Connect with us

Economy

How to grow your company in times of gig economy and digital nomadism – TechTalks

Published

on

By Lukasz Karwacki

gig economy remote worker
Image credit: Depositphotos

Companies face many challenges in their mission to grow. One of them relates to recruitment, or more precisely, to the cultural changes that impact the needs and preferences of talents.

Let’s make one thing clear:

To grow your company, you need top talent. And you need those people to stay with the company for more than just a few months.

Otherwise, there simply won’t be enough time for them to get in sync with the company goals and culture, move along the learning curve, and start being truly productive.

The trouble is, sourcing skilled employees is harder than ever. And even if you manage to find and hire talents, keeping them on board is really difficult.

Problem: Getting talent on board

Most companies (including mine) deal with one or more of these problems:

1. Recruitment difficulties:

  • A general shortage of talent – the demand for skilled workers is growing, but the number of these workers isn’t growing equally fast. That forces companies to explore outsourcing opportunities (which can be incredibly beneficial, but present another set of challenges).
  • Employees are more demanding than ever – enterprises and well-funded startups compete for the most talented workers. In this environment, highly-skilled workers can be picky, and that makes sourcing them even more difficult.
  • Lack of skill on the market – if you run a tech company, you probably realize that technology is evolving so quickly that no school or university can effectively prepare juniors for the reality of the job market in the tech industry which experiences an increasing pace of innovation.

2. The Gig-economy mindset:

Some employees prioritize independence and flexibility over loyalty and long-term commitment. Some even believe that one should be changing the workplace every few months to get diversified experience. As you can imagine, it’s more difficult to inspire these workers to commit, contribute to common objectives, and add value to the company sustainably over a period of time. But trust me, you can accomplish that with the right approach (more on that below).

3. Digital nomadism

Digital transformation and workforce globalization made remote work a new standard and a popular preference among workers:

  • 76% of workers prefer to do important tasks in places other than the office,
  • 82% of them claim they would be more loyal to their current employer if they offered flexible working arrangements,
  • the trend is particularly strong among Gen Y/Z workers – 69% of millennials will trade other work benefits for flexible workspace options.

Remote work presents companies with another share of challenges: efficient communication and collaboration, building bonds between team members, and building a company culture that lasts.

Here’s what all founders need to acknowledge

You won’t change the market

These new workforce trends will only become stronger with time. So you better spend time thinking about how to adjust to and leverage these trends. Business success comes to those who have an open mind and are willing to adapt their operations to new circumstances.

Human nature doesn’t change from generation to generation

We’re still the same creatures with the same behaviors, needs, and desires. What changes is the world around us. It’s important to remember that temporary hype and speculative bubbles can easily lead us astray; they distort our perceptions of the world, especially when we talk about the needs of Gen Y/Z workers. They essentially have the same needs as other generations, just want to fulfill them in new ways.

The world is increasingly polarized

Even though the barriers of entry in certain sectors seem to be decreasing (one only needs a laptop to work in IT!), the growing sophistication and complexity of the challenges we face as organizations require more effort and higher operational efficiency.

It’s much easier to start a company than it used to be in the past. But it’s much more challenging to grow a business and maintain a substantial competitive advantage.

So we better get used to these challenges and think of new strategies to counter them. Here’s how.

How to grow your company despite these challenges

teamwork

Here are three strategies that helped me to grow my company. During the last two years, Sunscrapers grew from 15 to 32 people.

1. Improve your recruitment tactics:

  • Articulate and showcase your company’s mission, vision, and values. It’s not only money that counts here. Especially for Gen Y/Z workers, the purpose and values they can identify themselves with are particularly important. For example, one of our values is “never stopping learning and self-improving” and we translate that into reality by offering our workers “growth budgets” they can spend on books, courses, or conference participation.
  • Find your employer differentiator; something that makes you different from other employers in your field. It’s like a Unique Selling Proposition, only formulated for your employer brand, not your product or service. It can be company culture, your approach to doing businesses, your unique processes or activities.
  • Adjust your processes, so they become more employee-oriented. Be responsive and deliver on your promises. If you say that you’ll get in touch with candidates within three business days, do that. Show how their future role is embedded within the company mission.
  • Provide value at every recruitment stage. For example, develop a method for speedy application processing. Acknowledge that you’ve received an application and thank the candidate for reaching out. Provide meaningful feedback.
  • Learn how to differentiate between talkers and doers when recruiting for critical roles in your team (which basically means every role). The culture of social media inspires people to look good, causing them to sometimes exaggerate when talking about their skills.

