Tag Archives: Opting out

Opt out or lean in – is that really the question?

Posted on by
Reply

Do you remember about 10 years ago when Sheryl Sandberg, who was the COO of Facebook at the time, published her book Lean In? I think it was, in part at least, a response to the debate on women opting out, especially to the voices that celebrated the women who left high-powered careers that they felt no longer worked for them. There were a lot of people who thought of opting out as an emancipatory act, while others were very critical of women leaving the careers and power positions that feminists had fought so hard for them to have. In her book, Sandberg called on women to lean in instead and make a difference, encouraging them to dream big and overcome obstacles in order to achieve their full potential. She felt that too many women weren’t doing this and she wanted to encourage women to take their rightful seat at the table. 

Sandberg did have many good points. Women do experience obstacles that prevent them from taking a seat at the table. However, due to issues of discrimination, many women can’t get a seat no matter how much they lean in. These are important issues that need to be discussed and I applaud Sandberg for championing women and encouraging them to succeed. 

But, as a result of the book, people starting thinking about opting out and leaning in as opposites. Maybe this isn’t so strange considering that the opting out debate, until I joined it, had solely been about women who leave high powered careers to become stay-at-home moms. People thought opting out was about leaving the paid work force altogether.

It is not.

What I have found in my research is that people with careers rarely opt out to stop working altogether. Opting out isn’t about dropping out. Nor is it necessarily about downshifting, quiet quitting or doing less. It can be, but mostly it’s not about the amount of work but rather having more control over when, how and when we work. It’s about choosing to leave a certain mainstream way of pursuing a career to work and live on different terms. 

People who opt out generally do so because they come to a point where they realize that they just can’t go on the way they have. Something happens that makes them see that the way they have been working just isn’t worth it and needs to stop. It can be health reasons, not being able to be there for loved ones, a clash of values at work, an identity crisis or anything really that provides a light-bulb moment that acts as a catalyst for change. It’s like the jolt that Anthony Klotz talks about in his book Jolted.

Contrary, however, to many of the types of jolts Klotz describes in his book, the people who opt out haven’t generally thought about doing it before they actually get that light-bulb moment. None of the people I have interviewed in my research dreamed about opting out nor did any of them plan to. They were all working on their careers in earnest when they realized that something had to give. In other words, they didn’t lack ambition nor the desire to have a meaningful job or career. 

Nevertheless, they opted out. 

Another thing that has been abundantly clear in my research is that not only isn’t opting out about people who don’t want to work or ‘lean in’, it really isn’t ’just’ a women’s issue either. Opting out is rather about our workplaces, our working cultures, and the expectations that we place on our employees, regardless of gender. Having said that, experiences of work are very gendered as we, in part, place different expectations on men and women. But opting out as a phenomenon is not limited to any one gender. 

Opting out is about people. It is about people who no longer want to or can work the way they have. It’s about leaving in order to create lifestyles and solutions of work that are sustainable and it’s about doing so on your own terms.

Opting out is about opting in to lifestyles and solutions for work where you have more control over where, when and how you work. It is also entails thinking about what is important to you and what you are and are not willing to give up.

In her book, Sandberg wrote, “I have written this book to encourage women to dream big, forge a path through the obstacles, and achieve their full potential.” And then later, “I hope they [my children] end up exactly where they want to be. And when they find where their true passion lies, I hope they both lean in – all the way.”

This really is not all that different from opting out and in. In fact, I would argue that this is what a lot of people who opt out and in do. They forge a path where they can finally work or live to their full potential without the constraints of a very rigid career ideal or model. 

So yes, you can both opt out and lean in. 

If you have opted out, or if you’re thinking about it, don’t listen to the people who tell you that you’re wasting your career. There are many ways to forge a career path. If there is one thing I have learned during my own career(s), it is that there are many ways to reach the same destination. You don’t have to tread the expected path. You can make your own way and create a path and a life that works for you. We are all different, why would we all want to do things in the same way?

