Slashdot Mirror


Building a Case For Telecommuting

Esther Schindler writes "Many of us geeks prefer to work at home without distractions, but a lot of bosses still believe that if they don't see you, you must be lolling about, eating bon-bons and playing Angry Birds. 'There may be many reasons a manager is distrustful of telecommuting but the phenomenon of what Albiero calls "presentism"—that is, only trusting and rewarding the folks you see at their computer is a major factor.' So it may be of some use to read through the research compiled by Diann Daniel that says telecommuting creates happier and more productive employees (which naturally include fewer distractions and better work-life balance), and an accompanying infographic showing the environmental benefits from reduced commuting. She follows it up with suggestions on how managers can mentor and support teleworkers. Some of this is general advice, but some of the tips are more specific: 'It may seem like a lot more work—all this up-front addressing of communication issues that happen far more naturally in the office—but the upside is increased efficiency. Albiero sees this especially in the area of meetings. He speaks of one client who has now instituted a meeting format that is structured to allow for the first five minutes of all meetings to be "small-talk minutes." Thus, everyone knows they needn't call in for those minutes unless they want to join."

230 comments

  1. person to person = best communication method by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Outsourcing to India = second best.

    If you can't understand the value of meeting up live and in person, don't expect your job to last.

    1. Re:person to person = best communication method by clay_shooter · · Score: 4, Insightful
      +1

      Public speaking classes tell you that over 1/2 of the communication between you and an audience is through non verbal cues including tone and body language, mostly body language. Even regular conversations are better in person because your meeting is better conveyed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_language

      If you're job can be done without communication then I can send that job to the cheapest place that can read the directions.

    2. Re:person to person = best communication method by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Techie's can probably do fine without face-to-face communication in most cases. However, that's not the case for non-techies. Thus, if you interact with non-techies in your job, it's best to be "available".

      Outsourcing to India

      And if you telecommute, managers may indeed start thinking that offshoring will be a cheaper version of the same thing. Don't put ideas in their heads. Globalization is a real threat to IT careers.

    3. Re:person to person = best communication method by Nursie · · Score: 2

      Agreed.

      I'm a 'techie' (software engineer) and effective collaboration is much easier and more productive face to face.

      I work for a global company and I won't say that I can't communicate effectively with people I don't share a room with (or haven't even met), because I can. But I wouldn't want to be part of a team that didn't spend a good part of the week together.

      Telecommuting is useful for those times when flexibility is required - someone lives remotely and would like not to commute a couple of times a week, the guy is coming to fix the dishwasher and you need to be home... but all the time? Hell no.

    4. Re:person to person = best communication method by Dop · · Score: 2

      So how does that work when you are employed by a large corporation that has multiple locations, where the majority of the people in meetings are on the phone from different locations? How does it matter if I'm at one of the other corporate offices rather than my home office?

    5. Re:person to person = best communication method by murdocj · · Score: 3, Informative

      The answer is that those meetings don't work very well. You get people not paying attention, people answering their email, people who are hard to understand over the phone, etc etc etc. Such meetings are very rarely productive. If you are having a lot of them, time to starting looking for another job, because your company is in trouble.

    6. Re:person to person = best communication method by Americano · · Score: 2

      You're right - I work at a very large company with half a dozen locations in the US spread across 3 timezones, plus a major presence in Europe and India.

      Face to face meetings aren't possible in a lot of cases, but my company has actually made an effort to consolidate the majority of people on a particular project team into one or two sites, and encourages managers to rotate "off-site" people through by bringing them to the project's main site for a couple weeks at a time. It works well.

      Our schedules tend to be very flexible, but we're all encourage to set (and keep!) "office hours" a couple times a week, where we'll commit to being available for in-person meetings at the office, as well as using instant messaging, screen sharing, and voice chat to keep in touch as-needed.

      It's not as good and convenient as being able to pop your head over the cubicle wall and ask the guy next door a question, but it is possible to be fairly effective while working "virtually." But it's definitely more effort.

    7. Re:person to person = best communication method by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      The answer is that those meetings don't work very well

      And the ones that do work well happen at companies that have spent a lot of money on technology to get themselves there - Good HD videoconferencing systems with good audio, allowing for the non-verbal cues and other components for good communication.

    8. Re:person to person = best communication method by Dop · · Score: 1

      I agree that the meetings don't always work well, I think you're 100% right on that. However, we're talking about Fortune 100 companies that aren't necessarily in any financial trouble, it's just difficult to manage that many employees. It's not physically possible for all of the employees to be in one location.

      My premise is, given meetings of that nature, why not telecommute?

    9. Re:person to person = best communication method by Nursie · · Score: 1

      I work for a giant multinational. While products in a suite may be globally distributed, we try to keep product teams in the same place.

      There are certainly flexible working practices and telecommuting is allowed, but not all the time. It was encouraged for a while, until it was realised that it cut team effectiveness and it impacted productivity (IIRC) to have everyone working remotely all the time.

      There are still communications problems between teams from time to time, whether in different time zones otr just different regions. I'm not sure you could solve these by having everyone in a giant office (and it would need to be huge), I think there are inevitable problems that will arise in any huge org. I don't think (100%) telecommuting and splitting up project teams is helpful, however.

    10. Re:person to person = best communication method by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      And now for people like me who don't really benefit (quite the opposite) from being able to transport information by body language...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:person to person = best communication method by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      There are still 3 very important differences. Since I have been working for a US company from Europe, I had to find them out the hard way.

      1. Time zones. If you outsource half a globe away, your working hours won't overlap a lot. Unless one side is willing to work "odd" hours. Teleconferences are a way to overcome distance but not time, and it might not be the best idea to schedule a meeting where one of the people involved has to be present at 4am his time. Simply because he might not be as alert as he should be.

      2. Language. No matter how well you learn a language, there are idioms, hidden meanings and speech figures that don't translate well or, worse, turn out to be the opposite. And even aside of misunderstandings because the meaning could not be transported sensibly, you might end up with a very unhappy and pissed business partner who might not tell you so due to cultural inhibitions to tell you that you just offended him. Hint: Some countries have VERY strict cultural laws who offers whom the "honor" of going to a first name base.

      3. A combination of the two is the fact that you cannot simply come in and do things "damn right now" because something needs some polish because the specs weren't as clear as you thought they are but need whatever was to be delivered NOW. And I guess we can agree that time is usually a resource that's in short supply, especially as deadlines close in.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:person to person = best communication method by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's not really THAT different from the local meetings my company has. There's a reason nearly everyone appears with their laptop, and it's not to take notes. One of the reasons is of course that the meetings are quite pointless to start with, where most people attending would be quite happy to be there for the 5 minutes their portion of the project gets some discussion time, but it's just easier to invite them and have them sit at the table.

      Yes, that's not productive. But imagine how little would get accomplished if these people didn't bring their laptops along to work while they're forced to waste their time in a meeting.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:person to person = best communication method by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      A team needs to be in one place at least part of the time, formal meetings (or teleconferences) are all very well, but what about the other interaction between team members, how do you allow this with remote workers ...?

      Your Teams can be spread around, but if each team is scattered then it is not longer a team ...

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    14. Re:person to person = best communication method by leastsquares · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Public speaking classes tell you that over 1/2 of the communication between you and an audience is through non verbal cues including tone and body language, mostly body language. Even regular conversations are better in person because your meeting is better conveyed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_language

      I completely agree with that.

      If you're job can be done without communication then I can send that job to the cheapest place that can read the directions.

      I completely disagree with that.

      Communication *is* impaired by a lack of face-to-face contact. This means you need to employ (or train, but that is less reliable) employees that are superb at communication to compensate. Nonetheless, "reading the directions" is probably a very small aspect of most jobs. You need to find the place that produces the most cost effective results and I'm sure that there are many jobs that are ideally suited to telecommuting because you can still communicate when you need to, but you avoid a lot of the frivolous communication you see in office-based environments.

      I say that as someone who works from home, and manages employees based in an office and other employees based remotely.

    15. Re:person to person = best communication method by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      If you're job can be done without communication then I can send that job to the cheapest place that can read the directions.

      Most of the jobs we're talking about aren't the type where the directions are actually written.

  2. Not exactly a balance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Going to work creates a balance by segregating time between work and pleasure. I work at home and the only thing that happens 18 hour days.

    1. Re:Not exactly a balance by __Paul__ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Log out and turn off your phone at 5pm, then. If you're not getting paid for those extra ten hours a day, you are giving your employer free labour.

      --
      worldmobilenet.com -- World Prepaid Wireless Internet plans
    2. Re:Not exactly a balance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I once told them if I'm stuck doing all the other employees work, they might as well fire them and pay me instead. I guess they took that seriously.

    3. Re:Not exactly a balance by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It depends on your situation. A 2 hour commute (hour both ways) makes telecommuting a lot more attractive. And when you can spread out in a larger house in the 'burbs instead of being in a tiny place in the city. Have a dedicated office where you can close the door and put away the business phone.

      Extended days is one of the well-known problems of working at home, the temptation to clear your inbox as long as you're taking a break. Some people say it's a self-discipline issue, but when you have both that and a feeling of responsibility, the two get in each others' way a lot. Turning on the work computer to get a personal mail from your corporate outbox can be quick or a two-hour issue response.

      Especially, and this is where people who say "self-discipline" can be forgetful, if your job entails on-call work. A quick response now, while you have cycles to spare, could prevent a call early morning or middle of the night. And if you work internationally, late night turnaround means your India, China, or maybe UK team can get back to work instead of having a day lag.

      The temptation to get a problem checked off the list varies with your situation, and the benefits likewise. I'm currently on a virtual team, and there are perks, but I miss being able to slap someone on the back of the head when they screw up. In a few years I'll be looking to work in a physical building with as many people located on site as possible. And then I'll wish I could work from home, I'm sure.

  3. Lights Out by Jonah+Hex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All the iron I work on I never get to see anymore, which is fine by me. At least from home I'm not trying to shout over all the fans while either freezing or burning. - HEX

    1. Re:Lights Out by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Same here. About the only time I have to set foot into a data center is for failed drive replacement, physical reconfiguration, or upgrades.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Lights Out by Jonah+Hex · · Score: 1

      That phase is good, but complete removal is the best. Last few of my contracts have been for data centers with dedicated teams, and even the onsite dev data center I did have access to I never needed to enter thanks to VMware. Pretty much same thing at home, split between desktop powerhouse and basement servers. - HEX

  4. What about non verbal communication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure its nice to work at home, cuts down on office costs, but don't good managers read all the non verbal communication coming from their employees? How are managers suppose to do that through email or phone?

    1. Re:What about non verbal communication? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Sure its nice to work at home, cuts down on office costs, but don't good managers read all the non verbal communication coming from their employees? How are managers suppose to do that through email or phone?
      I would say a good candidate for telecommuting should be someone who doesn't need a lot of management. I think I would qualify. I hardly ever talk to my manager. He rarely ever assigns me work. I basically, on my own initiative, discover inefficiencies in the way our company does things and build the tools we need to make us more efficient. I work from the office, but it is extremely distracting and I find that I get much more work done when I am sick at home than when I am well at the office.
      As an aside, in our company, sick means you are at home working instead of at the office working. You don't actually get to lay in bed and sleep or watch TV, but on the other hand, at least since you are still working. they don't actually limit your sick days...yet.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  5. I love it! by djbckr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I got lucky and found a job where I can telecommute from Seattle to San Francisco. I go to SF about once a quarter just to get some face time, but I spend my working time here at home. I put very few miles on my car now and I feel great about that. I don't take up office space there in SF and I feel good about that. I'm productive and my bosses are happy about that.

    I fully realize this can't work for everybody, but it sure works for me. My superviser and I communicate through Skype and GotoMeeting at least a couple times a day, once for SCRUM and every so often to get some information across to each other. It would be a boost to the economy, I would think, if more places would do this.

    1. Re:I love it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Call your auto insurance and see if you can get a discount for not having a "daily commute car". We did... both of our cars (wife doesn't work) are considered "secondary". Saved a couple hundred bucks.

    2. Re:I love it! by Necroman · · Score: 3, Informative

      I couldn't agree more. When I'm working on a difficult problem, I can buckle down and disable all distractions with ease. Turn off IM, close email, and just work. No co-workers coming up behind me and bothering me.

      My company also uses Skype and GotoMeeting to get everyone together, and it works pretty well. It takes some discipline from the office people to make sure to include remote employees, but it seems to be working out well. I know I couldn't be happier.

      --
      Its not what it is, its something else.
    3. Re:I love it! by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      ...It would be a boost to the economy, I would think, if more places would do this.

      Call your auto insurance and see if you can get a discount for not having a "daily commute car". We did... both of our cars (wife doesn't work) are considered "secondary". Saved a couple hundred bucks.

      It will reduce energy demands (good for the economy as long as we are making energy from non-renewable resources), but it will also reduce long term demand for new cars, auto service, road construction, medical services for car accidents, and any number of other industries that benefit when you drive - those are mostly domestic industries that are suffering.

      Fancy new computers, monitors, tele-presence camera/microphones, and most of the trappings of new telecommuters are all imported. Guess how many elected officials are pushing telecommuting as "Good for America"?

    4. Re:I love it! by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Informative

      Go read about the "Broken Window Fallacy". Our country is failing because of wars for oil, having to import oil, etc. Not to mention all the good citizens it loses to auto accidents. You want people to be killed and maimed just so that the medical industries can do better? This country needs to do anything it can to reduce oil usage; telecommuting is a good first step. Personal rapid transit like SkyTran is a good second step.

    5. Re:I love it! by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Go read about the "Broken Window Fallacy". Our country is failing because of wars for oil, having to import oil, etc. Not to mention all the good citizens it loses to auto accidents. You want people to be killed and maimed just so that the medical industries can do better? This country needs to do anything it can to reduce oil usage; telecommuting is a good first step. Personal rapid transit like SkyTran is a good second step.

