Re:locate magazine, autumn 2006

Clearing the mobility hurdles

Dual-career and education concerns have long been cited as key inhibitors to mobility. But there’s more to these issues than practicalities alone – and companies need to tailor their policies accordingly, as Sue Shortland explains.

Why are family barriers to relocation increasingly being taken seriously by relocation and HR professionals? Firstly, concerns over spousal careers and income-loss on relocation have grown in the UK, reflecting women’s increasing participation in paid work, their rise up the managerial ladder and – with the rise in house prices – the requirements for two incomes. Internationally, loss of career continuity, career track and loss of spousal income are cited as reasons for both rejection of assignments and assignment failure.

In terms of children’s issues, the key inhibitors to moving include finding suitable schools, maintaining educational continuity and – internationally – the cost of education abroad. Other factors may include concerns about special-needs children.

Less secure production

Globalisation and economic competition produce less secure and more geographically dispersed production, and the meaning of having a ‘job’ has changed, too, as multi-tasking, team-working and knowledge-centred work become increasingly important.

Knowledge acquisition makes workers more valuable to employers, but also enables them to move between firms and types of work. To change their work situations more often, people require new skills and, often, additional education. This places increasing strain on families, particularly those coping with geographical mobility.

Highly productive and flexible labour is increasingly supplied by women but, at the same time as staking their claim in the workplace, they are also generally regarded as being the ‘lynch-pin’ in family life. As Carnoy, writing in a collection of papers published by the ILO, points out, this results in a serious social contradiction. The new workplace requires even greater investment in knowledge than in the past, with families being crucial to this knowledge-formation for adults and children. The new workplace, though, through its requirement for increased flexibility, destabilises the nuclear-centred family, degrading the very institution crucial to further economic development.

Carnoy adds that the quality of family life will increasingly be gauged by availability of learning opportunities for adults and the capacity to provide these for their children. An intense emphasis on learning as a factor in life-decisions has already emerged in the upper and middle income groups across industrialised countries, as women are choosing to establish careers before having children. So it appears that the link between dual careers and children’s education is inextricable. As far as employees are concerned, assistance for families in pursuing dual-career opportunities and for their children’s education cannot be viewed as ‘nice-to-have’ bolt-ons to policy. Rather, these are integral both to organisational success and the longer-term economic growth.

Organisations, though, tend not to be philanthropic by nature – rather, they are geared to economic success. Investment in employees, families and their children must pay dividends now, rather than in some unspecified future period. Business is business, after all. So what are the immediate benefits of becoming involved in dual career and education issues? Clearly, the first point has to be concerned with motivating employees – valuable for their contribution, knowledge and skills – to stay with the employer when mobility is required, either domestically or internationally. But, at the same time, a balance has to be struck between being competitive with other organisations within one’s sector or market area.

There are various potential solutions that can be adopted, but they break down into two main groups: the provision of practical or financial support to aid employees involved in dual career partnerships to move, or to assist with education concerns for their children; and/or the use of alternative mobility strategies to address what otherwise might prove insurmountable barriers to domestic and international mobility.

Practical support

For international relocations, the most common forms of support are language lessons, pre-assignment trips, orientation, cross-cultural training, security briefings and work-permit advice. Job-search assistance is also commonly offered to spouses. Support is typically provided via the engagement of external service-providers. Very few organisations offer additional financial support to compensate explicitly for demonstrable loss of income to those spouses or partners who were employed prior to the assignment. However, support such as networking and job opportunity contacts, as well as lobbying for work permit-change, is given. In respect of domestic mobility, elements typically included in the domestic relocation policy for spouses include career assistance and counselling.

For international moves, in respect of children’s education, the cost of tuition and other expenses are generally met at the assignment location, although boarding costs may be met, too, as may a couple of round-trips. For parents, the key issue, though – besides cost – is how to find suitable schools and fulfil entry requirements. This is where organisations can provide considerable support and reduce the stress of relocating, whether internationally or domestically. Specialist consultancies can advise on suitable schools and help parents to gain entry for their children. Knowing how the schools appeals process works in securing places for children, for example, is helpful in domestic relocations.

New response

Dual-career and education concerns are nothing new. What is new, though, is how organisations react to them. Recognising the need to strike a balance between competitiveness and motivating employees to relocate, a number of alternatives are in evidence as potential solutions to both the dual- career and education dilemma. The use of alternative mobility strategies can present a potential solution. These include unaccompanied short-term (typically less than one-year) assignments, commuter and multiple business trips, flexible working and remote/virtual working.

All of these seemed to be on an upward trend for many years, although recently there has been a change in emphasis. An unaccompanied style of working – in whatever form – splits families and, while solving dual career and education dilemmas on the one hand, is known to provide an increased source of stress. The impact on family relations results in loss of productivity for many employees. Indeed, the 2005 ORC Dual Career Survey indicates there is the beginning of a downward trend in the use of these types of alternative mobility patterns.

Assignments abroad and domestic relocations bring with them huge potential for knowledge acquisition and growth. As organisations require this for global competition, so the focus appears to be moving away from alternative mobility strategies – which can split families and limit local exposure to knowledge acquisition – towards steps to encourage families to move together. But the dual career and education issues do not go away, and the answer may lie in more proactive approaches by organisations to find alternative solutions. These might include lobbying to relax work-permit rules for international moves. Modifying selection approaches and career-pathing arrangements to accommodate employees’ family needs at specific points in their careers, both for domestic and international relocations, are other options.