Written by

Bernard Marr

Bernard Marr is a world-renowned futurist, influencer and thought leader in the fields of business and technology, with a passion for using technology for the good of humanity. He is a best-selling author of over 20 books, writes a regular column for Forbes and advises and coaches many of the world’s best-known organisations. He has a combined following of 4 million people across his social media channels and newsletters and was ranked by LinkedIn as one of the top 5 business influencers in the world.

Bernard’s latest books are ‘Future Skills’, ‘The Future Internet’, ‘Business Trends in Practice’ and ‘Generative AI in Practice’.

Generative AI Book Launch
View My Latest Books

Follow Me

Bernard Marr ist ein weltbekannter Futurist, Influencer und Vordenker in den Bereichen Wirtschaft und Technologie mit einer Leidenschaft für den Einsatz von Technologie zum Wohle der Menschheit. Er ist Bestsellerautor von 20 Büchern, schreibt eine regelmäßige Kolumne für Forbes und berät und coacht viele der weltweit bekanntesten Organisationen. Er hat über 2 Millionen Social-Media-Follower, 1 Million Newsletter-Abonnenten und wurde von LinkedIn als einer der Top-5-Business-Influencer der Welt und von Xing als Top Mind 2021 ausgezeichnet.

Bernards neueste Bücher sind ‘Künstliche Intelligenz im Unternehmen: Innovative Anwendungen in 50 Erfolgreichen Unternehmen’

View Latest Book

Follow Me

How to Measure Absenteeism: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

2 July 2021

There’s no doubt that employee absence costs companies in terms of productivity and the bottom line. So finding a way to keep an eye on absenteeism makes good business sense. But are companies focusing too much on absenteeism scores at the expense of more pressing issues?

In this article we take a look at the most common ways to measure absenteeism, the potential pitfalls involved, and how employers can take a more meaningful approach to employee absence.

How absenteeism is typically measured

Staff absence is actually a pretty easy thing to measure. At its most basic, it may be a simple clocking-in and clocking-out system that tallies up when employees are absent from work.

Alternatively, you can calculate the crude absence rate, which tells you absenteeism as a percentage of contracted working time. This can be tracked at an individual, department or job function level, and is helpful for identifying ‘trouble spots’ in the company.

But by far the most common method for measuring absence is the Bradford Factor. This is a simple formula that translates absence patterns into an easy-to-interpret score: an employee with a high score indicates a problematic absence pattern. The Bradford Factor is particularly popular because it applies a weighting for repeat short-term absences, rather than just calculating the number of days someone has off. So, an employee who gets the flu and takes seven working days off in one go is typically less problematic than an employee who calls in sick every Monday for seven weeks. Even though they’ve both taken the same amount of time off, the second employee’s repeat absences are likely to have a greater negative effect on the company.

The good

One big plus is that the Bradford Factor and other absence measures are easy to use. Absenteeism is a very concrete, easy thing to measure – and, if we’re being honest, that’s why a lot of companies measure it. It’s also seen as a useful proxy for employee satisfaction – as in, high absenteeism = low satisfaction. (However, as we’ll see later in this article, I think jumping from absenteeism to satisfaction is quite a big leap to make.)

There’s also the advantage that, as a mathematical formula, the Bradford Factor treats everyone the same. There’s no sugar-coating hard numbers, and it’s impossible for an employee to argue they’ve been singled out for attention because their manager doesn’t like them. In that way, it creates a level playing field.

The bad

I’m always reluctant to measure something just because it’s easy to measure. For me, that screams of measuring stuff just for the sake of it. Yes, the Bradford Factor and other absenteeism measures are easy to use, but that doesn’t mean it’s the right tool for the job.

One problem with the Bradford Factor is directly related to one of its advantages: treating everyone in exactly the same way. That sounds good on paper but, in real life, do you really think your employees are all the same? What about employees with disabilities? Or an employee undergoing treatment for cancer? Such employees are likely to have more short-term absences – the very sort of absences that the Bradford Factor places more weighting on. Employers need to make reasonable allowances for circumstances like this, which is why the Bradford Factor should never be taken as scripture or used in isolation.