      "I" don't want people sacrificed on the Eisenhower Interstate altar of profits, but I have worked for many companies whose leaders gleefully rub their hands together at the thought of more customers for their products, even when their products are medical devices addressing terrible conditions, and I imagine the energy companies don't even bat an eyelash at the true cost of their non-renewable raw materials - something about being thankful for God's bounty which He hath provided them, I'm sure...

      SkyTran is cute, but I prefer to live where the dust in my air is pollen from the trees instead of the dust kicked up by millions of neighbors, and public transit systems of any quality won't reach my neighborhood with any kind of efficiency as long as we're still maintaining a system of privately owned vehicles, I think this applies to well over 50% of the U.S. population - good luck getting the American public to vote yes on giving up their private cars.

      I'd love to telecommute, and I have done it for about 6 months (aggregate) of the past 4 years, what I haven't been able to get is any feeling of job security while I'm telecommuting - the job that I have now permits roughly 10% telecommute "as necessary" and pays a reasonably reliable salary. My previous job was 90% telecommute, paid just as well, but was hourly and worked from one $10K pool of money to the next, in the middle of the 2nd pool - with no 3rd pool clearly in sight, I jumped back to the salary situation. Most telecommute opportunities I have had are similar, good money but in unreliable splashes instead of a steady rain that you can pay a 15 year mortgage with.

  6. They know your not playing Angry Birds by dilvish_the_damned · · Score: 1

    ..you must be lolling about, eating bon-bons and playing Angry Birds.

    No, they think your posting to slashdot.

    --
    I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
    1. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ..you must be lolling about, eating bon-bons and playing Angry Birds.

      No, they think your posting to slashdot.

      Classical case of false metrics. For practical business purposes, you should be measured on what you're actually getting done, not on what you might be doing alongside of it. I mean people do that kind of stuff in the office, too, you know. At the end of the day, the question is, did the job get done?

    2. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by clay_shooter · · Score: 2

      I worked on a project about 6 years ago where we actually tracked work for the staff across days. The whole "middle of the bell curve" part of our team did significantly less work on their Friday "work at home days". Less email, fewer source code commits, fewer tickets closed. Someone is going to claim it was because they were more "heads down" but I don't buy it given the size repeatability of the differences.

    3. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by Esther+Schindler · · Score: 1

      How big a sample size was this?

    4. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by Sneeka2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hold on, hold on, you're saying people don't actually work at 100% theoretical capacity 100% of their official work time? That they, like, ramp up on Mondays and wind down on Fridays? That they, like, cannot go from 0 to 100 instantly when coming into work and back down to 0 instantly when leaving? That they're, like, humans, not robots?

      Woah, woah, stop the presses, this is a mayor breakthrough!

      --
      Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...
    5. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by dudpixel · · Score: 2

      We collect stats here too.
      Recently an employee left to go overseas and his manager thought it might be interesting to read out some of his stats.

      Turns out that most of his commits were on mondays and wednesdays, the 2 days we work from home.

      Make of that what you will, but no one here would deny the benefits of working from home.

      I would argue, that even if the only benefit was happier workers, the company still wins.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    6. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 2

      Less email, fewer source code commits, fewer tickets closed.

      If what you say is accurate, then simple: identify those whose productivity does not decrease when remote and give them more remote. Take remote away from any who demonstrate insufficient maturity to manage it.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    7. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by mooingyak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ..you must be lolling about, eating bon-bons and playing Angry Birds.

      No, they think your posting to slashdot.

      Classical case of false metrics. For practical business purposes, you should be measured on what you're actually getting done, not on what you might be doing alongside of it. I mean people do that kind of stuff in the office, too, you know. At the end of the day, the question is, did the job get done?

      ^^THIS

      Most weeks I telecommute two days and go to the office the other three. We have a strong "get the job done, the rest is window dressing" philosophy. One of the things I tell my new hires early on goes something like this:

      "I don't need to walk past your desk and see you working non-stop for 8 hours. I don't expect it to happen. If I walk past you and you're checking some news site or playing minesweeper or freecell or whatever it is you do to pass time, I don't care. At the end of the week, I know if you're getting the job done. I know if you've completed all your assignments or have good reasons for not having finished. I know which projects you've asked for more details or clarification about, and that tells me all I need to know. I don't care how or when you're getting it done, so long as you're getting it done."

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    8. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by lightknight · · Score: 2

      It's a Friday, productivity is going to take a hit no matter which location you are working from.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    9. Re:They know your not playing Angry Birds by sootman · · Score: 1

      > At the end of the week, I know if you're getting the job done.
      > I don't care how or when you're getting it done, so long as
      > you're getting it done.

      But... if you're getting all your work done in 20 hours, you could be doing twice as much in 40!

      Signed,
      managers everywhere

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  7. I'm definitely sick of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Being in a 6 by 6 foot cube surrounded by co-workers who have annoying habits or have extended conversations.

    1. Re:I'm definitely sick of by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 3, Informative

      At Google, that included ducking the three way nerf gun crossfire between the SRE, sysop and intern cube farms.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    2. Re:I'm definitely sick of by rinoid · · Score: 1

      I pity the fool who modded you down.

      A lot of people need peace when working. It's called environmental sensitivity or at least awareness.

    3. Re:I'm definitely sick of by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      I'm just sick of being stuck in a cube, and not doing anything at work.

      If I'm not going to have anything to do, I can waste time much more effectively at home.

    4. Re:I'm definitely sick of by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 2

      I feel the pain. Which is why I was one of the few people to elect to not telecommute when it was offered. Now I get to go to the office and enjoy the peace and quiet and actually get some stuff done without having to get in at 3am. Strangely all the annoying people chose to "work" from home...

      --

      Shift happens. Fire it up.
  8. Infographic by cosm · · Score: 3, Informative

    and an accompanying infographic

    When this word plateaus, I will bring back synergy.

    --
    'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
  9. this is the future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    this is acutally the only way forward for alot of bussiness models.. it will only take 10-20 years before this becomes the norm in alot of fields think of it this way :

    Reduced Costs (office space)
    More of a Blurr between work/home life (woudl generally mean benefits for both) ie Flexible working times, equals greater coverage for support type roles.
    Less distractions

    As technologies overcome the issues for telecommuters (not being in same room for meetings etc) this will become the norm.

  10. Actually, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I am more likely to make diversions to snack on bon-bons, play whatever, and jerk off to porn. Sometimes, the structure of actually "going to work" is needed sometimes. Probably depends on the person -- just my two cents.

    1. Re:Actually, by UncleRage · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My standing rule for working from home (I spent years as a consultant and often find myself telecommuting with my current job): Get up at the same time you would if you were to go in, get dressed, shower, shave (if that's your thing), brush your teeth, have breakfast/coffee/etc... away from your work space. At the point you would typically leave for work, sit down at your desk. Do so dressed as you would at work.

      Keep your desk in the same state you would feel comfortable at your job. If you smoke, go outside for a typical smoke break. If you stop for coffee, do so by walking away from your desk.

      Take lunch away from your work space.

      Finally, log off VPN at the end of "your shift". Don't fall into the habit of "working late", it's only going to set a habit of allowing your schedule to fluctuate and will make you less productive where it matters.

      --
      #SickNotWeak
    2. Re:Actually, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt anybody cares whether you jerk off at home or work. In either case you waste a swivel chair that could be occupied more productively by a drooling chimpanzee.

    3. Re:Actually, by aXis100 · · Score: 2

      I did exactly that for 18 months and it worked well. It took some discipline to achieve, but I felt the benefit of maintaining work/home seperation was worth it.

    4. Re:Actually, by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      I am more likely to make diversions to snack on bon-bons, play whatever, and jerk off to porn. Sometimes, the structure of actually "going to work" is needed sometimes. Probably depends on the person -- just my two cents.

      Absolutely varies per person. The fact that I can take a jerk off break at home means I can focus on my work instead of daydreaming about the hot chick in accounting all afternoon.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    5. Re:Actually, by jedwidz · · Score: 2

      Also, can I add getting some physical exercise before sitting down to work. Even just a 10-minute walk outside.

      Gets the blood flowing or something.

    6. Re:Actually, by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      Actually, fyi, yak don't moo. Ever. They grunt.

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    7. Re:Actually, by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      To paraphrase, in the land of non-mooing bovines, the mooing yak is king.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    8. Re:Actually, by Pope · · Score: 1

      That's what I did when I worked from home full time. Walked up the street to grab a coffee to go, came back home and started my work day. It got me out of the house and into "work mode" when I got back. That job, our entire team was spread across the continent, the only person even in my city was one of the writers.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    9. Re:Actually, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case, moo away!

  11. Communications not a big issue with WFH by jedwidz · · Score: 1

    I'm going to make a sweeping generalization and say that in an office environment, people only talk when they're on the phone, in a meeting, or goofing off. So I don't really think communications is the biggest problem with WFH.

    Ironically the best reason I have for being in an office is to be free from the distractions of home. Also, having other people working around me helps me focus and maybe keeps me sane. People pace each other through the day; you can witness this collapsing on a hot Friday afternoon.

    But... offer me a well-paying job where I can work remotely from an affordable house in a beautiful environment, with a sound-insulated home office and a lock on the door, and I'm there in a flash.

    1. Re:Communications not a big issue with WFH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a lot of 2 person meetings in the next 6 by 6 foot cube in my office. Definitely distracting.

    2. Re:Communications not a big issue with WFH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked from home for a few months, and found it way too solitary! I agree that having people around helps me focus and keeps me sane.

    3. Re:Communications not a big issue with WFH by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      At my last job, I had all kinds of distractions: the A/C unit in the ceiling over my desk was horribly loud, cow-orkers constantly coming up behind me and startling me when I was trying to concentrate, people having conversations next to me, etc. And I didn't have any cubicle walls on two sides, only a half-height wall on one side and a full-height wall next to it (which separated workgroups from each other). It was so distracting I never could concentrate very well. My boss insisted we needed this environment for "collaboration". They didn't even have any decent quiet areas to go take a break in; they had one quiet area with chairs downstairs for a while, but then the building ownership told them not to let their employees sit there any more because some other company had rented the space next to it. I ended up walking out without notice one day in sheer frustration.

      Then I got a job telecommuting. It has its challenges and problems, but most of them are with myself and my own discipline, rather than other people and outside factors. I don't get in trouble for being a few minutes late to work, I don't have to deal with 25 miles of traffic each way, I can wear whatever I want, I can have my cats keep me company, I can play my music as loud as I want; it's a pretty good deal really. The discipline is a big problem though; you have to constantly exercise self-discipline to get things done and not get distracted (like with Slashdot).

  12. Poppycock by sk999 · · Score: 1

    OK, I AM the boss, and the problem is not that my telecommuting people aren't being productive, but rather that when you need them to do something or provide information that they uniquely possess, you can't get it from them on short notice, thus preventing other people from getting their jobs done.

    The fact that we are all on the road a lot (spread overy 4 continents) doesn't help either.

    1. Re:Poppycock by cavtroop · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're not using the tools available to you then. Phone. IM, chat rooms, teleconferences available at a moments notice. We have a number of people in our group that work remotely (and the rest of us work from home once or twice a week). We keep a chatroom going with the lot of us (8 of us) in there at all times - mostly it's used for the usual office-type banter, but its great for collaboration etc. We also have loose rules, that if you want to telecommute, you HAVE to make yourself available at a moments notice by phone. Sometimes you step away from the computer, so you miss an IM etc, but if that phone rings, you better be answering it or you're going to lose your telecommuting privs.

      Just set the expectations with the group. We have no problems getting stuff done on very short (minutes) notice.

    2. Re:Poppycock by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Implicit in the idea of "telecommuting" is the idea of "at a distance," a.k.a. "tele" -- the same root as "telecommunications" and "telephone." If you need to get in touch with your employees quickly, is there a reason you can't just make a phone call? Obviously, if your business is of a kind where employees need to be able to do things hands-on, then probably it's not a good candidate for telecommuting and TFS doesn't really apply to you. Otherwise, I'm not sure I see what the problem is.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:Poppycock by suutar · · Score: 1

      They don't answer the phone?

    4. Re:Poppycock by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      I can see a bit of that. I like walking to people's cubes to talk. If not there then often I'll just go do something else, and only after a few times of being missed then I'll try email. But email is too often a black hole (and it applies both ways I admit). And I never do IM, I just hate that as the worst way to communicate. So it is nice pragmatically just to talk to people.

      There's also the advantage of having someone in the office in being able to just chat. Ie, "what are you working on?" or "how's it going?" A lot of work related info can pop up that way, you learn that Bob is working on some feature that you might be able to use, that the source code control system totally sucks, how to work around a problem, etc. Most telecommuters are really only out of the office a short time, but for those telecommuters who spend the vast majority of time at home or away (ie, those on the other side of the country) are often left out of the loop on many things. They know about their own tasks and a few related ones but often seem to miss the big picture of the full project.

      For instance I can swivel in my chair and ask "what's the name of the function I need to use to log an event?" and get an answer. If I send email it may take an hour to get a response, and I've already figured out the answer on my own. Even in IM you don't get an instant answer (you can't tell if the person on the other end is busy). Of course some people don't like interruptions like that and maybe they're the sort who do better telecommuting. I can chat with the person in the next cube and say "this code is really nasty" and then learn some backstory on it but I'd never actually email something like that.

      Out of sight, out of mind. This does not apply just to the boss but to your coworkers as well. Especially if you're the sort who rarely shows up in person, the coworkers may not be sure just what you do or how you fit into the team or when you need to be consulted with. Team building is minimal.

      Telecommunication probably works best when you have a very well defined task, don't mind being isolated, etc. Even if you think IM is great does not mean all your coworkers are going to chatting with it as much as they could and some won't use it at all.

      I've been on a team where I was mostly doing my own thing. My boss would say "it's ok, you don't have to come to the status meeting" and things like that. But over time I really felt out of the loop and isolated. People would be using project names I'd never heard of, unfamiliar buzzwords, etc. I just did not feel like a part of a team.

