The habit of turning to contingent workers to see through a project or fill a crucial skills gap has long been entrenched in organizations. Entrenched in the practice, but not necessarily acknowledged in policy and strategy.
And in the absence of overall direction, line managers are left to improvise on a range of issues around contingent work. How do they manage people’s expectations when the possibility of a job offer just isn’t there? How do they offset the loss of productivity when people keep coming and going? And what about resentment among the permanent staff, who suspect the outside workers are paid premium dollars for doing the same job?
In their preliminary observations after a study on highly skilled contingent workers, two professors from Alberta’s Athabasca University found that organizations tend to lack clear strategies on the use of contingent work. They noted “the difficulty in managing the mix of core and contingent workers, and the lack of strategic HR plans for incorporating these people in a meaningful way,” said Deborah Hurst, associate professor in organizational studies at the university’s Centre for Innovative Management.
Together with Lindsay Redpath, academic director of the centre, Hurst conducted interviews with 47 contingent workers and 23 managers at five organizations. They’re in the middle of study and results haven’t been published.
Most managers cited functional flexibility as a reason for hiring contingent workers. A small number said the irregular work terms were initiated by the workers themselves.
But the downside of this is the difficulty in finding just the right skills. And even if an organization makes no investment in the formal training of these workers, some investment in informal training and orientation is still necessary. A number of managers regretted losing this investment when the contract workers can’t stay. By and large, the managers interviewed said they had no incentives in place for transferring knowledge or skills.
Managers were also somewhat concerned about issues of equity. Some expressed uncertainty about how to address workers’ hopes for a permanent position as the end of the work term nears. Several complained about the loss of productivity toward the end, when contractors disengage and start looking for the next project. And in terms of loyalty and commitment, most of the managers said they didn’t expect workers to be loyal to the organization.
A question of choice
A diminished level of commitment and loyalty wasn’t observed on the part of the contingent workers, however. For the most part, the workers approach the contract relationships as they would a permanent position.
“We’re pretty skeptical of this notion that there’s some kind of new ‘psychological employment contract’ and that the traditional employment contract is something of the past because people are managing their own boundary-less careers and that they have less affiliation with an employer,” said Redpath. That’s because even for high-skilled workers, this level of personal control is somewhat illusory.
Many of the workers interviewed said they like temporary assignments, mainly because the work offers them flexibility, time with family, or an opportunity to do interesting work after retirement. Out of 47 contingent workers interviewed, 30 said they were either very satisfied or reasonably satisfied with the set-up.
But an equal number said they would prefer a permanent position, Hurst and Redpath found. Many of the workers said they fell into contingent work to avoid being laid off or to tide themselves over until permanent work comes along. Some said they’re in contingent work because they haven’t found anything that holds their interest. Thus, a lack of opportunities in the marketplace has had an impact, even for workers with sought-after skills.
“What they’re doing is shopping around for the best fit, the fit between their values and their expectations. The frustration comes when they find a fit and there isn’t a place for them,” said Hurst.
The importance of a regular position for these workers comes into play when they view their career over the long term. While the pay can be high in the short term, the workers interviewed are all too aware that they lose out, in the long run, on promotional opportunities and professional development opportunities.
“Even the IT contractors have said it was frustrating for them to move ahead,” said Redpath. “They’re reluctant to take time out to invest in additional training or education, because they don’t know when the next job is going to come along. And the other thing is they get hired to do the same kind of work, because that’s what they did at their last contract. They don’t have a lot of opportunity for moving to the next level.”
Commitment
Whether they covet a regular position or not, the contingent workers interviewed in this preliminary study seemed motivated by a commitment to their profession, if not their employer. Some said they were working at their best because they wanted to be rehired or they hoped for a good reference. But many said simply that they were giving their best, and the level of effort and commitment is on par with what they would give a permanent employer.
A number of government employees, in particular, had to do short-term work as it was the only point of entry into the organization.
“There were some real barriers to full-time positions, so many of these people have been there for years. And there was a lot of frustration and negative feeling about that.” But despite this level of disenchantment, these workers demonstrated a strong “commitment to the profession and the mandate of the organization,” said Hurst. “They believed it; they bought into it.”
The same tenor of professionalism is seen when it comes to the questions about knowledge transfer. While most of the respondents said the organizations they worked with typically don’t have any formal mechanism for knowledge transfer, on an individual level many said they don’t hesitate to impart their experience and knowledge, even if these are their bread and butter.
“It’s in my interest to make sure the organization is very satisfied with everything that I do,” said one respondent. “Preparing the organization for when I leave is a big part of my service to them.”
Some indicated, however, that a sense of caution around intellectual property issues gets in the way of knowledge transfer, but this seems to depend on organizational culture. Informal workplace culture also plays a part in whether contingent workers are included in various organizational activities, though by and large, contingent workers say they’re well-integrated at a team-level.
Outside the team, however, the level of interaction varies. “Some organizations keep them distant — ‘You’re just a contractor’ — and others are not afraid to include them as part of a team,” said Redpath. The difference between one type of message and another can mean the difference between whether contingent workers are welcomed or resented, she added.
If there aren’t “clear messages from the organization about what contribution these people are making, and how that helps the rest of the organization in terms of their workload and competitiveness,” a sense of antagonism and disrespect can build against the contingent workers.
