National Public Radio had an interesting piece last week about workplace changes in light of the current recession. The piece, "Workers Dressing Better to Hold On To Jobs," observes that many people are dressing nicer and approaching their workplace interactions with more formality in order to retain their jobs.
One interesting component was the speculation on why businesses started to move to "business casual" in the first place. The piece surmises that the trend started when businesses were working hard to recruit and retain talented people. It was an easy thing to offer--work expectations could remain the same, but there was a perceived aura of being more laid back.
If it is an easy perk to offer, it seems like it would be an easy thing to take away once businesses no longer had to worry about a shortage of talented applicants. But does the formality of dress affect the nature of the workplace enough for this to be a fight worth fighting--on either side?
Another interesting question is if this affects women differently than it affects men. Business casual for men is pretty clear--collared shirt or sweater, nice pants, perhaps a tie. For women, though, it opens up a multitude of questions: how much of your toes or arms can show? What is appropriate jewlery? While it is nice to be able to have more room for individuality and unique dress, it can also be the source of stress as people are starting to question whether what one wears can have that much influence over advancing in, or even just keeping, your job.
For a few sites that discuss business casual for women, make sure to visit Corporette, the Fibers blog, and one (harsher) thought from the Women For Hire blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment