The Data That Drove Yahoo's Telecommuting Ban

Stiletto writes "Business Insider and All Things D are reporting that Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer's decision to ban telecommuting was data-driven, as you'd expect out of the former Google exec. After spending months frustrated at how empty Yahoo parking lots were, Mayer consulted Yahoo's VPN logs to see if remote employees were checking in enough. Despite all the outrage and flak she's getting from those outside the company for the move, some ex-employees are praising the decision, citing abuse, slacking off, and general 'unavailability' of folks working from home."

Comments

I can slack off anywhere

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm in the office right now, slacking off, and have been all day. As far as any "Data Driven" metrics are concerned though, I've been a star employee.

Re:I can slack off anywhere

[Xest]

Yes, basically what TFA tells us is not that working from home was ever a problem at Yahoo, but that Yahoo has never ever had any way of measuring productivity, settings goals, or ensuring people are achieving their targets.

It sounds like it was basically a free for all, turn up, don't turn up, do what you want, no one will care or measure you!

It sounds like working from home is their scapegoat instead of refusing to admit to extremely incompetent management.

Yahoo has been haemorrhaging talent for years, removing perks from them like working from home is only going to make the problem worse, especially if they're still refusing to admit to fundamental problems in their company like the aforementioned lack of ability to set goals or check whether anyone is actually doing anything.

Now all that's going to happen is they'll lose more talent, productivity will probably go down as people are tired from long probably sometimes unnecessary commutes, costs will go up as they have to pay for more heating/lighting/office space and Yahoo will continue it's downward spiral

I actually had some sympathy for the move before I saw this story, now it's obvious the decision had no demonstrable merit. More fool them.

Re:I can slack off anywhere

[fermion]

I can slack off anywhere, but at home I can do housework, cook dinner, run an errand, sex, lots of stuff. The idea is not that you can't do some of these things at the office,but that your choices are more limited.

It really sounds like the employees, as some often do, simply took advantage of a good situation. I have, and have known people, who have had such opportunities. You keep yourself logged in. You stay next to a phone. If you leave, you make sure you can check problems from where you are. You check email frequently. It is a matter of discipline. it is hard. It is why some people make more than others. Those who don't need supervision do not incur the expense of supervision.

Re:I can slack off anywhere

[Hal_Porter]

Stop posting on Slashdot, Kevin.

If you're not in my office by 6am tomorrow in smart casual dress for a pop quiz on "Watercooler Culture" you're fired.

Smart casual means ironed chinos and a dress shirt by the way, not filthy jeans and a filthier Tux T shirt with pin burns in it. Which reminds me, they'll be a drugs test afterwards.

Also a visit to the hairdresser might be in the best interests of your career, if you know what I mean.

Enjoy your evening!

Re:I can slack off anywhere

[Penguinisto]

That's the problem using any metric, really...

If I wanted to slack off and pretend to work (like the rest of the team would ever let that happen!), I'd simply fire up the VPN, then have some small program randomly open and close certain binaries on the remote servers, etc.

At work? Meh - I could slack off very easily by simply walking around a lot carrying papers, chatting with friends, or whatever. Far too many ways to slack off in a cube farm.

Problem is, when I was telecommuting? I was too busy on the phone in conferences w/ remote company clients, had deadlines to meet, and in IM sessions with other team members helping them out (and getting help). Because I worked on the servers, I had VPN open from 8am to 6pm on most days... working. Now, I show up at 8, then leave at 5.

Re:I can slack off anywhere

[Jaysyn]

Yes, that you're busy working on something that doesn't need connection to Yahoo's central systems probably.

That or Yahoo's hiring process is so flawed they ended up employing society's layabouts and nothing else.

That.... that would explain a lot actually.

Re:good idea

[h4rr4r]

That had nothing to do with being in the office or not.

I bet most of the posters right now are in the office. People will slack off no matter what. Either you get your job done or you do not, how long it takes in the allotted time frame or what you do while doing it should not matter.

how dumb can people be?

[alen]

if you're going to slack off, log on to VPN and slack off.
i work with people who work from home and offices in different states. everyone is always available and you know they are working because there are always emails flowing and tickets being done

Re:how dumb can people be?

[hcs_$reboot]

It works at your company because the management is (probably) competent, and knows how to motivate people to work. Management was not Yahoo's strongest quality

Forgotten employees?

[gblackwo]

"A lot of people hid. There were all these employees [working remotely] and nobody knew they were still at Yahoo."

It's amazing that a company can have people on the payroll, and the managers forget about them..

Re:good idea

[h4rr4r]

I have several. Thanks for trying though.

I know each of them very well and they know me. If they get their jobs done by the deadline they can be jerking it at their desks for all I care.

I never said they were cogs, just that I expect them to get their work done in a timely fashion and if they can do that in two hours and spend the rest of the day on slashdot that is my fault not theirs. Even more likely it means everything is going well and their jobs are not the sort were hours are that predictable.

Re:Motivation

[daem0n1x]

Every time I hear people complaint about lazy employees, I blame their managers. I mean, what are managers for? I don't expect them to micromanage what everyone is doing all the time, but their role is to receive the work, distribute it and check that it's delivered on time and quality.

If there are slackers, I can't believe their managers don't know about it. Unless they're also slackers, or don't give a shit. But then the company has far worse problems to attend than telecommuting.

It's a Mgmt Issue

[tungstencoil]

I've worked at places that are heavily remote and heavily not. I've seen it done successfully and not.

One place, when I was on team A 100% on-site, I interacted with my manager very minimally. We had little direction, lots of bureaucracy, and a slow pace of accomplishing anything. I moved to another team B, 100% remote, interacted with my manager a lot, we had lots of planning, direction, and follow-up, and got stuff DONE.

I've seen it time and again: the overwhelming majority of people need leadership. What kind of leadership is specific to the individual; good mgmt can tailor their style to individual needs. Rare - much rarer than most people think - is someone who needs no leadership.

What happens is that remote teams can exacerbate management failings. People slack off; some people work in chunks (as I do - I will goof off for a couple of hours and then pound out a day's work), some people work slow and steady. If you're results-oriented, you can measure this. If you manage people correctly, it can be done remote, on-site, or blended.

Managing remote teams requires a different set of skills. Most places make the mistake of assuming a remote worker is just like an on-site worker, to be treated the same. They're not. It's not better or worse, just different.