And in the absence of overall direction, line managers are left to improvise on a range of issues around contingent work. How do they manage people’s expectations when the possibility of a job offer just isn’t there? How do they offset the loss of productivity when people keep coming and going? And what about resentment among the permanent staff, who suspect the outside workers are paid premium dollars for doing the same job?
In their preliminary observations after a study on highly skilled contingent workers, two professors from Alberta’s Athabasca University found that organizations tend to lack clear strategies on the use of contingent work. They noted “the difficulty in managing the mix of core and contingent workers, and the lack of strategic HR plans for incorporating these people in a meaningful way,” said Deborah Hurst, associate professor in organizational studies at the university’s Centre for Innovative Management.
Together with Lindsay Redpath, academic director of the centre, Hurst conducted interviews with 47 contingent workers and 23 managers at five organizations. They’re in the middle of study and results haven’t been published.
Most managers cited functional flexibility as a reason for hiring contingent workers. A small number said the irregular work terms were initiated by the workers themselves.
But the downside of this is the difficulty in finding just the right skills. And even if an organization makes no investment in the formal training of these workers, some investment in informal training and orientation is still necessary. A number of managers regretted losing this investment when the contract workers can’t stay. By and large, the managers interviewed said they had no incentives in place for transferring knowledge or skills.
Managers were also somewhat concerned about issues of equity. Some expressed uncertainty about how to address workers’ hopes for a permanent position as the end of the work term nears. Several complained about the loss of productivity toward the end, when contractors disengage and start looking for the next project. And in terms of loyalty and commitment, most of the managers said they didn’t expect workers to be loyal to the organization.
A question of choice
A diminished level of commitment and loyalty wasn’t observed on the part of the contingent workers, however. For the most part, the workers approach the contract relationships as they would a permanent position.
“We’re pretty skeptical of this notion that there’s some kind of new ‘psychological employment contract’ and that the traditional employment contract is something of the past because people are managing their own boundary-less careers and that they have less affiliation with an employer,” said Redpath. That’s because even for high-skilled workers, this level of personal control is somewhat illusory.
Many of the workers interviewed said they like temporary assignments, mainly because the work offers them flexibility, time with family, or an opportunity to do interesting work after retirement. Out of 47 contingent workers interviewed, 30 said they were either very satisfied or reasonably satisfied with the set-up.
But an equal number said they would prefer a permanent position, Hurst and Redpath found. Many of the workers said they fell into contingent work to avoid being laid off or to tide themselves over until permanent work comes along. Some said they’re in contingent work because they haven’t found anything that holds their interest. Thus, a lack of opportunities in the marketplace has had an impact, even for workers with sought-after skills.
“What they’re doing is shopping around for the best fit, the fit between their values and their expectations. The frustration comes when they find a fit and there isn’t a place for them,” said Hurst.
The importance of a regular position for these workers comes into play when they view their career over the long term. While the pay can be high in the short term, the workers interviewed are all too aware that they lose out, in the long run, on promotional opportunities and professional development opportunities.
“Even the IT contractors have said it was frustrating for them to move ahead,” said Redpath. “They’re reluctant to take time out to invest in additional training or education, because they don’t know when the next job is going to come along. And the other thing is they get hired to do the same kind of work, because that’s what they did at their last contract. They don’t have a lot of opportunity for moving to the next level.”
Commitment
Whether they covet a regular position or not, the contingent workers interviewed in this preliminary study seemed motivated by a commitment to their profession, if not their employer. Some said they were working at their best because they wanted to be rehired or they hoped for a good reference. But many said simply that they were giving their best, and the level of effort and commitment is on par with what they would give a permanent employer.
A number of government employees, in particular, had to do short-term work as it was the only point of entry into the organization.
“There were some real barriers to full-time positions, so many of these people have been there for years. And there was a lot of frustration and negative feeling about that.” But despite this level of disenchantment, these workers demonstrated a strong “commitment to the profession and the mandate of the organization,” said Hurst. “They believed it; they bought into it.”
The same tenor of professionalism is seen when it comes to the questions about knowledge transfer. While most of the respondents said the organizations they worked with typically don’t have any formal mechanism for knowledge transfer, on an individual level many said they don’t hesitate to impart their experience and knowledge, even if these are their bread and butter.
“It’s in my interest to make sure the organization is very satisfied with everything that I do,” said one respondent. “Preparing the organization for when I leave is a big part of my service to them.”
Some indicated, however, that a sense of caution around intellectual property issues gets in the way of knowledge transfer, but this seems to depend on organizational culture. Informal workplace culture also plays a part in whether contingent workers are included in various organizational activities, though by and large, contingent workers say they’re well-integrated at a team-level.
Outside the team, however, the level of interaction varies. “Some organizations keep them distant — ‘You’re just a contractor’ — and others are not afraid to include them as part of a team,” said Redpath. The difference between one type of message and another can mean the difference between whether contingent workers are welcomed or resented, she added.
If there aren’t “clear messages from the organization about what contribution these people are making, and how that helps the rest of the organization in terms of their workload and competitiveness,” a sense of antagonism and disrespect can build against the contingent workers.