So contrary to what many people would have you believe, opting out does not mean dropping out or giving up on yourself or your career. It might just turn out to be a very strategic career move. Only you can know.

So no, opting out or leaning in really isn’t the question.

This is an extract from a new book I’m working on: 12 Things to Consider when Opting Out

Can change happen from the inside or is opting out the only option?

Posted on by
Reply

My mission is to change working life as we know it. 

It is high time that we do. Studies have shown that stress-related mental health issues have sky-rocketed in the past few decades and that more than half of all global workers are unhappy in their work. Ever since the pandemic people have been opting out of their work and careers in numbers never before witnessed and many of those who haven’t actually opted out, dream of doing so. 

It is clear that something has got to give.

I opted out of a career myself about a decade and a half ago to start working on a PhD. It wasn’t something I had planned – although I had been dreaming about doing something else. I came to a point when I realized that I just had to do something about my situation. Going on the way I had was out of the question, and I needed to create a lifestyle for myself where I could live and work in a way that worked for me. It wasn’t easy – opting out never is – but in hindsight, it turned out to be a good choice. Haven’t regretted my decision for a second. 

Still, ever since I started researching opting out, it has been pretty clear to me that I don’t want to be an opting out coach. I don’t want to dedicate my life to helping others opt out too. I don’t believe that is a sustainable solution. 

Opting out isn’t easy. It’s not something people do on a whim. Most of the time it happens because a person just cannot continue living and working the way they have. It is a time of crisis, of turmoil and of searching, and, despite what influencers and the like may tell you, there are no guarantees that a person comes out of a crisis better and stronger. I don’t think we should idealize crisis as the catalyst for change it can be.  

That’s why, instead of helping people opt out, I have made it my mission to help create workplaces that people won’t feel a need to leave. I want to be involved in creating workplaces where people can thrive instead of being the sites of suffering that so many workplaces are today. This is what my research has been about. I mean, we know a lot about why people leave, but what do we really know about how to organize work so that they won’t long to leave? 

These are some of the questions my research provides answers to and I’m writing a book about it as we speak. But lately, I have been wondering if I’ve actually gotten it all wrong. Can we change workplaces from the inside or is opting out necessary? 

I remember a few years when I first met my friend and colleague Birgitta Wahlberg. She is an incredibly inspirational woman. She is a researcher and activist and she is key in changing our understanding of and laws on animal rights. She is a firebrand and an iconoclast. I met her when she was giving a talk about the shocking treatment of animals in the food industry, and she said something profound. She said that there are two ways society can change, either through crisis and devastation which forces change, or by planning and implementing the change in a controlled fashion before everything crashes. She pointed out, however, that unfortunately humanity tends to choose the former. We tend to not make big changes until we are absolutely forced to.

I think about this often. I mean, this is also it is true for individual opting out processes. People seldom opt out until they experience some sort of crisis that pushes them to do so. But does it have to be that way? And more importantly with regards to what I’m trying to achieve, does it have to be that way for organizations?

Part of the problem is that we need a systems’ shift. We need to redefine how we think about work, and we need a change not only our practices but also our actual understanding of work and of how we organize work. 

When people come to listen to me talk about my research, they generally agree with me. They agree that something has got to give. But then they go back to their organizations and it’s business as usual. It’s as if they know on an intellectual level that we need change, but they are so caught up in the system and their everyday work that being the change just isn’t on their horizon. Also, in this competitive economy, where organization work hard to survive, it is hard to be the one to break the pattern and do something differently. 

So, the question I’m struggling with is, am I naïve to think that we can do this? Can we change working life as we know it in a controlled fashion before everything crashes and burns? Do organizations even want to? 

The thing with change is that it simply doesn’t happen unless you experience some kind of light-bulb moment that makes the change feel absolutely crucial. This is what a crisis does. And acute environmental issues or health issues do among others don’t seem to be providing the light-bulb moment organizations need. But, maybe and increasing number of people refusing to stay can? A lot of people researching opting out seem to believe so. 

