MBA dissertation_Gerald Overstall_FINAL_24_12_13

The University of Southampton
Faculty of Business and Law
School of Management
Masters in Business Administration programme (2011 – 2014)
Course unit title: Dissertation
Dissertation title:
‘What factors influence the uptake of a flexible working programme?
The case of JT.’
Candidate name: Gerald Overstall
Candidate number: 25265296
Date of submission: 24/12/13
Word count: 11,721

of 108
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank Richard Summerfield, Andy Holmes and Leah Gallie from the Human
Resources team at JT who supported me during the survey phase of this dissertation
and for their helpful feedback throughout. Thank you to the employees at JT for such
a fantastic survey response rate. Thank you to my wife Laura for her encouragement
and to my family, in particular my mum Carolyn who has been a pillar of support
throughout the whole MBA and my brother James for his proof reading skills. Finally,
I would like to thank my dissertation tutor Roger Plant for his helpful pointers and
direction in writing this dissertation.

of 108
Abstract
The aim of this dissertation is to understand the factors which influence the uptake of
flexible working within an organisation. Social, economic and technological changes
have prompted many organisations to re-evaluate how they design and implement
flexible working policies with a view to leveraging greater business performance. By
combining case study and questionnaire methodologies, this study focusses on the
employee’s perspective of flexible working to establish the various forms of flexible
working in use, the type of authorisation required for uptake and finally the perceived
benefits and barriers.
This dissertation indicates that perceived barriers to flexible working are a significant
influencing factor in subsequent uptake. The study suggests that an organisation
wishing to improve uptake of its flexible working policy needs to create opportunities
to challenge these perceptions, tailor formalised arrangements to individual employee
needs and support the programme through investment in technology and training.

of 108
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 10
1.1. Dissertation aims and question ................................................................... 10
1.2. Background to study ................................................................................... 10
1.3. Outline structure.......................................................................................... 12
1.4. Case study .................................................................................................. 12
1.5. Contributions and relevance........................................................................ 12
1.6. Research approach..................................................................................... 13
2. Literature Review .............................................................................................. 14
2.1. Flexible Working: A Definition ..................................................................... 14
2.2. Organisational benefits from flexible working.............................................. 15
2.3. Employee benefits resulting from flexible working....................................... 18
2.4. Factors influencing the uptake of flexible working....................................... 20
3. Methodology ..................................................................................................... 24
3.1. Theoretical back drop to choice of methods................................................ 24
3.2. Rationale for selecting methods.................................................................. 24
3.3. Acknowledgement of other methods and reasons for rejection................... 27
4. Results and findings.......................................................................................... 28
4.1. Type of flexible working arrangement ......................................................... 28
4.2. Process used to gain authorisation ............................................................. 33
4.3. Benefits of flexible working to the individual employee ............................... 34
4.4. Perceived barriers to flexible working.......................................................... 40
4.5. Respondents suggested improvements for JT’s flexible working offering ... 47
5. Discussion......................................................................................................... 49
5.1. Factors which influence the uptake of flexible working................................ 50
5.2. Methodological critique ............................................................................... 55

of 108
5.3. Recommendations to increase the uptake of flexible working..................... 57
5.3.1. Create opportunities to explore flexible working ................................... 57
5.3.2. Formalising agreements ....................................................................... 58
5.3.3. Supporting technologies ....................................................................... 59
6. Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 61
7. References........................................................................................................ 64
Appendix 1 – Questionnaire copy ............................................................................ 70
Appendix 2 – Questionnaire introductory email........................................................ 72
Appendix 3 – University of Southampton ethics and risk assessment form
submission ............................................................................................................... 74
Appendix 4 – Questionnaire data ............................................................................. 83
Appendix 5 – JT flexible working policy document ................................................. 100
Appendix 6 – JT job level framework...................................................................... 102
Appendix 7 – JT organisational structure ............................................................... 108

of 108
Table of Figures
Figure 1: PESTEL analysis for flexible working........................................................ 10
Figure 2: Percentage response rates per flexible working type................................ 28
Figure 3: Impact of gender on type of flexible working undertaken .......................... 29
Figure 4: Positive correlation between job level and use of home working .............. 30
Figure 5: Impact of age on type of flexible working undertaken ............................... 31
Figure 6: Impact of age on type of flexible working undertaken ............................... 32
Figure 7: Comparison of how flexible working was agreed for respondents............. 33
Figure 8: Comparison of how flexible working was authorised, by gender............... 34
Figure 9: Percentage response rates by perceived benefit ...................................... 36
Figure 10: Perception of benefit from flexible working from those employees with no
flexible working arrangement ................................................................................... 37
Figure 11: Perceived benefits from flexible working across males and females....... 38
Figure 12: Job satisfaction as a proportion of all other perceived benefits, by age
group........................................................................................................................ 39
Figure 13: Perceived barriers to flexible working...................................................... 40
Figure 14: Authorisation type for those who perceive no barriers to flexible working
................................................................................................................................. 41
Figure 15: Perceived barriers to flexible working, by gender.................................... 42
Figure 16: Job satisfaction as a proportion of all other perceived barriers, by age
group........................................................................................................................ 43
Figure 17: Lack of information as a proportion of all other perceived barriers, by age
group........................................................................................................................ 44
Figure 18: Job level breakdown for those who see colleague negativity as a barrier
................................................................................................................................. 45
Figure 19: Job level breakdown for those who see negative customer impact as a
barrier....................................................................................................................... 45
Figure 20: Job level breakdown for those who see negative impact on career as a
barrier....................................................................................................................... 46
Figure 21: Diagrammatic summary of proposed recommendations. ........................ 60

of 108
1. Introduction
1.1.Dissertation aims and question
This study aims to find out what factors influence the uptake of flexible working within
an organisation and establish a set of practical recommendations for those who wish
to implement a flexible working programme. In doing so, the study will find out which
are the most popular forms of flexible working and the extent to which these
arrangements are formally or informally agreed. Employee perceptions about the
benefits of and barriers to flexible working will be gleaned as part of the study.
The research question is:
‘What factors influence the uptake of flexible working? The case of JT.’
1.2.Background to study
A combination of changing external factors (summarised in Figure 1) have prompted
many organisations to re-evaluate how they design and implement flexible working
policies.
Figure 1: PESTEL analysis for flexible working

of 108
An ageing workforce resulting from the post World War II baby boomer period has
caused some commentators to express their concerns over an impending shortage
of skilled workers, a shortage of jobs for older workers who cannot afford to retire
and a rapid decline in the demand for goods and services as baby boomers retire
with insufficient incomes (O’Toole and Lawler, 2006).
The composition of the workforce has changed dramatically in recent decades with a
significant rise in the number of women in the workforce (Jalilvand, 2000) and more
employees engaged in a dual earner lifestyle where both partners work and share
responsibility for family care-giving (Greenhaus et al., 2000). Dunne and Teg (2007)
found that the increasing tension between work and family life brought about an
imbalance in employees work-life and a reduction in their wellbeing.
Communications technology has become increasingly sophisticated meaning that
employees can be in near constant contact with the workplace (Beauregard and
Henry, 2009). Remote working technologies such as mobile computing, cloud
computing, wireless connectivity, voice over internet and video conferencing have
also enabled new ways of working (McKinsey, 2012) in particular an increasing use
of virtual teams (Dyer and Shafer, 1998). As the western economies shift from
manufacturing to services, employees skillsets are increasingly knowledge based
leading organisations to measure employee performance on a ‘results only’ basis
(Millard and Gillies, 2011) and forming part of a wider management trend in using
contingent rewards to keep employee commitment and productivity high whilst at the
same time devolving authority to line managers (Kelly and Kalev, 2006).
Recent economic turmoil has forced organisations to search for flexible and cost
effective ways to make use of human resources and real estate whilst trying to
maintain employee engagement through a difficult period (Cherry, 2010). Additionally,
political and legal factors such as a cap on working hours and the right to request
flexibility have pushed organisations to offer flexible working (Millard and Gillies,
2011).
Flexible work arrangements have become increasingly common over the last 20 years
(Bond et al., 2005; Glass & Fujimoto, 1995), but their effects seem to be limited.