    5. Re:Poppycock by Esther+Schindler · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I understand what you're saying, but do you realize that you're contributing to someone else's need to get away from distractions? By showing up in someone's office to ask just one question, you're interrupting her -- which she might not appreciate. Peopleware made the point a generation ago that it takes 20 minutes to get back into a warm creative fog after you've had your elbow joggled.

      Instead, as a full-time telecommuter (who does like to see colleagues in-person once every three months or so) I live on IM. A message can pop up on my screen, and I can ignore it until I finish my thought (whether that's a paragraph of prose, code, or brilliant repartee). I can see who it is, and immediately triage my response: Client=answer-right-now; friendly acquaintance= The world won't end if I respond in 5 minutes, etc.

      Dealing with isolation is another issue, and so is "out of sight, out of mind." That's why a telecommuter does have to work to ensure that communication stays healthy.

      But in my opinion, it's a heck of a lot better than working in an office. For one thing, I can't imagine how anyone gets work done without a cat on one's lap.

    6. Re:Poppycock by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      There's no business where this isn't true. If I can take 2 hours and figure out something for myself, or ask someone and get an immediate answer, I'm asking. It's the right thing for me and the business. And the same thing in reverse (they come ask me all the time). This is especially true in a senior or lead position- if I was not to show up at the office on a given day, I'd probably cost my team half a day of productivity (even assuming I get a full day of work in). You can phone, but it isn't as effective when you can't pull up code and show them a function or show them a bug. You can email, but same problem plus a time lag. In person communication is the most efficient, by an order of magnitude- provided you use it effectively (not on minor issues).

      It's nice to be able to do it when necessary. It's a nice perk to have it to enable other life balance issues- take a vacation without using vacation days by working from the hotel evenings (or days if you're there visiting friends). But as a permanent way of working? It's just not effective.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    7. Re:Poppycock by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      In my experience, people expect an instant response to IMs and get extremely upset if there isn't one. At least with email they expect a lag of 15 minutes to several hours. IMs are the worst possible way to communicate- there's an expectation of fast response combined with the lack of non-written communication methods. Plus the annoying notifications themselves which annoy me more than being asked if I'm busy.

      Plus 20 minutes is an exaggeration. There's a cost, but it's more on the order of 5-10 minutes of reduced (not zero) efficiency. Whereas IM tends to be much worse- rather than 5 minutes of answering followed by 5-10 of getting back into the groove, you have 10 minutes of slowly typing back and forth waiting for responses where you get very close to 0 work done, followed by the same 5-10 minutes of getting back into the groove. It's a net loss. Which is why I refuse to ever install IM aplications- email me or come talk to me, don't waste my time on messaging.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    8. Re:Poppycock by JoeMerchant · · Score: 0

      You're not using the tools available to you then. Phone. IM, chat rooms, teleconferences available at a moments notice.

      Reread the bit about spread over 4 Continents... remember time zones?

      And, beyond that, in an office environment, if I have a minor need, I can take a break go for a walk, look and see which of the three people who might help me looks least engrossed at that moment and talk with them for a minute.

      Even though I truly believe in telecommuting, there are problems with all of the available tools, they really aren't a 100% substitute for "being there."

      Phones demand instant attention (and interruption of the callee) with no real "I'm busy" capability beyond flat out ignoring the caller with no explanation.

      E-mail has a tendency to be over-answered and suck up more time than a simple conversation might.

      A webcam looking at your workspace is just too creepy, especially not knowing who's looking when you really need to scratch somewhere...

      And, I refuse to constantly update "my status," now GET OFF MY LAWN.

    9. Re:Poppycock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cellphone responses not immediate? Or texting? Or email? If not, then I can see your concern...employees need to meet the needs of the guy who hands them their paycheck.

      Have you tried pointing out this problem to your employees, and asking them for a solution?

      Of course, being on the road isn't what I'd call telecommuting.

    10. Re:Poppycock by tepples · · Score: 1

      There's also the advantage of having someone in the office in being able to just chat. Ie, "what are you working on?"

      I've found that to be one of the hardest questions to answer without the cop-out of answering a question with a question: "At what level of detail?"

    11. Re:Poppycock by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      It probably depends on the people. You get to know who will be willing to discuss stuff and who hates it. If I'm twiddling my thumbs for an hour waiting for someone to tell me where a header file is, that's a big waste. And to be honest, it's been a long time since I could focus just on one think and nothing else for more than a couple of hours. There are always interruptions.

      Email helps but often I write a detailed description with backstory, possible solutions, and ask for advice from the team and end up getting no response at all. Coming back the other way I'll have lots of morning email that's just busy work, answering the same old questions again...

      For IM I hate it. It seems much more insistent to me than the phone (which rarely rings anymore anyway). The icon pops up, then bounces when I ignore it. And if you ignore it and the person trying to talk to you walks by later to stick a note in your cube it can be embarrassing. You spend too much time thinking or looking up the answer and the IM says "hello??" and starts bouncing again. One person always starts with "hello?" and refuses to ask the main question until I say "hello" back, worried perhaps that I'm not there. And the people who use IM act like they don't know how to type anymore and instead revert to caveman texting style. On the rare occasions that something useful happens in IM and there's good info I want to save I have to waste a lot of time editing and converting that conversation to an actual legible text file, whereas with email I can just drag it to an archive folder. I can do without it (in fact until two years ago I had done without it my entire life).

    12. Re:Poppycock by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      That works too. Eventually people will learn not to ask you questions.

      But it's a useful question. For instance if you need to interface to a particular feature it is much easier to get going on that if you actually know the person who works on that feature the most. Or it's time to pick some poor soul to do your code review and you need to know what people work on who might be most familiar with that piece of code.

      Otherwise it may become too easy to categorize people at work into you, your boss, and amorphous others.

    13. Re:Poppycock by Berfert · · Score: 1

      Nobody says that being in the office doesn't have it's benefits... but working from home has many benefits, too. Just because you aren't aware of the benefits of working from home and how they compare to those of working from the office doesn't mean they don't compare favorably.

      At the end of the day, I prefer a situation where I can go in when I want to and stay home when I want to. It usually works out that I'm in the office 1-2 times per week, and working from home the rest of the time.

    14. Re:Poppycock by AuMatar · · Score: 2

      It has benefits for *you*. It has detriments to all of your coworkers and your employer. It's one thing if you need to do it once in a while. Things happen, and it's a nice way to avoid sick days. And if your employer is happy with the amount of work you put out, then it's all perfectly fair. In my next job, I'm hoping to find a place that will let me work from the road a week every month or two so I can do more traveling. But be honest about it- if you're doing it regularly you are lowering the teams output from what it should be. The other forms of communication and collaboration don't come within an order of magnitude of the same effectiveness as face to face.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    15. Re:Poppycock by cshark · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem I've had with it is getting away from my personal life, which lives at home, and generally stays there all day. If I could figure out a way to get some quiet for ten to twelve hours a day, I could manage it.

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

    16. Re:Poppycock by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      If I can take 2 hours and figure out something for myself, or ask someone and get an immediate answer, I'm asking. It's the right thing for me and the business.

      Not necessarily. Will you learn something in those 2 hours? Will you need to figure it out again? If you do it now, and it takes you 2 hours, will you have an immediate answer next time? If I ran off to someone for the answer every time I had a question, I would never learn anything, and I'd piss off a lot of other people. Keep in mind, that asking that other person may save you 2 hours, but how much does it cost that other person? One advantage of something like IM or email, instead of in person... If I have the answer you seek, but I am busy, I can answer you when I am not busy, and when it doesn't cost me as much time.

    17. Re:Poppycock by jedwidz · · Score: 1

      Part of the problem there is that some of the 'benefits' are really unfairly-externalized costs to begin with. As a salaried employee, you can expect to cover all of your commuting costs out of your own pocket - be it public transport charges, or car ownership, maintenance, licensing, insurance, fuel, parking, and taxes on all of the above.

      Why the schmuck isn't that taken from your employer's balance sheet, or at the very least tax-deductible against your salary?

    18. Re:Poppycock by Berfert · · Score: 1

      It has benefits for *you*. It has detriments to all of your coworkers and your employer.

      No, it has benefits to me AND to my productivity. To name a few of the benefits purely to productivity:

      • No travel time to/from the office means more time to get work done.
      • My computer is always setup and ready for work so, should I get a thought on how to do something in the middle of the night, I can walk into my office and work on it without delays.
      • Less cost to the company as far as office space, supplies, etc
      • Reduced interruptions to getting work done; no noisy people talking in the cube next to me, etc
      • My entire library of books is available to me at all times (less of a benefit nowadays than it used to be, since so many things are online)
      • If I need to handle something personal (ie, doctor's appt), I don't lose an entire day of work, only the time to get over to the doctor's office and back. Along the same lines, if my child is home sick, I don't miss a day of work to be home with her.

      Honestly, the benefits to personal productivity are enormous. Sure, there's costs, but to dismiss the benefits out of hand is ... ignorant at best.

    19. Re:Poppycock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You skipped over chat rooms, unless you somehow confused chat rooms with Facebook via the status update comment.

      Chat rooms are a great means of communicating. They do not require any distraction - anyone can answer a question whenever a good stopping point is reached. You can set up most chat systems to log conversations so you can review conversations later. For any non-urgent discussion, chat is near perfect.

      If your "moment's notice" communication is genuinely that (worth breaking someone's flow), then it is urgent enough to make a phone call.

    20. Re:Poppycock by sjames · · Score: 1

      Actually, with the right tools, they CAN pull up code and show you while you talk. You can even operate a single workstation w/ dual controls.

      Email has benefits as well. It provides a nice transcript of the problem and it's resolution. If it's likely to be helpful to others, it can be pasted into a knowledge base/wiki.

    21. Re:Poppycock by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      After a decade's experience including being a project lead- you're almost always going to save more total time by asking than not if it's non-trivial to examine it yourself.

      For example, right now I'm training up new people to Android who previously worked on our product on Meego. They can spend literally a day or two trying to figure out the Android code for something, how it interacts with our core, and how Android itself acts. Or I can give them an answer off the top of my head taking 10 minutes of my time, show them the relevant sections of the code, and give them ideas on what to check for. One way wastes lots of their time, the other slightly inconveniences me. The second is far better. If it begins to impact your schedule, then you need to talk to your manager and redefine expectations, obviously mentoring and helping is a larger part of your role than previously expected.

      I'm not going to say there aren't exceptions. But if asking the question will save you at least an hour, it's right to ask more than 90% of the time.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    22. Re:Poppycock by nosfucious · · Score: 1

      Interruptions, interruptions, interruptions.

      I do both project and break-fix. However, we have no internal walls with 12 people in the area, in 3 teams. It's quite possible that we have 4 people on the phone for business calls and 2 or more people goofing off, and others in meetings. Goofing off is anything from idle chit-chat to playing rugby with the backup tape.

      Some of those on the phone want a quick answer to a question and those goofing off are just a distraction.

      Meetings and project work are best done in a distraction free environment. Some project work requires collaboration which often means being accessible to co-workers. Some times not. Break fix almost always means some collaboration but sometime means research and analysis.

      The best work places provide opportunities for collaboration, but not at the expense of quiet work areas. And vice-versa.

      Personally, the sooner I can get an office so I can shut my door when I can't be disturbed, the better. Working from home occasionally is some way towards this (and stops me going bat-shit insane).

      I actually get more done when I'm on the road and placed in some office or small conference room than at my usual desk.

      --
      Q:I was listening to a CD in Grip and it sounded horrible! What's up? A:Perhaps you are listening to country music
    23. Re:Poppycock by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      Reread the bit about spread over 4 Continents... remember time zones?

      While I agree with the rest of your comment, I don't think this plays into it. Time zone differences are the same challenge regardless of whether the individuals are in offices on those four continents or working from home.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    24. Re:Poppycock by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      We keep a chatroom going with the lot of us (8 of us) in there at all times
      Uggh, we all worked from home one time because an ice storm had brought down the electricity at the office. We had a group voice chat going on with like 8 people. It was horrible. I would never do it again. In fact, I find IM distracting in general and tend to treat it like e-mail. I'll check it at the next convenient break. My job takes a good amount of concentration and things like IM, or the GPs needing some information RIGHT NOW are a major distraction and contribute to an inefficient workplace.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    25. Re:Poppycock by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      For IM I hate it.
      Me too. We've got a guy here who can't type for crap, and is well aware of it. So instead of typing a message, he will send an IM consisting solely of a record identifier, then walk to your office (about 15 seconds) and ask if you researched the record he just sent. Of course, I haven't because I am not just sitting there twiddling my thumbs waiting for work to come in via IM.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    26. Re:Poppycock by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      OK, I AM the boss, and the problem is not that my telecommuting people aren't being productive, but rather that when you need them to do something or provide information that they uniquely possess, you can't get it from them on short notice, thus preventing other people from getting their jobs done.
      Whereas in the office you can get them to provide that information on short notice to the detriment of whatever they are currently working on.
      It seems that we have two schools of thought here. The ones in favor of telecommuting seem to think that communication is a distraction to getting the job done, while those that don't like telecommuting seem to think that communication is necessary to getting the job done.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    27. Re:Poppycock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reread the bit about spread over 4 Continents... remember time zones?

      If they are spread over 4 continents and don't telecommute you still have the same problem or even worse, since even if you wake them up at their 3am, the data they need might be at the office. Whereas if they telecommute, the data is in their home office.

      And, beyond that, in an office environment, if I have a minor need, I can take a break go for a walk, look and see which of the three people who might help me looks least engrossed at that moment and talk with them for a minute.

      Proper use of IM (which you seem to be ignoring) can help. Too bad there's at least one patent on auto-busy: http://www.google.com/patents/US20060064646
      (it doesn't seem to handle the case of the user thinking hard about a problem so that case would require a "manual busy" which is suboptimal).