There are of course organizations that are already doing great things. But on the most part it is still business as usual. 

So, tell me, have I got it wrong? Can we inspire organizations to change working life as we know it? Can we create change from the inside or is that just not disruptive enough? Or should I rather be putting my energy on coaching people on how to leave? 

What do you think?

On working in places where practices go against your values, and deciding that you can’t

Posted on by
Reply

People opt out for a number of reasons. Yes, the dream and pull of a new lifestyle that is more sustainable and where you can live and work on your own terms plays in. But truth be told, it is the push of a job that you no longer can or want to do, for whatever reason, that actually makes you take the step. 

In my research I have found that more often than not it is values, or the clash of values, that becomes the tipping point. It can be values regarding anything really, but I’ve found that it often has to do with the ethical treatment of others, both humans and non-humans. 

People come to a point when they realize that they just can’t stand for whatever it is their employer is doing. 

That was the case last time I left a job. Especially with the research I do and everything I stand for regarding sustainable work, ethical and respectful treatment of others, and wellbeing, I just couldn’t continue working for an organization that didn’t seem to care about any of that. 

I’m not going to get into the details right now because there are just too many for a blog post, but I had been mistreated myself and I saw how much suffering there was around me and I realized that if I accept this and just go on as if nothing had happened, it would be hypocritical. I can’t accept crap for myself that I tell others has no place in the organizational sphere. Or any sphere, really. 

So I left. And I’m no alone. A clash of values and a sense of disillusionment are reasons why many people leave. And the fact of the matter of is, values are important and they are just getting more so with every new generation that enters the work force. 

Research has shown that one thing that sets gen z workers apart from previous generations is that values play a much bigger role for them in relation to work and money. They generally want more than to just make money and also have higher expectations on their employers. They have sites where they compare notes and don’t want just any job, but one that is aligned with their values. 

Sometimes older generations will roll their eyes at this but I think they are right to expect more from their employers. I think one reason why so many work places are sites for so much suffering is that we haven’t expected enough. 

So don’t underestimate the importance of values.

Besides, research has also shown that ethical treatment of others – both those inside and outside the organization – is good for business. It’s good for the bottom line. But as I tell my students, using this as an argument to get organizations to act more ethically is really quite problematic. Because what if it turns out that it really isn’t a game changer? What if the bottom line is good enough without treating others well, is it still okay then not too?

If we all know something has got to give, then why is it so hard to change?

Posted on by
Reply

All the years I’ve been researching, writing and talking about opting out and in, sustainable solutions for work and work place wellbeing, I’ve never come across anyone in the organizational world who doesn’t think all this is of the essence. I’ve been at it for a while now, and the whole time my work has been received as timely and important and with great interest. 

Still, even though there is a lot of consensus regarding this, people continue struggling with the same issues at work and more and more of them dream of opting out. 

Okay, before you say anything, I do know that not everything is the same. The pandemic showed us that we can change when we have to and there are a lot of organizations that now provide their employees with more flexibility regarding where, when and how they work. Also, some organizations have started prioritizing mental health more and now have routines and policies in place to support that. 

Nevertheless, there are a lot of organizations that don’t. Some may talk the talk but not walk it, and some – all too many – don’t even talk it. 

Why is this? Why is it so hard to change?

Well, one of the main problems is that the way we understand work; and what we know to be a ‘good’ way of working or organizing our work has become something of a truth. When things have been in a certain way for as long as we can remember, we tend to think that is the natural way for them to be and it becomes hard to even imagine doing things differently. It is simply the way things are done. 

But let me let you in on a secret. The way we understand work isn’t a truth. It isn’t a law of nature, it has been invented and implemented by us and not even that long ago. It’s actually quite a recent invention. 