of 108
Henderson (2002) suggests that this is because flexible work arrangements, as they
are normally administered, rarely promote transformational change that deeply affects
employees’ experiences on the job or their ability to manage other parts of their lives.
Kelly & Kalev (2006) state that flexible working policies rarely lead employees or
leaders to question the baseline assumption that managers properly control the work
process, including when and where work is done. Indeed Lee et al. (2000) found that
new ways of working were often framed as individual ‘accommodations’ that deviate
from a set standard, rather than as opportunities for the organisation to learn and adapt
to a changing workforce and changing technologies.
1.3.Outline structure
This dissertation firstly reviews the literature on flexible working spanning a wide range
of academic subject areas such as economics, family studies, gender studies,
industrial relations, information systems, management, social psychology and
sociology. The methodology for the study will then be described followed by an
analysis of the data collected which will be presented in the results and findings
section. Further analysis will take place in the discussion with appropriate reference
to the literature already reviewed. A critique of the methodology will be included within
the discussion followed by the conclusion which will compare findings with the aims of
the study and suggest opportunities for future research in the field.
1.4.Case study
JT is a telecommunications company head quartered in Jersey with offices in
Guernsey, London, Melbourne and Boston. The company employs around 480 staff
and provides communications services to both business and consumer market
segments. A formalised flexible working policy (see Appendix 5) was introduced at
the company approximately 18 months prior to the study.
1.5.Contributions and relevance
This study will contribute to management practice by drawing out the perceptions of
employees surrounding flexible working, specifically the perceived benefits and
barriers for individuals. Much of the academic research surrounding flexible working
has been focussed on the organisation and often the perceptions of the firm’s HR
department. The data has generally been gathered from employees who have a formal

of 108
flexible working agreement, however this study takes a broader view to incorporate
those who have an informal arrangement and also those that do not undertake any
form of flexible working.
This study is relevant because the recommendations will enable organisations to
implement their flexible working policies more effectively or indeed allow organisations
and their employees to derive more value from their existing flexible working policy.
This study contributes to theory by focussing on the perceptions of employees
regarding flexible working with respect to benefits and barriers. This will provide insight
in order to improve the implementation of a new flexible working policy or improve the
effectiveness of a current policy.
1.6.Research approach
The research involved gathering primary data via a survey which was sent out to all
employees at JT. This approach was deemed to be appropriate as it was in line with
other studies relating to the implementation of flexible working (Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development, 2012; Casper and Harris, 2008; Hyman and Summers,
2004; Winstanley, 2009). Although post questionnaire interviews did form part of the
original research methodology, it was decided that there was insufficient time for these
to be completed and results analysed. The use of open questions within the survey
(enabling respondents to answer in free form) provided an alternative means of
collecting this type of qualitative data.

of 108
2. Literature Review
The topic of flexible working spans a wide range of academic subject areas such as
economics, family studies, gender studies, industrial relations, information systems,
management, social psychology and sociology. This section will review the literature
relating to flexible working by firstly establishing a definition for the topic, then looking
at the organisational and individual benefits, with the final section focussing on specific
factors which influence uptake.
2.1. Flexible Working: A Definition
There is a general consensus amongst scholars that flexible working involves
employees varying the amount, timing and/or location of their work (Kelly and Moen,
2007; McGuire et al, 2010; de Menezes and Kelliher, 2010). There are a number of
examples within each of these categories as suggested by Robertson (2011), which
can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1: Examples of flexible working by type (Robertson, 2011).

of 108
Kelly and Moen (2007) refered to a continuum of flexibility, from very minimal e.g. the
ability to request a change in normal hours once per year, to moderate e.g. the ability
to work at home occasionally with a supervisor’s approval, to extensive e.g. the ability
to set one’s own hours and perhaps work location with appropriate coordination with
co-workers. In addition to this, Healy (2004) highlighted the importance of including
formal and informal arrangements, as it was found that a large proportion of flexible
working is informal or ad hoc in nature.
Whilst it is important to understand the various types of flexible working as well as the
way in which arrangements are agreed, other scholars (Dyer and Shafer, 1998;
Cañibano, 2011) highlighted the need to embed flexible working in a broader context
relating to organisational culture. In doing so, flexible working can be seen as one
aspect of organisational agility which is something that has become a necessary core
competence for firms competing in dynamic external environments.
Although there is value in understanding the wider context for flexible working, it is
argued that greater importance must be placed on achieving definitional alignment
with the organisation on which the case study is based. The flexible working policy at
JT (see Appendix 5) defines flexibility in terms of varying the time and location of one’s
work, with formalisation being a pre-requisite for any arrangement. It would appear
logical to align this studies definition of flexible working with that of JT in order to
ensure that the data provided by respondents remains valid. The decision to include
informal flexible working arrangements was considered appropriate in light of the
recommendations made by Healy (2004).
2.2. Organisational benefits from flexible working
Cañibano (2011) considered flexible working to be an organisational tool for adapting
to changing market demands. Dyer and Shafer (1998) supported this by arguing that
‘organisational agility’ was a necessary core competence for firms to compete in
dynamic external environments. These agile organisations would have a built-in
capacity to shift, flex and adjust as circumstances changed.
Barney (1997) argued that employees were a specific source of competitive advantage
with their ability to read the market and mobilise a rapid response, whilst at the same

of 108
time learning as individuals and as an organisation. For many organisations, flexible
working reflected the need for a different relationship with their workforce in order to
react to the forces of globalisation and 24/7 operations (Robertson, 2011).
Baughman et al. (2003) argued that cost savings could be made through flexible
working because employees would be willing to accept lower wages in exchange for
flexibility. Added to this, Meyer et al. (2001) found that employees with flexible
arrangements were likely to work longer hours than they were contracted to undertake
due to the fact that they might be more available for work (for example due to reduced
commute time). Alternatively, McDonald et al. (2005) found that this link was because
employees were willing to work extra hours in times of peak demand in exchange for
flexibility at other times.
Alternatively, Shepard et al. (1996) thought that an increase in work effort was
motivated by the employees desire to avoid losing a job that offers them the flexibility
they desire. Pfeffer (1981) theorised that flexible working would increase positive job-
related attitudes and work effort, a view shared by Kelliher and Anderson (2009) who
found that flexible workers were willing to expend discretionary effort due to a sense
of obligation and gratefulness to their employers for accommodating changes to their
working arrangements. This study highlighted the apparent paradox of satisfied and
committed workers alongside abundant evidence of work intensification. Part of this
intensification was imposed by managers within the organisation whilst some was in
fact discretionary.
A study by Millard and Gillies (2011) found that organisations were making use of
flexible working practices as part of a wider ‘Results-only work environment’ model,
aimed at driving employee performance. They argued that a management model
based on outcomes not only changed the way in which employees were measured,
recognised and rewarded but also placed a greater emphasis on trust between
manager and employee. Bittman et al. (2009) described the growing trend to re-title
jobs as ‘managerial’, allowing some staff considerable autonomy over their time and
an increasing ability to make discretionary decisions (provided they deliver specified
outcomes). Lund et al (2012) argued that evaluating employee performance on

of 108
outcomes as opposed to hours was an imperative for knowledge workers however
required clear goals to be defined and reasonable timelines to be determined.
Lockwood (2003) stressed that flexible working led to significant improvement in
productivity, employee retention and commitment, lower absenteeism rates and high
morale. Research by Houston and Waumsley (2003) also found that flexible working
contributed to employee commitment to remain with a current employer. A study by
Millard and Gillies (2011) found that employee productivity could be improved through
flexible working and in particular by the use of supporting technologies which enabled
better collaboration and coordination within loose employee networks.
A survey by CIPD (2012) found that flexible working improved employee motivation
and engagement which was supported by Cherry (2010) who argued that balancing
the need to maintain employee engagement whilst making cost effective use of human
resources and real estate, was an imperative in difficult economic times. O’Toole and
Lawler (2006) found that many workers who undertook flexible working reported
greater satisfaction with their work and went on to state that there was a positive
relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction in some service
situations.
A number of scholars (Casper & Buffardi, 2004; Attridge, 2005) argued that flexible
working policies could engender positive perceptions about the firm within potential
recruits, thus gaining a competitive advantage in attracting talent to the organisation.
Added to this, a study by Lund et al (2012) suggested that technology such as
broadband, cloud computing and online collaboration tools were allowing jobs that
once required in-person interactions to now be performed anywhere. This meant that
the companies were now able to benefit from a much wider recruitment pool.
Contrary to these arguments, Beauregard and Henry (2009) stated that already
successful organisations were more likely to provide a flexible working offering and
indeed engage in high quality management practices overall meaning that flexible
working itself may not exert a favourable effect on organisational performance. Other
moderators included the link between flexible working and organisational outcomes,

of 108
including characteristics of the employee, organisation and the national context. A
number of studies have found no link between flexible working and organisational
performance (Bloom and Van Reenen, 2006; De Menezes and Kelliher, 2011) and
indeed a report by McKinsey (2012) suggested that the virtualised nature of flexible
working not only provided a barrier to organisational learning but also made it more
difficult for organisations to maintain their culture and values.
2.3. Employee benefits resulting from flexible working
There have been many studies which view flexible working as an employee centric
practice to help balance work and non-work duties (Galinsky et al, 2004; Dunne and
Teg, 2007; Cañibano, 2011). Bird (2006) found that flexible working helped to improve
individual relationships, enabled a better balance between work and family life and
reduced stress levels. Spinks (2004) suggested that due to the increasing intricacy in
today’s work and non-work lives, organisations incorporated work-life balance
initiatives to deal with issues such as child-care, eldercare and many others. Added to
this, Cryer et al (2003) found that flexible working might be offered as part of a wider
range of services to improve employee well being such as on-site yoga classes,
enforced holidays and stress management seminars. It was argued that company
culture and stress in people’s private lives worked against these approaches.
Research by Houston and Waumsley (2003) found that flexible working had a positive
impact on both psychological health and family life, a view which was supported by
Atkinson and Hall (2011) who stated that flexible working policies led to employees
feeling well treated and valued by the organisation. O’Toole and Lawler (2006) argued
that well-designed employer efforts to provide child care, elder care, flexible
scheduling and job sharing helped to reduce role conflict and increase organisational
support of workers in ways that make for healthier and more productive workplaces.
Kelly and Moen (2007) argued that although having discretion as to when, where and
how much one works (so called schedule control) would provide an important remedy
to time pressures and work-life conflicts, this involved more than an organisation
simply having a flexibility policy in place. Contrary to this, MacEachen et al. (2008)
argued that although firms often portrayed flexible working programmes in a positive

