In this chapter, we try to bring out the practical implications of the work that economists have done in recent years. However, this is not a manual of absence control for human resources managers. The lessons to be learned from these studies are more strategic than tactical in nature, and we hope that those who are charged with the development of strategic approaches to absenteeism control will find something of use in them.

Setting the target rate of absence

The first lesson (and possibly the most important) is that the idea of ‘minimising absence’ or ‘zero tolerance’ should have no place in an absenteeism strategist's mind. The fact that all workers are human, and most of them have some kind of life outside their work, implies that their attendance will never be 100 per cent, even though for many workers it is not much less than this. Add in the incidence of minor and major illness, and it is clear that trying to push absence too low is inconsistent with profit maximisation.

Given this basic fact, there are two sets of actions that a manager can take: one can try to manage absence itself, or one can try to manage its impact on operations and costs. Most managers (and certainly most firms) probably do both these things, and advice from organisations such as the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development in Britain recognises this. What that advice misses, though, is the idea that absence can be too low.