Report 4 mobility and flexible working

1

Report 004Mobility & Flexible WorkingLife Working Series 2013

2

3

1. IntroductionDeveloping our understanding of mobility and flexible working in the City.

This report, the fourth in our Life Working series, reflects on mobility and flexible working. More specifically, approaches to mobility, relocation and expectations of support from an employer plus availability of flexible working, it’s impact and the barriers to it’s success. Whilst the City remains one of the most attractive centres of work in Britain, our findings suggest that there is still plenty of appeal presented by other international finance centres. The report also identifies that while businesses are making headway in developing a flexible working environment, a significant proportion of employees consider that this could actually have a detrimental effect in their business. The research for this report was undertaken by online survey during July 2012. Requests to participate in the survey were sent to more than 45,000 candidates and clients of Astbury Marsden. A total of 1,655

responses were received and analysed. The information and data contained in this report are for information purposes only and are not intended, nor implied to be a substitute for professional advice. In no event will Astbury Marsden be liable to you or any third party for any decision made or action taken in reliance of the results obtained through the use of the information and/or data contained or provided herein.If you have questions regarding the survey or the report please contact:

Mark Cameron [email protected]+44 20 7065 1175

Jonathan [email protected] +44 20 7065 1221

Ben Cowan [email protected] +44 20 7065 1192

Mobility

We explore the various approaches to mobility within a business and employees’ expectations when making a move.

5

2 . Approach to MobilityUnderstanding how companies are encouraging mobility in the workplace.

Mobility

Generally respondents were very positive about their employer’s approach to mobility, with over half (58%) confirming that there was an internal mobility policy at their workplace.

Our findings show that 82% of employers advertise roles internally, suggesting that they encourage mobility across both teams and locations.

However, there is a distinct lack of support from managers with 43% of all respondents believing that internal mobility is not encouraged by management. This can be extremely detrimental to the retention of staff as employees choose to leave rather than pursue other options with their current employer.

SectorFig 2.1 We did not see a great deal of difference in the results between financial services and non-financial ser-

vices firms.

While 82% of financial services firms advertise roles internally, only 57% of respondents felt that mobility was encouraged by senior managers. 79% of non financial services firms advertised roles internally with 62% believing that internal mobility was encouraged by their senior managers.

6

FunctionFig 2.2

FunctionInternal mobility policy in place

No Not sure Yes

Administration 22.7% 31.8% 45.5%

Compliance 32.4% 20.6% 47.1%

Finance 23.4% 20.7% 55.9%

HR 15.8% 5.3% 78.9%

Internal Audit 7.1% 35.7% 57.1%

Operations & Middle Office 15.5% 17.2% 67.2%

Revenue Generating 24.0% 23.0% 53.0%

Risk 16.7% 19.2% 64.2%

Sales 26.2% 16.7% 57.1%

Strategy & Change 23.0% 21.6% 55.4%

Technology 16.3% 24.7% 59.0%

Other 25.0% 24.0% 51.0%

TOTAL 20.1% 22.0% 57.9%

FunctionInternally advertise roles

No Not sure Yes

Administration 4.5% 0.0% 95.5%

Compliance 20.6% 5.9% 73.5%

Finance 17.7% 6.0% 76.3%

HR 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

Internal Audit 7.1% 0.0% 92.9%

Operations & Middle Office 8.6% 0.9% 90.5%

Revenue Generating 20.0% 11.0% 69.0%

Risk 8.3% 3.3% 88.3%

Sales 14.3% 0.0% 85.7%

Strategy & Change 13.6% 4.8% 81.6%

Technology 9.1% 6.7% 84.2%

Other 18.4% 7.1% 74.5%

TOTAL 12.8% 5.5% 81.7%

FunctionMobility encouraged by Senior

Management

No Yes

Administration 19.0% 81.0%

Compliance 54.5% 45.5%

Finance 42.0% 58.0%

HR 26.3% 73.7%

Internal Audit 50.0% 50.0%

Operations & Middle Office 36.5% 63.5%

Revenue Generating 48.0% 52.0%

Risk 47.9% 52.1%

Sales 31.0% 69.0%

Strategy & Change 44.4% 55.6%

Technology 44.5% 55.5%

Other 35.1% 64.9%

TOTAL 42.5% 57.5%

Unsurprisingly, the highest proportion of staff who were aware of an internal mobility policy were HR staff at 79%. This contrasts with just 47% of Compliance staff who were aware of a transfer policy.

All HR staff were aware of internal advertising of roles along with a high majority of Administration, Internal Audit and Operations staff. Compliance and Revenue Generating staff were the least likely to be aware of advertising internal roles.

Administration staff are most likely (81%) to feel supported by senior managers to make a move. Compliance are the least likely (46%).

7

Job levelFig 2.3

Aware of internal mobility policyJust 11% of Assistant Vice President level staff were not aware of an internal mobility policy being in place.

A significant 42% of Managing Director level staff did not know about a policy, but an almost equal, 47% did. Analyst level staff were the least likely to be aware of an internal mobility policy with 55% either believing there was not a policy or being unsure.

Internally advertise roles89% of Vice President level staff were aware of roles being internally advertised. By comparison, only 72% of Managing Directors were aware.

Mobility encouraged by senior managementManaging Directors feel the most support and encouragement from senior management with regards to internal movement (71%). Associates feel the least support for mobility at 54%.

