Moonlighting -
An eclipse or an upgrade?
The recent and not-so-muted discussion on sacking of 300 engineers from Wipro over their ' moonlighting ', has brought this word at the forefront of management lexicon. And even though ' moonlighting ' has been practised for a long-time, the number of moonlighters has grown exponentially, thanks to the internet, which has opened a gateway for companies to connect with skilled professionals across the continents. I would be even so bold to say that moonlighting is a very integral part of our emerging Skilled Gig Economy!
Why 'Moonlighting'?
There are different aspects of why moonlighting has become commonplace in the expanding corporate culture. On one hand we have those who look for something extra other than their 9-5 jobs to stimulate their minds and sharpen their skills. These are the people who want to break their dull routines and work on projects that they like or feel satisfied with, because let's face it, 9-5s do tend to get monotonous. Then there are those who do it to support their families and earn an extra buck. These are ones facing financial hardships or some form of despair, that pushes them to look for alternate sources of income, because their 9-5 just doesn't cut it! While earning beyond their company's payscale is the goal for both categories, it is imperative to segregate both for the sake of this debate, to get a clear picture of why people actually moonlight. It is also necessary to do this so that we can ask the big question: who suffers or will suffer if we decide to either make moonlighting the new normal or brand it as the new corporate evil?
Exploring the Paradox
Furthering on the big question, first of all, let's get one thing clear; any one working (for profit) beyond the payroll of a company in any form or manner is considered a moonlighter. And the answer to the question, should any Organisation allow any of its employees to flirt with some other company or by oneself in the form is like Schrodinger's Cat - which is to say, it is both a Yes and a No!
Yes, because any company can't decide the upper cap of the people it employs. The needs of every company are ever-evolving and where there's a need, there is an opportunity and where there's opportunity, there are skilled professionals to fill that gap. Also, in absolutely no way, can any employer have a say if their employee is making an extra buck. As long as their efficiency is intact, their work ethics remain unflinched and their productivity remains unaffected, an employer should ideally have no problem. In fact, some companies, like Swiggy, are going to introduce a policy encouraging such a practice (obviously with a clause that it should not conflict with the company's interests).
But, it must also be understood that every company has a different business model, and that's what leads us to the opposite end of the spectrum, where the debate begins with a very fair argument, that an employee cannot engage with someone at the employer's peril.
The minute an employee starts offering their service to competitors, there is also a cross over of work styles, work ethics, formats, patterns, templates, ideas and above all, that very lingering possibility of privileged information changing hands. However this argument must not be construed as a misinterpretation of the character or ethics of any professional who is moonlighting. Let's understand this better with an example - let's say X is working with an IT company (because that's where this debate began from) and X also moonlights with an IT start-up. Now, while working on one of the start-up's projects, X used a major part of a particular information that he had worked on for his employer, and completed the project that was assigned by the start-up. He did not use privileged information, nor was such usage of information detrimental to X's employer, however the information was developed by X on the original employer's payroll and using the employer's resources. Now the question is, while no harm was done, is such a crossover of information fair for X's employer? It's something to really think about.
The utopian way out
Before we get into this part of the exploratory debate, let's get one thing out of the way - for those who think that moonlighting is cheating or illegal - it absolutely is not!
With that being said, we must also understand that today's market is talent driven and no one company holds a monopoly on talent. That's why the utopian way to make this situation amicable is to first and foremost bring about transparency between employers and employees. Sounds difficult, right? But that's the most integral step! At some point, both sides will need to sit down and iron out mutually beneficial policies.
For example, employers can get into a contract with the employee, where the employee should officially start sharing which company they are working for outside of their current employer's purview, before they begin such work. It'd be great if the employee can share which project they are to be engaged on, for what duration, whether they will be also spreading in a word for such a project within his company so as to facilitate their ecosystem of part-time projects, so and so forth.
But the million dollar question is are both parties i.e. the employer and employee willing to take that first step towards the proverbial middle ground? Will the employer be desirous to share the talent that they have recruited painstakingly, and will the employee commit to not being in direct competition with the employer after they finish their shift? These are some of the many things that both parties need to work out, because this affects us all!
In summary this Schrodinger's Cat Paradox cannot be resolved, till the box is opened up and the debate commences. Let us not brand moonlighting as evil, and let us not at the same time accept it as the new normal. Let us talk, and let us help each-other evolve!