      The main problem with telecommuting is it's harder to do stuff like play foosball with your colleagues and bosses after work or during lunch breaks. :)

    28. Re:Poppycock by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Plus 20 minutes is an exaggeration. There's a cost, but it's more on the order of 5-10 minutes of reduced (not zero) efficiency.

      This HIGHLY depends on the person and the work in question.

    29. Re:Poppycock by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      On the rare occasions that something useful happens in IM and there's good info I want to save I have to waste a lot of time editing and converting that conversation to an actual legible text file

      Just about all IM systems out there will automatically log conversations. You don't have to copy and paste them yourself.

    30. Re:Poppycock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What are you working on" is easier to answer if the asker knows how to access the main version control repository or similar ;).

      "How's it going" is a useful question, but if you really want real answers to that sort of question you should ask them privately where the answers can't be overheard AND the person trusts you to react appropriately.

      Otherwise you'll get noncommittal replies from most people. e.g. "OK", "Not bad", "usual". With only the occasional rant.

      Anyway at my workplace many people regularly work at the customers' locations (a customer could have many sites too). You can't walk up to say "hi". If you want to interact with them, you use the same tools and methods you'd use for telecommuters - email, IM, phone, etc.

      Face to face is good, but a professional knowledge worker nowadays should learn to use email, IM, phone too.

    31. Re:Poppycock by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I know this and I use the log. The log is nearly pointless without editing though. It's a long rambling conversation covering many topics including the weather. They're never as concise and to the point as email and never in a position to be saved as part of a bug ticket as-is (which does happen a lot with emails). The few times I've saved a log it has involved copying it into an editor and then trying to make sense of it.

      When people write email they very often take a more formal tone because they know it will be read as a whole and probably saved for later. When people write IM I rarely see this instead they language is more informal than even a conversation and appear to be written as though it'll be forgotten a few seconds.

    32. Re:Poppycock by Esther+Schindler · · Score: 1

      I think "it depends" is the answer here... to almost every point you raised. Not the least of which is what communication method we prefer, both individually and culturally. Some prefer e-mail, others IM, etc. God knows I still have people who call me to ask, "Did you get my e-mail?" -- always on something ignorable.

      But for an organization to work -- especially with telecommuters -- there has to be deliberate discussion about what communication tools work, whether it's IM, IRC (or Campfire, which I used successfully in one team), e-mail, etc. And what people really expect in regard to response time.

      On the other hand, if you call me on the phone when I am lost in a warm creative fog, there will be hell to pay. If you interrupt me, dammit, have a reason!

  13. Slashdot and your career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For most with a little care we are just as likely to get away with wasting our employers time and money on slashdot all day from our offices as we are from the comfort of our own homes.

    Posted as AC for obvious reasons.

  14. I find it much easier by Osgeld · · Score: 2

    to say "hey bob" rather than text him and hope I can get a response in a reasonable amount of time. We "telecommute" when people have to be on the road, like today where one of the engineers sent me an email at 1P.M., though I had zero reason to even be near my computer until I left at 6 ...yea, that was efficient

    1. Re:I find it much easier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you say has been true in the past, and to some extent is true even now. However, with the spread of smart phones (as much as 50% of adults in the US, as per recent reports) and Internet access becoming increasingly available in places like Trains and Airplanes as well, the argument that an email may go unnoticed between 1pm and 6pm, is quickly evaporating.

      It is easy to imagine, in a highly and increasingly connected world, that telecommuting can work well. I already know quite a few software engineers who telecommute. Not only does this really keep them happy, but the added flexibility of managing their own time without having to worry about 2hr daily commutes makes them much more efficient employees as well.

    2. Re:I find it much easier by sehgalanuj · · Score: 0

      Sorry for the duplicate post, but I wasn't logged in to Slashdot apparently.

      What you say has been true in the past, and to some extent is true even now. However, with the spread of smart phones (as much as 50% of adults in the US, as per recent reports) and Internet access becoming increasingly available in places like Trains and Airplanes as well, the argument that an email may go unnoticed between 1pm and 6pm, is quickly evaporating.

      It is easy to imagine, in a highly and increasingly connected world, that telecommuting can work well. I already know quite a few software engineers who telecommute. Not only does this really keep them happy, but the added flexibility of managing their own time without having to worry about 2hr daily commutes makes them much more efficient employees as well.

    3. Re:I find it much easier by kwerle · · Score: 1

      Telecommuting (in my experience) works very well when everyone knows when everyone else is working. I put in standard 8-5 hours. If someone wants to get ahold of me, they do (except a smaller than 1 hour lunch window that starts somewhere from 12-1). I am more predictably available than most folks in an office are at their desk.

      An awful lot depends on the person (as you would expect). But predictability is key.

    4. Re:I find it much easier by CaptBubba · · Score: 1

      Yes, keeping a regular schedule or at the very least a core set of hours is key. Some flexibility to allow people such as night owls to start a bit later and such is nice, but not really required because they save on commuting time.

      I telecommute and keep a very regular schedule of 8AM until... whenever, but at least 5PM with an hour lunch. I just finished up for the day a few minutes ago actually, something I certainly wouldn't do if I had to stay in the office.

    5. Re:I find it much easier by similar_name · · Score: 1

      Where I work, no one telecommutes but it is a large facility physically. It is reiterated to everyone constantly that if something is important, you pick up the phone. Many employees have work cell phones and all Managers have cell phones capable of receiving email. In your example, if something could wait 5 hours it seems it wasn't that urgent anyway. While 'hey bob' is easier, sometimes it is too easy. I have worked for bosses that 'hey'd' me so much I could hardly focus on anything.

    6. Re:I find it much easier by Necroman · · Score: 1

      If you can't get ahold of a co-worker via IM, how will being in an office be any better? I started telecommuting for a company just over a year ago and people that are unavailable via IM/Skype, tend to be in meetings and can't be bothered by people in the office either.

      As others have said, telecommuting requires a few things:
      1) keeping regular hours (which is important no-matter if you are in-office or not).
      2) Everyone staying available. This means checking emails and IMs regular. While this helps telecommuting, this also helps geographically distributed teams.

      I've worked in a "main" office, a satellite office and telecommuted. While the main office I could definitely stay on-top of the most information, I was also the most distracted (less productive).

      --
      Its not what it is, its something else.
    7. Re:I find it much easier by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      "2) Everyone staying available. This means checking emails and IMs regular."

      see not everyone works a desk job, so checking emails and IM's regular means I am running back n fourth all day not getting my job done, heck, I really didnt know that much time had passed, I was having too much fun rigging up a 9000 rpm vibration table inside a thermal shock chamber.

    8. Re:I find it much easier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that isn't something suitable for telecommuting, then, perhaps?

    9. Re:I find it much easier by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      2) ...staying available... I found telecommuting akin to being under house arrest. You are home but cannot step outside for a moment, lest someone IM you and find you're not at the computer. Telecommuters need to make their presence felt at the company even more than if you are physically present.

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
  15. It can be hard to seperate work and personal time by jonhorvath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I did part time telecommuting for a few years. It saved my an hour a day in commute time and reduce my gas purchases by half. There is one downside to telecommuting that wasn't mention in the article. At times, it can be difficult to separate work and personal time. If the work is engaging, it is easy to lose track of time and work many more hours. When working on tasks that are boring and monotonous, it can become impossible to focus. It is much easier to get into work mode when the environment changes.

  16. Ahh... by slasho81 · · Score: 1

    a lot of bosses still believe that if they don't see you, you must be lolling about, eating bon-bons and playing Angry Birds.

    Of course they're wrong if they think those are the only things I'm doing to avoid work.

    I salute anyone who figured out how to stay productive while working from home.

  17. Wrong title by rinoid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Angry Birds?!

    Try Battlefield 3 man...

    1. Re:Wrong title by Virtucon · · Score: 2

      Civ 5.. Just one more turn man!

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    2. Re:Wrong title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Starcraft 2....

  18. Works Best When... by Lord+of+the+Fries · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...you enjoy your job and what you're currently doing. I've telecommuted with a team of 18+ other software engineers for the last 5+ years, and did a stint a while back. When you're engaged in what your doing, and believe in it, working at home is awesome. You focus, you maximize your efficiency by finding the optimal interlacing with the rest of your life. But when the company is jerking you around, or dumps crap work on you, working at home is really hard.

    So my word to employers is if you believe in your product and your people, then this really is the best arrangement for you. Otherwise, get our the whips and put 'em in them thar cubies.

    --
    One man's pink plane is another man's blue plane.
  19. Re:It can be hard to seperate work and personal ti by sconeu · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up.

    I telecommute two days a week to take care of my wife. I find it much easier to focus when I'm in the office.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  20. Telecommuting can reduce CO2 by jackhatedance · · Score: 1

    I am dreaming about working at home. Just a few days ago, one of my client asked me that whether I was willing to work for them as fulltime employee. I am a part time freelancer and worked for her on her web site. It is always acceptable for bosses to have their freelancers work at home, but not so for their fulltime employees. So she asked me to move to either SF or Hongkong office while I have my family here in Hangzhou, China. So I guss I couldn't move there and lost this opportunity.

    --
    life is short, learn more.
  21. Another win-win of telecommuting often overlooked. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pooping in my own toilet. I get privacy and the company doesn't have to pay for TP or water.

  22. Whatever by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    I telecommute sometimes. They can tell I'm working by whether or not I meet my milestones. This is not difficult.

  23. Failed to build a case around productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    After reading all the relevant sources from the article, there is on peer reviewed research that shows improved productivity when telecommuting.

    In fact there is no research at all.

    There are opinions from people, but no actual evidence. And most of the opinions could be considered bias because the source is from those already pro-telecommuting.

    I think that lack of evidence is telling.

  24. Try hiring adults and managing them as such by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple solution: hire adults who will actually, you know, work, and manage them as such. I've worked remotely for 12+ years now for several companies, it's not that hard.

  25. my company "flex work" works well by netsavior · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I work for a megacorporation. I can go to any nearby office and get a desk for the day (or a conference room for my team), but I can mostly work from home. I tend to go in and meet my team about once a month for collaboration and socialization. My company was able to close 10 pretty large office buildings in my region, at pretty substantial savings. I am pretty sure they get tax breaks for "green" business practices.

    It's a pretty big company and we have a 20% telecommute goal, but it is mostly IT who are eligible, so nearly all of us in software telecommute now.

    Everyone I know complains that "you never really leave work" when telecommuting, and most of the people I work with don't even stop for lunch any more. I try to have boundaries, but honestly as a developer you never really leave work anyway... but I can take a shower and eat dinner at home, which is great.

    Mostly what they got from me though is loyalty. I have worked there for 8 years, only 2 of them telecommute, and no bonus, raise, or corporate title bought them the loyalty that telecommuting bought them. With this sweet setup, I will never quit... It would have to get pretty bad for me to want to... I am hoping that by the time I have to move on Telecommute will be the norm.

  26. On the other hand... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    The office has a better desk and chair than I have at home, a bigger monitor, etc. Work has faster internet access and better backups. People who will solder boards for me and people to get equipment from. Then the office has a nicely stocked refrigerator unlike my empty one at home, free lunch, and a much better cleaning staff. There are people there to have lunch with, some who will willingly talk to you even if they don't have to. Fewer distractions at work too.

    Seriously, I was letting my mind wander the other day thinking about winning the lottery. Besides the usual fantasies of figuring out where to live honestly wondered about somewhere to work part time...

    1. Re:On the other hand... by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      If any of that is true, you have a much, much better job than I do.

    2. Re:On the other hand... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      it's true. Well the free lunch may be more than most companies. But I don't have a chair as nice as the office one, because the office is willing to spend more money than I am (I'm cheap and I don't throw away things that still work). The monitor is definitely bigger than the one at home but that's to be expected also since it's their money and not mine. They have better snacks because I don't go to the store a lot and when I do I eat it all quickly (thus it's best for me not to go to the store a lot). And it seems reasonable that I'm not the only once who doesn't do housework as often as is prudent.

      Oh ya, forgot, they have air conditioning at work.

    3. Re:On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, i think the opposite is true. The majority of people I know have better computing equipment at home. Faster Internet (consider firewalls and internal WAN clouds to slow proxy servers),

      I know I've had instances working on a Customer issue (before I got my new laptop) where I would go home and load the Wireshark captures on my quad-core machine just so I could parse through them faster.

    4. Re:On the other hand... by netsavior · · Score: 1

      actually when you shift to work from home, my company buys you a proper chair and desk, they even send people over to install it for you.

    5. Re:On the other hand... by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Hmm, let's see how my workplace stacks up. better desk and chair than I have at home Nope
      a bigger monitor Nope
      Work has faster internet access Nope
      better backups Nope
      People who will solder boards for me and people to get equipment from Nope. But then we are not in that line of work.
      the office has a nicely stocked refrigerator Nope
      free lunch Ah, yes, between twice weekly free lunch and other lunch meetings, I probably pay my own way 3 times a month. So finally one that I can say "Yes" to.
      a much better cleaning staff Nope. All they do is empty the garbage daily, and vacuum about once every 6 months
      There are people there to have lunch with, some who will willingly talk to you even if they don't have to OK, another point for the office.
      Fewer distractions at work too And Nope

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  27. Make the manager work from home. by Above · · Score: 1

    Often telecommuters work for a manager who still works in an office. When this occurs, the #1 thing all involved can do? Make the manager work from home for two weeks straight!

    I've seen managers do all sorts of dumb things with telecommuters, from making them do things that made no sense to ignoring their requests for simple changes that make working from home much easier. 80-90% of these were simple ignorance. I had one manager who totally blew off my requests for video conferencing for some of our group meetings, after all we had the telephone. Two weeks of them from home and he told me he never realized how much you lose from not seeing faces for some of the meetings!

    Which brings up the other half, you have to have some minimal training/awareness for the still in the office folks. Things like setting your IM status become more critical when folks are in other time zones, or can't walk by your cube or hear you coming and going. Making everyone work from home for 2 weeks a year can go a long way to helping.

