If Work From Home becomes a thing...

Lumen wrote: »

In my place the function of management is to get people the resources required to do their jobs, and then help them make decisions about how to use them.

Consequently, the requests usually flow upwards, not downwards. e.g. "which of these things do you think is more important?", or "I can't get this done, does it matter?".

Same.
I'm a senior risk & strategy analyst (they change the titles regularly, role is essentially a hybrid of credit risk analyst and data scientist), and, while my team would be advanced users, consumers, and presenters of data, my manager's (and his etc) function is about enabling the team to provide their function. Not micromanagement.
Micromanagement = bad management.

PhilOssophy

Cyrus wrote: »

not sure about where you work but in my place if the owner wants it or the CFO wants it, its required.

Better get it done than get into a philsophical argument like the above that will get me the sack :pac:

Agree! It was a 2 minute job to tell him what was needed, and a 5-10 minute job for him when I got him. If I could have done it I would, and our CFO isn't a person who needs everything spoon fed either.
It was not worth the argument on here anyway, that's for sure

might be time to unfollow!

Cyrus

Lumen wrote: »

In my place the function of management is to get people the resources required to do their jobs, and then help them make decisions about how to use them.

Consequently, the requests usually flow upwards, not downwards. e.g. "which of these things do you think is more important?", or "I can't get this done, does it matter?".

thats good for you, but i was making the point that everywhere is different, and while there is a percieved right and wrong way of doing things id look pretty foolish having that debate with our owner given how successful he has been

just to be clear im not talking about a successful local company make a million or two a year, this is a multi national making multiples of that, wholly owned by one person.

Cyrus wrote: »

thats good for you, but i was making the point that everywhere is different, and while there is a percieved right and wrong way of doing things id look pretty foolish having that debate with our owner given how successful he has been

just to be clear im not talking about a successful local company make a million or two a year, this is a multi national making multiples of that, wholly owned by one person.

Sounds like a unicorn

Cyrus

ELM327 wrote: »

Sounds like a unicorn

if we were a tech company absolutely

but we are in a less sexy industry and make actual money so the multiples assigned would tend to be a lot lower :pac:

lickalot

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Agree! It was a 2 minute job to tell him what was needed, and a 5-10 minute job for him when I got him. If I could have done it I would, and our CFO isn't a person who needs everything spoon fed either.
It was not worth the argument on here anyway, that's for sure might be time to unfollow!

Everyone's work place is different, what be the norm in yours mightn't be the norm in others and vice versa.

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Agree! It was a 2 minute job to tell him what was needed, and a 5-10 minute job for him when I got him. If I could have done it I would, and our CFO isn't a person who needs everything spoon fed either.
It was not worth the argument on here anyway, that's for sure might be time to unfollow!

It wasn't an argument. It was discussion of business process.

People were sharing their experiences in different types of organisations.

PhilOssophy

beauf wrote: »

It wasn't an argument. It was discussion of business process.

People were sharing their experiences in different types of organisations.

I understand that, but people jumping to conclusions like micromanaged hell hole or that it must be a p1ss hole call centre (which I would add I'm sure provide thousands of jobs to mainly young people who appreciate them to start them off in life on a career) was not sharing experiences.

I understand that places are different and I was just using it as an example of the type of thing management would use (if they had found out) to further their argument that WFH doesn't work, if that is how they feel about it to start with.

Our organisation is flexible and generally people are left to their own devices, but sometimes things crop up and are needed urgently. Cest la vie. Get on with it, if it was going to take 2 days the CFO wouldn't have just asked so ad hoc.

I'll leave the debate there.

You wrote off WFH using a frankly ridiculous example.

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I understand that, but people jumping to conclusions like micromanaged hell hole or that it must be a p1ss hole call centre (which I would add I'm sure provide thousands of jobs to mainly young people who appreciate them to start them off in life on a career) was not sharing experiences.

I understand that places are different and I was just using it as an example of the type of thing management would use (if they had found out) to further their argument that WFH doesn't work, if that is how they feel about it to start with.

Our organisation is flexible and generally people are left to their own devices, but sometimes things crop up and are needed urgently. Cest la vie. Get on with it, if it was going to take 2 days the CFO wouldn't have just asked so ad hoc.

I'll leave the debate there.

I think the point people are making as that your thinking for why WFH won’t be adapted across the board would be reasons that wouldn’t apply in an awful lot of workplaces (that are suitable for wfh which are usually skilled to high skilled type roles).

That being said the person you tried to contact was being a bit foolish not having is phone on him. If I’m off away from my desk at a time I might be getting emails or on the very rare occasion a call I have my phone on me (who doesn’t have their phone on them 24/7 nowadays?) and push notifications on my emails etc not that they would be even urgent but I like to see what’s coming in email wise even across weekends and evenings etc.

storker

The Spider wrote: »

[...] and yes as has been mentioned middle managers will find it harder to get ahead not being in the office or they may become surplass to requirements as their teams carry on without much interference from them.