8

GenderFig 2.4

Women are marginally more aware of internal mobility policies and of roles advertised internally. However, fewer women (39%) than men (43%) believe that internal movement is encouraged by senior managers.

AgeFig 2.5 The younger age groups are more aware of an internal mobility policy existing, however, a substantial

number of respondents (96%) aged 60 and over are aware of roles being advertised internally.

Those aged 40-49 are most likely (61%) to think that internal movement is encouraged by senior managers. 49% of 20-29 year olds do not believe that senior managers encourage mobility despite being the most aware of a policy existing.

20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+ PNS*

Internal mobility policy exists

No 16.0% 18.0% 21.2% 26.7% 27.3% 20.9%

Not sure 19.9% 20.4% 23.3% 21.1% 22.7% 25.7%

Yes 64.1% 61.7% 55.5% 52.2% 50.0% 53.4%

Roles advertised internally

No 22.3% 10.9% 13.0% 11.0% 4.5% 12.3%

Not sure 7.0% 4.8% 4.7% 4.3% 0.0% 8.3%

Yes 70.7% 84.3% 82.2% 84.7% 95.5% 79.4%

Mobility encouraged by senior managers

No 49.4% 44.3% 38.7% 42.3% 40.9% 42.6%

Yes 55.1% 55.7% 61.3% 57.7% 59.1% 57.4%

* Prefer not to say

9

SalaryFig 2.6

Those earning salaries over £60,000 are most likely to believe that mobility is encouraged by their employer. Those earning less than £40,000 believe their employer is less committed in terms of an internal mobility policy, roles advertised internally and mobility being encouraged by senior managers.

Less than £40,000

£40 to 60,000

£60 to 80,000

£80 to 100,000

£100 - 120,000

£120,000 +

Internal mobility policy exists

No 25.7% 19.7% 19.1% 15.8% 20.5% 26.7%

Not sure 28.4% 24.9% 16.6% 22.4% 20.5% 18.7%

Yes 45.9% 55.4% 64.3% 61.7% 59.1% 54.7%

Roles advertised internally

No 21.6% 13.1% 10.3% 11.5% 15.2% 12.5%

Not sure 2.7% 5.2% 5.0% 4.9% 5.3% 4.9%

Yes 75.7% 81.7% 84.7% 83.6% 79.5% 82.6%

Mobility encouraged

No 49.3% 45.3% 43.8% 43.9% 43.2% 40.4%

Yes 50.7% 54.7% 56.2% 56.1% 56.8% 59.6%

10

3 . Relocation

Discovering how employees feel about relocation.

Mobility

Our report shows that nearly half of respondents (48%) have relocated for their job, demonstrating commitment to the development of their career.

A substantial 52% would move domestically for their career, however, by comparison 76% would move internationally. This suggests that the career opportunities in the UK, outside of the City are less desirable than those within international locations.

SectorFig 3.1 Non financial services employees are more open to relocation than financial

services staff with 63% of staff who have relocated, compared to just half (52%) of financial services staff. More non financial services staff compared to financial services staff would move domestically with 64% compared to 58%.

However, when it comes to international opportunities, financial services staff are only slightly more likely to make the move with 86% compared to 85%.

11

FunctionFig 3.2

Internal Audit staff are the most likely to have relocated for work, with Operations and Middle Office staff the least likely.

Interestingly, respondents are more likely to move internationally than they are domestically. In particular, 82% of revenue generating staff would make an international move, however only 37% (the lowest of all the functions) would move domestically.

Function Has relocated

Administration 46.2%

Compliance 50.0%

Finance 44.4%

HR 61.9%

Internal Audit 68.8%

Operations & Middle Office 38.3%

Revenue Generating 50.0%

Risk 55.3%

Sales 58.7%

Strategy & Change 52.3%

Technology 46.8%

Other 52.4%

TOTAL 48.2%

Function Would move domestically


Compliance 57.9%

Finance 53.3%

HR 42.9%




Risk 49.6%

Sales 60.9%


Technology 52.5%

Other 53.3%

TOTAL 52.3%

Function Would move internationally


Compliance 84.2%

Finance 76.0%

HR 71.4%




Risk 78.8%

Sales 78.9%


Technology 72.7%

Other 73.3%

TOTAL 76.3%

12

Job levelFig 3.3

Senior level staff are more likely to have relocated than any other job level. In particular, the Managing Director level (65%). Perhaps this suggests that relocating provides greater opportunity for promotion.

In contrast, just 38% of AVP level staff have relocated. However, AVP level staff are also the most keen to move internationally (82%,) and the least keen to move domestically (46%).

GenderFig 3.4

Men are generally more open to relocating than women. 56% of men have previously relocated compared to 48% of women. In addition, 61% of men would move domestically, and 86% would move internationally. By comparison, half of the women who responded would move domestically and 86% would move internationally

Has relocatedWould move domestically

Would move internationally

Analyst 43.5% 55.2% 75.8%

Associate 44.7% 50.7% 79.6%

Assistant Vice President 38.1% 46.3% 82.1%

Manager 49.8% 58.0% 74.9%

Vice President 51.9% 48.1% 79.9%

Director/Executive Director 53.7% 50.6% 76.9%

Managing Director 65.4% 59.3% 75.3%

Other 42.7% 49.4% 65.9%

TOTAL 48.2% 52.3% 76.3%

13

SalaryFig 3.6

Those earning £120,000 or more are the most likely to have relocated at 64%. Those earning £40 - £60,000 are the least likely. Those earning lower salaries are more interested in moving domestically than those on higher salaries, however, respondents across all salary bands are similarly interested in an international move.

AgeFig 3.5

The older generations are more likely to have previously relocated and also to relocate domestically. However, it is both the youngest and eldest age groups who are the most keen to make a move internationally with 95% of 20-29 year olds and 90.9% of those aged 60 and above.

20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+ PNS*

Has relocated 46.5% 50.4% 56.1% 64.0% 77.3% 57.0%

Would relocate domestically 59.2% 57.0% 63.9% 61.1% 77.3% 52.8%

Would relocate internationally 94.8% 89.4% 81.3% 76.1% 90.9% 85.1%

Less than £40,000

£40 to 60,000

£60 to 80,000

£80 to 100,000

£100 - 120,000

£120,000 +

Has relocated 48.6% 47.6% 50.6% 48.4% 63.6% 64.1%

Would relocate domestically 71.6% 62.9% 56.6% 58.2% 55.3% 55.6%

Would relocate internationally 87.8% 86.7% 84.3% 88.5% 87.9% 83.4%

14

4 . Expectations of supportWhat do employees expect if they do make a move?

Mobility

We found that employee’s expectations vary substantially depending on whether they are making an international or a domestic move.

For an international move, expectations are far higher. For example, 82% of respondents would expect assistance with finding and paying for accommodation compared to just 47% when making a domestic move.

73% of employees would expect help with medical cover and 78% would expect travel expenses when making an international move.

The highest expectation of support for a domestic move was placed on the moving of belongings at 48% of respondents expecting help. However, this was compared to a substantial 79% who would expect this for an international move.

15

SectorFig 4.1 With regards to a domestic move, almost half of all employees irrespective of sector, would expect assistance from

their employer with the moving of their belongings, as well as finding and paying for relocation accommodation. The only other expectation of note is for assistance with travel expenses; 45% of financial services and 49% of other sectors would expect help with this.

Expectations for assistance with an international move are far higher. Respondents across both sectors expected assistance with finding and paying for accommodation, travel expenses and the moving of their belongings. They also rated very highly medical cover and assistance with finding and paying for schools for children. We saw the lowest expectation across both sectors was for paying for local club memberships and for additional holiday.

16

FunctionFig 4.2

Domestic

Ad

min

istr

atio

n

Co

mp

lianc

e

Fina

nce

HR

Inte

rnal

Aud

it

Op

erat

ions

&

Mid

dle

Off

ice

Rev

enue

G

ener

atin

g

Ris

k

Sal

es

Str

ateg

y&

Ch

ang

e

Tech

nolo

gy

Oth

er

Assistance with finding and/or paying for accommodation

42.3% 60.5% 43.2% 38.1% 68.8% 49.2% 30.5% 54.5% 45.7% 48.8% 46.8% 51.4%

Medical cover 38.5% 39.5% 35.8% 38.1% 18.8% 43.8% 29.7% 43.2% 32.6% 31.4% 35.5% 42.9%

Travel expenses 42.3% 57.9% 42.3% 52.4% 62.5% 44.5% 34.7% 56.9% 52.2% 45.3% 46.4% 43.8%

Additional holiday 15.4% 18.4% 11.2% 0.0% 12.5% 6.3% 10.2% 13.8% 2.2% 12.2% 11.3% 10.5%

Assistance with finding and paying for school for children

7.7% 28.9% 20.4% 4.8% 25.0% 19.5% 15.3% 22.0% 19.6% 19.2% 21.6% 20.0%

Partners allowance 11.5% 23.7% 12.7% 14.3% 12.5% 8.6% 7.6% 19.5% 6.5% 13.4% 12.4% 14.3%

Support with paying for local club memberships

11.5% 15.8% 10.4% 4.8% 12.5% 7.0% 7.6% 17.9% 4.3% 8.7% 7.6% 11.4%

Moving of belongings 42.3% 60.5% 42.6% 52.4% 68.8% 51.6% 37.3% 52.8% 56.5% 50.6% 46.9% 59.0%

Internal Audit employees have the highest expectations from their employer when making a domestic move. 69% of Internal Audit employees expect assistance with finding and paying for accommodation as well as the moving of their belongings. Compliance staff also have similarly high expectations. Across both domestic and international moves, the highest expectation is placed on assistance with accommodation, medical cover, travel expenses and the moving of belongings.

HR staff have the lowest expectations generally, with the highest placed on travel expenses and moving of belongings (52%) and the lowest on additional holiday (0%).

With regards to international moves, Sales and Strategy & Change staff have the highest expectations, with 90% and 89% respectively expecting assistance with finding and paying for accommodation. Strategy & Change staff place equal importance on travel expenses and moving of belongings. The least importance is placed on support with paying for local club memberships and additional holiday.