of 108
manner where loosening of boundaries between home and work was cast as a perk
for employees, in reality the collapsing of boundaries between work and home time
meant that personal time and space was eclipsed. This view was supported by Joshi
et al. (2002) who stated that the purpose of tele-commuting and home working was to
make the schedules of the employees more flexible.
O’Toole and Lawler (2006) found that flexible working policies were being used as part
of a high-involvement approach to structuring jobs and employment, empowering
individual employees to plan their lives and careers more effectively. Hochschild
(1997) went further to argue that employee’s identities and priorities were actually
orientated more to work than family or non-work activities, in part due to the often
intractable nature of personal-life tasks meaning that workers actually derived more
satisfaction from work-life.
A study by O’Toole and Lawler (2006) showed that flexible working in fact
contributed to greater on-the-job stress and increased tensions between work and
family responsibilities because of the fact that both parents were working which in
many cases was a financial necessity. Houston and Waumsley (2003) found that
there was a growing recognition that family life might be better if men and women
were able to share work and family responsibilities more evenly, although it was
acknowledged that the resulting change in work patterns might cause some anxieties
for men particularly.
McKinsey (2012) reported that individuals were less able to compartmentalise and
separate the different elements of their lives in the virtual workplace. It was argued
that technology removed the limitations of time and space meaning that employees
were available at all times and with the increasing trend in 24/7 operation resulting
globalisation, there was a potentially lethal mix ending in employee burnout.
Alternatively Deetz (1992) found little evidence to suggest that work related
technologies were ‘colonising’ employees personal lives with the corporate values of
instrumental efficiency and rationality. Indeed Bittman et al (2009) found that the
combination of flexible working and mobile communications could contribute to a

of 108
reduction in the sense of being rushed for employees. It was argued that activities
that were once tied to a particular place could now be conducted at times that were
previously characterised by enforced idleness, which in turn relieved stress at work.
Added to this, Wajcman et al. (2010) found that the internet was in fact being used
for personal purposes during work time to a greater extent than for work purposes
during non-work time.
2.4. Factors influencing the uptake of flexible working
Numerous studies (Hochschild, 1997; Fried, 1998; Epstein et al., 1999; Grosswald et
al., 2001; Blair-Loy and Wharton, 2002; Still and Strang, 2003) have suggested that
the uptake of flexible working is limited due to a decoupling of the policy itself and what
is implemented in practice. Premeaux et al. (2007) argued that the presence of
supportive managers and organisational climates was the key to gaining benefits from
flexible working whilst Ryan and Kossek (2008) found that managers played a vital
role in ensuring that opportunities for flexible working were inclusive for all employees.
Kelly and Kalev (2006) argued that uptake was limited due to constraints within the
flexible working policies themselves, for example using ‘formalised discretion’ to
explicitly protect a managers’ right to grant or deny requests for flexible working. Lund
et al (2012) found that managers were concerned that remote workers would become
disconnected from the company, thereby reducing loyalty and increasing the likelihood
that employees would move to a competitor for a small increase in salary. The study
noted that these issues were dependant on the individual, with some employees
thriving in independent, remote work environments.
Cherry (2010) stated that trust enabled organisations and individuals to be more agile
and flexible, in order to meet the demands of employees, customers and clients. There
was evidence that the recent economic turmoil had resulted in decreased trust within
organisations as management reverted to traditional models of ‘command and control’
coupled with headcount reductions to cut costs. Houston and Waumsley (2003)
argued that flexible working was either misunderstood or treated with mistrust because
it was perceived that traditional patterns of work, particularly shift working and
overtime, would be threatened.

of 108
A report by McKinsey (2012) found that an influencing factor in the uptake of flexible
working was the remote management skills if line managers. An example would be
the ability to evaluate an employee on the fulfilment of a set of measurable
deliverables, as opposed to putting in a certain number of hours a week. Mulki et al.
(2009) suggested that the benefits of flexible working could be enhanced through
training of employees and managers in effective virtual work practices and
communication techniques.
Houston and Waumsley (2003) stated that employee concerns about the potential
negative impact on career advancement could be a barrier to the uptake of flexible
working whilst Beauregard and Henry (2009) found that employees were concerned
about management and colleagues perceiving them to be less committed to the
organisation.
Davenport & Pearlson (1998) found that flexible working could lead to reduced face-
to-face interaction with colleagues and managers, resulting in social isolation.
This view was echoed by Lund et al (2012) who stated that the absence of daily contact
with co-workers or the camaraderie of working in a traditional team was a common
issue with flexible working. Marshall et al. (2007) found that this inhibited social
exchange was exacerbated by the need to rely on technology to communicate with
others using common forms of communication technology (e.g., email) which provide
a low level of information richness.
Millard and Gillies (2011) found that supporting technology was an important aspect
of flexible working to enable better collaboration within loose employee networks and
to help coordinate their activities. The opportunity to inadvertently offend through
inappropriate tone as well as poor use of ‘copying in’ causing clogged email inboxes
were amongst the many drawbacks highlighted.
A study by Houston and Waumsley (2003) found that there were a number of
demographic factors which influenced the uptake of flexible working. For example,

of 108
women were more likely to take up flexible working in comparison to men and
managers more likely than skilled or semi-skilled workers. Male managers were most
likely to be current users of flexible working and female semi-skilled workers least
likely. A McKinsey (2012) report found that virtual approaches to work were attractive
to a wide array of employees, including working mothers, older workers, and younger,
‘Generation Y’ professionals who wanted flexible lifestyles. It was also highlighted that
younger workers were often particularly suited to working remotely, having grown up
socialising and collaborating online.

of 108
3. Methodology
3.1. Theoretical back drop to choice of methods
In their review of the flexible working literature, de Menezes and Kelliher (2011) argued
that future research should adopt a multi-level approach in order to examine the
relationships between flexible working practices whilst exploring the different
mediators and moderators at both an individual and organisational level. They stated
the need for recognition of the differences in the nature of what was being examined
e.g. policy, perception, take-up, nature of choice, as well as the differing perspectives
from which to view the topic e.g. employees, managers, organisational, societal.
Having reviewed the literature it was observed that many of the previous studies took
an organisational perspective of flexible working with data often collected from the
Human Resource department which largely revolved around formally registered
flexible workers. Kelly and Kalev (2006) argued that survey questions such as ‘Do you
offer flexitime?’ or ‘Do you have a policy about flexitime?’ are not valid measures of
the employees’ access to flexible working because the policies adopted in these
organisations deliberately and explicitly allow supervisors to decide, on a case-by-
case basis, which workers may use flexible working. Taking the above in to
consideration it was decided that this study would focus on the employee’s view of
flexible working and the factors which influence uptake.
Similar studies by Casper and Harris (2008), Hyman and Summers (2004), Winstanley
(2009) and Chartered Institute for Personnel Development (2012) were used as a
reference point in determining the research methodology for this study as well as the
structure and content of the questionnaire.
3.2. Rationale for selecting methods
A case study research method was used because of the ease of access to a sample
population i.e. JT. The author works at the company and has done for a number of
years meaning that there was a greater chance of a good response because of existing
relationships with the employees. There were however some drawbacks in using a
case study, for example the results may not be easily generalised and transferred to
other companies, industries or geographies.

of 108
A questionnaire method was selected in order to gather data which was designed
using software licensed by Survey Monkey, a company which considers itself to be
one of the world's leading providers of web-based survey solutions. A one month
subscription fee was paid amounting to £25.00 which allowed more in-depth analysis
and interrogation of the raw data, over and above that which was provided as part of
the free Survey Monkey service. The questionnaire was distributed via email with
appropriate introductory text and a web link to the survey web site (see Appendix 2).
The email stated that the research was supported by the Director of Human Resources
at JT which it was thought would add credibility to the study. Additionally the
respondents were informed that that the data collected would be anonymous. It was
predicted that these factors would have a positive impact on the eventual response
rate.
The combination of web based questionnaire and email distribution was considered to
be most suitable due to the fact that all employees at JT had an email address and
access to a suitable device with internet connection. This view is supported by Phellas
et al (2011) who found that the use of an internet survey was indeed appropriate when
the target population consists entirely (or almost entirely) of Internet users. There were
concerns that a significant portion of the employees at JT were field based engineers
and it was therefore anticipated that a lower response rate would be gained from this
group of employees who were not desk based. It was predicted that a web based
survey would yield a greater response rate due to the relative ease and small amount
of time required for respondents to complete the questionnaire.
The questionnaire was distributed to all employees at JT which ensured the largest
sample population possible. It was questioned whether or not to only survey those
who had formerly signed up for flexible working at JT, however it was viewed that this
would be detrimental to the study’s objectives under the assumption that much of the
flexible working being undertaken at JT was in fact informal.
The questionnaire consisted of ten questions of which five related to respondent
demographics, more specifically:

of 108
 Division within which the respondent worked;
 Location where the respondent was predominantly based;
 Male/female;
 Job level within JT;
 Age.
It was thought that gaining data from across the entire organisation would enable
comparisons to be made across divisions and hierarchy with respect to the factors
which influence the uptake of flexible working. As part of this rationale, demographic
data was collected as part of the questionnaire relating to which division the
respondent worked in and which job level. A breakdown of JT’s job level framework
can be found in Appendix 6 and an organisational chart which details the various
functions within JT can found in Appendix 7.
A further four questions in the questionnaire related to flexible working, more
specifically:
 Form(s) of flexible working undertaken by the respondent;
 Type of flexible working agreement (formal or informal);
 Top 3 benefits of flexible working for the respondent;
 Top 3 barriers to flexible working for the respondent.
All of the above nine questions were in a multiple choice format with the data analysis
being undertaken using Microsoft Excel software. The tenth question related to what
further suggestions the respondent would make to improve the flexible working
offering at JT. This question was left open for the respondent to write free form, the
data from which was analysed using a constant comparison method Patton (1990)
involving identifying, coding, and categorising the primary patterns.
The questionnaire response rate was calculated according to the following formula:
Response rate (%) = (Total respondents / Total sample size) x 100;
A response rate of 31.2% was achieved, yielding a total of 150 responses across the
organisation from a sample size of 481.