I understand the fear and need to get back to an office if you essentially aren't producing outputs but your team is

Electric Sheep

In my experience, confident managers are usually fine with wfh, it is the managers who lack confidence either in themselves, their teams or both that feel the need for bums on seats in the office.

Electric Sheep wrote: »

In my experience, confident managers are usually fine with wfh, it is the managers who lack confidence either in themselves, their teams or both that feel the need for bums on seats in the office.

Agreed. Presenteeism is best left in the 90's where it belongs.

If I can do my day's work in 4 hours or 10, what difference does it make to the company, once my days work is done.
Many moons ago, I was hourly and made sure to clock out and leave at exactly 40 hours done.
Now (without micromanagement) I'm checking emails on my phone at midnight if I cant sleep. See the difference?

PhilOssophy makes a valid case for this scenario and I agree.

If people treat WFH as coming and going as everyone pleases, how can it possibly work.

In his scenario, what if PhilOssophy stepped away for an hour while his colleague was? Then the CFO has to wait two hours. If the CFO happened to go away just as the data was gathered, it could be three hours before he looks at it.

A three hour delay for something that could be retrieved in a few minutes if people were at their desks like they are supposed to is acceptable ?

You're implying its completely reasonable to expect someone to be at their desk all day with no breaks. Because that's the only way to find them and the only way to get the information with a few minutes of a request that can come at anytime day or night 24/7

Because as soon as you bring in breaks, holidays or any one of a hundred other possibilities etc this "communication system" is broken.

Not only does that not work for WFH it doesn't work even if you are in the office.

beauf wrote: »

You're implying its completely reasonable to expect someone to be at their desk all day with no breaks.

Away from your desk for an hour is not a break.
It's going awol.

People gets breaks at lunch time and usual scheduled times in the morning and afternoon.

People coming and going as they please throughout the day will make WFH not feasible for many organisations.

storker

salonfire wrote: »

Away from your desk for an hour is not a break.
It's going awol.

People gets breaks at lunch time and usual scheduled times in the morning and afternoon.

People coming and going as they please throughout the day will make WFH not feasible for many organisations.

It's not difficult to work around. I've never worked anywhere where you couldn't slip out to run an errand, take and extra long lunch or leave a bit early for some reason as long at the rest of the team was informed, including the team-leader or manager, and the time made up later or taken as a quid pro quo for something else. I treat WFH the same way - if I'm going to be away from my computer or uncontactable for more than a few minutes, I inform those who need to know - just like I would do in the office.

Electric Sheep

salonfire wrote: »

Away from your desk for an hour is not a break.
It's going awol.

People gets breaks at lunch time and usual scheduled times in the morning and afternoon.

Nobody on my team has scheduled breaks. We come and go as we lease as long as we are there for scheduled meetings.

I wouldn't work somewhere where I had to ask permission to take a break.

salonfire wrote: »

Away from your desk for an hour is not a break.
It's going awol.

People gets breaks at lunch time and usual scheduled times in the morning and afternoon.

People coming and going as they please throughout the day will make WFH not feasible for many organisations.

This is no longer about WFH its about archaic work practises in the office.

So how do you have meetings, go to someone else's desk to mentor them, or office, work off-site, meetings off site, travel if you can't leave your desk. We've also got Flexitime. Someone might be on a diet day anything.

My day today was pretty much all meetings. If I had been in the office I'd have spent less than an hour at my desk. I wouldn't have been near my work phone or my PC to get the email or call for hours.

Electric Sheep wrote: »

Nobody on my team has scheduled breaks. We come and go as we lease as long as we are there for scheduled meetings.

I wouldn't work somewhere where I had to ask permission to take a break.

So how is anyone supposed to schedule a meeting with you between your existing meetings and your going away from your desk as you please?

Of course it's handier for you to do what you want. But it's not effective way of working for the company or colleagues as the example illustrates.

If there is a junior you are working with and he takes his lunch at 12 and you take yours at 2, that's an hour's less of an overlap you have of working together. That's five hours less per week support time the newbie can call on you as he gets stuck.

Electric Sheep

salonfire wrote: »

So how is anyone supposed to schedule a meeting with you between your existing meetings and your going away from your desk as you please?

Of course it's handier for you to do what you want. But it's not effective way of working for the company or colleagues as the example illustrates.

You schedule meetings at least a day in advance and attendees work around it. It's considered pretty rude to just call a meeting on the day unless it's a production issue.

I presume you have heard of Outlook.

salonfire wrote: »

So how is anyone supposed to schedule a meeting with you between your existing meetings and your going away from your desk as you please?

Of course it's handier for you to do what you want. But it's not effective way of working for the company or colleagues as the example illustrates.

If there is a junior you are working with and he takes his lunch at 12 and you take yours at 2, that's an hour's less of an overlap you have of working together. That's five hours less per week support time the newbie can call on you as he gets stuck.