The current career ideal was developed as a result of industrialization and the prosperity many nations experienced after World War II. Employees were expected to be loyal to one employer and career advancement involved an upward movement in the organization in a timely fashion, brought about by promotions. As mainly men started working in the industries, some argue that the career wasn’t created for one, but one and a half people: the man with the career and the wife who took care of everything he didn’t have time for because he was so tied up at work. 

Although a lot has changed in society since then, this is ironically still the career ideal today: the timely upward movement and the expectation of complete dedication and devotion to work. Anything else it considered suspect, at least if you want to advance to the upper echelons of corporate hierarchies. 

But guess what, we don’t have to organize work the way we do! There is nothing natural or predetermined about it. We can reinvent why we work, how we work and how much we work. 

The problem is just that in order to change we have to want to change. And not only that, we also have to realize that we need to change. We have to have that lightbulb moment. Until we do, and if it’s going well enough, it’ll just feel easier to continue the way we have.  

So how do we do that? How do we get people and organizations to see the light? Do we have to wait until things get so bad that there will be no choice but to change?  

The Great Resignation, Opting Out, The Quit, The Great Reshuffle, The Great Attrition… What’s really going on?!

Posted on by
3

It’s all over the media:

The Great Resignation! No no, no one is calling it that anymore, it’s The Quit. The what? No, no one wants to quit altogether, people need to make a living. The Great Reshuffle is more accurate. Although since it is something that is happening to workers all over the world, maybe The Great Attrition is the thing?

…and on it goes. Meanwhile, I’m still talking about ‘opting out’. 

What really is going on? What’s what?

I’m going to let you in on a secret. It’s actually all the same thing.

I started researching opting out in 2009. Yes, it’s that long ago. When I started, it was a debate that had been going on for a few years already, ever since that by now famous New York Times article The Opt-Out Revolution was published in 2003. And the truth is, although people were talking about a revolution, it really wasn’t that revolutionary at all. People have opted out to work on their own terms long before we knew to call it opting out. What was different in 2003 was that they were thought to be doing it in larger numbers than before. 

No one really knew, though, exactly how large the numbers were. No one was measuring how many people actually were leaving their jobs or careers to work on different terms. There were numbers on how may left the workforce altogether, but as I already mentioned, people do need to work, so not surprisingly those number weren’t very high at all, nor were they on the rise. 

But then COVID hit and suddenly everything became extreme. 

Companies started doing things they thought were impossible. Governments and organizations started cooperating in ways they had never dreamed of. Restaurants and entertainers fell on really hard times – harder than most of us can imagine. People actually slowed down enough to smell the coffee, except for healthcare worker of course who became the temporary heroes of the world (I say temporary because let’s face it, we have really short memories and now that things are somewhat under control I think most people have gone back to taking them for granted).

Things became extreme and people in the US started quitting their jobs in never before seen numbers. Hashtags like #quittingmyjob or #antiwork started circulating on social media. Terms were coined left and right to describe what was happening (see my first paragraph) and people started to feel a pressing need to measure what was really going on. And presto, now we have numbers:

About 40% of people are considering quitting their jobs and up to 70% (depending on what study you read) are dreaming of doing so. In addition, over 50% of the work force is burned out. These number are shockingly high!

But when you scratch the surface, it turns out that it’s always about the same thing: It’s about people. It’s about stress. It’s about feelings of insecurity. It’s about not having control over your life. It’s about exhaustion. It’s about lacking a sense of meaning. It’s about feeling that something has got to give. 

And all this is hugely important regardless of what we call it. 

There have always been people who have opted out. That isn’t new. But what is different now is the sheer magnitude of it. Up to 70% percent dream of doing it!

So yes, something has got to give.

I’ve written a book on women opting out, and another on men, and now it is high time to focus on what organizations need to do. 70% is not sustainable, organizations need to act and they need to do it now. We need work places people don’t dream of leaving, we need organizational cultures that make people want to stay. 

With that, I’m starting to work on my next book. I’m going to revive this blog (yes, it’s been relatively quiet here lately) and I’m going to use it to explore and discuss issues and aspects of my book. 