    It doesn't fix all the problems, but it provides a solid foundation for all of the other advice you see in the managing people remotely books.

  28. Re:Obligatory/Shameless GoToMeeting && GoT by Dan541 · · Score: 1

    A 3rd of Telecommuters can't even dress themselves in the morning as it's too strenuous.
    Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/20/pjs_every_day/

    --
    An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  29. Communication Methods and Culture are key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Telecommuting is commonplace where I work. It is very very RARE where my spouse works. Why?

    - My work communication: 50% instant messaging, 35% email, last 15% split between phone or face time
    - Spouse work communication: 75% split between phone or face time, 25% email, no instant messaging.

    - Where I work, dead weight is very obvious to both management and coworkers. Doesn't go over well.
    - Where spouse works, accepted for there to be dead weight in the group. Others end up picking up the slack.

    However, it comes down to communication methods and company culture, neither of which are going to be easy to "make a case" to change on a large-scale per OP. Start small with pilot groups, find what works and what doesn't. Make the business case afterwards.

  30. Naturally? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In my experience, there's nothing natural about having less distractions, increased productivity, or a better work-life balance when it comes to working remotely. Like all things, you have to work at it. Remove distractions, create a productive work environment, and make sure you leave work in your office area and get on with your personal life when the day is done.

  31. It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's always been about employer risk. Certainly, many telecommuters do good work and do work well. That's not the point. For every ten good ones, there's at least one bad one. That bad one is really bad. And the problem is that it takes a long time, and a lot of effort and money to discover and deal with that one bad one. It's just not worth the risk.

    I, as an employer, far prefer the costs associated with the office setup to have ten office employees who are each at 50%, than to have ten telecommuters, save the office expenses, have 9 at 100% and 1 at 20%. That one guys can take down my entire business. I've worked far too hard and risked far too much to let that happen.

    And the article is correct. It takes longer to train a telecommuter -- who may not stick around longer enough to matter.

    Telecommuting is for already-proven and trusted employees, who want a break and a better life. It's something to be earned.

    1. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you prefer 50% efficiency with office overhead to 92% with no overhead - man I am astounded you are still in business. (and those were YOUR numbers).

      Wake up - you get dead wood in every workplace... at least from home they cost you less to keep.

    2. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by laffer1 · · Score: 1

      I've got a coworker that knits at work. Just because they're there doesn't mean they're actually working. I don't think your math makes sense.

      You train them in the office before you let them telecommute. You have to know they're actually going to perform. I did it for ten months and it was the happiest I've been working. I actually got a lot more done than when I had to start coming into the office. I eventually managed a team for that company and it ended up that we got less done than I did alone at home. When you're there, you get sucked into meetings, office distractions, etc. When I telecommuted, I only had a meeting once a week. My boss could call me at any time if there was an issue and I was on Jabber all day. Most of the time, a boss just emails you anyway.

    3. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFC. The one at 20% can kill his business. That's a hell of a liability. For his business, it's not worth the risk. Do you really believe that we're all completely interchangeable?

    4. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been a boss, and I am again now an engineer.

      It's hard to measure software developers. So seeing them sit in front of the glowing monitor in their cloth covered box gives the boss a sense of something is happening.

      When you aren't there in the box what *are* you doing?

      The problem is that as a boss, you can't really tell what that developer is actually doing even when in the office.

      Where I work now, the company tracks all our time against tasks. When we open the project task, the timer starts. Tasks have estimates. They can measure your hours vs. the estimate. But they don't know what you are doing. I find this level of task monitoring stupid and insulting.

      Is there a better way?

    5. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Don't you assign your guys work, and then expect them to finish it in a reasonable amount of time? If not, how do you know your guys in the office are actually doing good work? Can't you use the same method for the people who work from home?

      Also, it's somewhat concerning that one non-working employee can take down your entire business. You might want to look into increasing your profit margins or something.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 2

      you missed the important part, because you didn't read. 50% efficiency is profitable. 92% efficiency with the chance that you lose a client because of a bad employee means that at any time, I can lose the entire business. that's just not worth the risk.

      but like I've always said. start your own company, and see what works for you.

    7. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      I am the boss, and those meetings you speak of are what make the company run well. my employee's productivity isn't my concern. the company's reliability and consistency are. when the guy in the office knits, I can fire him on the spot, and I don't need to answer to anyone. But when I suspect an employee of knitting at home, I can't just fire him, I need to prove it. that's a waste of my time.

      I don't care how fast the business is running, as long as it's profitable, I can go from there. I can about the liabilities of the employees beneath me. that's it. and when I become liable for their errors, it becomes a problem. and there's an easy solution to that problem.

    8. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      yes there's a better way. you ask the employee how long it'll take. and then you hold them to it. if it takes them longer, they don't get paid. it's their estimate to make appropriately. only that doesn't work because employees haven't the foggiest notion of self-management.

      but if you can see them in their box, you can easily prove that they are working. again, it doesn't matter in general, it matters only once you suspect a problem. I can go years without checking up on an employee. but if the day comes when I suspect that they are taking advantage of my risk and my business, then I can start watching. and no, employees don't know how to suddenly pass the checks.

      all this means is that I can easily prove my suspicions. and that's all I need. It's all I need to sleep at night. it's all I need to protect my investment. it's all I need to protect my clients. otherwise, I'm placing my entire life in the hands of my employees.

      remember, they can get fired and get another job. I can't. this is my one and only source of income, and everything from my sandwich to my house is riding on it.

    9. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      if any programmers could self-manage themselves well enough to estimate how long a task will take, and how many problems will come up along the way, that'd be swell. but it's software, and beyound their lack of skill in management, technical shit happens. any given task, no matter how easy, can come up against a nightmare wall to be resolved. my margins take all that into account as flux. it's not a problem. but it means that any telecommuter can hide their lack of effort in a few dozen delays.

      my profit margins aren't what that one employee can affect. I can just not pay them, it's not a problem. the problem is that they can derail a project. that project can be $50'000.00, and the client can simply cancel the project mid-way. so I'm out the lion's share of the revenue -- which is my profit, because I get paid last. on top of that, many clients have multiple projects on the go. I can not only lose the project, I can lose the entire client. That can easily be $200'000 per year for 5 years.

      That kind of loss is easy for me to deal with -- I scale down until I find a replacement client. But that means firing employees. That degrades other projects and other clients, and basically has me double the risk to save the money. Alternatively, I can pay my employees out of my pocket, and double my financial risk to spare my business risk.

      Either way, I'm screwed in the short term. But more importantly, in etiher case, I've allowed an employee to screw me, as well as my clients, and my employees. I'm responsible and accountable to too many people to allow one person to risk everyone's mortgage payments.

    10. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      if any programmers could self-manage themselves well enough to estimate how long a task will take,

      A decent manager SHOULD be able to do that. A good manager will teach his programmers to do that (one technique is to have them estimate at the beginning of each project, preferably shorter projects, and then measure how close they were at the end. Make sure they feel comfortable estimating a reasonable amount of time otherwise they will always estimate too short. Do this repeatedly and they will improve).

      but it means that any telecommuter can hide their lack of effort in a few dozen delays.

      This is true, but I'm not sure why you think it's any different than hiding their lack of effort while at work.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    11. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      wow, take individual sentences out of paragraphs of context, and it sounds as though you didn't read anything at all.

      like I said, any given task in software programming can hit unpredictable walls.

      like I said, it's not about their lack of effort, it's about my being able to easily prove it.

      read harder. and stop quoting partial points.

    12. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      wow, take individual sentences out of paragraphs of context, and it sounds as though you didn't read anything at all.

      OK, I'll address the rest of what you said here. It sounds reasonable enough. There.

      like I said, it's not about their lack of effort, it's about my being able to easily prove it.

      Once again, I'm not seeing it. What do you do, sit behind their monitors to make sure they are actually programming?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    13. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      no. I wait until a client tells me that a project isn't working out so well, or until an given employee mis-estimates too much for my liking, or until I suspect anything at all. Then I sit behind their monitors to make sure they are actually programming, until I figure out what went wrong. either they don't know how to ask for help, or they have a fundamental misunderstanding of our systems or of the client's project, or they aren't working. And that's something that I can determine within three days of staring at them.

      and that's my job.

    14. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      also, if I determine that they aren't working properly, I can fire them on the spot. and I don't need to answer to anyone. if they are at home, then I need to actually prove it. that's a waste of my time.

    15. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > And that's something that I can determine within three days of staring at them.

      That's just silly. Don't you have a code repository and commit log? A ticketing system for work queue? A quick glance can determine if the person is productive or not, doesn't matter if he or she is sitting in the office.

    16. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Do you issue laptops or do people use their own computers while telecommuting?

      What I did was issue laptops with a VNC server installed, so I can look at anyone's monitor any time. I can also record the session to collect evidence of non-productivity.

      When I have a low-performing employee, or one who "works" at home as a means to goof off and get paid for not working, it is usually pretty easy to get them to resign in disgrace when I have a recorded session of them surfing porn on a company-owned laptop while on my dime.

    17. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just as in non-telecommuters, if they aren't performing, fire them. You can dick off and do nothing in the office all day just as easily as you can from your house. Hell, I'm sure many people are reading this article from the office :) The only gauge you have is if their work is getting done on schedule. If they're working from home and it's not, and they don't have a really good reason, THEN you come down on them.

      And as I'm sure most people pointed out, 92% is better than 50% in your example :)

    18. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      good work is often done staring at problem, not commiting broken code. designing structures takes time away from code. so does discussing ideas with coworkers, researching methods, and reading documentation.

      or would you have me fire the telecommuter because they went two days without commiting any new code?

      not to mention, staring at someone working at a desk for a few days is much easier than reviewing three days of repository logs.

    19. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 0

      and like most people you didn't read enough. You can't just fire someone for not being productive enough.

    20. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      you ask the employee how long it'll take. and then you hold them to it.

      That's a pretty good idea.

      if it takes them longer, they don't get paid.

      And now you've just turned it into total crap.

      but if you can see them in their box, you can easily prove that they are working

      Not really. Commenting on /. can look an awful lot like working.

      and no, employees don't know how to suddenly pass the checks

      otherwise, I'm placing my entire life in the hands of my employees.

      Maybe you should do better due diligence into hiring people you can actually trust.

    21. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      if they are at home, then I need to actually prove it. that's a waste of my time.

      If you're half the boss you claim you are, then no, you don't.

    22. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by s73v3r · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. You've claimed you can do that for people in the office all the time. Working at home is not different.

    23. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      better due dilligence = money and time invested. you forget that. commenting on /. doesn't look like working. I'm quite familiar with the work that's done, and what's involved in doing it.

      you're forgetting that I do this for a living, and it works. so telling me that what I'm doing isn't working, just isn't right. and you forget that one employee can kill the whole business for every other employee too. as a good employer, it's my job to ensure that employee A doesn't lose his job because of employee D.

    24. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      yes I do. you can't just fire someone because you want to without that employee being able to cause a lot more effort to be sunk into firing them. there's the expectation of the opportunity to make it up to the company, retraining, back-pay, forward-pay, severence-pay, benefits, and more. but in the office, if I see an employee not working, I can fire them on the spot, not pay them another dime, and send them packing in ten seconds. they stole from me, I saw them stealing from me, that's it. it's all red-handed all the time. whether or not it was a small infraction, it's my right to make a small infraction significant. but when it's sight unseen, then it's no longer my right to grow suspicion into action. try it some time.

    25. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      not at all true. in the office, if I see them not working, I can terminate them on the spot for stealing from me. I've caught them red handed, and it's my right to make any infraction, no matter how small, into an actionable event. if it's sight unseen -- logs be damned -- it's only suspicion. I'm not allowed to grow suspicion into action. I'm supposed to offer retraining, support, and at the very least severence if I choose to let them go. And then they can still yell and scream and argue and sue, however unsuccessfully -- it still costs me time money and effort to terminate them. but in the office scenario, I escort them out immediately, and there's nothing that they can do.

    26. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > good work is often done staring at problem, not commiting broken code. designing structures takes time away from code. so does discussing ideas with coworkers, researching methods, and reading documentation.

      Agree. And those insight gained from staring at the problem should be captured in the ticket and / or commit message.

      > or would you have me fire the telecommuter because they went two days without commiting any new code?

      Now you are just attacking a straw man.

      > not to mention, staring at someone working at a desk for a few days is much easier than reviewing three days of repository logs.

      Something like Trac ticket / commit history gives you the complete view, without requiring you to physically dick around. A 2, 3 days snapshot doesn't work, because a human being is not a robot, and will have up and down days (or weeks, even months).

    27. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      I don't waste my employee's time filling out tickets and commit messages. that's a bigger waste of time than everything else mentioned here. type your code, test your code, and move on. there's no meta-work. that's a good 30% drop in productivity right there. even worse when you need to review them, check them, and the problems that come when someone misunderstands them or they are incorrect. documenting code is the absolute worst thing you can do. learn to read the language, and stop writing cryptic code. then all you need to document is what you didn't code. perl can be read like english. I've built an entire platform to be able to work on live sites and not document anything. it works, it's better, and there's no way in hell that I'll ever go back to repositories and documenting code. get lost.

    28. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      But when I suspect an employee of knitting at home, I can't just fire him, I need to prove it. that's a waste of my time.
      You don't need to prove it. Just fire him/her. It doesn't matter whether they were knitting or not. If they are not meeting your productivity requirements, then they need to be let go. If you go searching for reasons to fire them, you are searching for reasons that they can bring up a wrongful termination lawsuit. Fire them because they're fired.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    29. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      yes there's a better way. you ask the employee how long it'll take. and then you hold them to it.
      That would be great, if their boss is doing their job and preventing other people from inserting other items and also preventing scope creep on the project. You can't hold an employee to blame because their boss is not very good at managing.
      employees haven't the foggiest notion of self-management.
      You must be a boss. As an employee, I find that I need no management. What I need is a goalie. The goalies job is to prevent other players from knocking additional tasks into my net. Unfortunately, in most situations, the boss is right there along with everyone else, insisting that this task get done RIGHT NOW, followed by another, and another, and then later they wonder why your number one priority task hasn't gotten anywhere in the last week.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    30. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      you're incorrect. there is the expectation (the legal expectation) of retraining, support, exceptions, back-pay, forward-pay, severence-pay, getting my equipment back, and more. it's a pain in the ass to fire a telecommuting employee. and that's when they co-operate, which they have no reason to do.