of 108
There was a high proportion of respondents from the Jersey and Guernsey offices and
considerably less from the other offices in London, Boston and Melbourne. This
Channel Island bias will be considered when drawing conclusions from the study,
specifically the ability to generalise and transfer the findings to non-Channel Island
companies.
3.3. Acknowledgement of other methods and reasons for rejection
Although post questionnaire interviews did form part of the original research
methodology it was decided that there was insufficient time for these to be completed
and results analysed. The use of open questions within the survey (enabling
respondents to answer in free form) provided an alternative means of collecting this
type of qualitative data.
Analysis of JT’s employee engagement survey data was considered in order to provide
a greater understanding of the employee’s general attitudes towards the organisation
and management team. This method was rejected because the data was considered
to be of the limited value in the pursuit of this study’s objectives.

of 108
4. Results and findings
4.1. Type of Flexible Working arrangement
The research question sought to find out the factors which influence the uptake of
flexible working at JT. It was considered important to first establish what the uptake of
flexible working at JT actually looked like in terms of type and prevalence within the
sample population. The questionnaire therefore asked ‘What forms of flexible working
do you currently make use of at JT?’
The results showed that the uptake of flexible working at JT was extensive, with 71%
of the respondents (at the time of the survey) undertaking one or more types of flexible
working compared to 29% of respondents who did not undertake any form of flexible
work. Location flexibility was the most popular form of flexible working with ‘Working
from home’ being the most popular (24%) followed by ‘Mobile working’ (20%).
Flexibility in hours worked comprised the rest of the forms of flexible working with
‘Flexitime’ being most popular (12%) followed by ‘Part time/reduced hours (6%).
Figure 2 provides a full breakdown of percentage responses per flexibility type.
Figure 2: Percentage response rates per flexible working type (Total responses = 200)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
None
Working from home
Mobile working
Flexitime
Part time/reduced hours
Compressed work week
Structured time off in lieu
School hours
Term time working
Annualised hours
Time off for work in the community
Work sharing
Zero hours
% responses
Type of flexible working undertaken

of 108
Females were more likely to undertake flexible working with respect to time whereas
males were more likely to undertake flexibility in terms of location (see Figure 3).
Figure 3: Impact of gender on type of flexible working undertaken (Total responses = 197)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
None
Working from home
Mobile working
Flexitime
School hours
Term time working
% responses
Gender split by type of Flexible Working
Male
Female

of 108
The HR department at JT had the highest proportion of respondents undertaking some
form of time flexibility (41%) when compared to other departments and flexibility in
terms of location (specifically home working) was positively correlated to seniority, as
shown in Figure 4. A full breakdown of the JT job level framework is provided in
Appendix 6.
Figure 4: Positive correlation between job level and use of home working (Total responses = 47)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
1 2 3 4 5 6
%responses
Job level
Respondents working from home by job level

of 108
The majority of respondents (43%) who undertook some form of flexible working were
between the ages of 35-44 whilst the 18-24 year old age band had the fewest overall
of respondents undertaking flexible working, as shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5: Impact of age on type of flexible working undertaken (Total responses = 136)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+
Employees using flexible working by age group

of 108
The 18-24 age band also had the lowest proportion of respondents undertaking some
form of flexible working (25%) when compared to all of the other age bands, as shown
in Figure 6.
Figure 6: Proportion of respondents using flexible working, by age group (Total responses = 195)
This question provided a free form ‘other’ option to allow for any types of flexible
working that were being undertaken by respondents that were not provided within the
answers options. Upon analysis it was discovered that all of these answers fitted into
one of the existing answer options and these were apportioned as such. A breakdown
of the individual answers is provided in Appendix 4.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
Proportion of respondents using flexible working
by age group
Flexible working
None

of 108
4.2. Process used to gain authorisation
In answering the questions as to what factors influence the uptake of flexible working
at JT it was considered important to understand the process by which respondents
gained authorisation for any flexible working they undertook. The questionnaire
therefore asked ‘How has your flexible working arrangement been agreed?’
The majority of respondents (70%) had an informal flexible working agreement as
shown in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Comparison of how flexible working was agreed for respondents (Total responses = 79)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Informal/adhoc arrangement with my line
manager
Formal application and subsequent
authorisation
%responses
Formal V's informal agreement for flexible working

of 108
Females were more likely to have formal agreement when compared to males, as
shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8: Comparison of how flexible working was authorised, by gender (Total responses = 77)
The question provided a free form ‘other’ option to allow respondents to state ways in
which flexible working may have been authorised that were not provided within the
answers options. Upon analysis it was discovered that all of these answers fitted within
one of the existing answer options, with a small number of respondents using this
option to state the type of flexible working undertaken. A manual re-apportionment into
appropriate data sets was required to resolve this issue. A breakdown of these
answers is provided in Appendix 4.
4.3. Benefits of flexible working to the individual employee
In order to understand the factors which influence the uptake of flexible working at JT
it was considered important to find out what respondents perceived to be the benefits
to them of flexible working. In light of this the questionnaire asked, ‘What (if any) are
the main benefits to you of flexible working at JT?’ Respondents were asked to choose
their top three benefits.
Figure 9 shows that respondents perceived ‘Improved productivity at work’ to be the
greatest benefit to them of flexible working at JT (17%). This was followed by
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Male Female
%responses
Process for authorisation, by gender
Formal application
Informal/adhoc arrangement

of 108
‘Increased job satisfaction’ (16%) and ‘Better able to manage caring responsibilities
for children’ (15%). A small proportion of respondents (4%) perceived there to be no
benefits to flexible working for them at JT.

Figure 9: Percentage response rates by perceived benefit (Total responses = 343)

All employees who undertook some form of flexible working arrangement could see
one or more benefit to them and the majority of those respondents (92%) who did not
undertake any form of flexible working still perceived there to be benefits to them
(Figure 10).
Figure 10: Perception of benefit from flexible working from those employees with no flexible working arrangement
(Total responses = 98)
Figure 11 shows that a higher proportion of males (70%) considered increased
productivity to be a benefit when compared to females and a larger proportion of
females (60%) thought that management of caring responsibilities was a benefit to
them.
92%
8%
Perception of those employees with no flexible
working
Perception that benefits can be
gained
Perception that no benefits can
be gained

of 108
Figure 11: Perceived benefits from flexible working across males and females (Total responses = 327)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Improved productivity at work
Increased job satisfaction
Better manage caring responsibilities
(children)
Reduced pressure/stress
More time with family/friends
Better able to pursue hobbies/interests
outside of work
Reduced commuting time/cost
Allow more time for exercise
None
Other
Better manage caring responsibilities
(parents/grandparents)
% responses
Perceived benefits across males and females
Males
Females

of 108
The 18-24 age band contained the highest proportion of respondents (27%) who
perceived job satisfaction to be a benefit from flexible working when compared to the
other age bands, as shown in Figure 12.
Figure 12: Job satisfaction as a proportion of all other perceived benefits, by age group (Total responses = 311)
The question provided a free form ‘other’ option to allow respondents to state any
flexible working benefits which were not provided within the answers options. Upon
analysis it was discovered that all of these answers fitted within one of the existing
answer options and was therefore apportioned as such. The exception to this was one
respondent who stated ‘better able to manage caring responsibilities (pets)’ as a
benefit. A breakdown of the individual answers is provided in Appendix 4.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
Job satisfaction as a proportion of all other
perceived benefits, by age group
Job statisfaction
All other benefits