I hope you will follow me on this journey. In the meantime, I would love to hear from you. If you work somewhere where they are doing things right (anything, big or small), or if your workplace is a place you don’t long to leave, please tell me about it. 

What are they doing right and why is it good? You can email me at theoptingoutblog@gmail.com

If Finland is the happiest country in the world why do people long to opt out here too?

Posted on by
1

I’m reading Anu Partanen’s book The Nordic Theory of Everything at the moment. It’s really an excellent read; I wish I had read it sooner. Partanen’s book so clearly explains the differences between life in Finland (or the Nordics) and the US and how these two very different social, political and cultural systems come together to create independent or not so independent individuals. 

Now, especially if you’re from the US, you may be guessing that the US system is the one that creates independent individuals, not the Nordic welfare state, but, perhaps surprisingly, it’s not. It’s the Nordic system that does that. 

One of Partanen’s messages is that the Nordic countries are most certainly not socialist, despite popular (American) belief, and that any Nordic person would balk at the idea. On the contrary, the Nordic model of social security and support allows individuals to be independent and to create good lives for themselves, instead of having them depend on for example parents, family members and employers just to be able to afford important, but basic, things like education, health care, day care etc. And yes, if you visit the Nordic countries, you will see that individualism actually does run strong throughout our cultures, for better or worse.

I strongly recommend the book, but that wasn’t actually the point of this blog post. What I want to talk about is how it is possible that opting out experiences can be so similar in both countries despite the differences that rank Finland at the top of so many lists* and the US much further down? How is it that people in a country like Finland long to opt out of their current jobs and lifestyles just as much as Americans do? 

Finland has recently, once again, been declared the world’s happiest country. It kind of makes you wonder, if this is the case, why is it that the opting out stories I have collected in Finland and the US are so remarkably similar? Why is it that people who live in a country with free education, free health care, more reasonable working hours, five weeks of legislated vacation time per year, long maternity leaves, paternity leaves, even longer parental leaves after which they are guaranteed their job back, high quality affordable day care etc. etc. etc., have very similar experiences to those who do not enjoy any of the above? 

How can it be that they also feel exhausted, they feel a lack of control over their lives, and they also have difficulties creating coherent life narratives? How can it be that they also reach a point when something’s got to give, or if not, at least long to leave their current way of living and working?

How come so many of the world’s happiest people don’t seem so happy?

Well, first I want to say, that no system or country is perfect. The happiest country in the world does not necessarily mean absolute happiness at all times. Finland is also ranked one of the most gender equal countries in the world, but that does not mean that the work here is done. Finland has not reached a state of perfect gender equality, nor will it any time soon at the rate we’re going.

I recently read that Finnish mothers are among the most stressed and exhausted in the world. The main problem is (in addition to the all-consuming motherhood ideal of today) that while Finland has among the highest percentage of women working fulltime, women also continue to be mainly responsible for childcare and household chores. While working life has become more equal, home life has been lagging behind, compared to Sweden for example. 

But one factor that has become glaringly obvious to me during all these years of researching opting out and having the privilege of hearing countless people’s opting out and in stories, is that regardless of any national differences, one common denominator is corporate cultures and ideals. They tend to be similar throughout the world thanks to globalization and global organizations, and they also tend to override local practices and sometimes even legislation. 

Let me give you an example. 

It happens, in Finland, that when a man wants to take some legislated paternity leave to get to know his child and to share the load with his partner, his employer may let him know that ‘it is simply not done in this company’. 

Research has also shown that men with low incomes are more likely to take time off to care for their children than are men in high-powered corporate positions. 

So what should we do? We need to work on changing work. We need to create corporate cultures that belong in the 21stcentury. 

* In addition to being ranked the happiest and one of the most gender equal societies, Finland is also considered one of the most stable, best-governed, least corrupt, and best-educated countries in the world.