Travel policies may be lagging behind the increased demand to stay in touch 24/7, suggests David Churchill
IT’S OFFICIAL: business travel really does damage your health. According to researchers at Colombia University in the US, those travelling frequently on business were more likely to be obese and have high blood pressure than those who travelled less often.
“The travel environment is not terribly healthy,” explains Andrew Rundle, epidemiology professor at Colombia and senior author of a recent study based on 13,000 workers who were on the ‘corporate wellness’ plan of preventive health company EHE International. “It’s hard to eat healthily while you’re on the road when you think what’s available at airports and rest stops,” he says. “A lot of hotels, for example, don’t have gyms, or gyms that are of that great a quality.” But his comment that will resonate most with road warriors is: “And layered on top of all that, you have the stress of business travel.”
While leisure travel can be a hassle – think crowded airports and fractious offspring, especially during the hot summer months – being away from the office or home on business brings its own set of pressures. Not least, of course, is that while travelling may seem glamorous to those back at work, the very fact that an employer is paying for the travel signals that the company expects a return on the investment.
So, apart from coping with the hundred and one minor irritations of modern transport systems, there is the added pressure of actually having to work while away. And it might not only be important for your company’s profitability, but also for your own career prospects. No sweat, then.
Yet while there have always been pressures on business travellers, many now feel the squeeze has been ratcheted up significantly by the growth of new communication technology. Where once keeping in touch with colleagues back in the office required negotiating the intricacies of hotel switchboards or international telephone exchanges, now those ‘lucky’ enough to be travelling on business are expected to be in constant communication through the wonders of smartphones or tablet computers You can run, but you can’t hide anymore.
“I can’t even eat a muffin in the [airport] lounge without some busybody from work wanting to check one last thing before I get on the plane,” opined the anonymous frequent traveller in Buying Business Travel’s sister publication Business Traveller. “It’s as if I am going to the moon. Don’t these people know they will be able to reach me later when I am settled in my hotel?”
Ciaran Kelly, UK general manager for FCm Travel Solutions, says that companies seeking to keep more in touch with their employees while travelling “is definitely an area we have become increasingly aware of over the past few years”.
He adds: “As things become more global, and people work in different time zones, the expectation is that you should respond because of the capabilities of new smartphones. But it could get to the stage that staff may suffer from exhaustion and stress due to the constant demands of being available 24/7.”
Being at the beck and call of the office ‘base’ when travelling is now considered by many companies as the norm, even though most corporate travellers would not expect such a need for regular contact with family and friends, or other colleagues in the field, unless it was absolutely urgent. But when on the road, a business traveller’s time is not his or her own.
And time spent away from the office is on the increase, according to the latest tracking survey (July) by the Institute of Travel & Meetings of UK travel managers and others responsible for buying/organising travel and meetings. “A huge 66 per cent of respondents suggest that their travellers are spending more time away from the office than three years ago,” says the ITM. “This clearly correlates with the increased demand for mobile solutions.”
The ITM survey (in partnership with Argate Consulting) found that 47 per cent of travel buyers believe the demand for improved use of mobile devices would “grow dramatically over the next three years”.
Factors driving this demand included the “need to always stay in touch” (mentioned by 52 per cent), plus improvements in mobile software and applications (47 per cent) as well as smartphone handsets (38 per cent). Yet it is not just office interventions that irritate. Travellers are expected when on the move not only to check emails but also social networking sites, such as Facebook or LinkedIn, if this is relevant.
More significantly, the huge growth of mobile applications and the need to reduce back-office costs can mean that the traveller may also have to handle booking arrangements as well. European carrier Vueling is the latest of many airlines and hotels to offer a new iPhone app which can be used “to check-in online, download boarding passes, change seat selection or time of travel”. The app is being adapted for use with Google’s Android operating system as well.
According to the ITM study, “hand-held self-booking technology appears to be the biggest item on travel buyers’ shopping lists, with 34 per cent advising of their plans to implement such systems”. Devolving responsibility for some travel bookings while on the road will inevitably become more widespread as a result.
Even so, the ITM research suggested that mobile technology worked best when there were clear service benefits for the traveller. But where the benefits were less obvious or potentially more complex – such as with mobile expense tracking – there were “mixed feelings about the use of handheld devices as solutions to add value in these cases”.
