commentary

From TANSTAAFL to Purple Sneakers?

People who know me know of my current obsession interest in Yahoo!'s recent changes to their telework policy. I just can't wrap my mind around a good reason for it.

It's not about productivity (studies show that many people are more productive when they're not in the office). It's not really about collaboration; most people in offices talk a lot but that doesn't lead to great new products. It can't really be about a fraction of a fraction of the employees who both worked from home and also "hid". That's too small a number to care about.

And then, someone I was chatting with in Twitter made a comment that might, actually, explain things:

... [Marissa] needs to do this to weed out folks not totally committed to Yahoo!.

Think about it.

Yahoo!'s WFH Edict And Ensuing Debacle

Yahoo! recently decided to bring its "free range" (i.e., remote working) employees into the office. Much of the Net has an opinion on this edict. This is mine.

Disclaimer: I worked at Yahoo from June 2006 - Nov 2011. I left before Marissa Mayer came on board. I have a vested interest in the future of telecommuting in general and the policy at Yahoo! in particular (I have friends there who work/ed remotely.) You can probably guess how I feel about this policy from my use of the word "edict". :-)

As recently as a day before the news hit the fan, I still considered the possibility of going back to Yahoo!. Now? No.

How it Started

The fireworks started when Yahoo!'s head of HR sent a memo to everyone at the company:

To become the absolute best place to work, communication and collaboration will be important, so we need to be working side-by-side. That is why it is critical that we are all present in our offices. Some of the best decisions and insights come from hallway and cafeteria discussions, meeting new people, and impromptu team meetings. Speed and quality are often sacrificed when we work from home. We need to be one Yahoo!, and that starts with physically being together.

Beginning in June, we’re asking all employees with work-from-home arrangements to work in Yahoo! offices. If this impacts you, your management has already been in touch with next steps. And, for the rest of us who occasionally have to stay home for the cable guy, please use your best judgment in the spirit of collaboration. Being a Yahoo isn’t just about your day-to-day job, it is about the interactions and experiences that are only possible in our offices.

Highly Sensitive People and the Interruptive Workplace

Good News: I have a new manager and increased scope at Dayjob. My job title and description will be adjusted to formally recognize what I've actually been doing for the past three years.

Bad news: New manager wants me in the office "more often". It's the only point on which we disagree. But it's a big point. For some time now, I've been telecommuting three days a week.

Within a month of my starting work at this company (on a temporary "contract"), I asked to telecommute one day a week. When they offered to make the position permanent, I requested permission to telecommute two days a week. That (and a Mac on my desk :-) were my most important negotiating points before saying Yes.

About a year and a half ago, I increased my telecommuting to three days a week. As my commute time and exposure to noise and disruption have gone down, my stress levels have also gone down. The ability to telecommute is one of my top reasons for staying with this company.

Asking me to "be the office more" feels like a punishment for a job well done.

Step Away from the Problem

A few days ago, I was working on a small application for some people at Work. Part way into the project, I went out briefly on an errand.

Driving down the street, I suddenly realized that I could (and should) make a simple change to the user interface that would result in less risky code as well as a better experience for the users.

Later that day, I found myself banging my head against some JavaScript. No matter what I did, it was not working. I'm not a master JS programmer, so I figured it was probably just something I didn't understand yet about the code. Still frustrated, I stepped away for lunch.

When I returned to my desk, the first thing I saw was that two forms on the same page had the same name. Oops. That's not going to work. I renamed one and the JS code worked as planned.

When you're in the middle of a problem, it can be difficult to step away. Your brain wants to Solve This Thing Right Now. But many times, stepping away is just what is needed.

Re-orgs Hazardous to Teams

On Monday, my manager said "We're having a re-org. But don't worry. it doesn't affect anyone in my group."

She was partially correct. There is no immediate, direct, acute effect. However, the longterm indirect effects are demoralizing. We're losing three people from the Team.

Four Walls and a Door

In 1992. I was working at Apple. Apple had recently completed and opened a new R&D center — 6 large buildings, across the road from where I worked. Our group wasn't moving but we'd heard the rumors. Everyone in the R&D center had an office with a door.

In 1993, I went to work for Taligent, the Apple-IBM Joint Venture. Taligent was about to start construction on new office space. They studied what Apple had done, then proceeded to follow the same model — a hard-walled office for every employee, complete with a door.

The space wasn't large; it had less floor space, frankly, than my former cube. But it had real walls and a door, a door I could close (and often did). It had its own lighting controls.

It was private. It was conducive to thought and productive work.

Empowered Teams

Companies fear empowered teams. Employee empowerment represents the end of management as we have known it. That cannot happen too soon for me.

I have been privileged to have worked in an empowered team. Without a full-time "official" manager, they were self-managed. Proponents of the corporate management hierarchy might fear anarchy. Instead, this team was democratically run. They were independent, innovative, professional, and accountable; they shared responsibility and ownership. They got things done.

Being a part of an empowered team is a heady experience. Once you've experienced that, you want it again.

The team still exists, but it's "under new management". In other words, there's a "real" full-time manager now and he's taken charge in the way of all managers. There's hope, however, if not for us, for others.

Commute Time Management

I've been reading various Time Management books lately, comparing and contrasting methods and recommendations. One book seemed pretty reasonable (if I discounted the fact that the author thought his audience consisted primarily of managers). Then toward the end, I tripped over a disturbing contradiction.

Business Communication

There is a popular belief, generally put forward by human resources departments, time management consultants, and other "experts", that formal communication and discussion between people in the workplace should never be handled by email (i.e. written). "Important" communication should be handled by voice.

Preferably, they say, this communication should be in a face to face meeting. If that's not possible, they recommend using the telephone. The rationale that is typically given is that written methods of communication (i.e. email) don't convey tone and facial expression.

A recently published study would seem to support this view.

Managing by "Piles"

Originally posted to Slightly Off Kilter.

Most Time Management books argue against managing paper by "piles". They advocate making decisions as soon as the paper appears - respond, hand it off to someone else, file it appropriately, or throw it away.

Personally, I find a fifth category to work well. That category is managed as a pile (a stack, a box, a tray...).