And the ugly

Treating absenteeism as a direct proxy for satisfaction is problematic for me. There are many reasons why an employee might be taking more short-term absences (including the obvious one: health issues), so it’s not as simple as drawing a straight line between high absenteeism and low satisfaction. The relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism can be moderated by a number of factors. For example, an employee might be satisfied with the company, their compensation and many other factors, but extremely dissatisfied with their manager.

The Bradford Factor gives you a simple score only; it doesn’t help you understand whether the absence was health related or not. And if it wasn’t health related, it doesn’t help you understand why an employee would rather pull a sickie than come into work. That’s why I think it’s a mistake to focus on absence without considering the whole employee satisfaction landscape.

A better way to approach absenteeism

While I understand the need to keep an eye on absenteeism, it certainly shouldn’t be one of the key indicators that you focus on. To understand what I mean by this, think of a car dashboard. The dashboard gives you the key information that you need to know as you’re driving along: speed, engine temperature, petrol, that sort of thing. But the car is also monitoring a number of other metrics behind the scenes. In the event that a problem arises, a warning light appears on the dashboard. That warning light is only there when you really need to see it.

The same should be true of absenteeism. By all means track it, but think of it as a measurement that ticks along behind the scenes. It’s not a useful measure to focus on – at least, not unless there’s a real issue that needs attention. In this way, absenteeism should be like a warning light that only flickers into life when you really need it to.

So what else should be on your dashboard instead of the Bradford Factor or another absenteeism metric? Well, that depends on your strategic priorities. Ask yourself, “What is it we’re really looking to achieve by measuring absenteeism?” Do you, in fact, want to understand more about employee satisfaction levels in the business? If so, there are much better ways to do that than focusing on absenteeism, such as short pulse surveys or eNPS surveys.

Where to go from here

If you would like to know more about measuring HR effectiveness, check out my articles on:

Or browse the KPI Library to find the metrics that matter most to you.


Business Trends In Practice | Bernard Marr
Business Trends In Practice | Bernard Marr

Related Articles

15 Habits To Achieve A Better Work-Life Balance In Today’s Fast-Paced World

Our world is unpredictable and changing fast. Technology brings new challenges and, very often, pressure to be constantly connected.[...]

The Future Of Business: 8 Trends For Startups To Watch

Change and transformation in business continue at a furious rate, and new trends pose opportunities and challenges for organizations of all sizes.[...]

The Power of Mindset: How Curiosity And Humility Can Drive Career Success

I’ve recently finished writing a book on essential future skills, and if I had to pick one skill that underpinned all the other skills in the book it’d be curiosity.[...]

How To Upgrade From Data-Driven To AI-Driven Marketing Analytics

We’re told that data is the key to business success. But how do we go about turning data into money?[...]

The 5 Biggest Problems With Blockchain Technology Everyone Must Know About

Blockchain technology has undeniably captured the imagination of the tech world and beyond, offering the promise of decentralized, transparent, and tamper-proof systems.[...]

How to Make AI Work in Your Organization

As the world continues to embrace the transformative power of artificial intelligence, businesses of all sizes must find ways to effectively integrate this technology into their daily operations.[...]

Sign up to Stay in Touch!

Bernard Marr is a world-renowned futurist, influencer and thought leader in the fields of business and technology, with a passion for using technology for the good of humanity.

He is a best-selling author of over 20 books, writes a regular column for Forbes and advises and coaches many of the world’s best-known organisations.

He has a combined following of 4 million people across his social media channels and newsletters and was ranked by LinkedIn as one of the top 5 business influencers in the world.

Bernard’s latest book is ‘Generative AI in Practice’.

Sign Up Today

Social Media

0
Followers
0
Followers
0
Followers
0
Subscribers
0
Followers
0
Subscribers
0
Yearly Views
0
Readers

Podcasts

View Podcasts