4 ms·

The problem with work from home is that you have to get past the one issue most offices cannot do right, the personnel issue. As in, there are people who don't

The problem with work from home is that you have to get past the one issue most offices cannot do right, the personnel issue. As in, there are people who don't work well at work and management knows they likely won't work well if not worse if from home. However because personnel issues are hard these people linger on and stifle benefits that others could enjoy because no one wants to put up with the idiocy when they are told, so and so can work from home but you cannot. To raise productivity first act on those who are not productive so that the rest of the team doesn't have to tip toe around a problem that has been to obvious.

mpdehaan2 12y ago
To me, it means you have to actually be aware of what your people are working on, and being a better manager, than just assuming physical presense equates to producitivy. Yes, it does make you want to be more careful at hiring, but I think that's a good thing.
JoeAltmaier 12y ago
That's the FUD factor talking. The OP reported none of this happening. Its an unfounded fear. Anyway its the same problem whether or not they work from home - some people will underperform and have to be let go. Finally, use some collaboration software and folks 'working from home' or from other sites will seem as connected as people working in the office. Even more so - a meeting of remote workers works better in fact, because each one has a headset and can be clearly heard and distinguished. Instead of for instance a crowd of people 'in the office' sharing a desktop microphone and heard as a babble by everyone remote. We use Sococo (I work there). Its got the best presence information in the industry. Its clear who's working and who isn't. You can see everybody in the area, who's active and who's idle, whom they are talking to and what meetings are going on. Managers love it! Working 'remotely' for 5 years now, in a company where everyone does it. Its superior in almost every way.
- cookiecaper 12y ago
  I work remotely right now. We have 2-3 people call in and 4-5 people who are sitting together in person in a conference room in the office. The problem is that you lose the physical cues that indicate when it's someone's turn to talk. The remote workers end up trouncing all over everyone else when they try to speak, because they don't have the cues that the people in the conference room are using to determine it's someone's turn to talk. Remote people talk far less than they would otherwise because they can't tell when it's safe to interject. The meetings still function, but it's a significant disadvantage over being present in the same room. It can also be hard to appropriately distinguish speakers until you learn the voices of your colleagues really well.
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    Exactly. Get them out of the conference room and back at their desks. They can put on headsets, run a collaboration tool (like Sococo) and turn on their video cameras. Now everyone is on an even footing! And its actually better than what you're doing now - everyone can share docs with everyone else; others can be called into the meeting in seconds; folks can chat privately and get their stories straight so presentations go smoother. Even though we make Sococo, we had to train our management to ONLY do Sococo conferences for exactly the reasons you mention. Everything went much faster after that. In fact we have to train them to stop calling it a 'conference call'. Its just a meeting, like any other meeting you ever held before. Except everyone can hear everyone perfectly; more than one person can share docs (at the same time!) and everyone can keep in sync effortlessly.
    - cpwright 12y ago
      You might make everyone on an even footing; but the people around the table would have been more effective around the table than in their separate cubes with a headset.
      - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
        Deny! That's exactly what I'm getting at. With a good thorough always-on collaboration tool, you can actually share better and easier than crowded around a table trying to share a document, or fool with a projector, or waiting for somebody to arrive, or a hundred other time-wasting things that happen in physical conference rooms.
s73v3r 12y ago
All of that sounds like it stems from management not doing their fucking jobs.

mpdehaan2 12y ago

To me, it means you have to actually be aware of what your people are working on, and being a better manager, than just assuming physical presense equates to producitivy. Yes, it does make you want to be more careful at hiring, but I think that's a good thing.

JoeAltmaier 12y ago

That's the FUD factor talking. The OP reported none of this happening. Its an unfounded fear. Anyway its the same problem whether or not they work from home - some people will underperform and have to be let go. Finally, use some collaboration software and folks 'working from home' or from other sites will seem as connected as people working in the office. Even more so - a meeting of remote workers works better in fact, because each one has a headset and can be clearly heard and distinguished. Instead of for instance a crowd of people 'in the office' sharing a desktop microphone and heard as a babble by everyone remote. We use Sococo (I work there). Its got the best presence information in the industry. Its clear who's working and who isn't. You can see everybody in the area, who's active and who's idle, whom they are talking to and what meetings are going on. Managers love it! Working 'remotely' for 5 years now, in a company where everyone does it. Its superior in almost every way.

cookiecaper 12y ago
I work remotely right now. We have 2-3 people call in and 4-5 people who are sitting together in person in a conference room in the office. The problem is that you lose the physical cues that indicate when it's someone's turn to talk. The remote workers end up trouncing all over everyone else when they try to speak, because they don't have the cues that the people in the conference room are using to determine it's someone's turn to talk. Remote people talk far less than they would otherwise because they can't tell when it's safe to interject. The meetings still function, but it's a significant disadvantage over being present in the same room. It can also be hard to appropriately distinguish speakers until you learn the voices of your colleagues really well.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Exactly. Get them out of the conference room and back at their desks. They can put on headsets, run a collaboration tool (like Sococo) and turn on their video cameras. Now everyone is on an even footing! And its actually better than what you're doing now - everyone can share docs with everyone else; others can be called into the meeting in seconds; folks can chat privately and get their stories straight so presentations go smoother. Even though we make Sococo, we had to train our management to ONLY do Sococo conferences for exactly the reasons you mention. Everything went much faster after that. In fact we have to train them to stop calling it a 'conference call'. Its just a meeting, like any other meeting you ever held before. Except everyone can hear everyone perfectly; more than one person can share docs (at the same time!) and everyone can keep in sync effortlessly.
  - cpwright 12y ago
    You might make everyone on an even footing; but the people around the table would have been more effective around the table than in their separate cubes with a headset.
    - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
      Deny! That's exactly what I'm getting at. With a good thorough always-on collaboration tool, you can actually share better and easier than crowded around a table trying to share a document, or fool with a projector, or waiting for somebody to arrive, or a hundred other time-wasting things that happen in physical conference rooms.

s73v3r 12y ago

All of that sounds like it stems from management not doing their fucking jobs.