2. Improve your operational efficiency

  • Invest in your onboarding process to help new employees get up to speed quickly and start adding value to your company. Here’s how:
    • Prepare the right materials and the training process,
    • Set very clear goals (most companies find that problematic, we’re just starting to get it now),
    • Prepare a detailed plan and tasks for the first weeks of work,
    • Provide supervisor support.
  • Prepare processes and tools for remote collaboration. “The best are everywhere,” and there’s no reason your company shouldn’t take advantage of talent just because it’s located elsewhere.
  • Manage by values. That doesn’t mean abdicating from management, especially when it comes to supervising junior employees. But here’s another approach to managing a company:

Management by values ​​is based on developing a working process that meets the company’s business needs, as well as the employee needs.

In practice, it means focusing on building self-organizing teams where team members are empowered to make mission-critical decisions. Such teams usually deliver an excellent quality of work, identify with the company’s objectives and express loyalty to the company.

Another management by values technique is articulating company values and referring to them in the daily work (feedback, rewards – we use Bonusly for that), as well as company events and evaluations.

3. Decentralize the structure and decision making

  • Gather and organize all the relevant knowledge within the organization. This is especially important in the onboarding process where the immediate availability of insight is essential for process productivity.
  • Invest more in establishing processes but avoid complexity. Break roles and processes into standalone, manageable, and often-updated chunks and assign the owners to each process, role, or responsibility. Such owners need to be 100 percent aligned with the company’s culture and vision.
  • Always be grow replacements for critical people in the organization, so that events such as emergency incidents, health problems, holidays or simply parting ways doesn’t hurt your operations.
  • Create local leaders and tribes. Instead of a fixed hierarchy, group people around specific competencies or responsibilities. That approach worked well at my company – for example, we group developers not only by technology (like frontend or backend), but also by their role in a team (team lead, architect, DevOps, etc.) or their involvement in in-house processes recruitment, marketing, or sales).

Company growth happens over a long-term basis.

To follow Ray Dalio, it will still take for a team member at least 1.5 year to become aligned and fully productive! Out of the people who decide to leave the company, most will do that during their first year of employment. Fewer of them do that in their second year and even fewer in their third year. So do what you can to keep talents on board for the first three years, and you’ll position your company for success.

Over to you

Have you used other strategies to address these challenges and grow your company with top talent?

Please share them in the comments section; I want to start a conversation about what founders can do to leverage the latest workforce trends to their advantage.

Lukasz KarwackiLukasz is a co-founder and CEO of Sunscrapers. He’s got his background in computer graphics (graduate of Kingston University London) and has started his career as a web designer in a creative agency. He currently manages Sunscrapers, leads the business development team and does client consulting. Throughout the last 10 years, Lukasz managed, supervised and consulted over 100 projects for startups, SMBs and enterprises across different industries and locations.

Source link

Economy

A roadblock to the gig economy? UK Supreme Court classifies Uber drivers as “workers”

Published

on

By

In a landmark ruling, the UK Supreme Court has unanimously held that private hire vehicles drivers who provide their services through the Uber app were “workers” for the purposes of UK employment legislation: Uber BV and others (Appellants) v Aslam and others (Respondents) [2021] UKSC 5.  Earl Deng and Allison Wong discuss the decision and its implications for the gig economy in Hong Kong.

Hong Kong is known for being an employer-friendly jurisdiction, so it may come as a surprise to many that as long as 14 years ago, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal held in Poon Chau Nam v Yim Siu Cheung [2007] 1 HKLRD 951 that the status of an “employee” working under a contract of service under section 5(1) of the Employees’ Compensation Ordinance, Cap. 282 did not depend on the mere existence of a contract or necessitating dominant control over the worker in question, but must instead be ascertained as a matter of overall impression and to be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Since Poon, the rise of the gig economy through app or web portals has further muddied the waters with innovative business models and service agreements where the service provider no longer directly engages the worker to provide a service for its customers, but instead purports to act as a matching agent between a service providing worker and the ultimate paying customer and taking a portion of the fees.

