Maybe it's the introvert in me. Maybe it's the nature of my job. But we cannot deny that for many of us, the magic of good work happens when we work apart, far from the corporate campuses, from the cubicle confines. It's not just me: plenty of studies report most companies see productivity boost when they allow employees to work from home at least sometimes.
For those of us who've made a successful go at the work-from-home life, it's been because we've been trusted enough to work where we work best, whether that be in an office, in a board room, at the coffee shop, in the spare bedroom, or on a park bench. Those of us who've successfully navigated the work-from-home waters have done so because we love our work, take pride in our work, and don't choose to work from home merely because it's cheaper or easier or cozier, but because we work better there. It's also been because we haven't lost sight of the need to work together or of the magic that happens when we spend time together. It's just that successful work-from-homers understand that this can look different.
Some of the "magic of togetherness" I experience happens from secret work-related Facebook groups, where we swap ideas and seek support. Other times it comes from Google (notice: not Yahoo) hangouts or emails or good old fashioned phone calls. Those of us who do well with the work-from-home life don't eschew togetherness, we just live it out in different ways.
If this hasn't been true for the Yahoos, I hope that going back to working from work gives them a fresh sense of togetherness and community. I hope it reinvigorates them and gives them new passion and spark. I hope Yahoo morale soars, despite this dictum and despite reports that Mayer built a nursery next to her office (working from home is out, but homing from work is in!). I hope the company survives and thrives.
But more than anything, I hope this doesn't restrict society's view on how or where good work happens. I hope companies continue to empower workers to do their best work, from wherever it's best done. And I hope employees continue to understand that no matter where we work, it's how we work that matters, and that our best stuff happens when we work together—as God created us to—in all the forms "together" takes.
Steve Maller / Flickr
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Pinterest
Comments
Adam Shields
@Janet, My point is that this is about poor management of resources not working out of the office. If you are not going to fire people that don't work, then you are not going to fire people that don't work regardless of where they work. Maybe this makes sense in your industry, but this does not make sense for a software and webbased company like Yahoo.
JANET W
Well, it's not hurting their brand with me. I fully support holding employees accountable for their actions. And I'm not sure if you've ever been in management before -- but it's really difficult to just "fire" someone nowadays. First, you've got to realize that unless there's documentation (and a history documented), firing just doesn't happen in a company that size. Secondly, if a person is marginally productive but in a key position, it's not like you can just replace them with some "yahoo" off the street. If there are projects that are mid-process, changing personnel mid-way through a project can be devestating. There's always lag time when you have to fill an open position, as well. So, say you immediately filled the position, you've still got to do orientation, etc. Plus, I don't know how great a PR move it would be for Yahoo to fire all those people given that there's such an uproar about merely making them come to the office and work.
Adam Shields
@Janet W, But why is this being blamed on those that work out of the office. By your numbers how are the 1% affecting the 5% that are in the office unduly? I fully agree that those that work outside of the office can sluff off. But so can those that are in the office. By all accounts that I have read this is about management, not about the actual working out of the office. If you can't fix the 5% that are in the office already and not working (again by your illustration) then what makes you think getting the work outside of the office people in the office will make it better? There are industries that working outside the office just doesn't work (you can't fix a washing machine remotely). But software development is one of those industries that is perfectly designed to work remotely. If people are not working, fire them. But that does not seem to be what is going on here. To me this appears to be yet another bad move by Yahoo to further hurt their brand & marginalize their company.
JANET W
Adam, It's naive to think that those 2% (whose pay, work output, and expected contribution to the company we know nothing about) aren't part of the issue. As a business-person myself, I can testify that if 2% of my employees aren't doing what they're supposed to be doing, it can drastically negatively affect the other 98% who may be working very hard but whose jobs are seriously negatively affected by the lack of performance of their co-workers. But let's say that even half of those who were working from home are slacking off (1% of my work-force) and let's say that I've got another 5% at the office who are doing the same thing. One easy fix for the 1% is to get them into the office so that I can monitor their performance. As for the other 5% who are already at work but not contributing -- I'll have other initiatives that I'll apply to them (that probably wouldn't make headlines).
Adam Shields
It is ridiculous to think that 2% of the Yahoo workforce that works from home is responsible for the decline of Yahoo. A company that has been in near continuous decline for the past decade. Work at home staff are a scapegoat that will do nothing to turn the company around. If 15-20% of the workforce worked from home, maybe she could claim a problem. If 2 percent work from home, then it is either about scapegoating or about poor management of staff.
JANET W
A business that is failing will absolutely look at ways to tighten up. And, yes, this means evaluating productivity and making adjustments. If these 200 happy employees were working diligently at home and productivity was up, then there wouldn’t have been a reason to make a change. Obviously, being happy at home, in this case, didn’t necessarily equate with increased productivity. I’m not sure why it was necessary to bring up the fact that the CEO is a new mom. She didn’t decide that, because of her new mom status, she should work from home. I think that, as a business, it would be much better to have an on-site daycare than 200 employees watching their own kids at home while trying to work. How much better can a person concentrate while managing small children at home than at an office where they have a dedicated cubicle or office, free of children interrupting? We have to remember that a business is able to compensate and retain employees only as long as the company is still in business.
Tim Fall
Together does take many forms, and in God's kingdom that togetherness nowadays seems to take form through bits and bytes as well as face to face. As you say, for us introverts this can be invigorating. Cheers, Tim ( timfall.wordpress.com )
*