Not at all, but I do see how it can be respectful if a boss was to come in first and leave last. It DOES play a factor (albeit not a major one) in leading a team.
Almost impossible these days with flex hours. We have some people starting at 5 a.m. And other people ending their day at 9 p.m. but who begin at noon.
I think the question is: how can a boss still make it known that they are the most committed person at the organization given the modern work environment is mobile and time shifts.
In order to "lead by example", a "boss" should manifest the best of practices. That may include commitment to others as evidenced by presence in the office. Being there first and last will only be effective if it is not done for superficial reasons.
If I arrive at the office after the "boss" only to find him/her napping, surfing the web or playing solitare, any meaningful purpose would be lost.
If your job is an integral part of your life as well as the people employed with you, there is no first and last. Complete your daily job goals and see who else you can help.
The "boss" is responsible for motivating and leading his/her team while creating value for the company. I dont believe that they are more likely to achieve any one of these before 8 or after 5- In my mind, a manager should be the model for listening, making sound decisions, leading and teaching his/her team. It may result in a late night here and there, but displaying a work life balance while still creating value for the company is also a defining quality of a well rounded leader and human.
The boss needs to play by the same rules as everyone else. however if the bosses schedule is different that the rank and file well he needs to have agreement by the rank and file. otherwise it becomes a "stamp collecting issue," where each time he is late the rank and file make a mental note and resentment builds up and undermines the team effort.
It depends. Is the manager trying to set an example or create a certain culture? Perhaps she is doing a turnaround of a troubled organization and needs to accelerate results. As long as the manager doesn't wear their "time card" like a badge of courage they should work at a pace and time they when they feel most productive.
Being the first one in and last one out does not guarantee that a person is efficient. It can actually be a sign of declining efficiency. Quality output is more important than being the first person in or the last person to leave the office. I say No to this practice.
Overall, more than the physical presence it is the intellectual and emphatic presence that a boss needs to demonstrate to the team.
Multiple time zones makes it physically difficult for the boss to be the first one in the office and the last to leave office.
Two things, come to mind :
1. It is not so much the physical presence that matters but the leadership. Too many time one hears "I don't care, you get it done". Well one must care to ensure that the team feels motivated and looked after.
2. Are the expectations set for the team , inline with the standards that the boss sets for self ? Does the team feel sufficiently recognised and empowered about their efforts ?
Leading from the front requires a lot more than just showing up first in office...
This is a behaviour mindset therefore and it is a perfectly legitimate life choice, if that is what makes someone feel good then it is simply one more adult choice. If however this behaviour is driven as a leadership instruction to "serve as or set an example" for others, then there may be a flaw in the hiring system or it maybe indicative of a failure to create trust or the boss may simply treating the workplace as her or is home, for why we do always assume that rationality is always the standard choice - when reality says that many things that most people to do are always far from rational. So it should not be about first in last out, but the fostering of an intelligent attitude to value of time and the value of focusing on the customer rather than the clock......M.
I don't think the Boss has to be the first one in the door everyday and the last to leave. However I believe that it is the "Boss" (and I am not saying George Steinbrenner here) is the one who should set the examples or office tone.
The boss does not always need to be the one turning the lights out at night, but he or she must also have a strong work ethic and a desire to be a winner. So I guess for me the Boss goes by the old saying "lead by Example".
No. I was told once that you can't lead from behind a desk. The boss needs the flexibility to visit clients or off-site employees. In this age of the internet and cell phones, work does not have to be done just in the office.
First of all...as is often the case on this site... "the boss"...What does that even mean?
Secondly, while this sounds noble, in practice, a lot of people in the organization (especially leadership) have to be out of the office a fair amount.
-to meet with customers, potential customers, other various stakeholders in community
you can't lead any company only by starring at your screen. It doesn't cares if you'll start this at 5 am and end this at 12pm. the boss should have the overview, that's his job, and he should be reachable 24hrs, for the big problems
Boss doesnt need to take responsibility for that.if boss need to stay from early morning to late night, its too much work for the boss.but when company had a problem, enployees need the boss so, sometimes boss should be, but not everyday. employees and boss can work for it in rotation.
For me it`s not importent that my boss should be the first one into the office in the morning and the last to leave in the evening. He works all the time enough.