The Arguments

In Uber, the appellants argued that pursuant to its service agreements which both the driver and the customer accepted and separately entered into, Uber’s role was simply as a booking agent for independent contractors who provide transportation services (“Driver”) and that the contract for transportation services was between the Driver and the end user (“Rider”).

The Supreme Court unanimously rejected Uber’s arguments on two grounds.

On agency, the Supreme Court rejected that any agency relationship arose on the facts, whether on the wording of the service agreements or any evidence of overt acts by the principal (i.e. Driver) to confer the necessary authority to Uber to act on its behalf.

On contract, the Supreme Court upheld its previous decision in Autoclenz v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41; [2011] ICR 1157 and clarified the theoretical justification for it.  Like PoonAutoclenz held that whether a contract gives rise to a relationship of employment is not to be determined by the ordinary principles of contract, but to adopt a test that “focuses on the reality of the situation where written documentation may not reflect the reality of the relationship”.  However, instead of focusing on the exceptional nature of employment contracts, the Supreme Court held that the rights asserted by workers under employment legislation are not contractual rights but rights under legislation, and therefore the Court is to determine whether for the purpose of that specific legislation, the claimant was an employee.

The Court went on to hold that the purpose of the employment legislation in the UK is to protect vulnerable workers from exploitation by providing minimum standards and conditions of work and therefore it would be inconsistent against this legislative background to use the contract as a starting point to determine whether an individual falls within the definition of a worker.

On the facts, the Court emphasised certain aspects of the relationship between Uber and the Drivers which tend to show that there was a relationship of employment, including:

(i) the fixed nature of Drivers’ remuneration with no bargaining power on the part of Drivers;

(ii) the fact that Uber dictated the terms of services;

(iii) Uber’s control over Drivers on their performance via inter alia cancellation penalties and performance metrics;

(iv) restrictions on Drivers from establishing any relationship with Riders.

Significance to Hong Kong

At first blush, this decision together with the CFA’s judgment in Poon suggest that the gig, literally, is up.

However, and like all “overall impression” cases, Uber BV case was confined to its facts and the evidence before the Court.  Uber BV’s position remains that the case is confined to a group of drivers in 2016 under those terms of service agreement.

In Australia, the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission held in Amita Gupta v Portier Pacific & Uber Australia Pty Ltd [2020] FWCFB 1698 that workers delivering through the Uber Eats platform were not employees due to:

(i) lack of control over working hours;

(ii) no exclusivity to platform;

(iii) no requirement to wear a uniform, bear logos, or represent herself as a representative of Uber.

Deputy President Colman also noted that the factual matrix did not require the Court to consider whether there was an employment relationship as Uber was simply a commercial intermediary between restaurants, customers and deliverers. That judgment is now on appeal.

Also of note is the decision of the Supreme Court not to express any concluded view on arguments put forward by Uber that they were simply a payment agent (but which failed to establish on the facts and evidence), providing some support to Deputy President Colman’s views.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

NSW gig economy guide ‘penned by Uber’

Published

on

By

New guidelines from the NSW government aimed at improving safety in the gig economy may as well have been penned by Uber and ignore the compounding pressures leading to dangerous conditions for delivery riders, the Transport Workers Union says.

The NSW government established a taskforce to improve the safety of gig economy workers following the deaths of five delivery riders in the space of two months late last year. The Joint Taskforce on food delivery rider safety is led by SafeWork NSW and Transport for NSW, and is expected to unveil its final guidelines this week.

The guidelines were discussed and given the green light at the taskforce’s final roundtable, held in Sydney on Thursday.

But no delivery riders were present at this roundtable after the Transport Workers Union after its members quit the taskforce last week, labelling it “farcical” and criticising it for not taking stronger action.

At a press conference held below the roundtable meeting, TWU national secretary Michael Kaine said the taskforce’s final recommendations will do nothing to address the dangerous issues for delivery riders, including low rates of pay and scheduling pressure created by algorithms.