That's micromanaging in all its glory.

No one can function without being managed by the person above. No schedule, just constant unplanned interruption. No autonomy. Ticking all the boxes and then some. It's the opposite of efficient.

There's is no doubt however that some people are unable to work in any other way.

beauf wrote: »

That's micromanaging in all its glory.

No one can function without being managed by the person above. No schedule, just constant unplanned interruption. No autonomy. Ticking all the boxes and then some. It's the opposite of efficient.

There's is no doubt however that some people are unable to work in any other way.

That's nice, but you still haven't explained how to avoid the scenario as exampled in this thread.

salonfire wrote: »

That's nice, but you still haven't explained how to avoid the scenario as exampled in this thread.

Which scenario there's been more than one.

https://dilbert.com/strip/2019-01-15

Maybe you mean this one...

salonfire wrote: »

So how is anyone supposed to schedule a meeting with you between your existing meetings and your going away from your desk as you please?....

This seems to suggest your only form of communication is either person, or via their desk phone. Is that a genuine question?

thewolfisloose

krissovo wrote: »

I plan my weekly schedule and block book slots in dairy, if colleagues need to get me they will book a slot and I am available For them. I have never had an issue with being available as we all work in a similar way. The company trusts us to get the job done. If we struggle to book a meeting slot with the whole team for an important meeting we indicate it in the invite and most will make alternate arrangements for the kids. If they cannot make arrangements then often they will have a child on their lap for the meeting.

I think failing on these basic tasks is a dead giveaway as you suss the competency of a new colleague. If they've graduated into a manager/team lead role and can't book in a meeting via Outlook or distribute minutes of a meeting then chances are your team are in for a gruelling and directionless 6-9 months!

Banana Republic.

bilbot79 wrote: »

I'd be tempted to buy a little apartment in the Canaries and spend my winters there, in fact I'd probably

1/ Sell my Dublin gaff

2/ By a cheaper Irish gaff in the countryside

3/ Buy a place in the Canaries

4/ Buy another place somewhere in Europe, Hvar or somewhere like that

And just spend weeks and months in each place.

How would the rest of you exploit work from home if you had it permanently?

That all sounds great but I’m sure you need a permanent address then having one for 6 months and then somewhere else for 3 months then another for 3 months this sounds fanciful at best. WFH isn’t a free pass, that’s how WFH wouldn’t work for some companies and individuals cause they think it’s a holiday job then.

Going down stairs for a cuppa tea is fine but leaving the house and just generally doing whatever you want will kill any long term benefit & puts your job at risk WFH. The one thing it demands is personal responsibility and then it’s the best move ever. I still treat it exactly like I’m in the office. It’s the best way to approach it from the start otherwise it’s a slope.

I know of a guy who went into town for the afternoon and got caught after doing it numerous times. Tried every trick in the book to get wat with it but eventually got the heave ho.

So WFH can be the handiest job if done right no commuting and a far more relaxed self managed environment if you do it right.

Banana Republic. wrote: »

That all sounds great but I’m sure you need a permanent address then having one for 6 months and then somewhere else for 3 months then another for 3 months this sounds fanciful at best. WFH isn’t a free pass, that’s how WFH wouldn’t work for some companies and individuals cause they think it’s a holiday job then. .

But working say 3 days in the office and 2 days at home how about that. Because that's the same thing. Or working with an outsourcing you don't even know where there are. Or if you are off site or traveling for work. Maybe you think thats also a holiday?

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Going down stairs for a cuppa tea is fine but leaving the house and just generally doing whatever you want will kill any long term benefit & puts your job at risk WFH. The one thing it demands is personal responsibility and then it’s the best move ever. I still treat it exactly like I’m in the office. It’s the best way to approach it from the start otherwise it’s a slope.

I know of a guy who went into town for the afternoon and got caught after doing it numerous times. Tried every trick in the book to get wat with it but eventually got the heave ho.

So WFH can be the handiest job if done right no commuting and a far more relaxed self managed environment if you do it right.

I like the way these types of stories never mention metrics or tracking productivity. Only clock watching.

Banana Republic. wrote: »

................

I know of a guy who went into town for the afternoon and got caught after doing it numerous times. Tried every trick in the book to get wat with it but eventually got the heave ho. ..................

We all know of someone who got the heave ho ......... not doing your job doesn't go down too well with your employers in many cases, shocker.

Lumen

salonfire wrote: »

A three hour delay for something that could be retrieved in a few minutes if people were at their desks like they are supposed to is acceptable ?

From a productivity perspective you're conflating throughput and latency. More responsive does not mean more productive.

The classic case of this is the receptionist who is largely paid for attendance. He will be "unproductive" almost all the time. But this is OK, because that's the job.

Most people, particularly expensive people, are paid to produce things. The modern workplace operates asynchronously.

"Being at their desks like they're supposed to" is twentieth century thinking for many workers, but culture is slow to change.