3 ms·
Will they, though? Or, will they discover what IBM discovered decades ago, that work-from-home saves $$millions on otherwise unnecessary office space. They've
by toss1 7y ago
Will they, though?
Or, will they discover what IBM discovered decades ago, that work-from-home saves $$millions on otherwise unnecessary office space. They've long had both work-from-home, and a temp office setup where you sign up where you'll need an office that day, go to the location, get assigned a desk, and everything routes to that location/desk. I've had a fam member working for them from home for nearly 20yrs.
Sure, managers may like the control of walking down the hall and standing over any employee when they feel like it.
But I expect that they'll like even better not having to spend insane commercial real estate costs, hear every worker complain about traffic, only to see lower net productivity...
(Edit: I'm assuming this must be a different IBM division from the one in which my family member works, which has see no change in her work-from-home status, even tho the article says 'IBM cancelled it'.)
- hpoe 7y agoYou're assuming rational actors. If the company is big enough then management won't care. It doesn't come out of middle management's pocket to pay for the extra space and they enjoy the feeling of control they have being able to tell people where to be and when. As for upper management they are too busy playing political games to care about those more ephemeral issues. Ultimately the biggest takeaway from this WFH situation might just make it clearer which employers are worth a spit, and which ones genuinely don't care about their employees.
- toss1 7y agoYes, I've also read studies showing that WFH tends to make good managers (and their teams) perform better and lesser managers & their terms perform worse. So that may end up having something to do with it too - along your lines of thought, the worse managers will want to bring ppl back to the office to cover up their performance?