17

InternationalA

dm

inis

trat

ion

Co

mp

lianc

e

Fina

nce

HR

Inte

rnal

Aud

it

Op

erat

ions

&

Mid

dle

Off

ice

Rev

enue

G

ener

atin

g

Ris

k

Sal

es

Str

ateg

y&

Ch

ang

e

Tech

nolo

gy

Oth

er


73.1% 86.8% 80.8% 81.0% 87.5% 83.6% 80.5% 80.5% 90.2% 89.1% 82.0% 81.9%

Medical cover 76.9% 81.6% 74.9% 76.2% 75.0% 77.3% 74.6% 74.6% 85.4% 80.4% 71.5% 78.1%

Travel expenses 73.1% 84.2% 76.3% 76.2% 87.5% 77.3% 78.8% 78.8% 84.6% 89.1% 75.0% 78.1%


Assistance with finding and paying for school for children

26.9% 52.6% 62.1% 52.4% 75.0% 52.3% 57.6% 57.6% 63.4% 60.9% 61.6% 61.9%



15.4% 28.9% 26.6% 19.0% 37.5% 21.9% 23.7% 23.7% 34.1% 28.3% 24.4% 28.6%


18

Job levelFig 4.3

Barrier

Ana

lyst

Ass

oci

ate

AV

P

Man

ager

VP

Dir

ecto

r/E

xec

Dir

ecto

r

Man

agin

g

Dir

ecto

r

Oth

er

TOTA

L


Domestic move 42.2% 48.7% 43.3% 51.2% 48.9% 42.7% 51.9% 45.7% 46.5%

International move 79.7% 79.6% 82.8% 84.4% 87.7% 84.7% 82.7% 67.7% 81.8%

Medical cover

Domestic move 30.7% 41.4% 41.8% 37.6% 39.9% 36.5% 35.8% 29.3% 36.3%


Travel expenses

Domestic move 39.9% 53.9% 47.8% 48.5% 47.4% 42.0% 49.4% 43.3% 45.7%


Additional holiday

Domestic move 13.4% 15.8% 14.2% 10.8% 6.0% 7.5% 11.1% 12.2% 10.9%


Assistance with finding and paying for schools for your children

Domestic move 20.9% 22.4% 17.9% 20.7% 25.4% 15.7% 24.7% 13.4% 20.1%


Partners allowance

Domestic move 13.7% 17.1% 11.9% 13.6% 13.4% 7.1% 12.3% 13.4% 12.7%



Domestic move 7.8% 15.8% 9.0% 11.9% 9.0% 7.8% 8.6% 6.1% 9.4%


Moving of belongings

Domestic move 43.8% 44.7% 46.3% 51.9% 53.7% 47.5% 56.8% 41.5% 48.1%


When making a domestic move, 40% of Analyst level staff compared to 54% of Associates would expect travel expenses. This is quite a substantial given the similar level of both in an organisation.

In terms of moving of belongings for an international move 74% of Analysts would expect assistance compared to 87% of VP level staff.

19

GenderFig 4.4

Men and women appear to have a very similar view on the support that they should be receiving for either an international or domestic move. The biggest discrepancies appear with assistance to find and pay for schools for children when making an international move. 59% of men would expect this, compared to 52% of women. A similar difference is seen for support with paying for local club memberships, with 24% of men expecting support with this compared with 18% of women.

With a domestic move, the only real difference identified was where 11% of men expected to receive a partners allowance compared to 18% of women.

20

AgeFig 4.5

A surprising 100% of those respondents aged 60 and above would expect assistance with finding and paying for accommodation. This is in stark contrast to just 76% of 20 -29 year olds. 77% of the 60+ age group also expect the same support for a domestic move, whilst just 35% of 20-29 year olds would.

Benefit

20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+ PNS

Dom Int Dom Int Dom Int Dom Int Dom Int Dom Int


34.5% 75.7% 47.4% 85.6% 47.5% 84.5% 59.3% 83.7% 77.3% 100% 41.4% 72.8%

Medical cover 33.3% 70.6% 41.0% 78.1% 35.2% 73.1% 39.0% 76.7% 40.9% 81.8% 29.0% 64.5%

Travel expenses 40.7% 77.4% 48.7% 81.7% 43.2% 79.5% 55.8% 79.1% 72.7% 90.9% 38.6% 67.6%


Assistance with finding and paying for school for your children

16.4% 53.7% 22.4% 61.0% 21.6% 62.9% 14.5% 47.7% 13.6% 45.5% 19.8% 53.4%



13.0% 24.9% 10.1% 22.6% 9.1% 24.0% 8.7% 21.5% 4.5% 22.7% 7.4% 19.8%

Moving of belongings

35.0% 72.9% 47.9% 83.2% 49.9% 80.5% 62.2% 81.4% 72.7% 86.4% 44.4% 70.1%

21

SalaryFig 4.6

Generally those earning lower salaries, have lower expectations in terms of assistance with either a domestic or, an international move. Interestingly, when making an international move, of those earning £100 - 120,000, 68% would expect medical cover compared to 82% of those earning over £120,000.

With regards to finding and paying for schools, just 44% of those earning less than £40,000 would expect assistance when making an international move, compared to 67% of those earning £120,000+.

