Cobb also speculates that Apple’s new openness to perks may be because “they perceive that they are losing out on good job candidates to Google and other similar firms, or that they are having a harder time recruiting and retaining people. So [these perks] may be a way to potentially narrow that gap.” Tim Cook “apparently isn’t trying to be Steve Jobs. I can appreciate that. He seems to be viewing human resources as an area the company could improve on. It shows a different attitude toward employees.”
Blurring the line
In addition to the benefits recently adopted by Apple, employee perks can include everything from fitness centres, free gourmet meals and on-site dry cleaning services to childcare, an in-house doctor and free commuter shuttle buses.
Yet perks such as these can be doubled-edged, as many observers have noted. “Beyond the basics, work-life balance is a big deal,” says Cappelli. “The problem is that a program alone rarely creates a good balance, so the culture has to fit with it.” The examples cited above “are really ways of helping to accommodate the fact that the employer expects you to be there all the time.”
“It’s a lifestyle choice,” adds Cobb. “These companies have created a version of the old company town. So yes, these initiatives may seem like perks, but they [also point to] an ethos of crazy working hours. The company becomes the central institution in your life. It’s not your family, not religion, not the broader society. There is a real blurring of where one’s personal life begins and where it ends. That may be perfectly acceptable to some people.”
Bidwell agrees. “A lot of perks are about helping people work harder. ‘Come to work, and you need never, ever leave’.” But perks can also be motivating, he adds. “If there is a broad sense that your employer cares about you and is looking after you, this feeds through to a certain loyalty to the company. Psychologists talk about the strong norm of reciprocity. Employees [who get perks] feel they should reciprocate with extra effort.”
In general, says Rothbard, perks that are tied into a company’s strategy – such as Blue Sky –are the most successful. “Perks that are not tied into strategy can become marginalized and less effective.” For example, having a doctor on site can be strategic because it means that employees don’t waste hours during the day sitting in a doctor’s office. An example of a wasted perk would be offering flex-time arrangements for employees but then setting up, or allowing, core meetings at times when employees on flex-time are not there. “So if people really care about their career in the organisation, they won’t be able to take advantage of that perk,” says Rothbard. “Flex-time can be tied to strategy, but it has to be aligned with” implementation in a way that allows employees to actually use the benefit.
Perks can also show that a company is interested in a diverse workforce, one with employees who might have different needs than single people without kids who live and breathe Apple, says Rothbard. “Restricting the talent pool to a certain subset of people can make it difficult for a company to meet its needs for high-level talent.”
Wharton accounting professor Wayne Guay says that “perks work best when they are something that the employees value, but cannot buy themselves” or can’t buy as efficiently or easily.