of 108
4.4. Perceived barriers to flexible working
In determining the factors which influence the uptake of flexible working at JT, it was
considered vital to find out what respondents perceived to be the barriers to flexible
working for them. The questionnaire therefore asked, ‘What (if any) are the main
barriers to you of flexible working at JT?’ Respondents were asked to choose their top
three barriers.
Figure 13 shows that the greatest perceived barrier to flexible working at JT was
workload/operational constraints, with a third of the overall responses (this was indeed
the case whether an employee had a flexible working arrangement or not) and there
were a high proportion of respondents (21%) who could see no barriers at all. A small
proportion of respondents (2%) perceived a lack of line management support was a
barrier to flexible working and 10% of respondents perceived a lack of
information/communication as a significant barrier.
Figure 13: Perceived barriers to flexible working (Total responses = 210)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Workload/operational constraints
None
Negative perception from colleagues
Negative impact on customers
Lack of information/communication about
flexible working at JT
Negative impact on my career progression
Personal financial constraints
Lack of support from my line manager
% responses
Perceived barriers to flexible working

of 108
Figure 14 shows that those with formal agreements were more likely to perceive there
to be no barriers to flexible working compared to those with informal agreements.
Figure 14: Authorisation type for those who perceive no barriers to flexible working (Total responses = 28)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Formal Informal
%responses
Type of authorisation for those who perceive no
barriers to flexible working

of 108
Figure 15 shows that a greater proportion of males (13%) thought that negative
colleague perceptions were a barrier in comparison to females (7%). Females
generally perceived fewer barriers to flexible working with 27% seeing no barriers
compared to 19% of males. Females also perceived personal finance constraints to
be a greater barrier compared to males.
Figure 15: Perceived barriers to flexible working, by gender (Total responses = 207)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
None
Lack of information/communication
about flexible working at JT
Negative impact on my career
progression
% responses
Gender comparison for perceived barriers
Male
Female

of 108
perceived that flexible working would have a negative impact on their career
progression when compared to the other age bands, as shown in Figure 16.
Figure 16: Job satisfaction as a proportion of all other perceived barriers, by age group (Total responses = 167)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
Negative impact on career progression as a
proportion of all other barriers, by age group
Negative impact on career
progression
All other barriers

of 108
perceived that lack of information/communication was a barrier to flexible working
uptake when compared to the other age bands, as shown in Figure 17.
Figure 17: Lack of information as a proportion of all other perceived barriers, by age group (Total responses =
169)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
Lack of information/communication as a proportion
of all other barriers, by age group
Lack of
information/communication
All other barriers

of 108
Figure 18 shows that middle management (level 4) were most likely to perceive
negative perceptions from colleagues to be a barrier to flexible working in comparison
to other job levels.
Figure 18: Job level breakdown for those who see colleague negativity as a barrier (Total responses = 21)
Figure 19 shows that senior management (level 5) were most likely to perceive
negative impact on customers to be a barrier to flexible working in comparison to other
job levels.
Figure 19: Job level breakdown for those who see negative customer impact as a barrier (Total responses = 20)
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
1 2 3 4 5 6
%responses
Job level
V's job level
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1 2 3 4 5 6
%responses
Job level
Perceived negative impact on customers V's job level

of 108
Figure 20 shows that middle management (level 4) were least likely to perceive
negative impact on career to be a barrier to flexible working in comparison to other job
levels.
Figure 20: Job level breakdown for those who see negative impact on career as a barrier (Total responses = 18)
The question provided a free form ‘other’ option to allow respondents to state any
barriers to flexible working which were not provided within the answers options.
Analysis shows that the respondents answers broadly match those given for the
‘Suggested improvements’ question (as detailed in the following section). A
breakdown of these answers is provided in Appendix 4.
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
1 2 3 4 5 6
%responses
Job level
V's job level

of 108
4.5. Respondents suggested improvements for JT’s flexible
working offering
In order to find out the factors which influence the uptake of flexible working at JT, it
was considered important to give respondents the opportunity to suggest
improvements to the flexible working offering at JT. The questionnaire therefore asked,
‘What other suggestions do you have to improve the flexible working offering at JT?’
Respondents were given a maximum of 100 hundred words in which to provide their
response.
Table 2 summarises the results from the constant comparison analysis (as described
in the methodology section). Over a third (38%) of respondents thought that the flexible
working offering could be improved by allowing individuals to tailor a flexible working
arrangement around their individual needs, resulting in greater accessibility.
Additionally, a quarter of respondents thought that an improvement in the supporting
technologies would help to improve the flexible working offering at JT. Finally, one
sixth of employees believed that greater support from management would help to
improve flexible working at JT.
Table 2: Constant comparison analysis on how improve flexible working offering (Total responses = 40)
A full breakdown of respondent’s answers can be seen in Appendix 4 whilst Table 3
provides a number of specific answers which resonate well for each theme.

of 108
Table 3: Example answers for each theme resulting from the constant comparison analysis.

of 108
5. Discussion
The research question asked, ‘What factors influence the uptake of flexible working?
The case of JT’. The research objective was to provide key recommendations in order
to improve the implementation of a flexible working programme within an organisation.
This section will present answers to the research question by providing a critical
analysis of the findings whilst placing them in the context of the relevant literature. Key
practical recommendations will be provided as well as suggestions for further
research.
5.1. Factors which influence the uptake of flexible working
The findings show that the largest perceived barrier to the uptake of flexible working
for employees at JT was workload/operational constraints, with 30% of respondents
providing this answer. It could therefore be argued that there is a negative correlation
between perceived employee workload and uptake of flexible working i.e. an increase
in perceived employee workload leads to a decrease in flexible working uptake. This
would appear to be at odds with the finding that the largest perceived benefit from
flexible working is improved productivity, with 17% of respondents providing this
answer.
The literature suggests that there is a positive relationship between flexible working
and number of hours worked (Shepard et al., 1996; Meyer et al., 2001; McDonald et
al., 2005; Kelliher and Anderson, 2009) and some evidence of a positive relationship
between flexible working and productivity (Lockwood, 2003; Millard and Gillies,
2011). There was however no evidence found within the literature to support the
finding from this study that there is a negative relationship between workload and
flexible working uptake.
The converse view of this finding is that a reduction in perceived workload leads to an
increase in flexible working uptake. Following this line of reasoning, if respondents
perceive that excessive workload is a barrier to flexible working then it could be argued
that they would perceive someone who utilises a flexible working arrangement to have
a lower workload. This could provide a reason for the common held perception that
‘working from home’ equates to doing less work and being less productive, a view
which is supported in the literature (Beauregard and Henry, 2009). The strength of this

of 108
argument is diminished however, due to the fact that there were relatively few
respondents in this dissertation who perceived a ‘negative perception from colleagues’
to be a barrier to flexible working.
This findings also suggests that perceived operational constraints are a significant
barrier to the uptake of flexible working. A number of studies (Hochschild, 1997; Blair-
Loy and Wharton, 2004; Premeaux et al., 2007) found that organisational culture was
a barrier to the uptake of flexible working and it could be argued that the phrase
‘operational constraints’ links to organisational culture. The phrase
‘workload/operational constraints’ is vague and despite having been referenced to a
recent flexible working study carried out by CIPD (2012), this is considered to be a key
methodological criticism. This issue could have been mitigated by carrying out post
survey interviews in order to elicit more information about this particular barrier,
however time constraints prevented this.
The results show that only a small proportion of respondents (2%) perceived lack of
support from their line manager to be a barrier for the uptake of flexible working. This
finding is contrary to a number of studies (Ryan and Kossek, 2008; Premeaux et al.,
2007; Kelly and Kalev, 2006) arguing that line managers were a limiting factor in the
uptake of flexible working because they used the discretion afforded to them within the
policy to deny employee requests. Although the results from this dissertation suggest
that line managers are not a significant barrier to the uptake of flexible working,
employees do appear to need support from their managers to help remove the
perceived workload/operational constraints which hinder their ability to make use of
flexible working.
The results from this dissertation show that the majority of respondents (70%)
undertake one or more form of flexible working and that the majority of these
arrangements are agreed informally with line management. This finding is supported
by Healy (2004) who argued that flexible working research often failed to incorporate
informal arrangements, despite having a significant contribution to the overall uptake
figures. Although this result suggests that the existence of a formal policy is not a
significant factor in the uptake of flexible working, it is likely that a proportion of the

of 108
respondents had already agreed their flexible working arrangement prior to the formal
policy implementation at JT.
The results show that a higher proportion of employees with formal arrangements
perceive there to be no barriers to flexible working, when compared to employees with
informal/adhoc arrangements. This finding suggests that the experience of an
employee who is undertaking flexible working can be enhanced by formalising the
arrangement. This study is focussed on the factors which influence the uptake of
flexible working as opposed to those that enhance the experience and as such no
literature was gathered to either support or refute this finding. It could be argued
however, that an enhanced experience may indirectly influence the uptake of flexible
working due to positive word of mouth amongst employees.
The results show that respondents utilised a variety of flexible working types, the most
popular of which were working from home and mobile working. This finding was
supported by Hislop and Axtell (2007) who stated that location flexibility was
increasingly common, in part due to enabling information communication
technologies. Although it could be argued that the types of flexible working
arrangements made available could influence subsequent uptake, there is scant
literature to that effect, with the focus instead being on the definition and categorisation
of types alone.
The results suggest that seniority influences the uptake of flexible working in that
there was a positive correlation between uptake and job level. This finding is
supported by Bittman et al, (2009) who described the growing trend to re-title jobs as
‘managerial’, allowing some staff considerable autonomy over their time and an
increasing ability to make discretionary decisions (provided they deliver specified
outcomes). Additionally, Cañibano (2011) argued that flexibility was offered to those
employees who built a long term commitment to the organisation based on mutual
trust, something that was less likely to the case in junior positions.
The results show that age is an influencing factor in the uptake of flexible working at
JT. The youngest age band (18-24) contained the lowest proportion of respondents
(1%) who undertook some form of flexible working, when compared to other age