Benefit

Less than £40,000

£40 to 60,000

£60 to 80,000

£80 to 100,000

£100 - 120,000

£120,000 +

Dom Int Dom Int Dom Int Dom Int Dom Int Dom Int


49.4% 77.0% 39.5% 80.3% 55.4% 87.2% 48.7% 87.6% 43.0% 83.2% 46.3% 88.8%

Medical cover 35.6% 71.3% 38.6% 75.4% 41.5% 78.3% 41.5% 78.8% 30.9% 67.8% 36.7% 82.1%

Travel expenses 49.4% 73.6% 45.2% 78.9% 51.9% 85.3% 52.3% 82.9% 40.9% 77.2% 45.0% 83.3%


Assistance with finding and paying for school for your children

26.4% 43.7% 16.2% 53.5% 21.3% 62.8% 25.4% 61.7% 17.4% 57.0% 20.4% 66.7%



19.5% 23.0% 10.1% 21.9% 10.1% 20.5% 13.0% 26.9% 6.7% 20.8% 7.5% 30.4%


22

Market Insight

Where do you expect to be the biggest financial services centre in ten years’ time?

1= Hong Kong (22%)

Shanghai (22%)

3 London (20%)

4 Singapore (16%)

5 New York (13%)6

UAE (7%)

23

Flexible Working

We explore the various approaches to mobility within a business and employees expectations when making a move.

24

5 . Availability of Flexible Working

Flexible Working

Understanding the flexible working options available

SectorFig 5.1

Non financial services firms provide greater flexibility than financial services firms. In particular, 66% of non financial services firms accommodate mobile working compared to just 37% of financial services firms.

65.1% of non-financial services firms employees work from home regularly compared to 47.6% of financial services firms.

A substantial proportion of employees have flexible working available to them. 51% of respondents are able to work from home, and 43% have access to mobile working. However, only 22% are part time, term time or job sharing and 32% utilise flexi time, annual or compressed hours.

25

FunctionFig 5.2

HR staff utilise flexible working the most out of all business functions with 79% of HR staff regularly working from home and over 64% with flexi time, annual or compressed hours and mobile working. The second most flexible workers are those within Strategy & Change with 65% regularly working from home and 62% mobile working. By comparison, Administration and Compliance functions are the least likely to adopt mobile working.

The least commonly adopted flexible working method is part time, term time or job sharing with just 8% of Sales staff and 16% of Compliance staff working in this way.

FunctionPart time, term time

or job sharingFlexi-time, annual or compressed hours

Working from home regularly

Mobile working

Administration 25.0% 50.0% 52.4% 30.0%

Compliance 16.1% 18.8% 35.3% 33.3%

Finance 21.2% 30.4% 44.3% 39.2%

HR 50.0% 64.3% 78.9% 64.7%

Internal Audit 50.0% 35.7% 50.0% 53.3%

Operations & Middle Office 13.4% 23.2% 38.5% 30.9%

Revenue Generating 20.0% 21.6% 36.9% 47.5%

Risk 19.5% 26.5% 45.7% 37.2%

Sales 7.5% 21.4% 54.8% 51.2%

Strategy & Change 30.4% 44.0% 64.7% 62.3%

Technology 20.3% 34.3% 57.7% 38.9%

Other 28.9% 30.6% 50.0% 51.6%

TOTAL 21.5% 31.7% 50.8% 42.6%

26

Job LevelFig 5.3

GenderFig 5.4

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the more senior the respondent, the more flexibly they work. For example 66% of Director/Executive Director level staff work from home on a regular basis, compared to just 36% of Associates. In addition, only 15% of Analysts are part time, term time or job sharing workers compared to 31% of Director/Executive Director staff.

However, there does seem to be a drop at Managing Director level (19%), with fewer working flexibly than their Director/Executive level (31%) colleagues.

There is little difference between the sexes when it comes to working from home and mobile working. However, 37% of women adopt flexi time, annual hours or compressed hours compared to 30% of men. In addition 27% of women are part time, term time or job sharing compared to 20% of men.

Availability of flexible working options

Analyst Associate AVP Manager VPDirector/

Exec Director

Managing Director

Other

Part time, term-time working or job sharing 15.0% 16.7% 19.5% 25.5% 22.6% 31.4% 17.7% 18.4%

Flexi-time, annual hours or compressed hours 29.1% 23.7% 27.9% 38.8% 28.4% 38.1% 32.3% 30.1%

Working from home on a regular basis

40.2% 35.8% 50.4% 55.2% 55.6% 65.6% 54.4% 43.7%

Mobile working 30.4% 32.3% 31.6% 51.4% 39.8% 60.3% 65.2% 34.8%

27

AgeFig 5.5

The most flexibly working age group are those aged 60 and above. In general, the older a worker gets, the more flexibility they have in their role. In particular, 68% of those aged 60+ regularly work from home, compared to just 36% of 20 - 29 year olds.

SalaryFig 5.6

The highest paid groups are most likely to utilise mobile working and regularly work from home. However, those earning less than £40,000 are most likely to work part time, term time or job share and also to utilise flexi time, compressed or annual hours. This is perhaps unsurprising, since fewer hours suggests a lower salary will be paid.

Benefit 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+

Part time, term time and job sharing

16.7% 21.9% 20.6% 23.0% 36.8%

Flexi-time, compressed or annual hours

24.2% 32.6% 33.9% 30.7% 55.0%

Working from home regularly 36.3% 50.5% 56.4% 55.0% 68.2%

Mobile working 34.0% 42.5% 45.9% 47.5% 52.4%

28

6 . Impact of Flexible WorkingUnderstanding how flexible working affects the workforce.

