4 ms·

I don't see how you make Yahoo! a great company again without having employees work hard (not just smart) and work side-by-side, physically. Whatever percentag

by tyang 14y ago

I don't see how you make Yahoo! a great company again without having employees work hard (not just smart) and work side-by-side, physically. Whatever percentage of Google or Facebook works from home, I'd argue the percentage at Yahoo! should be less. It's clear Marissa is on a mission to make Yahoo! succeed at playing catchup and righting the ship. Folks who wish to work from home should go to more established, relaxed institutions. This isn't your daddy's Yahoo! anymore. Go long Marissa Mayer.

InclinedPlane 14y ago
What is the value of Yahoo the company right now? Is it in their IP, their customer base? Is it in their physical assets, their cash on hand? Is it in their employees? If any significant amount of value is in their employee base then what is the advantage of cracking down and removing employee perks? You're not going to get rid of the dead weight that way, the folks with the least talent and skills and the least ability to find jobs elsewhere are logically the ones who are not going to leave voluntarily, they're going to put in the bare minimum of effort (whether at home or in the office). Instead you'll get rid of the people who have the easiest time of finding jobs elsewhere, the most talented folks. And by removing a perk that is common in the industry you'll make it harder to attract outside talent. There's a time and a place for buckling down and cracking the whip, but that comes after you instill a new vision for the company, not before. Asking people to buy in to the old vision and buckle down for the same old work that they've already checked out of is unlikely to have good results.
wyclif 14y ago
Wait, Yahoo! isn't established? Were they not incorporated on March 1st, 1995?
chrisyeh 14y ago
I don't see how you can get employees to work hard unless they want to do it. I do see value in getting rid of dead weight (productive employees hate slackers more than just about anything) but this telecommuting ban is a terrible way to get rid of dead weight.

by tyang 14y ago

InclinedPlane 14y ago

What is the value of Yahoo the company right now? Is it in their IP, their customer base? Is it in their physical assets, their cash on hand? Is it in their employees? If any significant amount of value is in their employee base then what is the advantage of cracking down and removing employee perks? You're not going to get rid of the dead weight that way, the folks with the least talent and skills and the least ability to find jobs elsewhere are logically the ones who are not going to leave voluntarily, they're going to put in the bare minimum of effort (whether at home or in the office). Instead you'll get rid of the people who have the easiest time of finding jobs elsewhere, the most talented folks. And by removing a perk that is common in the industry you'll make it harder to attract outside talent. There's a time and a place for buckling down and cracking the whip, but that comes after you instill a new vision for the company, not before. Asking people to buy in to the old vision and buckle down for the same old work that they've already checked out of is unlikely to have good results.

wyclif 14y ago

Wait, Yahoo! isn't established? Were they not incorporated on March 1st, 1995?

chrisyeh 14y ago

I don't see how you can get employees to work hard unless they want to do it. I do see value in getting rid of dead weight (productive employees hate slackers more than just about anything) but this telecommuting ban is a terrible way to get rid of dead weight.