Dress codes (including IBM's) fade away - or do they? (Column)

When I read the Wall Street Journal on February 3, I thought my eyes were getting worse. There it was - the headline read, "IBM Goes Casual, Drops White Shirts, and Plans a Woodsier Headquarters." Will wonders never cease...

The article began, "Tom Watson must be turning over in his grave," noting that IBM's founder was known for his straight-laced attitudes and the "culture of corporate rectitude" he created. Lou Gerstner, IBM's chairman, announced that he's doing away with the dress code at IBM headquarters and has approved plans for a new, more casual headquarters building that will be set n a wooded, campus-like setting. As everyone knows, IBM employees were known for their starched white shirts and nondescript ties, and for a corporate culture that was anything but casual.

I think this is a great move. I'm the ultimate example of the casual dresser - when I'm working at home, "getting dressed up" means putting on socks. But as I said in my keynote speech at "Telecommute '94" last October, the shift to casual dress is not always what it appears to be. The speech was entitled "The Well-Intentioned (but Slightly Misguided) Confusion of Means and Ends in Large Organizations Today." I noted that there's a growing gap between what employees want and what their employers actually give them. For example, employees want freedom from micro-management, but companies give them freedom from suits, ties, and high heels. It's great to loosen up the collars and relax, but if this is only a cosmetic change that barely disguises the same control-oriented approach to supervision, not much is different.

To make things more complicated, these new casual dress codes can be much less casual than they appear. Robert Goldberg, in a "Manager's journal" column in the January 16 Wall Street Journal, writes that "many ...