The announcement from Yahoo
last week “revoking work from home privileges” started a BlogStorm about
office vs. virtual office work, and I decided to write about some of the
statements and assertions running around the blogsphere about virtual vs
office-based work environments.
First up; “they
did/did not earn the privilege of working from home”. I think this
statement displays a thorough lack of understanding of the entire issue. Integrating
employees who work from a virtual office, i.e., ‘not in space the company
rents, owns, or leases’, is a way of doing business. Being a virtual employee
is a choice of employment. Working from a virtual workspace is not a trophy for
accomplishment or a cookie for good behavior. There are positions, like most
sales positions, that are traditionally mostly remote. Work is just evolving to
fit the demands of the marketplace.
Along those same lines; ‘You
need to meet face to face to be productive’, ‘hall meetings are when things get
done’. Um, no; and the hall meeting
where I have to listen to a description of the nasty thing that happened at the
Super-Bowl party the guy in Engineering went to over the weekend doesn’t help
me get my work done. Current technology supports a huge chunk of work
communication needs. With instant message tools I can quickly check-in with
co-workers, for more complicated messages there is email and if I need to have
a conversation we all have phones. Countless work days I drove to an office
building and sat in a cube and every single bit of my work communication was
through email or phone.
‘What’s to keep you
“at work” when you’re at home?’ OK, this is lame. We’ve all worked with
countless people who spend their time at the office visiting co-workers,
watching the clock, chatting to family on the phone and any number of other
non-work activities. Either you get the work done and done well, or you don’t.
Management works best by assessing goals accomplished and quality work
completed, not by counting heads at desks.
‘I’m going to work
from home so I can take care of my (parakeet/child/ailing parent).’ No, you’re
not. You’re going to work from home OR you’re going to take care of your (parakeet/child/ailing
parent). Caring for our loved ones is a full-time job and requires focus you
cannot give while you’re ‘at work’. Arrange for focused, dedicated care for
your loved ones, don’t do the disservice of doing half of such an important
task. That said, working from home can give an employee the flexibility to
arrange for the specific care needed.
Maybe the situation calls for several caregivers and their schedules do
not over-lap. Working at home allows the employee to sign off for an hour and a
half to cover the gap and sign back on to finish the work. Work gets done and
care is continuous. As long as these plans are clearly communicated to
management, deadlines are met and the work is done well, it sounds like a good
working plan to me.
It just doesn’t make sense for this to be a divisive issue
between employer and employee. Richard Branson said: “To successfully work with other people, you have to trust each other.”
Yes! This strikes me as the heart of the matter. No matter our physical work proximity,
we are hired by a company who trusts us to do the work. And we trust the
company to provide the benefits agreed upon by contract. And if that trust is
betrayed, we part ways. So let’s ease off on the drama and be rational and grownup
about this, shall we?
