickly do they need to engage or respond? As a manager, they may control the flow of work or may have to pivot quickly to focus on a new task, which may require team meetings.
Assess if the role can be segmented to allow for colleagues to take on new responsibility or shared with a peer. This could be an opportunity to support and nurture employee development.
A well-designed flexible role can help increase employee productivity and motivation. 70% of UK employees want to work flexibly, and now is the time to respond to market need, but it must be effective, realistic, achievable and measurable in order to succeed.
RoleMapper is a job design platform that helps organisations create and scale consistent best practice, job design, job profiles, job descriptions and job adverts.
By automating the flexible job design process, RoleMapper not only reduces the time it takes to design roles, but also removes bias, shift manager mindsets and supports a more inclusive organisational culture.
We are currently offering a cost-effective Proof of Concept trial of RoleMapper. If you would like to find out more, why not get in touch with us at enquiries@rolemapper.tech and find out how we can help your business.
Role Mapper Technologies Ltd
Kings Wharf, Exeter
United Kingdom
© 2025 RoleMapper. All rights reserved.