      I think you forget that an employee has equipment, data, client files, confidential information and more. firing them requires them to sign things too, if possible. in-person, not letting them walk out of the building until they sign two documents and return my stuff is easy. with telecommuters, it's more likely that I'll simply never see them again. that's terrible for business.

    31. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      if any programmers could self-manage themselves well enough to estimate how long a task will take, and how many problems will come up along the way, that'd be swell.
      You sure seem to have a low opinion of programmers. The ones I know are pretty middle of the road, but they have a much better idea of how long things take than a manager would, unless that manager knew how to write code. The real issue is people shoving other stuff in front of your primary project. That is what needs to be stopped and that is a management problem.
      Whenever I estimate how long a project will take, I always give the time in man hours. I am currently working on a project which I estimated 6 weeks of development time. I made it quite clear that that was development time and not elapsed time. I have not completed the project yet. It has been 4 months. However, it has not been 6 weeks of development yet. I am still two weeks of development out and I will deliver it on time. Unfortunately, I am not able to stop other people (including the one who should be shielding me from distractions) from heaping more stuff on my plate, in front of what they declare almost daily, is my #1 priority.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    32. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      congratulations on not knowing what is being managed. it's not the employees. I don't need to know how long a project is going to take in order to control my employees. I need to know in order to control my clients. that's why employees can screw me over. that's why I need to keep tabs on everything. and that's why employee get fired when they become liabilities -- because I don't get paid by the client.

    33. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      you're not listening -- or reading. stop quoting individual sentences within paragraphs of context.

      programmers can't self-manage themselves because they can't estimate how long a task will take because programming tasks aren't estimatable so I need to manage clients and their expectations without having any idea how long an employee is going to actually take to do something and since clients can cancel for being one day late and not start for not giving an estimate I need to promise a date and manage the client knowing full well that no one knows how long it'll take.

      is it better without punctuation? quote that sentence.

      obviously you're going to get more work added and more distractions. welcome to business. you think a client assigns one project, and waits for it to be completed before assigning another project? not the good clients. the good ones continue to buy services independently of what's done. and the priorities flip in reality for them as well as for us.

      and then there's the actual business side. would you want me, your boss, to throw away a new client because we're fully booked with existing client work? or would you rather I take on the new client, and screw over the time-line of the existing client? Here's a hint. the former gives us two clients, one slightly upset or understanding and the other with a full budget. the latter gives us one client with no remaining projects. so the former guarantees the employees work for another two to five cycles, while the latter gives the employees work only through to the end of the current cycle, then nothing.

      so which do you want? I'll bet it's different if you're a contractor vs an employee. and that's why telecommuting employees need to be treated like contractors, but unfortunately as employees aren't.

      but hey, be a contractor. that solves all of my problems. pay your own damn taxes, work when I have work for you and charge me nothing when I don't. deal with your own benefits, your own supplies, and your own time. then you can be a telecommuter all you like. I don't need to pay you until 30 days after you're done the work. that's perfect for me.

      welcome to the non-contractor relationship. it differs in trust, and in supervision, and in guaranteed payment. you get to pick.

    34. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      programmers can't self-manage themselves because they can't estimate how long a task will take because programming tasks aren't estimatable so I need to manage clients and their expectations without having any idea how long an employee is going to actually take to do something and since clients can cancel for being one day late and not start for not giving an estimate I need to promise a date and manage the client knowing full well that no one knows how long it'll take.
      OK, so I quoted the whole run-on sentence. Now, if a programming task is not estimable, then how is a manager going to do a better job of estimating it than a programmer?
      For the record, I disagree that programming task are not estimable. If you know what needs to be done, the time is easily estimated. Only if there are unknowns, such as a missing spec, or an interface that you are not familiar with does it become more of a gray area. But you can make reasonable assumptions about how long those will take. and then there's the actual business side. would you want me, your boss, to throw away a new client because we're fully booked with existing client work? or would you rather I take on the new client, and screw over the time-line of the existing client? Here's a hint. the former gives us two clients, one slightly upset or understanding and the other with a full budget. the latter gives us one client with no remaining projects. so the former guarantees the employees work for another two to five cycles, while the latter gives the employees work only through to the end of the current cycle, then nothing. I have unfortunately worked for several companies in the past that were more than happy to screw over a client who was already on the hook and unable to back out. Usually, the company lies about what it can deliver, but then takes two or three times as long, but the client has so much invested that they can't back out. i think that is low and underhanded.
      I am not against looking for new work, but if it is going to overlap with a current client's timeline, then perhaps some temporary contract workers would be in order.
      but hey, be a contractor. that solves all of my problems. pay your own damn taxes, work when I have work for you and charge me nothing when I don't. deal with your own benefits, your own supplies, and your own time. then you can be a telecommuter all you like. I don't need to pay you until 30 days after you're done the work. that's perfect for me.
      I would prefer to be a contractor, pay my own taxes, deal with my own benefits, supplies etc.. I would make a lot more money and have a lot more deductible expenses. But my employer doesn't want that. I started out as a contractor at my current employer, but they insisted I be an employee and said I wouldn't be able to participate in stock options if I didn't become an employee. As it turns out, I still haven't received any stock options 5.5 years later, so I would have been better off as a contractor, but I didn't realize at the time that they were lying to me.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    35. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      I never said the manager would estimate the job. you still didn't read. I said the manager would manage the client's expectations.

      they aren't estimatable becase loads of other carp gets thrown in. that's the industry, and that's the job. and that's what makes it all profitable. you can't estimate something that's going to change based on outside input. that's what's getting managed. it's not the employees, it's the carp.

      It's the bug in mysql that you found on an otherwise normal select query, that now takes seven hours to work around, since it wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. but it's a bug in the query optimizer, and there isn't anything you can do about it now.

      for all of those reasons, you can't wait until one project's done before getting a new one. because you don't know when the current project will be done. and you can't survive with nothing to do between projects while you search for new ones. your programmers will simply have nothing to do until your sales department's done, and then your sales department will have nothing to do until your developers are done.

      it's not about screwing over clients. it's about your clients sharing the carp that this industry deals with. they can't get software without the problems that software industries have.

      so you were a contractor, and became an employee so as to not lose your job. you can always quit and become a contractor again. I adore my contractors. I don't need to pay them -- ever if I don't like the work. I can treat them well, and they'll always serve my interests. I can treat them poorly, and still pay them, and they'll still always serve my interests. that's the fun thing about business to business, especially between small businesses. of course, they rarely stick to timelines of any kind. but that's par for the course.

      it doesn't matter why you stopped being a contractor. you did, and you haven't gone back. we're done here. you have someone else getting you the work, someone else convincing the client to pay for it, someone else invoicing, someone else collecting, someone else doing your taxes. your work is lined up for you, you take zero risk when it comes to working and not getting paid, and all you need to do is your job on a day by day basis.

      For you to spend a dollar, you need to earn a dollar-fifty, get paid a dollar-twenty, then pay twenty cents of taxes. For me to spend a dollar, I need to find someone able to pay five dollars, convince them that something is worth five dollars, get them to promise to paying the five dollars, organize the work, get the client deliverables, divide the work, supervise the work, do some of the work myself, give updates along the way, deliver the work, present the work, organize changes to the work, deliver the work again, present the work again, invoice for the work, wait, remind them to pay the invoice, wait, demand they pay the invoice, wait, go and pickup the cheque myself, then hope that of the five dollars, after paying employees, employee taxes, office expenses, and insurances, that there remains a dollar-fifty to pay myself.

      see the difference? of course you want work lined up one day at a time, you get paid for each day. I need to take a six month process, and at the end of those six months, have some money to pay everyone at all times. it necessarily needs to overlap with another six month cycle by as much as five months, since most of my six months was spent waiting for the client.

    36. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it looks like you have much bigger problem to deal with than the trivial telecommute versus chained-in-office debate. It is interesting to see how, with each reply, you revealed more and more about how dysfunctional your organization is.

    37. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      odd that you could say that. seeing as how I've been describing the problems that I've solved. you're the only one in this conversation with problems. I've got none. my business runs smoothly, my employees work as expected, my clients are satisfied, and I'm making money nicely.

      you might want to learn the difference between someone with a problem, and someone without one.

    38. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by laffer1 · · Score: 1

      Trust me, you can't get reliability and consistency when productivity is zero. You need to care about productivity. If not, you're a terrible boss. It's a balancing act for sure, but it's important.

    39. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      better due dilligence = money and time invested.

      Ahhh. So you're a cheap ass.

      you forget that. commenting on /. doesn't look like working.

      Not always. Many times it does.

      you're forgetting that I do this for a living, and it works.

      If you're in danger of losing the whole damn company due to one employee, then no, it does not work.

      and you forget that one employee can kill the whole business for every other employee too.

      Only if you're doing it very, very wrong.

    40. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but you're completely and utterly wrong. You can fire someone remotely on the spot. There's nothing different about it and someone working in the office. The only effort is the effort you're building up in your head.

    41. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      not true. been there, done that. how would you go about getting your corporate equipment back from a telecommuter? who won't answer your calls and isn't obligated to do so? you get to try for a few weeks, then send a registered letter, which gets returned a few weeks after that, then you get to sue that employee for a $2'000 laptop? and what about the confidential records that they have at home?

      even if you give an non-telecommuter those things, you can deal with it before they leave the building, in a hundred and one different ways.

    42. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      like I said. I've been there, I've done that. I know what's worked and what hasn't. I couldn't care less what you do. You're welcome to make the same mistakes. enjoy.

    43. Re:It's never been about employee productivity by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      that's not being cheap, that's recognizing costs -- money I could be giving to employees, you piece of shit.

      no, it doesn't. not unless it's syntax highlighted to look like my platform. you can't post to slashdot from ultraedit, nor mysql query browser, nor paintshop.

      I'm not in any danger due to one employee, because I don't take that risk. did you not follow along? I'm not having any problems. This is why.

      And very very wrong, is exactly what you're proposing.

  32. Re:It can be hard to seperate work and personal ti by swillden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I did part time telecommuting for a few years. It saved my an hour a day in commute time and reduce my gas purchases by half. There is one downside to telecommuting that wasn't mention in the article. At times, it can be difficult to separate work and personal time. If the work is engaging, it is easy to lose track of time and work many more hours. When working on tasks that are boring and monotonous, it can become impossible to focus. It is much easier to get into work mode when the environment changes.

    Different people are different; I don't think one size fits all. For me, I found it much easier to balance work and home life while telecommuting, because of the flexibility it gave me -- not to mention the hours saved in commute time. I telecommuted nearly full time for 10 years, and then a year ago got a new job that requires me to be in the office most of the time, and it's been hard adjusting. I appreciated the ability to easily leave "work" for an hour or two to go to a kid's school production, or to go out for a run, or whatever. I shifted some of my "work" time late into the evening when my family was in bed. All in all, I really preferred it. I love my new job, but I'd love it even more if I could work from home.

    I found that it is useful to maintain some separation, though, even when working from home, mainly so that your family can distinguish between your work and non-work time. I did it by designating my home office as my workspace. My kids knew that when Dad was in his office, he was working and not to be disturbed if possible. Though my wife never did grasp the concept, somehow...

    That doesn't mean I only worked in my office. Geek that I am, I packed my laptop everywhere, and I didn't see anything wrong with answering a few e-mails while watching a movie with the kids or something. On the other hand, I also didn't see anything wrong with ignoring the e-mail when it wasn't convenient.

    Company culture (this was at IBM) had quickly developed some rules of etiquette that really helped. For example, one rule is that you don't call anyone on the phone without first instant messaging them to ask if you can call. So when people aren't working, they shut off their IM client, and that's a signal to everyone else that they aren't to be bothered. Some other rules were that e-mail was not used when quick replies were expected and that background noise (kids, dogs, whatever) was normal and not unprofessional during conference calls.

    One thing that really makes a huge difference in your ability to successfully telecommute is the number of your colleagues who telecommute. At IBM it quickly became everyone, so it worked very well. At Google, where I am now, most everyone is in the office and while we have great tools for remote communication (Google+ Hangouts, basically, integrated into calendaring and with high-end audio/video equipment in the conference rooms), if you're not around for the water cooler conversation you miss a lot, and it would be hard to be productive.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  33. CLM by PPH · · Score: 1

    Just tell the boss that you spend all day lolling about, eating bon-bons and playing Angry Birds at the office, so you might as well work from home.

    I'll bet he'll send you home in no time.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  34. Re:It can be hard to seperate work and personal ti by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up.

    I telecommute two days a week to take care of my wife. I find it much easier to focus when I'm in the office.

    And, I have 2 young boys who get home from school at 2pm, they're a little distracting too.

  35. Why management should love telecommuting... by Rik+Rohl · · Score: 1

    The beauty of it is, if you can telecommute to do your job, then some dude in India can do it too for half the price!

    1. Re:Why management should love telecommuting... by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      The beauty of it is, if you can telecommute to do your job, then some dude in India can do it too for half the price!
      Yeah, half the price, and twice the cost.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  36. Find another boss by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

    The best way to build a case for telecommuting is to find a boss who likes the idea.

    Then when they ask you why be truthful and tell them you wanted to telecommute and when you were turned down you decided to look for other opportunities.

    Nothing beats negotiating like 2 weeks notice.

    And never take the counter-offer.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
  37. All About Results by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am a software engineer for SAP, and I've been telecommuting for the last 4 years for a job that would normally be 1 hour away, and I love it. I go into the office once a week for a few hours for our weekly meeting to discuss current projects, any issues, etc. Our team is fairly small, only 5 of us (4 developers including the manager and 1 QA.) When I got the job my boss said to me, "I don't care when you work or where you work, all I really care about is results."

