top of page
Writer's pictureShekar

Moonlighting

Is this a big deal ? My thoughts on the What, Why and How.


It all started with a couple of tweets, which very quickly went viral and got the internet divided right through the middle. It was either condemned outright or welcomed as the new norm. The arguments put forth by both sides was interesting, thought provoking and sometimes amusing. Ranging from moral, ethical and legal dimensions to evoking emotional appeal like loyalty and commitment, people across the spectrum expressed their strong views on moonlighting.


Moonlighting is nothing new. For years doctors have consulted on the side and teachers have “helped” students with tuitions / extra coaching. In fact, in many government organisations in India, it is not uncommon to see the employees doing something on the side – from selling insurance policies to real estate brokering. More savvy ones dabble with stock markets. And the most common phenomenon is the average unhappy employee who is running a parallel entrepreneurial track to “make the switch at the right time”.


But why is this subject becoming important now ?


Most businesses have gone digital. As a result, digitisation of work is the norm now. With technology baked into every aspect of every business, demand for knowledge workers is on a rapid rise. The supply side is struggling. Talent is difficult to find.


For continued success and relevance, knowledge workers have to constantly keep themselves updated with new developments in technology, tools and practices. Very few companies / jobs provide this opportunity in-house.


Covid validated the virtual-remote working model successfully. While all jobs cannot be continuously and efficiently done remotely, the transformation to a hybrid workforce and associated workplace innovation is already underway across the world.


Managers in the IT product and services industry have, for long, linked their “power” and position to the number of people in their team and how hard they work them (not outcome, but number of hours clocked). This has led to very high inefficiency in the industry. Even big tech like Google & Meta have been acknowledging this problem.


Increasing focus of companies (employers) on shareholder value alone has caused an erosion in people focus. Hire & fire, lack of career path creation and inability to create a sense of purpose for employees or not investing in their development for the future have all led to the employer-employee relationship turning transactional and exploitative.


What have we (not) learnt from the past ?


I am reminded of the bygone era where companies used to have very strict and restrictive clauses in supplier contracts, including restricting trade with competition (worded in a way that did not break the provision of any law in letter).


With time, the engagement evolved and suppliers were seen more as partners. Companies started investing in supplier relationships and developed their supply base to a point where suppliers are now selected based on their expertise in the category of produce, which by inference means they work with competition too.


For example, Goodyear and Bridgestone produce tyres for all brands of automobiles. Battery and screen suppliers are common across brands of phones and laptops. Microsoft powers all brands of laptops, so does Intel. It is now an ecosystem play. In fact, this has helped companies design, engineer and develop the products with better focus. In fact, many suppliers have black box designs for their OEM customers.


Even technology companies / IT services companies, who are vocal against moonlighting, work with competing customers. It is also common to see companies hire from each other (with or without a cooling period). Companies also use staff augmentation models by using contractors / payroll administrators purely for cost reasons.


So, if it is possible for the company to manage this arrangement with its clients and suppliers, why is there a hesitation to manage a similar situation with its employees ?


Where does this go from here ?


As I see it, this is a business design issue. Gig work is real and will grow. Not all roles will require or suit gig workers, but specific areas of expertise will certainly qualify. Companies have to evolve their workforce design to adapt to the changing times to attract the best talent, which might be available only in a flexible / gig mode.


To do this, companies might have to think out of the box and be very innovative in re-designing their employment practices. Just like nurturing suppliers, distributors and dealers, companies will have to think of nurturing the best talent by building ecosystems for knowledge worker communities that possess a specific skill and share a common interest to develop solutions for specific problems.


It is also time to take a look at the labour laws and make necessary changes to nurture a knowledge worker ecosystem that can foster innovation in the digital space. The industry as a whole can flourish if this is designed and nurtured properly. And such a design should obviously put in firewalls and safeguards as is currently done with suppliers, sub-contractors and outsourced partners.


Smart companies will create a swarm of volunteers instead of a team of employees.


In my opinion, this is where the future of work is headed.


276 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page