“This is not an action plan, it is an inaction plan. This guidelines process has failed to deal with the deadly pressures that are killing riders on our roads. It has left those deadly pressures untouched, unacknowledged and unregulated,” Mr Kaine said.

“It looks as though these guidelines have been penned by Uber or Deliveroo themselves. This government has caved into the pressure from these massive companies and accepted hook, line and sinker their version of how they want the world to look.”

NSW taskforce guidelines miss the point: Transport Workers Union national secretary Michael Kaine

Steve, a Deliveroo delivery rider, had taken part in the taskforce’s roundtable, but said he had also chosen to withdraw from it.

“I just feel it’s pointless to stay on with how it’s going about it at the moment,” Steve told the media.

“Reasonable pay is all we’re asking for, so it doesn’t compel us to rush from one place to the other. There is a clear link from our income stream to our health and safety. The problem with this taskforce is they’re ignoring it because they just want to talk about health and safety.

“But you have to link it with the core issues of why it’s happening. We need state government interventions, we need some kind of regulation in this economy otherwise there’ll be more deaths.”

Esteban, who is also a delivery rider, was recently injured after falling off his bike on light rail tracks in the rain while rushing to complete a job.

“I just don’t want this happening anymore,” he said. “Safety in this occupation is very critical and it’s something that’s not being taken into account properly. Fellow riders have died, most of them immigrants.

“I put myself in their shoes, and I imagine what will happen with me and my family if I come to this country with a lot of dreams and suddenly I just died because of a lack of safety in my job. It’s very disappointing.”

The launch of the taskforce came with renewed hope that action would be taken to protect delivery riders, but this has now been “extinguished”, Mr Kaine said.

“That’s what the NSW government is going to announce in the coming days, that it is extinguishing hope that things will get better for riders in the gig economy,” he said.

“We were told absolutely that the government would take no regulatory steps to improve conditions for riders, it would take no steps to ensure that responsibility was placed on these behemoths and would not listen and not take into account or acknowledge the key pressures that exist that are creating these problems.”

Do you know more? Contact James Riley via Email or Signal.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Deliveroo share price rise shows investors aren’t bothered about gig economy workers | Comment & Opinion

Published

on

By

Deliveroo rider Subway

It’s understandable some Deliveroo riders opted to go on strike this week. While CEO Will Shu and early investors have made hundreds of millions (despite the IPO flop), a damning report last month found many are paid less than the minimum wage; only a handful qualified for the maximum £10,000 bonus; and none got employee share options either as, despite their blue Roo uniforms, and in some cases years of service, it’s just a gig. 

Trouble is, the striking riders not only have no worker rights: they have no power. Courier work promises some pay instead of none, and it seems there are many more ‘scabs’ willing to keep gigging among the 50,000 riders than the few hundreds reportedly on strike. With a low barrier to entry – a pedal bike – there’s also an easy pipeline among the 693,000 fewer Brits on a payroll since February 2020 as its recruitment of 25,000 extra riders last year proved. And some riders like the gig, and fear changes would mean less flexibility to work when they want.

True, concerns about the fate of Deliveroo’s gig economy workers led City fund managers, including Legal & General and Aviva, not to invest (albeit more likely concerned due to the potential impact on their investment than on ethical grounds).

But this week, as retail shares in Deliveroo started trading, the share price went up, despite the strikes – albeit fractionally – indicating everyday investors aren’t bothered.

Perhaps real change will come when Deliveroo’s supermarket and fast food chain partners start getting tarred with the exploitation brush. A few big names pulling out of the platform would surely bring some change.

Or perhaps some of Deliveroo’s rivals can make more of the rights they afford their riders. Just Eat CEO Peter Duffy said recently that the gig model had led to the worst working conditions “in a hundred years”.

But the most likely agent of change is the courts. We’ve seen Uber lose its legal fight. If a rider strike won’t harm Deliveroo, losing its gig workers would be much more damaging to its business model. And you never know, Chancellor Rishi Sunak may also impose a digital delivery tax. That would nuke it.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Gigger.news.