    That is really the way any company really needs to handle it. You can't be setting hour requirements, you need to set result requirements. As long as reasonable expectations are set on both sides it is win-win.

    The only issue I have had is separating personal time and work time. Sometimes I will be so into a project I would realize that I had been writing code for the last 15 hours and lost track of time, but whenever that happens I usually just end up giving myself a day off later in the week.

  38. Other members of the household by tepples · · Score: 2

    No co-workers coming up behind me and bothering me.

    In my experience telecommuting, I traded that for people who live with me coming up behind me and bothering me, forgetting that I'm on the clock.

    1. Re:Other members of the household by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      In my experience telecommuting, I traded that for people who live with me coming up behind me and bothering me, forgetting that I'm on the clock.
      That happens to me too. My wife doesn't work, and if I work from home, she thinks I am on vacation or something, because she wants me to pick up the kids, go to the store, make dinner, fix some broken thing, etc. I've had days when I was not feeling well and went to the office anyway because there were too many people at home and I knew I'd not get any work done.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    2. Re:Other members of the household by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      If you're not feeling well, why not take a sick day? That's what they're there for.

    3. Re:Other members of the household by SimplyGeek · · Score: 1

      I knew about that potential conflict before I started working from home. To prevent it, I had a serious discussion with my significant other that while at home, I'm working and not to be interrupted. Since she respects my work time, it hasn't been a problem at all.

      The only time it's an issue is when the significant other walks in half naked wanting some sexy time. At that point, work can wait a while.

      Where I did have the same problem you describe is with people outside my home. Friends and family would email, IM, or call me during the day as if I had nothing else to do. It was annoying, especially family that acted like somehow I had quit my job and was taking a long term paid vacation. It's mostly older people who hold that stereotype. Over time, with some very direct and annoyed responses, people came to realize that I'm working just as hard, if not harder, at home as people in an office.

    4. Re:Other members of the household by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      If you're not feeling well, why not take a sick day? That's what they're there for.
      At my company, there is no sick day. If you are sick, you work from home, but you still have to get your job done. Nobody else is going to do it for you.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    5. Re:Other members of the household by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      That's very, very shitty.

  39. As addictive as Crack(ed) by tepples · · Score: 1

    "Infographic" is not going to plateau while Cracked.com is still up.

  40. Just be careful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I telecommuted for a Fortune 500 company for over 2 years, only occasionally coming into the closest office (actually the one I originally worked out of before we were acquired by the F500 company that had a telecommuting policy). There was a lot to like and some to dislike. My commute was relatively tame - an hour a day, total, at most, but it was nice to just roll out of bed and go to work (yes frequently I didn't even bother to shower or shave, much to my wife's chagrin). And, after I had done up to 3.5-4 hour daily commutes at one point in my career, telecommuting was like realizing a dream.

    There are a number of specific downsides if, like me, you have small children at home. I carved out a corner of our very messy garage for my "home office" which was separate from the house. When I started telecommuting it took them a while to get the whole "Daddy's at work NOT at home (even though I'm AT home)" thing down and not come out to the garage every 5 minutes to bug me. Once that was done the biggest downside it was, about 70% of the time, either too hot or too cold. I lived in a place where it was frequently very cool / cold in the winter (not like the Midwest or Great White North obviously, but still pretty cold) and 100+ in the summer so frequently by 1 or 2 it was so hot I just had to go into the house.

    I also am not sure I was entirely built to telecommute. The first month I really diddled around a lot and didn't feel very productive at all. I had started growing my own little business about a year into telecommuting and would frequently just leave my regular job to take care of little business things and split for the rest of the day. My boss wasn't looking over my shoulder so I didn't really even think it mattered to go about my "other" job. When the time came for a round of lay-offs in 2009, I was let go, probably because I was, at best, really just a "C" player who wasn't really getting his tasks and projects done in a timely manner. I really believe it was because I had fully taken unfair advantage of the freedom of telecommuting.

    Telecommuting IS a big adjustment from office life. Yes it's great but you have to have real self-discipline to make it work. Some people might take to the change quickly, but others have to be cautious about the freedom they have. I wasn't very cautious or discrete about the freedom. I don't need someone telling me what to do every second of the day in the office - if anything, I'd be leaving that job, quick, if that was happening - but the office is pretty quiet, relaxed, and allows me to retreat into my thoughts without the kinds of interruptions I have in a home with small children (or have an environment where you're either freezing or burning up). Others work in offices where there's constant noise, interruptions,

  41. There is no such thing as working at home without by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    .... distraction. There are hell of a lot more distractions at home than at an office. Anybody who claims the contrary is either oblivious to facts or a complete liar.

    Distractions at home that you don't have at work are (but not limited to):
    - Kids (and/or other family members)
    - Pets
    - TV / Entrainment
    - Personal phone calls
    - Internet (particularly social networks)
    - Food
    - The "need to" exercise

    It takes a hell of a lot more discipline to do work at home, than at an office.

  42. Wish I Could Have It Back by OceanWave · · Score: 1

    Where I work, we've got a reactionary CIO who still believes that gas is $0.92 a gallon. (He also throws "cloud computing" under the bus, among other things.)

    Really though, I had been graded top of my class for two years running. June 3rd, 2011 came as quite a surprise when many others, including myself, were told they had to either commute or leave the company. At first, they offered severance. Then this option was taken away. (More complicated, but I'll keep this short.)

    Now we've got folks upside down on mortgages driving 180+ miles a day with gas fast moving towards $5 / gallon. (On cars that will be more than upside down.) Can't sell the house to move closer, and nor is there work available locally. I understand a manager in Iowa--at his own expense--takes a plane to Colorado, and rents a hotel room for the two days he's required to be present, then flies back. (Our executive was the hard-line, he requires three days in office.)

    The touted benefits of "social interaction" are altogether missing, as most of the folks in a globalized company are remotely connected anyways. The forced relocations should have been to Chennai, India and not the office 90 miles away. Even our department is scattered throughout 7 states.

    So: Any hints on where to find telecommuting friendly employers? Most of what I see online are either scams or auctions where the "employer" takes the lowest bidder. You spend more time looking for work--on very short term "contracts"--then making a steady income. I'm on Dice, but nothing is telecommute and minimum travel is 180 miles a day, if I'm lucky.

    Thanks and take care...

    --Robert

  43. telecommute = outsource by stanjo74 · · Score: 1

    If your job can be telecommuted, it can be outsourced. I'll stick to jobs that require my presence at the office or nothing gets done.

    1. Re:telecommute = outsource by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ban offshoring.

    2. Re:telecommute = outsource by MLease · · Score: 1

      Ban offshoring.

      Yeah, that's gonna happen! Big corporations pretty much own the government, and they save tons of money from offshoring (or at least they think they do). You think they're going to allow a law which gets in the way of that? Dream on!

      --
      I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
    3. Re:telecommute = outsource by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      If your job can be telecommuted, it can be outsourced.
      Common misconception, but not necessarily true. I mean, if you are 8 or more timezones away, have absolutely no interaction with the office and know nothing about the companies inner workings, then you could make the case for outsourcing, but otherwise, you are a person who is more valuable than a faceless drone on the other side of the world.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  44. It's like giving a stack trace by tepples · · Score: 1

    ["What are you working on?" is] a useful question.

    It's still a complex question: What sub-step of what step are you on of adding what feature to what module, and to which bullet points promised by marketing does it contribute? There are five wh's in that, and answering all of them at once is like giving a stack trace.

    For instance if you need to interface to a particular feature it is much easier to get going on that if you actually know the person who works on that feature the most.

    Then the question becomes "What modules do you maintain?" or "Do you know who maintains this form or that report?"

    Or it's time to pick some poor soul to do your code review and you need to know what people work on who might be most familiar with that piece of code.

    I'd start by looking at who has made the last few commits to the module.

    1. Re:It's like giving a stack trace by TheLink · · Score: 1

      You could point them to the bug report you filed to help yourself keep track of stuff.
      Q: "What are you working on?"
      A: bug #1321.

      So to use your link's example:
      bug #1321: LXML, crashes under heavy load when using the system default version of libxml.

      They or you can look up the bug dependencies, and the comments on why you are fixing or working-around stuff that way.

      --
  45. Re:It can be hard to seperate work and personal ti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I actually find it harder to focus when in office and easier when alone at home. You know, alone? no distractions.

  46. Re:There is no such thing as working at home witho by OceanWave · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Home:

    I've got no kids home, here. I can tune out the pets. The TV is too hard for the other to figure out, so it's off. I skip personal calls, if I don't have the time.

    I will peek at my weather radar from time to time. (I can still peek when I'm in the office on lessor applications.)

    Food? Don't have time to eat during the day.

    Exercise? Guilty there. I'll keep the cordless on mute and jog around the yard on conference calls that last 10 times longer than they should. (At least I get the exercise.)

    In the Office:

    My iPod is broken, and the chatter boggles my mind when trying to code (when I'm awake). While I do have a parrot for a pet, he's less of an issue on conference calls.

    Since they killed off telecommuting 3 days a week, the 180 mile commute leaves me "dead but dreaming" for the better part of the morning into the afternoon. (Not enough hours in the day, and going through heavy city traffic).

    Tiny laptop monitor, vs. self purchased dual screen. Painful chair, vs. ergonomic (purchased). No mouse / trackball / keyboard, but for said company laptop. Bootup time is 1-2 hours, where I can leave it on, working from home.

    Yes, working from home is better for some.

    --Robert

  47. Now and then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd be happy with a couple of days a month of telecommuting. The Senior VP at my work claims that companies are moving away from telecommuting because of the problems it causes. I don't buy it. Some days I'm perfectly happy to work but just can't be bothered to drag myself in. If I'm really feeling that way, I call out sick and they get no work at all. Which do they prefer?

  48. ROFL by lightknight · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think the telecommuting debate can be easily answered by asking a single question-> which location offers the least amount of distractions?

    If you have Office Space-style bosses, dropping by every 15 minutes, to see "how you're coming along with that project" then working at home is a godsend. You'll be more productive, and your code will show it.

    If you have bosses who know to leave you alone while you're working on something (but they are known themselves for being generally available for when you have questions (you go to them) -> "What does the client want here?" or "Teach me how to Git" or "When you worked at Inuit, how did you guys solve this problem?"), and family life is filled with distractions (the GF is PMSing that week, the kids like to play loud music, the husband is in Marketing and has entered his mid-life crisis) than working at work would potentially be better. Hell, some of the most productive workers in human history are people who stay late at the office because they hate their family life.

    And of course, if both home and work are filled with equal levels of annoyance, then you're kind of screwed. You can try working at a Starbucks or a Barnes and Noble, but it's still fairly rough. On the plus side, you do get the social interaction that you miss at both places, the coffee is usually hot, and there are lots of books on various subjects you might need to learn nearby (boss says learn Ruby, wander over to aisle with O'Reilly Ruby book in it).

    If I had a choice in life, I'd have two offices -> one to meet with people in, and one to be productive in. The one to meet with people in would have conference chairs, a large Mahogany desk, and perhaps a small putting green next to the Koi pond (the palace at Versaille might be large enough). The one to be productive in would be at an undisclosed location, with a fiber connection & enough food / supplies to last me weeks (a Japanese sleeping tube might be slightly smaller than I'd potentially want here). The only people with knowledge of said undisclosed location would be the catering (for when I don't feel like cooking) and cleaning (for when I leave) staff, and they'd work for cash (no name given). I'd keep a separate email address and cellphone for said place; it's the only way to be productive. If you stumbled across the place, there'd be a pair of swords of the doorways, and a sound recording constantly being played over the outside speakers (said sound consisting of the last few moments of the life of the person who previously disturbed me while I was otherwise engaged in potentially deeper thoughts).

    --
    I am John Hurt.
  49. Re:It can be hard to seperate work and personal ti by ajlisows · · Score: 1

    I've been doing half time telecommuting for a few years now and I actually love (most of the time) how personal and work time change a bit. I can shift my working time around to fit my schedule. Wife is off today and wants to go to lunch? Cool, I'll take a long lunch and just work a bit later in the day. Friends called and they want to slam a few back? I'll work from home that next day and start late. Sometimes I'll have to take a call while I am doing something else once in awhile, but the gains are worth it.

    Not to mention I find it a lot easier to focus on all tasks away from the office. The number of times people stop by to say hi, ask a non work related computer question, receive a cold call from a vendor, etc. I deal with while in the office is really high. Almost every time it blows all momentum I had. I try to do all the interacting with people I need to do when I am in the office and do the actual work while out of the office.

  50. It's called lack of self discipline by shiftless · · Score: 1

    Learning some self discipline will solve this problem.

    1. Re:It's called lack of self discipline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother to force myself into an unnatural seperation when it's a 5min bike ride to the office?

      The phycological value of seperating the "work spaces" from "home spaces" allows me to be happier at home. Work from home is just a scam to get me to pay for power for the machine I'm working on. Also replacing drives and power supplied from home when they blow is... challangeing.

  51. Rise when cataclysm occurs by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    As the movie Contagion pointed out on a side note, telecommuting will skyrocket in the event of a pandemic or any kind of incident like it. It briefly shot up after 9/11 when people were afraid to fly.

    1. Re:Rise when cataclysm occurs by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that travel budgets are the first to go when the economy goes south or the company isn't doing well.

      It's a nice option, but IMHO should only really come into play during rare circumstances like that.