of 108
bands. The youngest age band also contained the highest proportion of respondents
(27%) who perceived job satisfaction to be a benefit from flexible working when
compared to other age bands, a finding which is supported in the literature (McKinsey,
2012).
The results indicate that perceived personal financial constraints negatively influence
the uptake flexible working, a finding which is supported by Houston and Waumsley
(2003) who argued that employees perceived flexible working as a threat to traditional
patterns of work, particularly shift working and overtime. There were a high proportion
of respondents (92%) who, despite perceiving there to be one or more benefit to
flexible working and no barriers, did not undertake any form of flexible working. It could
be argued that the perceived benefits were not sufficient for these individuals.
The results show that relatively few respondents perceived a lack of
information/communication as a barrier to flexible working, a finding which is refuted
by Kelly and Moen (2007) who argue that organisations often wrongly assume that
simply having a flexibility policy in place is sufficient in terms of implementation. The
exception to this was within the 55-64 age band which contained a relatively high
proportion of respondents (27%) who perceived a lack of information/communication
as being a barrier to flexible working, when compared to other age bands.
A further finding was that the Human Resources department contained the largest
proportion of employees with a flexible working arrangement when compared to the
rest of the organisation. Added to this was the result that the department also utilised
the greatest variety of forms of flexible working. There is no evidence in the literature
to support this finding or indeed explain the reason why. It could be argued that this
department were more aware of the flexible working policy or it may be that the
department head was more supportive with respect to flexible working.
The results show that 9% of respondents perceived that a negative impact on their
career would be a barrier to flexible working. Although a relatively small proportion of
total respondents, this finding is supported by the literature (Houston and Waumsley,
2003). Additionally, 10% of respondents believed that colleague perceptions would be
a barrier to flexible working, a finding which is supported by Beauregard and Henry

of 108
(2009) who argued that colleagues thought that employees undertaking a flexible
working arrangement were somehow less committed to the organisation. It is not clear
from the findings whether or not perceived benefits of flexible working influence the
subsequent uptake. The results show that the largest perceived benefit resulting from
flexible working was an improvement in productivity, a finding which is supported in
the literature (Lockwood, 2003; Millard and Gillies, 2011).
The results also show that there were a relatively high proportion of respondents (15%)
who perceive being able to better manage their caring responsibilities as a benefit of
flexible working, a finding which is supported in the literature (Houston and Waumsley,
2003; Spinks, 2004; Bird, 2006; O’Toole and Lawler, 2006). The results additionally
show that a larger proportion of females perceived being better able to manage caring
responsibilities (children) as a benefit in comparison to males. It could be argued that
gender stereotypes would be barrier to the uptake of flexible working. Houston and
Waumsley (2003) argued that more evenly sharing work and family responsibilities
amongst men and women would have a positive impact on family life however this
change in work patterns could cause some anxieties, particularly amongst men. These
anxieties may become a barrier to the uptake of flexible working.
The results suggest that there are a wide range of perceived benefits from flexible
working, with increased productivity, increased job satisfaction and improved ability to
manage caring responsibilities coming out as the most popular. The literature also
indicates a wide range of benefits, both from an organisational (Baughman et al., 2003;
Lockwood, 2003; O’Toole and Lawler, 2006) and an individual (Galinsky et al, 2004;
Dunne and Teg, 2007; Cañibano, 2011) point of view.
A suggested improvement for the flexible working policy at JT is the ability to tailor the
arrangement to an individuals needs. O’Toole and Lawler (2006) found that the varied
needs, desires, motivations and economic circumstances of individuals meant that
there were no universal best practices with regard to flexible working. Kelly et al.
(2006) argued that it was the flexible working policy itself which caused the greatest
barrier to uptake, whilst numerous other studies (Hochschild, 1997; Blair-Loy and

of 108
Wharton, 2002; Still and Strang, 2003) suggested that the main barrier was policy
implementation.
5.2. Methodological critique
There were a number of methodological changes which could have been made to
improve the study. Firstly, the demographic question relating to company seniority
levels was missing an ‘Executive Committee’ option (something that was picked up by
a respondent). In addition, a ‘supporting technology’ option was missing as a barrier
to flexible working, despite this being highlighted in the literature (Millard and Gillies,
2011). A result was that a number of respondents added this as a barrier in the ‘other’
option or suggested this as a way to improve JT’s current flexible working policy.
It could be argued that the questions concerning benefits and barriers to flexible
working are potentially biased due to the fact that they limit a respondent’s answer to
three. This question methodology was chosen in order to draw out what the
respondents perceived to be the most important benefits and barriers. It must be
acknowledged however, that this particular question methodology was not based on
previous studies. A potential improvement could have been to request that
respondents rank their perceived benefits and barriers which may have increased the
richness of data. It must be noted however, that this may have overly complicated the
survey and therefore had a negative impact on response rate.
A potential bias may have resulted from the fact that the wording of the questions
concerning benefits and barriers may have resulted in respondents being anchored
(Kahneman and Tversky, 1974) to a view that there are any benefits or barriers at all.
The risk of this bias being introduced was mitigated by inserting the words ‘if any’ to
the question and providing an answer option of ‘none’. Additionally, valuable data may
have been gained by specifically asking a question relating to the costs of flexible
working to them as individuals. MacEachen et al. (2008) stated that although firms
often portrayed flexible working programs in a positive manner where loosening of
boundaries between home and work was cast as a perk for employees, in reality the
collapsing of boundaries between work and home time meant that personal time and
space was eclipsed.

of 108
A potential methodological issue is that respondents perceived benefits and barriers
to flexible working may have been from a generalised viewpoint as opposed to being
specific to themselves as individuals. For example, one of the findings was that senior
management (level 5) at JT were most likely to perceive that flexible working would
have a negative impact on customers when compared to respondents from other job
levels. In this instance, it could be argued that senior management were thinking about
the impact of their teams undertaking flexible working rather than themselves. A
suggested improvement could be to undertake follow up interviews and in doing so
seek clarity around the respondents understanding of the question.
Whilst having access to the employees at JT to gather primary data was a major
benefit in the study, it must be noted that there may well be limitations when trying to
generalise the results for the benefit of other organisations. It could be argued that the
Channel Islands provides a relatively unique working environment which must be
considered in light of the fact that a high proportion of respondents were based in
Jersey and Guernsey as opposed to the company’s London, Boston and Melbourne
offices.
Additionally, the telecommunications industry within which JT competes has a unique
set of factors which may provide similar challenges when trying to put forward
generalised conclusions and recommendations. For example a bias may result in the
fact that a significant proportion of employees at JT are field engineers who routinely
work on customer premises and therefore may assume remote working to be part of
their job role. It could also be argued that there was bias because respondents were
more likely to have an interest in flexible working when compared to those within the
company who chose not to respond to the survey.
Compulsory questions were not used as it was thought that this might increase the
chances of respondents exiting the questionnaire without finishing, therefore limiting
the response rate. This resulted in a number of respondents skipping questions and
consequently there were some gaps in the data. There did not appear to be any
questions that were misunderstood by respondents due to the fact that all had a high
response rate with no obvious anomalies. Additionally, the options provided for each

of 108
questions was apparently comprehensive because there was only limited use of ‘other’
by respondents throughout the questionnaire.
5.3. Recommendations to increase the uptake of flexible working
It is argued that the recommendations provided are a direct and logical result of the
previous analysis and are informed by the flexible working literature which has been
reviewed. A diagrammatic representation of the recommendations can be seen at
the end of this section in Figure 19.
5.3.1. Create opportunities to explore flexible working
It is recommended that opportunities are created for employees to explore flexible
working, uncovering the perceived benefits and barriers to them as an individual.
Higgs and Rowland (2011) argue that a key determinant of successful change in
organisations is that leaders create opportunities for employees to learn and grow.
Findings from this dissertation suggest that the largest perceived barrier to flexible
working was workload and operational constraints and it is therefore logical to suggest
that removing the workload and operational constraints would lead to the greatest
increase in flexible working uptake. With this in mind, a good first step would be to
create a discussion between the employee and manager to more fully explore the
cause of this barrier, allowing the individual to verbalise any doubts and
misconceptions about flexible working as well as provide an opportunity to discuss
their specific needs and requirements. This suggestion is supported by Ryan and
Kossek (2008) who found that the use of a single “best practice” approach was not
considered to be effective due to the great variability in needs, preferences and values
of employees.
This opportunity could be created as part of the company’s performance appraisal or
as part of the recruitment process, whether that be for an internal move or for an
external new joiner. Line manager training requirements would need to be considered
to help ensure that these discussions were effective, a suggestion which is supported
in the literature (Ryan and Kossek, 2008; Premeaux et al. 2007). A finding from the
study was that very few respondents perceived support from their line manager to be
a barrier to flexible working. It is argued that this provides a positive starting point for
line managers to initiate discussions.