Flexible Working

Generally, respondents were very positive about the impact of flexible working. However, there is a general consensus that more widespread flexible working may have a negative impact upon teamwork and knowledge sharing as well as customer service.

The most positive impact was believed to be expected for staff retention, employee motivation and attractiveness as an employer.

29

SectorFig 6.1

There were no notable differences between financial services and non financial services firms when considering the impact of flexible working.

The biggest difference was for impact on staff retention. 44% of financial services employees believe that flexible working will have a major positive impact on staff retention compared to 38% of non financial services firms.

30

Staff RetentionThe Technology function felt that flexible working would have the most positive effect on staff retention. Internal Audit respondents believe it would have the most negative effect.

Employee MotivationAdministration (84%), Internal Audit (86%), and Risk (86%) employees believe that flexible working has the most positive impact on employee motivation. HR and compliance felt the opposite.

Attractiveness as an EmployerMore than 90% of Administration, HR and Compliance staff believe that more flexible working would increase the attractiveness of an employer. Just 71% of Internal Audit staff agree.

Corporate ProductivityUp to 22% of Revenue Generating staff believe that more flexible working would have a negative impact on corporate productivity compared to 74% of Compliance professionals.

FunctionFig 6.2

31

AbsenteeismOver 60% of Administration and Strategy & Change staff believe that improved flexible working would have a positive effect on absenteeism.

Customer Service ImpactLess than 20% of Administration, Sales and Strategy & Change staff believe that flexible working will have a negative impact on customer service. The majority of all functions, believe customer service will be unaffected.

TeamworkRevenue generating staff believe that flexible working will have the biggest negative impact on teamwork. Compliance staff think it will have the most positive impact (46%)

Knowledge Sharing58% of Revenue Generating staff believe that flexible working will have a negative impact on knowledge sharing with just 21% of Internal Audit staff in agreement.

32

Job levelFig 6.3

Impact of Staff Retention85% of AVP level staff believe that flexible working would have a positive effect on staff retention. This is compared to 79% of Associate level staff who agree.

Impact of Employee Motivation8% of Associate level staff believe that more flexible working will have a negative effect on employee motivation. 80% of AVP level staff disagree and think employees will be motivated.

Attractiveness as an Employer89% of Manager level staff believe that flexible working will improve the attractiveness as an employer.

Corporate Productivity57% of Managers believe that greater flexible working opportunities will have a positive effect on corporate productivity.

33

AbsenteeismHalf of AVP level staff and Managers believe that more flexible working will have a positive impact on absenteeism.

Customer Service ImpactOne third of Associate level staff believe that flexible working would have a negative impact on customer service compared to 68% who believe it will have a positive, or no impact.

TeamworkOver half (53%) of Director/Executive level staff believe that greater flexible working will have a negative impact on Teamwork. More than one third of AVP level staff disagree.

Knowledge SharingOne third of AVP level staff believe that flexible working will have a positive impact on knowledge sharing.

34

GenderFig 6.4

Women have a more positive impression of the impact of flexible working. For example, 59% of women believe that flexible working will have a strongly positive effect on the attractiveness of an employer compared to 41% of men.

In addition, men felt more strongly than women, that flexible working would have a negative effect on teamwork.

35

AgeFig 6.5

Those respondents aged 20 - 29 and 60 and over held more negative views than their younger counterparts regarding the impact of flexible working on a business. For example, 15% of over those aged 60 and over believe that flexible working will have a negative impact on staff retention, compared to 7% of 20-29 years olds (the next highest).

Two thirds of 50 -59 years olds compared to half of 60 years olds and above believe that flexible working will have a positive impact on corporate productivity.

36

SalaryFig 6.6

57% of those earning less than £40,000 believe that greater flexible working will have a major positive effect on employer attractiveness compared to 38% of those earning £80 - 100,000.

13% of those earning £120,000+ and 13% of those at the opposite end of the pay scale, £40,000 and less believe that more flexible working would have a major negative impact on knowledge sharing.

37

7 . Barriers to Flexible WorkingWe discover what factors are inhibiting flexible working.

Flexible Working

SectorFig 7.1

Financial services staff believe that operational pressures are the biggest barrier to flexible working, whilst non financial services staff believe that the existing organisational culture is the biggest inhibitor. Financial services firms believe that employee resistance is the lowest barrier and financial services believe it is demonstrating fairness between different employees.

Existing culture, operational pressures, line management attitudes and problems communicating with a team were seen to be the highest barriers to flexible working.

However, there is plenty of support from employees to implement further flexibility as employee lack of interest and employee resistance were not seen as barrier with just 5% and 4% of respondents respectively.