  52. Experiences from a telecommute startup by Yuen-Lin · · Score: 2

    We build a video collaboration tool (VSee) for telecommuters and distributed teams. We're 25+ people spread across the East and West Coast US, Europe and Singapore. Almost everyone works from home. Some things we've learned over the years:

    Appropriate mode of communication:
    Email, micro-blogging, IM, IRC, video - we've tried them all :) There isn't a one size fits all. The modes vary in how asynchronous they are (email: asynchronous, video/IM: synchronous), how "lightweight" they feel (video: heavy, IM: light) and how much human communication bandwidth they offer (video: high, IM: low). Knowing when to switch from one to another - and not get stuck in a sub-optimal mode of communication - is key. We've developed a sense for when an email thread or IM conversation has grown past its usefulness, and switch to video e.g. VSee. Used appropriately, video can really reduce conflict, promote understanding and speed up decisions. We usually don't start a conversation right off on video, but on IM.

    Appropriately designed tools:
    Because telecommuting is still in early days, often we've adopted tools which weren't quite designed for the "remote work" use case. E.g. with Skype, one can't do video + screen sharing at the same time, and the screen sharing quality is just not enough for real work e.g. looking at code together. With WebEx, video is sub-par and the UX is optimized for webinars/presentations, not group collaboration. VSee is our (ongoing) attempt to solve many of these problems and package group video + app/screen sharing in a UI that's pleasant to use throughout the telecommute work day. We love feedback on how to make it work even better in the trenches.

    Team practices:
    It's easy to get out of sync when relying purely on as-needed communication. We've found daily standups/huddles over video to be indispensable, even if brief. The formula we use is each team has its own daily huddle. Tech leads will often attend the huddles of other teams. After huddles, people often break out into smaller groups to discuss issues in more detail. All of this happens quite seamlessly on VSee.

    Ambient awareness, team bonding:
    Being remote does take a toll on these aspects. Ambient awareness refers to the random ideas and conversations, things overheard while sitting in an open work area. We haven't fully figured that one out yet :) Micro-blogging, IRC and a culture of open sharing helps (e.g. every email list is open to all employees). For team bonding, we get everyone together for fun activities (snow sports, wake-boarding) twice a year, encourage team members close to each other to meet up more often, and in general try to create a family-like and family-friendly environment.

    All the best to telecommuters old and new!

  53. Re:Obligatory/Shameless GoToMeeting && GoT by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Judging by my coworkers, the other 2/3 don't telecommute.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  54. Telecommuting Isn't for Everyone by rosieannemayers · · Score: 2

    When I first started working at home, I missed having co-workers. I missed dressing up for work although I admit I liked not having to commute for work. In terms of productivity, I really needed to discipline myself. I have a child at home so my productivity was definitely affected in the first few weeks. I agree that telecommuting is a great option but I don't think it's something that should be implemented for all. Some groups of people need to be in the same physical space to work. Some are more productive working alone at home.

  55. mitchell and webb cover this topic... by krups+gusto · · Score: 1
  56. why is this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    still an issue? i telecommuted starting back in '97 and the wife unit has been telecommuting since '05

  57. Working at home is a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People don't work at home to be free from distractions. They work at home so they can goof off and pretend to work while still getting paid.

    I have 60 reports in my department (5 managers, each having a dozen or so reports), and as an experiment one year I allowed anyone who wanted to work from home one day per week to do so. I had our IT department produce reports on email, VPN, and web browsing activity from everyone in my department during that year, and what I found was not surprising at all. Most of the people who "worked" from home were far less productive, goofed off online far more than employees in the office, and took on average about 20% longer to complete their projects (owing to the 20% of the time they were at home not doing any work). Monday and Friday were also, not surprisingly, the most popular work-at-home days taken, and by a large margin.

  58. We tried it and it didn't work well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I own a small company that builds computational systems for numerical analysis (hardware and software). I have 18 full time and 10 part time/hourly employees in a 12,000 square foot office/lab/assembly facility.

    Distraction is a constant problem, even with as few people as we have. Whether it's walk-up traffic, other people having conversations, Internet time sucking, phone calls, or whatever, it all sucks money out of the bottom line.

    We have tried numerous approaches to minimizing distraction and time-off-task, and telecommuting was certainly not one of those that helped. Between spouses and kids and errands and pets and TV and other life responsibilities, there was just too much getting in the way.

    We tried office hours - people would set "office hours" during which time they welcomed visitors and interruption for various things, but that didn't work because people did not respect them - there was always something "too important" to delay.

    We tried universal quiet hours, and that didn't work because it made it too difficult to meet the needs of our clients.

    So, we finally did what America did for decades before modern "office efficiency" practices took over. I moved the company to a rented facility for four weeks and had a construction company come in and bulldoze the cube farm and replace it with offices around the perimeter of our building (it's a 120x100 building), and moved the labs and conference rooms to the center space.

    Now, everyone has their own office with natural lighting, a pleasant atmosphere, and individual temperature control (THAT was freakin' expensive). Each of the 24 new staff offices is 140 square feet (14x10) with seating for up to four for small meetings. There are smaller shared offices for the part-time/temporary/hourly/co-op workers. We lost some lab space and a couple of conference rooms, but we're getting by without it just fine.

    I had to suspend profit sharing for a while to pay for it, but nobody was the slightest bit upset about it. It was by far the best $350k I ever spent on my employees.

    The moral of the story is, employees work best in a comfortable environment that they enjoy being in, because they're not thinking about how much they'd rather be somewhere else, doing something else. Some people like it warmer. Some like it cooler. Everyone likes natural lighting. Everyone likes to be comfortable in their surroundings. Give them a comfortable environment, and they will thrive and prosper.

  59. Telecommuting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Our company is increasingly working with remote teams in the US and India. Because of that, phones are used a lot more than they used to be, making the work environment noisier. Those who are able to work from home have a lot better chance of getting their work done IF THEY WANT TO because they will have more control over their own environment. My house is dead quiet during the day and my cube is one person's voice after the other.

  60. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +1 Insightful

  61. I'm far more productive at home by KlomDark · · Score: 1

    No distractions, far better development machine, triple 24" monitors, etc.

    Coming into work, I have to use a shitty laptop with a 1280 x 900 (900? not sure on Y axis) hooked to a single 1280x1024 monitor. Short cube walls. I'm really tall, so the typical cube desk is always too short for me, pinning my legs between it and the chair. (Gotta have the chair at its highest position or my posture is horrible.) Have to constantly be bothered when I'm trying to concentrate on coding. Listening to people blabber loudly on their phones in several languages. (I can easily filter out people speaking English, but if it's a language I don't know, then part of my brain is always focused on that, trying to find a pattern in the strange speaking.)

    I'm not a social person while coding, so I get a hell of a lot more accomplished when I work by myself.

    For the kind of work I do, there's no reason at all to come into work except for weekly meetings. When I'm working from home, I am relaxed and don't care how long I work. When I'm in the cube farm, all I want to do is leave.

  62. Waking up at work by FarrisGoldstein · · Score: 2

    I've been 80% telecommute for the last 5 years, and just two months ago started a 100% telecommute job. New employer is PST, I'm in Central timezone. On top of the new employer being very good with communication technology, it also just really helps to make telecommuting work when you have an organization of people with effective and complementary work ethics in general.

    My previous employer was Eastern. Waking up AFTER your co-workers have already started their workday is annoying and gets old very fast, especially when the people to the east of you are idiots. Many places tend to treat email as a realtime communication tool these days, which breaks down very easily. Almost daily, I would wake up to an "urgent" email thread requesting a ton of last-minute work from me as soon as I "get in." I learned to check (and double-check) whether somebody else had been contacted to do it, because a majority of the time they would have found some other schmuck without telling me or even replying to the thread with a "nevermind."

    It's no wonder our General Manager was a diehard "presentist." His constant, unsubtle reminders of how much better it would be when (not if) I relocated to HQ were one of the reasons I jumped ship. He knew I did all my work and then some. He knew first-hand that I performed better when I didn't have a herd of caffeinated New Yorkers drooling on the back of my chair and asking about my non-existent opinion on the recent sportsball encounter. He knew I was underpaid even though the cost of living in my hometown was almost 50% of that in HQ. Yet he still thought it was more important for me to relocate than to recognize and exploit the increased efficiency of keeping Grumpy Goldstein happy and alone in his secluded batcave somewhere out in the midwest.

    If your company is always managed by firedrill, with poor planning and project management, it's a safe bet that your telecommuters are going insane. And he was shocked (SHOCKED!) when I left.

    The only inherently tough part of working from home that I still struggle with is keeping my family from being too much of a distraction without creating unnecessary distance. I don't like keeping my office door closed unless I'm VERYBUSYDONOTDISTURBFORANYREASONBEWAREOFBEARS, but if I'm honest that's rarely the case. Sure, there are times when undivided focus would be a good idea. I just don't like shutting them out, because, well... They're my family, and I'm quite fond of them and wish them to be happy. I've considered putting some sort of studio light outside my office door: if the light's on, do not enter. But that's probably overkill. Most of the time, my wife will just IM me from the other room anyway, which works most of the time.

    Anyway, now that I've gone from several wrong-way-to-do-it telecommuting jobs to one that is modern and good at it, I wonder if there are any decent trade groups for telecommuters. Or, better yet, I'd love to let some coke-bottled researchers observe my habits for some university study on long-term telecommuting.

  63. You don't need a green card to telecommute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Telecommuting is really flexible. While in college in South Africa I did a remote internship with an American company - no work visa required. This is how things should work. I'm educated, I'm a native English speaker - why should I face discrimination just for being born in a different country?

  64. I figure. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . .once the inevitable war with Iran breaks out (come on, you know it's coming) and gas shoots up to $3.00/litre, bosses will look upon telecommuting more favourably.

  65. Re:Obligatory/Shameless GoToMeeting && GoT by fdrebin · · Score: 1

    A 3rd of Telecommuters can't even dress themselves in the morning as it's too strenuous.

    When I worked from home full time, I'd torn a tendon in my knee and had on a leg brace and was on crutches, so I just had on my robe, and since it was a little cold, over the robe I had on this Mexican poncho sort of thing - very colorful. So FedEx shows up with a package for me (a laptop) and I open the door... the poor guy was so shocked by my appearance that he dropped the laptop upon seeing me. (He kinda caught it with his foot, it wasn't damaged).
    After that I swore that I'd always be fully and properly dressed, no matter what.

    Where I work now, you could show up in the office in swim fins, trunks, mask and a snorkel and maybe it'd get a comment... but probably not.

    --
    Stupidity... has a habit of getting its way.
  66. Great to see by Rob+Nance · · Score: 1

    It's great to see so many people extolling the virtues of working from home. I got very ill back in December, and was kind of forced to be allowed to work from home and now it's kind of an open option for me. I usually do it one or two days a week, and I get a lot done those days. I also usually put in more hours, because it's easy to just pop on the TV around quitting time, and work less efficiently, but keep on working since I have my laptop out and I'm already logged into things. Saving the miles on my car, the gas, the commute time, etc is all awesome. Losing an hour or more of my day to commuting is such a waste for me and the company I work for.

  67. Working from home by WankerWeasel · · Score: 1

    I've been working from home for 6 years now. My boss is 2000 miles away and I love it. I get more done working on my own than in an office where people are going to be stopping by every couple minutes to distract me. I don't take a lunch break generally other than to quickly cook something or grab something and head back to my home office or the couch. It also means I generally work longer hours than I would in the office since when 5pm comes, I'm already at home and if I'm into something, I just continue working on it. This isn't to say that working remotely is for everyone. It takes a great deal of discipline to be able to stay on task when you could be doing things like cooking, cleaning the bathroom, going shopping, watching TV or taking a nap. It's definitely not something for everyone but it has worked great for myself and the rest of my company.

  68. News flash, people in the office are lazy too by Rob+Nance · · Score: 1

    It's probably easier to skate by in an office environment and go unnoticed than telecommuting. To say 10% of telecommuters aren't working means that chances are, 10% of your office workers aren't working. Lazy is lazy, people don't just magically become productive when you force them into an office. I'd venture to say because of improved morale, you're probably getting more work out of telecommuters than office zombies.

    1. Re:News flash, people in the office are lazy too by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      like I said, it's not about productivity. read harder. it's about liability. I can run a business on as little as 5% productivity. there's money to be made any at level. but there's also too much to lose at every level. that's why the liability matters more than the productivity. you can't fire a telecommuter on a whim. you can fire an office employee on a whim.

  69. Re:There is no such thing as working at home witho by s73v3r · · Score: 1

    Half of your "distractions" are just as present in the office.

  70. Must be nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would *love* to telecommute. What I'm actually getting is quite different. At my company, my team's manager recently took over for another manager who left, and is taking our team with him. He's now managing a different team in addition to ours. The other team is on a different floor of the building than us, working on something different than us. They're already out of room, and are hiring more people, exacerbating their space problem. My team has plenty of space where we are. But of course, they're doing the obvious thing: Trying to think of ways to move us up to the other team's floor so we can "collaborate with them". We're going to end up jammed in on top of each other. Sometimes I think companies do stuff like this just so they can appear to be trying hard.

  71. The right attitude helps by spxZA · · Score: 1

    My CIO's feelings are, "I don't care where or how long you work, as long as you deliver and as long as you are reachable".

    I try to work from home as much as possible. As a team lead, this means that I'm constantly shuffling meetings and workshops around, to free up a day here and there. However, I find that I only tend to work half the day - from lunchtime I mope around the house. But, I do the same amount of work in those 4-5 hours than I do in 2-3 days at the office. I'm a whole lot more productive, and it ends up being cheaper for everyone - I don't have to pay for petrol/gasoline, my employer doesn't have to pay for the energy to power the aircons, etc. Plus it's less stressful for both myself and my team (although I bug the shit out of them on skype & lync when I'm working remotely). I am planning to work 2 or 3 days a week from home, once we

    My work day varies in length - it's fairly flexible depending on what is going on, was is broken and what my workload is. Some days I work 5 hours, other days 24 hours. I sometimes get looks from other departments if I stroll in at 10h00. But I care not: I'm here to get the job done.

    We have a number of devs that telecommute from various places around the country and world. It works because they are the right kind of people to make it work. Yes, they may work slightly less or more than what their contract says, but they deliver. Other people just cannot work outside of an office, they need a strictish/rigidish environment in order to work properly.