At present Team Choices is trying to kick off its first official project “Shiksha – Jodhpur”. So obviously it is common for us to revisit and discuss several social issues that might affect the success of our program. Under this program Choices will sponsor education of economically disadvantaged students in Jodhpur, Mount Abu and Ahmedabad (Country: India, States: Rajasthan and Gujarat). The conditions a student must fulfil to become a part of this program are:
1. Family income of the student must be less than $250
2. Student must be enrolled in a school already
3. Minimum attendance should be 70%
Once a student has been enrolled in the project then he/she must fulfil following conditions to stay in the program:
- Maintain 80% attendance in school
- Show an upward movement in his/her academic growth chart
- Follow the rules of the school and refrain from any and all illegal acts.
As we work on launching the program and get it working some of our team members were of the opinion that we should only finance girl students as they face so many difficulties in getting educated. This began the discussion on attitudes towards girl child in India and gender roles.
Gender Role is truly nothing more than division of labour (DOL) in a family setup. Irrespective of whether DOL occurs within a family or in an organization the arguments in its favour are similar. People by virtue of who they are have strengths and weaknesses and it makes best practical sense for them to specialize in tasks that agree with their strengths and leave the tasks they are not best at to those who are best at doing them. It is suggested by DOL supporters and disagreed by none that DOL is an essential management tool for increasing productivity in a complex environment wherein multiple processes must be carried out with exacting precision or at least at a respectable quality level for the final product’s success. This means that proper application of DOL in a domestic environment must also lead to optimum productivity from all players in the household and as better productivity contrary to more work leads to better balance between work and leisure/family it must lead to happy families(1). Applying this premise to Indian households where gender roles are very prominent one should be able to assume that Indian families are very happy families. The simplest way to determine the happiness quotient of Indian households is to examine the divorce rates in the society and that unfortunately does not support our assumption. In the past five years alone (2005-2010) there has been a 100% increase in divorce rates in India(2) [2] despite the long drawn out divorces (that can easily take up to 10 years) and social stigmas. To India’s credit the divorce rate has only gone up to 2% from 1% but yet it is a sign that something is not right in the typical Indian happily ever after fairytale. One of the major villains in India’s romantic story is Gender Roles or Division of Labour.
What does that mean for DOL? Does it mean that DOL is possibly not as universally applicable as one might think? The fallacy with that train of thought is that while DOL has existed in form of gender roles in the Indian society for a very-very long time divorces caused by shifting gender roles is a relatively recent phenomenon. This leads one to consider examining application of DOL in a modern Indian household before passing a judgment against universal applicability of DOL.
In a corporate or industrial environment DOL leads to optimum productivity in presence of following factors:
1. Position specific roles: In a corporate setup each position is assigned with a specific set of duties, responsibilities and tasks. Any and every person who may take the position inherits the set of duties, responsibilities and tasks (DRT) specific to that position and loses it or passes it on to another individual when he/she loses or gives up that particular position. Thus, DOL in a corporate or industrial setup is position specific.
2. (Comparative) Constant Movement: In a corporate environment workers move from one position to another thereby changing shedding old roles and acquiring new roles. Those who remain in one position thereby retaining same set of DRT (duties, responsibilities and tasks) are considered stagnant.
3. More the Merrier: Division of Labour by definition can only exist where more than one person are involved in finishing a product or delivering a service. It brings out optimum productivity when a task can be broken into pieces / stages / processes that can then be assigned to different positions. An industry that has used this principle most efficiently and reaped huge benefits is the outsourcing industry. In an outsourcing industry for example Legal Outsourcing or Document Management Outsourcing every task is broken into several stages or processes and each stage is handled by separate individuals. Breaking up the task in such a fashion has the unparalleled benefit of making it simple and thus easier to perform than the task in its original form. It also allows the industry to save money as it does not need to hire as many experts to do the job. It can easily tap into that section of the masses that may not be highly skilled (thus cheaper), can be trained to develop a sense of detail and is willing to work hard and then hire one expert for quality control.
4. Free Choices: Last but not the least all roles are taken up by players in a corporate setup voluntarily. No roles or positions are thrust upon individuals against their wishes.
One look at the gender roles in Indian households will show that though Indian households have taken the concept of division of labour and embraced it they did not accept the conditions required to utilize DOL to the optimum level.