38

FunctionFig 7.2

Barrier

Ad

min

Co

mp

li-an

ce

Fina

nce

HR

Inte

rnal

A

udit

Op

s &

M

idd

le

off

ice

Rev

enue

Gen

Ris

k

Sal

es

Str

at &

C

han

ge

Tech

Oth

er

TOTA

L

Employee resistance 11.5% 0.0% 5.3% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 3.4% 4.1% 0.0% 2.3% 4.8% 1.9% 3.5%

Financial restraints 11.5% 5.3% 4.7% 0.0% 0.0% 6.3% 4.2% 3.3% 1.7% 1.7% 4.2% 3.8% 3.9%

Employee lack of interest 0.0% 5.3% 5.3% 0.0% 6.3% 2.3% 5.1% 8.1% 1.2% 1.7% 4.8% 3.8% 4.2%

The need to recruit more workers to main-tain service/output

7.7% 5.3% 6.5% 4.8% 18.8% 10.2% 4.2% 4.1% 0.0% 3.5% 4.4% 4.8% 4.9%

Demonstrating fairness between different employees

26.9% 18.4% 18.6% 23.8% 12.5% 18.8% 16.9% 13.8% 3.5% 17.4% 15.1% 22.9% 15.9%

Technological limitations 15.4% 23.7% 25.4% 28.6% 6.3% 24.2% 26.3% 25.2% 4.7% 18.0% 19.1% 19.0% 20.1%

Reduced productivity 19.2% 2.6% 25.1% 4.8% 6.3% 20.3% 27.1% 25.2% 6.4% 18.6% 21.4% 26.7% 20.5%

Lack of senior level support 11.5% 31.6% 24.6% 19.0% 31.3% 21.9% 24.6% 37.4% 5.8% 30.8% 29.0% 26.7% 25.4%

Customer service demands

30.8% 15.8% 27.2% 33.3% 18.8% 26.6% 33.9% 25.2% 8.7% 25.0% 27.5% 32.4% 25.7%

Line manager’s ability to effectively manage flexible workers

26.9% 28.9% 31.7% 42.9% 31.3% 36.7% 31.4% 37.4% 8.7% 34.9% 35.5% 37.1% 31.9%

Problems communicating with a team

30.8% 21.1% 35.5% 33.3% 43.8% 28.9% 43.2% 35.8% 11.0% 33.7% 40.3% 33.3% 34.0%

Line management attitude towards flexible working

38.5% 39.5% 32.0% 52.4% 31.3% 30.5% 35.6% 43.9% 12.2% 44.8% 41.2% 26.7% 35.1%

Operational pressures 34.6% 39.5% 45.9% 52.4% 31.3% 49.2% 35.6% 31.7% 12.8% 27.9% 39.5% 36.2% 36.7%

Existing organisational culture

46.2% 44.7% 37.3% 52.4% 25.0% 30.5% 44.1% 48.0% 12.8% 52.9% 42.0% 41.9% 39.1%

HR staff equally believe that line management attitudes, operational pressures and existing organisational culture are to blame as barriers to flexible working. They believe that there are no issues with employee resistance, financial restraints and an employee lack of interest.

Technology staff believe that existing organisational culture is the biggest barrier to flexible working opportunities (42%), whilst financial restraints was the lowest barrier (4%).

39

Job levelFig 7.3

Barrier

Ana

lyst

Ass

oci

ate

AV

P

Man

ager

VP

Dir

ecto

r/E

xecu

tive

Dir

ecto

r

Man

agin

g

Dir

ecto

r

Oth

er

TOTA

L

Operational pressures 37.6% 41.4% 43.3% 38.3% 44.8% 37.6% 35.8% 36.6% 39.5%

Customer service demands 27.8% 28.3% 23.9% 28.1% 30.6% 28.2% 32.1% 20.7% 27.6%

Line manager’s ability to effectively manage flexible workers 35.3% 31.6% 40.3% 35.6% 35.1% 31.0% 40.7% 29.3% 34.4%

Line management attitudes towards flexible working

41.8% 32.2% 38.1% 37.6% 36.9% 34.5% 37.0% 42.7% 37.8%

Existing organisational culture 40.8% 43.4% 39.6% 45.1% 43.7% 40.0% 32.1% 45.7% 42.1%

Lack of senior level support 24.2% 28.9% 29.9% 29.5% 26.5% 27.1% 24.7% 29.3% 27.4%

Financial restraints 5.9% 3.3% 4.5% 5.1% 2.2% 4.3% 1.2% 4.9% 4.2%

Technological limitations 26.1% 25.0% 22.4% 21.4% 22.8% 15.7% 16.0% 20.1% 21.6%

Employee lack of interest 5.6% 4.6% 4.5% 4.1% 4.1% 2.7% 11.1% 3.0% 4.5%

Employee resistance 4.9% 3.3% 3.0% 4.4% 3.0% 3.1% 4.9% 3.7% 3.8%


18.3% 15.8% 20.1% 16.3% 17.2% 14.1% 22.2% 17.7% 17.2%

Reduced productivity 23.2% 24.3% 21.6% 14.6% 28.4% 24.3% 24.7% 16.5% 22.1%

The need to recruit more workers to maintain service/output 6.2% 4.6% 3.0% 5.8% 6.3% 3.5% 8.6% 4.3% 5.3%


40.2% 37.5% 35.8% 32.5% 37.7% 38.4% 27.2% 36.6% 36.6%

45% of VP level staff believe that operational pressures are the biggest barrier to flexible working, compared to 38% of Analyst and Director/Executive Director level staff.

40% of Analyst level staff believe that problems communicating with the team is a barrier to flexible working and 42% believe it is down to line management attitudes towards flexible working.