of 108
It is also recommended that opportunities to discuss flexible working are created
between employees and their peers within the organisation. One suggestion could be
to highlight a number of employees who have successfully undertaken flexible working
and in doing so overcome any barriers encountered. Selecting case studies which
cover a wide range of flexible working types could help to stimulate interest and
subsequent uptake by prompting employees to think about how flexible working might
apply to them. It must be noted that there were a number of respondents who without
prompt, offered to share their experiences of flexible working with the rest of the
organisation which suggests that case studies would indeed be forthcoming.
The findings from this dissertation suggest that JT should focus efforts on increasing
the uptake of flexible working within the 18-24 age band, due to the fact that a relatively
low proportion of respondents within this age band undertook any form of flexible
working and yet a relatively high proportion perceived that flexible working would
improve their job satisfaction. The findings also suggest that there is an
information/communication gap regarding flexible working for 55-64 year olds within
JT and that there would be value in targeting this demographic specifically to market
the flexible working policy.
5.3.2. Formalising agreements
A further recommendation from this study would be to formally agree an employee’s
flexible working arrangement. Higgs and Rowland (2011) argue that a key determinant
of successful change in organisations is that leaders work with others to provide a
framework for change with clear boundaries, within which employees can be free to
contribute. Formal agreement for flexible working would help to define and agree these
boundaries as well as improving uptake by creating a further opportunity for
employees to explore flexible working, which links back to the first suggested
recommendation.
A key finding from the study was that a higher proportion of employees who had a
formalised arrangement perceived there to be no barriers, when compared to those
with an informal arrangement. This would suggest that actually agreeing and
documenting the arrangement leads to an improved experience of flexible working for
the employee. Bearing in mind one of the study’s findings was that the vast majority

of 108
of flexible working was informally agreed, it would seem like a valuable exercise to
convert agreements from the informal to formal. A number of studies support this view
(Hochschild, 1997; Fried, 1998; Epstein et al., 1999; Blair-Loy and Wharton, 2002,
2004; Still and Strang, 2003) by arguing that a significant barrier to flexible working
uptake is the gap between the formal policy and the practical implementation.
5.3.3. Supporting technologies
A final recommendation is that organisations must provide appropriate technology to
underpin any flexible working initiative. A significant proportion of respondents in the
study suggested that improvements in supporting technology would lead to
improvements in the flexible working offering at JT with specific issues around the
limitations of remote working technologies when compared to existing office based
technology as well as reliability of access, amongst other things. The need to have
requisite supporting technologies is a view supported by Millard and Gillies (2011) who
found that this resulted in better employee productivity and collaboration.
An important point is that the business case for flexible working would need to be put
forward in order to gain the funding for the required technology. The literature suggests
that there are a wide variety of business benefits resulting from flexible working and
indeed this study adds to that argument by finding that the respondents perceive there
to be business benefits in the form of improved productivity. It must be noted that other
studies have shown no link between flexible working and improved organisational
performance (Beauregard and Henry, 2009; De Menezes and Kelliher (2011).

of 108
Figure 21: Diagrammatic summary of proposed recommendations.

of 108
6. Conclusion
External factors such as globalisation, an ageing workforce and technological
innovation have provided the impetus for organisations to re-look at flexible working
as a means of reducing costs, increasing productivity and increasing employee
satisfaction. This study has attempted to find out the factors which influence the uptake
of flexible working within an organisation, focussing on the somewhat under
researched employee perspective as opposed to the organisational viewpoint.
This study has found that employee perceptions significantly influence the uptake of
flexible working within an organisation. The fact that respondents perceive their
workload to be one of the largest barriers to flexible working suggests that there is a
belief that flexible working will lead to a reduction in output. What is perplexing is that
respondents believe that one of greatest benefits from flexible working is an increase
in productivity – surely a contradiction? Further research would be useful to explore
this finding further.
This study has found that although the majority of respondents utilise flexible working,
the types of arrangement in use are mainly limited to flexibility in location. It has been
argued that a significant limiting factor in the uptake of flexible working is that of an
employees self imposed constraint and that creating discussions to explore these
constraints will assist in expanding the uptake of flexible working.
The findings suggest that line managers are a significant influencing factor in the
uptake of flexible working, however far from being a barrier themselves (a view that is
argued in much the literature) this study argues that line managers are in fact a
potential catalyst in the uptake of flexible working, by taking the lead in creating the
previously mentioned discussions with employees.
A further finding was that the process of formalising a flexible working arrangement
actually helps to remove perceived barriers for employees, thus improving their
experience of flexible working. It has been argued that converting informal
arrangements to formal agreements would be a worthwhile exercise not only from an

of 108
employee’s perspective but also because of the increased visibility that this would
provide the organisation around flexible working uptake.
The findings from this study suggest that employees perceive there to be a wide array
of benefits from flexible working, both for themselves and the organisation. It must be
questioned however whether perceived benefits result in real benefits. Further
research would be useful to help understand the impact of flexible working on actual
employee productivity and performance, as well as the reasons behind this impact.
For example, do employees perform better in virtual teams when compared to
traditional co-located teams situated in an office environment? Would employees
actually gain more satisfaction from working in a virtual team rather than working in
close proximity to their colleagues?
It has also been stated that tailoring a flexible working arrangement would help to
increase subsequent uptake. Further research into the different aspects of flexible
working which appeal to individuals would be of benefit. For example, could it be that
flexibility in time and location is only a small part of a bigger flexible working picture?
Could flexibility in the type of work undertaken be of interest or indeed the manner in
which a task or role is performed? If employees were given the flexibility to design their
perfect role within an organisation, would this lead to confusion or would it instead
unleash creativity and innovation beyond that which the individual or organisation
could have imagined?
What is apparent from this study is that simply providing employees with the
opportunity for flexibility is not enough because the self-imposed shackles are often
too strong to break. What’s needed is a trusting environment within which to discuss
perceptions, refined processes to help tailor solutions and underpinning technology to
enable new ways of working.

of 108
7. References
Atkinson, C. and Hall, L. (2011) ‘Flexible working and happiness in the NHS’,
Employee Relations 33 (2), 88–105.
Attridge, M. (2005) ‘The business case for the integration of employee assistance,
work-Life and wellness services’, Journal of Workplace Behavioural Health, 20 (1), 31-
55.
Barney, J. (1997) Gaining and sustaining competitive advantage. Reading, MA:
Addison- Wesley.
Barney, J. (1991) ‘Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’, Journal of
Management, 17 (1), 99-120.
Beauregard, T. A. and Henry, L. C. (2009) ‘Making the link between work-life balance
practices and organisational performance’. Human Resource Management Review,
19 (1), 9-22.
Bird, J. (2006) ‘Work-life balance - doing it right and avoiding the pitfalls’. Employment
Relations Today, 33 (3), 21-30.
Bittman, M., Brown, J. and Wajcman, J. (2009) ‘The mobile phone, perpetual contact
and time pressure’. Work, Employment and Society. 23 (1), 673-691.
Bloom, N. and Van Reenen, J. (2006) ‘Management practices, work–life balance and
productivity: a review of some recent evidence’. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,
22 (1), 457–482.

of 108
Cañibano, A. (2011) ‘Exploring the negative outcomes of flexible work arrangements.
The case of a consultancy firm in Spain’. Journal of Management, 31 (4), 622-640.
Casper, W. and Buffardi, L. (2004) ‘Work-life benefits and job pursuit intentions: The
role of anticipated organisational support’. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 65 (3)
391-410.
Casper, W. J. and Harris, C. (2008) ‘Work-life benefits and organisational attachment:
Self-interest utility and signalling theory models’. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 72
(1), 95-109.
Cherry, J. (2010) Out of office: Building Team for an Agile Future.
http://opportunitynow.bitc.org.uk/system/files/research/out_of_office_complete_docu
ment.pdf. [Accessed 7 September 2013].
CIPD (2012) Flexible Working Provision and Uptake.
http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/survey-reports/flexible-working-provision-
uptake.aspx. [Accessed 3 September 2013].
Cryer, B., McCraty, R. and Childre, D. (2003) ‘Pull the plug on stress’. Harvard
Business Review, 81 (7), 102-107.
Davenport, T.H. and Pearlson, K. (1998) ‘Two cheers for the virtual office’. Sloan
Management Review, 39 (1), 51-65.
Deetz, S. (1992) Democracy in an age of corporate colonization: Developments in
communication and the politics of everyday life. New York: New York University Press.
de Menezes, L. and Kelliher, C. (2011) ‘Flexible working and performance: A
systematic review of the evidence for a business case’. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 13 (1), 452–474.

