If you can't reconcile this 37signals campaign against Office365 with their book on remote working, then maybe this explanation will help: * 37signals believes

If you can't reconcile this 37signals campaign against Office365 with their book on remote working, then maybe this explanation will help: * 37signals believes that empowering employees to work remotely is a good thing (see Remote[1] and We Work Remotely[2]). * 37signals also believes that a live/work balance is important and it's critically important to confine work to work hours whenever possible (see Rework[3] and various blog posts[4,5]). * The problem with the Office365 campaign is that it sells remote access to managers with the promise that they can increase productivity by expecting their employees to work from dawn to dusk, and even while in the bathroom or eating meals. Remote work and employee availability are orthogonal concepts. While remote work may enable more flexible work hours, granting remote access to employees should not come with the expectation that they are available 24/7. I'm surprised that more people cannot grok this distinction, and if that's true here at HN then I really worry that Microsoft's Office365 campaign may turn out to be prescient. [1] https://37signals.com/remote/ https://37signals.com/remote/ [2] https://weworkremotely.com https://weworkremotely.com [3] http://37signals.com/rework/ http://37signals.com/rework/ [4] https://37signals.com/svn/posts/3180-a-good-days-work https://37signals.com/svn/posts/3180-a-good-days-work [5] http://37signals.com/svn/posts/902-fire-the-workaholics http://37signals.com/svn/posts/902-fire-the-workaholics Edit: Fixed grammar issue. Added references.