Crises such as 2010 and 2011’s Icelandic ash clouds – and other unpredictable events seem to be becoming more frequent – add further to the pressures on the traveller. While some companies may feel this is part and parcel of the life of a busy executive, there are signs that the issue is moving up the corporate agenda – not only because of the duty of care towards employees that companies are legally obliged to undertake, but also because of newer legislation such as the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act that puts the onus on employers to ensure their staff’s safety.
“Responsible companies acknowledge that this may not just be the legal thing to do but also the right thing to do,” points out Nigel Turner, Carlson Wagonlit Travel’s director of programme management. “There is an awareness that corporate social responsibility [CSR] in its widest sense extends to ensuring that employees away on company business do not overdo things to the detriment of their health and ability to do the job.”
Stewart Harvey, commercial director of HRG (Hogg Robinson Group), says that there is a growing understanding that modern technology is changing the way employees are expected to behave when on company business.
“Employers understand the need to ‘cut some slack’ for people who may have crossed several time zones and been on the road for days,” he says. “But while more seasoned business travellers usually have developed an ability to pace themselves, younger or less experienced travellers may feel the pressure to be available at all times, to answer emails or voicemails immediately, and so on.”
Formal travel policies tend to become rather blurred in such areas simply because they are difficult to quantify. It is hard to imagine a written policy instruction not to answer emails or return calls after a certain amount of time travelling, simply because people work and respond in different ways to stress. Yet a formal prohibition on driving your own car home after a long flight is something that not only makes sense from a personal safety point of view but can also be a legal necessity, given the corporate manslaughter laws.
Yet while duty of care responsibilities may sometimes seem more nebulous, they should not be ignored. Apart from the fundamental responsibilities under health and safety at work legislation that has underpinned CSR in respect of employees since the 1970s, there is also the implied need to act to avoid accusations of negligence under civil rather than criminal law.
But if formal travel policies have yet to reflect this, the responsibility is increasingly being met by companies issuing informal guidance on what is expected of their employees while travelling. “Providing guidelines is a practical solution to the need to get the message across to travellers that they do not have to be available 24/7 to do their job and, even if they want to, they should not do it for their own health,” says Harvey. “This applies as well to their use of mobile communication devices – they have to be prepared to ‘switch off’ at certain times and know that they are not being penalised for this.”
CWT’s Turner also believes a ‘guidelines’ policy is the one most favoured by companies at present. “It takes a reasonable approach to the reality of business travel without offering a strictly legalistic stance which might be ignored,” he says.
“But guidelines are an important step forward in helping to cope with the stress levels created by a 24/7 world.”
Yet more pragmatic – and practical – support may be needed. FCm’s Kelly suggests that “expense polices should be reviewed to take into account the length of time people are away from home to make sure they eat sensibly, have access to a hotel or local gym and generally have a healthy lifestyle while away on business.”
But this may be easier said than done. “I don’t think many corporates are keen to add to their costs in this way, given that price remains one of the key elements of the business travel mix in the post-recession environment,” says CWT’s Turner.
Yet some companies do now insist on their preferred hotels having leisure facilities available for their employees’ use – even if hoteliers still believe (with some justification) that many business travellers prefer to relax in the bar rather than spa.
There may be a case for a review of some elements of travel policies, such as the class of flights or quality of hotels. “If it’s a short trip of a night or so, then economy class and perhaps a budget hotel may be appropriate,” points out Harvey. “But for longer and more complex trips, then moving up the plane or staying in hotels with more facilities may be better value in terms of helping the traveller cope with the demands of the job.”
The rapid advance of mobile communications – especially in the ability to manipulate data while on the road – may have developed more speedily than anticipated and been embraced by individual business travellers faster than employers expected. But, as the ITM survey found, this is a case when policy has been lagging. Some 77 per cent of respondents said their official corporate policy stated that only approved, secure technology should be used by travelling executives.
“But travellers are finding their own way to embrace the plethora of services available to them, and it’s no wonder we regularly see people with two or more handsets,” notes the ITM.
Such self-induced stress may be an essential part of the corporate traveller’s lifestyle in the 24/7 world. But, as Professor Rundle commented when detailing the findings of his study, people tend to cope with it in different ways. “I find that when travelling for business, I give myself permission to be ‘bad’ in the sense of ordering French fries or going to the hotel bar to have a drink,” he says.
“And I have to remind myself that just because I’m travelling on business, there’s still my real life out there.”