of 108
Dunne, H. and Teg, C. (2007) ‘Putting balance into business-work life balance as a
business strategy for avoiding brain drain’. Strategic Human Resources Review, 6 (6),
154-161.
Dyer, L. and Shafer, R. (1998) From human resource strategy to organisational
effectiveness: Lessons from research on organisational agility.
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1124&context=cahrs
wp. [Accessed 5 September 2013].
Galinsky, E., Bond, J. and Hill, E. (2004) When work works: A status report on
workplace flexibility. Who has it? Who wants it? What difference does it make?
http://familiesandwork.org/3w/research/downloads/status.pdf. [Accessed 12
September 2014].
Golden, A. and Geisler, C. (2007) ‘Work-life boundary management and the personal
digital assistant’. Human Relations, 60 (1) 519-528.
Healy, G. (2004) ‘Work–life balance and family friendly policies – in whose interest?’
Work, Employment and Society, 18 (1), 219–223.
Higgs, M. and Rowland, D. (2011) ‘What does it take to implement change
successfully? A study of the behaviours of successful change leaders’. The Journal of
Applied Behavioural Science, 47 (3), 309-335.
Hislop, D. and Axtell, C. (2007) ‘The neglect of spatial mobility in contemporary studies
of work: the case of telework’. New Technology, Work and Employment, 22 (1) 34-41.
Hochschild, A. (1997) The time bind: When work becomes home and home becomes
work. New York: Metropolitan Books.
Houston, D. and Waumsley, J. (2003) Attitudes to Flexible Working and Family Life.
http://www.jrf.org.uk/system/files/jr159-flexible-working-attitudes.pdf [Accessed 12
September 2014].

of 108
Hyman, J. and Summers, J. (2004) ‘Lacking balance? Work-life employment practices
in the modern economy’. Personnel Review, 33 (4), 418-429.
Joshi, S., Leichne, J., Melanson, K., Pruna, C., Sager, N., Story, C.J. and Williams,
K. (2002) Work-Life Balance. A Case of Social Responsibility of Competitive
Advantage?
http://www.worklifebalance.com/assets/pdfs/casestudy.pdf. [Accessed 5 September
2014].
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1974) Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and
biases. Journal of Science, 185 (457), 1124-1131.
Kelliher, C. and Anderson, D. (2009) ‘Doing more with less? Flexible working practices
and the intensification of work’. Human Relations, 63 (1), 83-106.
Kelly, E. L. and Kalev, A. (2006) ‘Managing flexible work arrangements in US
organisations: formalised discretion or a right to ask’. Socio-Economic Review, 4 (3),
379-416.
Kelly, E. and Moen, P. (2007) ‘Rethinking the clockwork of work: Why schedule control
may pay off at work and at home’. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9 (4),
487-506.
Lockwood, N. (2003) Work-life balance: Challenges and solutions.
http://www.ispi.org/pdf/suggestedReading/11_Lockwood_WorkLifeBalance.pdf.
[Accessed 6 September 2014].
Lund, S., Manyika, J. and Ramaswamy, S. (2012) Preparing for a new era of
knowledge work.
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/organization/preparing_for_a_new_era_of_work.

of 108
MacEachen, E., Polzer, J. and Clarke, J. (2008) ‘You are free to set your own hours.
Governing worker productivity and health through flexibility and resilience’. Social
Science & Medicine, 66 (1), 1019-1033.
Marshall, G., Michaels, C. and Mulki, J. (2007) ‘Workplace isolation: exploring the
construct and its measurements’. Psychology & Marketing, 24 (3), 195-223.
McGuire, J., Kenney, K. and Brashler, P. (2010) Flexible work arrangements: the fact
sheet.
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=leg
al. [Accessed 13 September 2014].
McKinsey (2012) The Evolution of work: one company’s story.
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/managing_in_uncertainty/the_evolution_of_work_
one_companys_story. [Accessed 8 September 2014].
McKinsey (2012) Preparing for a new era of knowledge work.
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/organization/preparing_for_a_new_era_of_work.
Millard, N. and Gillies, S. (2011) Work shift: The Future of the Office.
http://www.btireland.ie/pdfs/The%20Future%20of%20the%20Office.pdf. [Accessed
16 September 2014].
Mulki, J., Bardhi, F., Lassk, F. and Nanavaty-Dahl, J. (2009) ‘Set up remote workers
to thrive’. MIT Sloan Management Review, 51 (1), 63-69.
O’Toole, J. and Lawler III, E. (2006) The New American Workplace. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Patton, M. (1990) Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.

of 108
Ryan, A. and Kossek, E. (2008) ‘Work‐life policy implementation: Breaking down or
creating barriers to inclusiveness?’ Human Resource Management, 47 (2), 295-310.
Spinks, N. (2004). Work-life balance: Achievable goal or pipe dream? Journal for
quality and participation, 27 (3), 4-11.
Wajcman, J., Rose, E., Brown, J. and Bittman, M. (2010) ‘Enacting virtual connections
between work and home’. Journal of Sociology, 46 (3), 257-275.
Winstanley, C. (2009) Writing a dissertation for dummies. London: Wiley.

of 108
Appendix 1 – Questionnaire copy
1. Which division of JT Group do you work within?
Finance
Operations
Global Enterprise
Global Consumer
Corporate Affairs
Wholesale
Human Resources
Ekit
Worldstone
Other (please specify)
2. Where are you predominantly based?
Jersey
Guernsey
London
Melbourne
Boston
3. What form(s) of flexible working do you currently make use of at JT? [If you do not
make use of flexible working please tick 'None']
Working from home
Mobile working (e.g. using laptop to work from another location)
Flexitime
Term time working
School hours
Annualised hours
Zero hours
Work sharing
Time off for work in the community
None
4. How has your flexible working arrangement been agreed? [Please skip this question
if you answered 'None' to question 3].
Formal application and subsequent authorisation
Informal/adhoc arrangement with my line manager
5. What (if any) are your main barriers to flexible working at JT? Please choose your
top 3. [If you have no barriers please tick 'None']
Lack of information/communication about flexible working at JT

of 108
None
6. What are the main benefits to you of flexible working at JT? Please choose your top
3. [If there are no benefits to you, please tick 'None']
Improved ability to manage caring responsibilities (children)
Improved ability to manage caring responsibilities (parents/grandparents)
Reduced pressure/stress
Improved productivity at work
Increased job satisfaction
Better able to pursue hobbies/interests outside of work
More time with family/friends
Allow more time for exercise
Reduced commuting time/cost
None
7. What other suggestions do you have to improve the flexible working offering at JT?
[100 words max]
8. Are you male or female?
Male
Female
9. What is your job level at JT?
1
2
3
4
5
6
10. What is your age?
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+

of 108
Appendix 2 – Questionnaire introductory email
Flexible working at JT - a short survey
Dear colleague,
I am writing this email to appeal for your help.
Having spent the last 18 months studying for my MBA, I am now attempting the final
hurdle which is my dissertation.
My chosen topic of study is Flexible Working and I intend to find out the most effective
way of implementing a flexible working programme within an organisation.
I would be most grateful if you could complete a short, anonymous questionnaire which
will take around 2-3 minutes from start to finish (please follow the link below).
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/6YZNYFT
The study and questionnaire has kindly been supported by Richard Summerfield (JT
Group HR Director) and a summary of my findings will be posted on JT Hub in a few
months from now.
If you would be happy to talk about your views and experiences of flexible working at
JT in more detail, then please email me at gez.overstall@jtglobal.com .
Thank you for your help.
Kind Regards,
Gez

of 108
Appendix 3 – University of Southampton Ethics and risk assessment
form submission
ERGO application form – Ethics form
All mandatory fields are marked (M*). Applications without mandatory fields completed are
likely to be rejected by reviewers. Other fields are marked “if applicable”. Help text is provided,
where appropriate, in italics after each question.
1. APPLICANT DETAILS
1.1 (M*) Applicant name: Gerald Overstall
1.2 Supervisor (if applicable): Dr Roger Plant
1.3 Other researchers/collaborators (if
applicable): Name, address, email,
telephone
2. STUDY DETAILS
2.1 (M*) Title of study: What factors influence the uptake of flexible working.
The case of JT.
2.2 (M*) Type of study (e.g.
Undergraduate, Doctorate, Masters,
Staff):
Masters
2.3 i) (M*) Proposed start date: 10/9/13
2.3 ii) (M*) Proposed end date: 24/12/13
2.4 (M*) What are the aims and objectives of this study?
The topic for this dissertation is flexible working and the problem being researched is how
best to implement a flexible working policy within an organisation. The research objective is
to produce a best practice process for marketing and implementing a flexible working
programme.
2.5 (M*) Background to study (a brief rationale for conducting the study. This involves
providing a brief discussion of the past literature relevant to the project):
Flexible working has risen in popularity amongst organisations in the past 20 years for a
number of reasons. Firstly, there have been political and legal drivers which have meant
employers have had to offer flexible working (Millard and Gillies, 2011). This has been coupled
with an organisational drive to achieve high performance and high commitment from staff
through a ‘results only work environment’ and high trust (Millard and Gillies, 2011).
Organisations have also been driven towards using flexible working because of external
changes in the social, economic and technological environment meaning that firms need to
be more adaptable and agile (Dyer et al, 1998). Remote working technologies have enabled

MBA dissertation_Gerald Overstall_FINAL_24_12_13

MBA dissertation_Gerald Overstall_FINAL_24_12_13

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to MBA dissertation_Gerald Overstall_FINAL_24_12_13

Similar to MBA dissertation_Gerald Overstall_FINAL_24_12_13 (20)

MBA dissertation_Gerald Overstall_FINAL_24_12_13