Yesterday, I posted on an internal memo at Yahoo sent to company employees about a new rule rolled out last week by CEO Marissa Mayer, which requires that Yahoo employees who work remotely relocate to company facilities.
1. You dummies don't understand that if you don't allow me to work from home, I actually work less once you factor in commute time, crappy meeting time, office politics time. You should let me work from home.
2. Yahoo nailed it. Too many slackers working from home don't give enough, aren't availalbe to collaborate, etc. There's no replacement for being together.
Both reactions have truth in them. Which means there are really only two things that matter when it comes to the debate of remote workers as it relates to the HR practice:
1. You should be trying to find ways to make your location specific, "in the office" workers more productive. Do they have protected time where they can really get away from meetings, people, etc to drive value? We should be finding ways to bring the best elements of remote work to the office.
2. You should be trying to make your remote workers more available in all ways to be part of teams, to collaborate and set the expectation that's a part of the role. You should be thinking video in this regard - nothing holds a remote worker more accountable that being available for video calls. Much harder to be disengaged if that's the case.
Seems like these two angles are what we should be focusing on related to the remote worker debate. Best of one world transferred to the other. Cats and Dogs living together.
What did I miss?