I engaged in a lively and interesting debate online (via Facebook) about the pros and cons of working from home (aka, WFH). It centered around Yahoo’s announcement that, effective this June, employees will no longer be able to work remotely.
Those who were against a WFH policy felt that it promoted slacking and disrupted a cohesive team environment. Those in support of a WFH policy (and that includes me but I do believe there have to be some standards) felt that it flew in the face of the same technology that companies like Yahoo provide and that requiring people to return to a 20th-century work environment was a morale killer of the first degree.
A few made comments that working remotely reduced accountability and performance, though no one could provide any data to support that assertion but they were quite emphatic about this nonetheless.
That last point got me thinking that the reason why some don’t support a WFH policy is that either require having people around just so that they can be productive (which sounds like an issue in itself) or that they do not trust that people outside the office are working as hard as they are (but is working hard working smart?).
So really the issue around a WFH policy is not so much WFH but ensuring that goals and performance measurement is transparent so that everyone, inside and outside of the office, can see everyone’s contributions. Actually, a real-time ticker of success (showing revenue contributions, bug fixes, etc. would be a powerful motivation and accountability tool).
Of course, if a company doesn’t have a valid measuring toolkit and its goals are not well thought-out, then maybe everyone should come into the office…to pick up their last check and head to greener pastures.