The differences between application of DOL in a corporate setup and domestic environment are listed in the following table:
Application of Division of Labour in | ||
Industrial or Corporate Environment | Domestic Environment | |
1 | Positions and roles are accepted voluntarily | Gender Roles are thrust upon individuals based on their sex. |
2 | Position Specific Roles | Gender roles are not position specific but individual specific. A woman has to fulfil the role of a nurturer and homemaker even if she is an earning member of the household. |
3 | Constant Movement or No stagnancy in Roles: Individuals are encouraged to change their roles and thus their set of DRT to avoid stagnancy and encourage personal growth. | A man must fulfil role of the breadwinner for the family all his life without any change in roles. He is not at the liberty to run the household on his wife’s income while he pursues a long time passion that may not yield economic returns even if his wife is willing to support him. |
4 | More the Merrier: DOL works at the optimum level when a complex task is broken into many simple tasks and then divided amongst a team. | When it comes to Gender Roles running the household is a woman’s responsibility and it is she who must manage the same at all times. While the husband may sometimes lend a hand in a task or two that can not be qualified as breaking the complex task of maintaining households in small tasks and dividing the labour because of its infrequency. |
A perusal of the above table makes it clear that DOL in form of gender roles is not applied in an Indian household in its true form. On the contrary in the case of a career oriented Indian woman DOL is simply turned upside down as she is expected to play the traditional role of a nurturer while she fulfils the role of an earning member of the household. While at most times her job is seen as her fancy “graciously allowed” by her husband and in-laws even in cases where her income is necessary for the family she is expected to continue shouldering the responsibility of managing the household. While she may have help of a domestic servant (if the family can afford it) management of the household still remains her responsibility. Thus, effectively instead of dividing the labour she takes on added responsibilities and added set of DRTs. The fallout of such a lack of efficient division of labour in a household is witnessed in its effects of:
1. Lack of productivity (one most remember more work is not the same as productivity)(3)
2. Reduced quality: Either one of the woman’s role (employee/entrepreneur and caretaker of home) or even both are bound to suffer as she is over burdened.
3. Disillusionment: In today’s Indian society women are continuously told by their parents and media that they are the same as men and have equal rights as them but as they step into their 20s they realize that they are not the same as men and do not have the liberty to pursue their career with the same determination as a man can. When a woman realizes that all opportunities are not available to her as she assumed in her teen years she feels betrayed by her family and a sense of resentment towards family responsibilities might develop that is then reflected in her relationship with her husband, in-laws and sometimes even her children. At the same time a man also feels betrayed and disillusioned when his wife does not give prime importance to family in a manner that he expects her to. While the woman may in her heart give first priority to her family if she does not fulfil her gender role in the traditional manner wherein she must be actively involved in daily chores of the family, it is seen as lack of involvement and a priority screw up on the part of the woman leading to disillusionment for the husband who is fed since childhood with the image of a wife who actively maintains and manages the household.
4. Failed expectations: Both men and women in modern Indian households enter into a marriage expecting a partner and a friend. Both husband and wife are forced to face failed expectations when DOL is not executed properly in the family. A woman who expects to find a supporter and a friend in her husband is disappointed when he expects her to take care of household chores (that might not be as important in her eyes) before she takes care of her office work. A husband is disappointed in the wife if she does not actively involve herself in the household chores or gives more importance to her “work” than to daily “responsibilities” of the house. Even if he takes up those responsibilities in his mind he is picking up the slack of his wife while in the woman’s mind he is not helping her but simply doing his part. This again leads to a sense of not only failed expectations but lack of appreciation.
Thus we see that an improper application of DOL in a household in today’s world increases the risk of discontent and splits in the family.
So what then is the solution? Could it be a solution that career loving women must only look for men who are ready to stay home and take care of the house? Probably, in an ideal world it would be possible without any negative repercussions. But ours is not an ideal world and women over the centuries have been conditioned to be the nurturer and men have been conditioned to provide. Thus, it is extremely difficult to find men and women (women find it difficult to give up control and rise above their guilt(4) who defy gender roles and are still well balanced in the society and comfortable in their own skin.
The practical solution then is to balance the scales, bring corporate principles to action in our households and apply Division of Labour as it is supposed to be applied. The two main tasks involved in running a household are:
- Earning a livelihood
- Managing the Household
In a family where traditional gender roles have been accepted and the woman is happy to take on the role of a home maker and stay home while the husband is happy being the bread-earner of the family all is fine. But, in a household where both partners wish to pursue a career it is the latter task of managing the household that needs to be broken down into simpler, smaller tasks and each member of the household must take turns at performing these small, simple tasks. Example: they can take turns at cooking, doing the laundry, cleaning up after dinner, etc.. If one partner is better at a task that requires expertise such as cooking or helping children complete housework then that task can be further divided into smaller tasks or each partner can find task that each is “expert” at and balance the responsibilities of managing the household amongst themselves.
___________________________________________
(1) For better understanding of how productivity and happiness are related please refer to following articles:
- “Employee productivity equals happiness (yes, happiness!)” by Mark Vickers
- “World’s Happiest places” By Lauren Sherman
(2) A BBC News article on increasing divorce rates in India: “Not so happily ever after as Indian divorce rate doubles” By Mark Dummett
(3) For better understanding of relationship between multitasking and productivity please refer to following articles:
- "Believe it: Multitasking reduces productivity and thats not all" by Doctor Marlene M Maheu
(4) A very good article on shifting gender roles that also touches on the issue that sometimes women will not allow division of labour: Gender Roles, The Blurring Divide by Malvika Kaul