A manager shouldn't have to keep constant tabs on all of her/his employees. The manager should be able to know what the team is up to and how to efficiently make progress.
I agree with other bloggers. Boss is a nebulous term, but some organizations, especially billable ones frown of anyone not putting in the hours and therein develops a culture where folks watch the clock when folks leave and come. I personally wish I was immune to this but I get excited when I boost my average to 60 hours one week becuase it pushed up my totals. I am a complete failure in that respect as it goes against my personal tennants which are "go home when the work is done".
The boss is the boss anyway, no amount of employees work under him/her bosses always carry the bulk of the jobs. He can't sleep like others do because the success of the company depend on his/her leadership ability. So, I think it is good if employees will consider their boss and support their vision to help manage the time spend at work. It will be a good idea if boss could count on his/her employees successful execution of some jobs in his/her absence.
Leaders lead. The best lead by example. There's a lot of sentiment in these comments that what a Boss accomplishes is more important than the hours he/she puts in at the office. That's the example a leader should offer. What's important is what you accomplish, not how many hours you work.
30 Total
March 24, 2008 at 10:54am by David Denny
no
March 24, 2008 at 11:15am by Tim Tymchyshyn
only if he is stupid
March 24, 2008 at 11:21am by Bob Wood
no
March 24, 2008 at 2:02pm by YLL Catino
very old school if he or she does...
March 24, 2008 at 2:18pm by Gene Lu
Not at all, but I do see how it can be respectful if a boss was to come in first and leave last. It DOES play a factor (albeit not a major one) in leading a team.
March 24, 2008 at 2:36pm by Edward Sussman
Almost impossible these days with flex hours. We have some people starting at 5 a.m. And other people ending their day at 9 p.m. but who begin at noon.
I think the question is: how can a boss still make it known that they are the most committed person at the organization given the modern work environment is mobile and time shifts.
March 24, 2008 at 2:45pm by Don Scheible
In order to "lead by example", a "boss" should manifest the best of practices. That may include commitment to others as evidenced by presence in the office. Being there first and last will only be effective if it is not done for superficial reasons.
If I arrive at the office after the "boss" only to find him/her napping, surfing the web or playing solitare, any meaningful purpose would be lost.
March 24, 2008 at 3:27pm by richard covington
If your job is an integral part of your life as well as the people employed with you, there is no first and last. Complete your daily job goals and see who else you can help.
March 24, 2008 at 4:24pm by David Grossman
I think that would make employees feel uncomfortable. I vote bad.
March 24, 2008 at 4:41pm by ganesh salunke
no gooood,
March 24, 2008 at 4:42pm by Barrie Bramley
If inputs are more important than outputs, then possibly the boss should be first in and last out.
Should inputs continue to be more important than outputs in today's business environment?
Don't ask your boss : )
March 24, 2008 at 6:01pm by Marco Murillo
The "boss" is responsible for motivating and leading his/her team while creating value for the company. I dont believe that they are more likely to achieve any one of these before 8 or after 5- In my mind, a manager should be the model for listening, making sound decisions, leading and teaching his/her team. It may result in a late night here and there, but displaying a work life balance while still creating value for the company is also a defining quality of a well rounded leader and human.
March 24, 2008 at 9:11pm by Jim Peake
The boss needs to play by the same rules as everyone else. however if the bosses schedule is different that the rank and file well he needs to have agreement by the rank and file. otherwise it becomes a "stamp collecting issue," where each time he is late the rank and file make a mental note and resentment builds up and undermines the team effort.
March 24, 2008 at 11:40pm by Bob Lodie
It depends. Is the manager trying to set an example or create a certain culture? Perhaps she is doing a turnaround of a troubled organization and needs to accelerate results. As long as the manager doesn't wear their "time card" like a badge of courage they should work at a pace and time they when they feel most productive.
March 24, 2008 at 11:46pm by Bill Maher
A boss that needs to consistently put in "first in, last out" hours hasn't figured out how to efficiently do his job- a bad example for his staff.
March 25, 2008 at 1:39am by Kishore Malani
No
March 25, 2008 at 1:57am by Dominic Anthony Tan
Being the first one in and last one out does not guarantee that a person is efficient. It can actually be a sign of declining efficiency. Quality output is more important than being the first person in or the last person to leave the office. I say No to this practice.