40

AgeFig 7.5

Barrier 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+ PNS

Operational pressures 39.0% 41.4% 40.0% 40.7% 68.2% 33.3%

Customer service demands 26.6% 29.2% 26.4% 30.2% 31.8% 25.0%

Line manager’s ability to effectively manage flexible workers 39.5% 34.0% 36.3% 39.0% 27.3% 28.1%

Line management attitudes towards flexible working 31.1% 39.5% 41.3% 45.3% 31.8% 30.9%

Existing organisational culture 35.0% 46.8% 44.3% 46.5% 54.5% 31.8%

Lack of senior level support 25.4% 27.4% 29.3% 33.1% 27.3% 23.1%

Financial restraints 6.8% 4.3% 2.7% 3.5% 4.5% 4.9%

Technological limitations 24.3% 25.5% 19.2% 15.7% 9.1% 20.1%

Employee lack of interest 7.3% 4.8% 4.0% 1.7% 4.5% 4.3%

Employee resistance 4.0% 4.3% 4.3% 2.3% 13.6% 2.5%

Demonstrating fairness between different employees 11.3% 18.6% 17.3% 19.8% 27.3% 15.4%

Reduced productivity 31.1% 23.6% 22.1% 14.0% 13.6% 19.1%

The need to recruit more workers to maintain service/output 4.5% 5.1% 6.7% 6.4% 9.1% 3.4%

Problems communicating with a team 44.1% 36.6% 34.9% 39.5% 36.4% 32.7%

GenderFig 7.4

Women believe that line management attitudes are the biggest barrier to flexible working, whilst men believe it is the existing organisational culture.

Both believe employee resistance is the lowest barrier.

68% of 60+ year olds believe that operational pressures are the biggest barrier to flexible working, compared to just 39% of 20 - 29 year olds.

31% of 20 - 29 year olds believe reduced productivity is a barrier to flexible working, compared to 14% of those aged 60+.

41

Salary

48% of those earning £60 - 80,000 believe that existing organisational culture is a barrier to flexible working, compared to 4% who believe employee lack of interest is a barrier.

BarrierLess than £40,000

£40 - 60,000

£60 - 80,000

£80 - 100,000

£100 - 120,000

£120,000 +

Operational pressures 37.9% 42.1% 42.2% 39.9% 35.6% 45.4%

Customer service demands 25.3% 28.5% 29.1% 26.4% 30.9% 29.6%

Line manager’s ability to effectively manage flexible workers

46.0% 35.1% 31.4% 39.4% 39.6% 34.6%

Line management attitudes towards flexible working

42.5% 36.0% 37.2% 45.6% 38.9% 40.0%

Existing organisational culture 41.4% 45.6% 47.7% 40.4% 42.3% 40.8%

Lack of senior level support 23.0% 30.3% 28.7% 28.0% 30.9% 27.9%

Financial restraints 4.6% 6.6% 5.4% 3.1% 0.7% 3.8%

Technological limitations 13.8% 25.4% 22.5% 23.8% 17.4% 20.4%

Employee lack of interest 8.0% 3.5% 4.3% 4.1% 3.4% 3.3%

Employee resistance 5.7% 5.7% 5.0% 4.1% 2.7% 3.8%


20.7% 17.1% 18.2% 16.6% 18.1% 19.6%

Reduced productivity 18.4% 23.2% 21.3% 23.8% 24.2% 29.6%

The need to recruit more workers to maintain service/output

8.0% 5.7% 5.0% 6.7% 4.0% 5.0%


39.1% 31.6% 37.2% 36.8% 42.3% 42.5%

Fig 7.6

42

Case study

“Flexible working is a way of working that suits an employee’s needs”

(www.gov.uk/flexible-working/overview)

43

About Astbury Marsden

Our success is based on acquiring a special understanding of the markets in which we operate. We take this in its broadest sense, encompassing understanding and empathy with our clients and candidates, and also a broad knowledge of the working environment.

We are always adding to that knowledge and experience; in the process we are building up a unique picture of all the components of the working lives of our clients and candidates and their world.

The result is that we are more successful at attracting talent, and better able to recognise opportunities for clients.

Ours is a dual customer focus. A shared agenda if you like.

The duality of the client-candidate relationship makes recruitment in the mid to senior-level world of international finance, consulting and strategy more human than one might otherwise think.

It demands more than an appreciation of the skills or experience required to fulfil a role. It is quite unlike the volume recruitment business, which is widely held to be something of a numbers game. We look beyond the idea of recruitment for a post, thinking about how individuals could develop in a role or a team, fulfilling the longer-term needs of the business and the career goals of the individual.

To achieve the necessary understanding, some of our people are drawn from the industries to which we recruit, others have made those industries their particular focus. Our expansion into the Far East adds an international perspective to our work and serves to broaden the outlook and experience of our teams.

Keeping to a particular field means, over time, we have acquired a depth of knowledge and experience, to create a unique understanding of our markets, of the people in them, and ‘the life’ they lead.

To find out more, visit www.astburymarsden.com

LondonJonathan Nicholson60 New Broad St, London EC2M 1JJ +44 (0)20 7065 1222

Hong KongPaul Evans77 Wing Lok Street,Sheung Wan, Hong Kong+852 3971 4712

SingaporeMark O’ReillySingapore Land Tower, 50 Raffles Place, Singapore+65 6829 7122

Astbury Marsden is an international recruitment firm focussed on banking, financial services, oil and gas and management consulting.

44

Case study

Business

Report 4 mobility and flexible working