Perceptions of time are culturally dependent. In some societies, time is seen as expansive and time considerations may have lower priority than relationships in business dealings. In others, notably Western cultures like the United States and Canada, time at work is perceived more like a series of deadlines that must be met (Hall, 1959; see Hahn, 2011, for a blog essay on these differences from a Westerner’s point of view). If you teach in the United States or Canada, or work with students or clients who interact with North American businesspeople, you may have referred to these contrasting views of time in order to impress upon your students that punctuality is critically important. But is it really? How does the North American sense of time actually translate into punctuality practices?

PUNCTUALITY AT WORK

To start a discussion in my communication classes for immigrant professionals in Canada, I like to give them a quiz question―in two variations. The two multiple-choice questions focus on punctuality at work:

• Question #1: Which attitude about punctuality is most common among employees?
• Question #2: Which attitude about punctuality is most common among managers?

The response options for both questions are the same:

1. You (Employees) should try to arrive at the office early, to show how hard-working you are, and never late.
2. You (Employees) should always try to be on time.
3. Life is difficult sometimes. It’s natural that you (employees) will be late to work once a month or so, with a good reason.
4. Punctuality every day isn’t really important. What’s important is that you (employees) finish responsibilities and tasks well and on time every day or every week (Bartel, 2009, pp. 41-42).

Working in two groups, students poll each other. Invariably, the vast majority of students report that they have learned that if they plan to work in Toronto, they should choose (b) in response to both questions. As well, when I ask local ESL instructors the same questions, they usually have the same answer.

Results of Popular Surveys

When responses of class members are compared to North American survey results, however, lively cultural discussions ensue. In fact, a poll conducted by the well-known career service CareerBuilders.com involving 1,000 hiring managers and more than 1,500 employees shows that North American work culture isn’t monolithic―there is a spectrum of acceptable behaviors (“Punctuality problems,” 2006).

Regarding the reported punctuality of the employees themselves, both teachers and students are regularly surprised to hear that 24 percent of workers admit to a late arrival at least once a month. Arriving late to work at least once a week, a habit so unexpected that I did not even list it as an option in my quiz, was the response for 13 percent of workers; in 2009 the same pollsters found that figure had climbed to 20 percent in the United States (“Oops, the alarm clock didn’t go off,” 2009). About 60 percent of employees reported that they generally get to work on time every day―a figure considerably less than the near-unanimous expectation of students and instructors.

Also surprising were the results from managers. Only 10 percent of the managers were so strict that they might fire an employee who was late to work a few times a year. About 60 percent of the managers allowed employees to arrive late sometimes, with a good reason. In addition, fully 30 percent of the managers said that punctuality in arrival time is not as important as good quality work that is done on time. My interpretation of the latter figure is that it likely reflects the growing acceptance of flex-time and work-at-home arrangements in today’s workplaces. Thus we find that managers are actually a little more lenient than the employees themselves.

Critically Examining Our Cultural View of Punctuality at Work

When I present these statistics at local TESL conference sessions, some attendees (ESL and ESP instructors) do not like the unexpected results. Regardless of the great variety of industries that must have been polled, they argue that it is their duty to instil in students the importance of punctuality across the board. In a considerable number of classrooms students must be hearing the warning “Don’t be late! You have to be on time in this country.” Yet the cited statistics come from a poll of 2,500 hiring managers and employees, a substantial number of people. Should one individual―even an instructor―teach a (personal) cultural value that does not represent the actual practices of large segments of the population?

I think it is essential to acknowledge the range of acceptable punctuality behaviors. Our students must learn that they might encounter a variety of scenarios on the job, so that they can make informed decisions about their own behavior as well as reasoned judgments of the performance of others. For example, they might see a colleague coming in late fairly often. On the basis of their ESL teacher’s warnings, they could decide not to try to get to know that coworker, supposing him or her to be lazy and shiftless―because good employees are always supposed to arrive on time. However, in reality, the managers in that company might just be rather relaxed about working hours.

In my view, we should not be telling our students what they have to do to “fit in,” presenting long lists of “do’s” and “don’ts” in class. Our culture, influenced by immigrant and generational attitudes, is richer than that. In fact, in workplaces in Toronto and other multicultural cities the boss may be an immigrant, too, and may be carrying his or her own cultural expectations. So it is valuable to hear many opinions on this question and compare them to a large sample of North Americans.

This does not mean that instructors cannot set standards for their own class. From the discussion that ensues, teachers can go on to compare those workplace expectations with classroom behavior. They can state their views and values, explaining which kind of manager they see themselves as. The discussion, including reasons for the expectations of punctuality, has an impact on students’ immediate lives and daily schedules and is an excellent occasion to practice the give and take of meaningful communication.

Language Activity for the Topic

Besides the above-mentioned meaningful discussion, further language activities can be carried out. For instance, consider possible verbal reactions of a supervisor or manager to an employee’s regular tardiness:

Jim is late a few times every month. His boss might speak to him with:

concern: “I hope everything’s OK, Jim?”

understanding, sympathy: This traffic has been terrible lately, hasn’t it?”

sarcasm, criticism: “It’s nice to finally see you today, Jim.”

warning, criticism with a consequence: “Don’t let this become a habit, or I’ll have to make a note in your file” (Bartel, 2010, p. 28).

Not only vocabulary but also, and especially, tone of voice are of interest here. Students’ understanding of comments of concern and criticism will acquire more depth.

Expanding the Topic Further

To extend the topic further, explore, for example, the question of how important punctuality is in situations other than work, such as a job interview or a dinner invitation. A large poll has shown that for the former, punctuality is clearly expected―77 percent of interviewers rate lateness as a top annoyance (Galt, 2008). Lacking survey results for the latter situation, I do tell my students my personal perspective: that many North American hosts hope that guests are not punctual!

CONCLUSION

As seen from a number of surveys and their results, there is not just one “punctuality rule” for students learning about North America to memorize. It is important for us all to realize the range of possible attitudes within a culture. When discussing the issue of punctuality, in addition to using language skills, students―and instructors―also practice cultural and self-awareness. As well, critical thinking skills are needed to choose appropriate behaviors to suit each context. With awareness of the various attitudes they may encounter in North America, our students can then make their own choices as to appropriate behaviors for themselves.

REFERENCES

Bartel, J. (2009). Office soft skills 1. How to make a good first impression at work – in person, in writing and on the phone. Toronto, Ontario: Bartel.

Bartel, J. (2010). Office soft skills 1. The indispensable ESL instructor’s guide to language support activities (2nd ed.). Toronto, Ontario: Bartel.

Galt, V. (2008, February 13). No love lost here. The Globe and Mail, p. C2.

Hahn, H. (2011). Time Sense: Polychronicity and Monochronicity. Blog essay retrieved from http://www.harley.com/writing/time-sense.html

Hall, E. T. (1959). The silent language. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

Oops, the alarm clock didn’t go off. (2009, March 4). The Globe and Mail, p. C3.

Punctuality problems. (2006, May 2). metro [Toronto edition], p. 16.

Joan Bartel will be presenting on soft skills in ESP at the 2012 TESOL Convention (March 29). Her books, Office Soft Skills 1 and 2, will be available at the English Central booth.