March 25, 2008 at 3:39am by Syamant Sandhir
Overall, more than the physical presence it is the intellectual and emphatic presence that a boss needs to demonstrate to the team.
Multiple time zones makes it physically difficult for the boss to be the first one in the office and the last to leave office.
Two things, come to mind :
1. It is not so much the physical presence that matters but the leadership. Too many time one hears "I don't care, you get it done". Well one must care to ensure that the team feels motivated and looked after.
2. Are the expectations set for the team , inline with the standards that the boss sets for self ? Does the team feel sufficiently recognised and empowered about their efforts ?
Leading from the front requires a lot more than just showing up first in office...
March 25, 2008 at 7:21am by Mark Zorro
This is a behaviour mindset therefore and it is a perfectly legitimate life choice, if that is what makes someone feel good then it is simply one more adult choice. If however this behaviour is driven as a leadership instruction to "serve as or set an example" for others, then there may be a flaw in the hiring system or it maybe indicative of a failure to create trust or the boss may simply treating the workplace as her or is home, for why we do always assume that rationality is always the standard choice - when reality says that many things that most people to do are always far from rational. So it should not be about first in last out, but the fostering of an intelligent attitude to value of time and the value of focusing on the customer rather than the clock......M.
March 25, 2008 at 7:27am by John Palmay
I don't think the Boss has to be the first one in the door everyday and the last to leave. However I believe that it is the "Boss" (and I am not saying George Steinbrenner here) is the one who should set the examples or office tone.
The boss does not always need to be the one turning the lights out at night, but he or she must also have a strong work ethic and a desire to be a winner. So I guess for me the Boss goes by the old saying "lead by Example".
March 25, 2008 at 8:31am by Steven Heath
No. I was told once that you can't lead from behind a desk. The boss needs the flexibility to visit clients or off-site employees. In this age of the internet and cell phones, work does not have to be done just in the office.
March 25, 2008 at 9:23am by m e
First of all...as is often the case on this site... "the boss"...What does that even mean?
Secondly, while this sounds noble, in practice, a lot of people in the organization (especially leadership) have to be out of the office a fair amount.
-to meet with customers, potential customers, other various stakeholders in community
March 25, 2008 at 3:19pm by Sven GVH
you can't lead any company only by starring at your screen. It doesn't cares if you'll start this at 5 am and end this at 12pm. the boss should have the overview, that's his job, and he should be reachable 24hrs, for the big problems
March 25, 2008 at 3:22pm by manu denis
it depens most of the time the boss should be at the workplace to encourage all the company, but the boss have many reason to be or not to be...
March 25, 2008 at 3:32pm by silvia smith
Boss doesnt need to take responsibility for that.if boss need to stay from early morning to late night, its too much work for the boss.but when company had a problem, enployees need the boss so, sometimes boss should be, but not everyday. employees and boss can work for it in rotation.
March 25, 2008 at 3:35pm by Priska Heusser
For me it`s not importent that my boss should be the first one into the office in the morning and the last to leave in the evening. He works all the time enough.
March 25, 2008 at 7:06pm by Michael Perlman
A manager shouldn't have to keep constant tabs on all of her/his employees. The manager should be able to know what the team is up to and how to efficiently make progress.
March 26, 2008 at 9:23pm by John Jackson
I agree with other bloggers. Boss is a nebulous term, but some organizations, especially billable ones frown of anyone not putting in the hours and therein develops a culture where folks watch the clock when folks leave and come. I personally wish I was immune to this but I get excited when I boost my average to 60 hours one week becuase it pushed up my totals. I am a complete failure in that respect as it goes against my personal tennants which are "go home when the work is done".
March 27, 2008 at 3:27am by Christopher Fasipebi
The boss is the boss anyway, no amount of employees work under him/her bosses always carry the bulk of the jobs. He can't sleep like others do because the success of the company depend on his/her leadership ability. So, I think it is good if employees will consider their boss and support their vision to help manage the time spend at work. It will be a good idea if boss could count on his/her employees successful execution of some jobs in his/her absence.
Chris Fasipebi, Lagos-Nigeria.
April 15, 2008 at 9:37am by Zane Safrit
Leaders lead. The best lead by example. There's a lot of sentiment in these comments that what a Boss accomplishes is more important than the hours he/she puts in at the office. That's the example a leader should offer. What's important is what you accomplish, not how many hours you work.