Location : Cleveland, OH
A December post by Bob Cringely, titled "You Can't Go Home Again," focuses on telecommuting. The two companies mentioned are Lockheed Martin and IBM. Lockheed, apparently because they are a defense contractor, can charge the government for lights, heat, water, and so on, if there are bodies in their plants. Therefore, people in seats in the plants equate to someone else footing the bill for their facilities. IBM, which really pushed for telecommuting and closed many offices, is now requiring people to work from their new offices. Specifically in Iowa, Missouri, and Colorado. Those sites are all "Delivery Centers."
I found it strange that IBM was moving back to a "traditional" or "legacy" office mentality. Especially as all of the IBMers that I know work from their home offices. So, I simply asked two IBM employees about Cringely's post, their thoughts on relationship building as telecommuters, and whether Cringely's assertation that IBM will start opening more offices is, in their opinion, valid. Two opinions is not statistically significant, but at least I could get *some* balance to the article. Neither IBMer gave me specific approval to use their names, they remain "Anonymous."
What does the other respondant have to say?
It looks like Cringely needed to do a little more research. Both of these individuals are able to function, quite well, without the daily face-to-face interactions. Both, I would venture to guess, also take the time to occasionally meet their management, peers, and, possibly, support staff. What is apparent to me is that they function very well without the need to commute to an office. A global assertation that IBM is moving all of their employees back to offices, based on delivery centers in certain parts of the USA, does not appear to be correct. Like asking two IBMers for their opinions and using that to show that Cringely is mistaken. But at least I asked someone at IBM.
Link: I, Cringely: You Can't Go Home Again
I found it strange that IBM was moving back to a "traditional" or "legacy" office mentality. Especially as all of the IBMers that I know work from their home offices. So, I simply asked two IBM employees about Cringely's post, their thoughts on relationship building as telecommuters, and whether Cringely's assertation that IBM will start opening more offices is, in their opinion, valid. Two opinions is not statistically significant, but at least I could get *some* balance to the article. Neither IBMer gave me specific approval to use their names, they remain "Anonymous."
I find Cringely's article to be quite a distortion. Yes, IBM Global Services, in an effort to not simply offshore all services contracts, has been opening more US data centers for managed services and outsourcing. For those data centers, where typically IBM is hiring externally and bringing in new and younger talent, they are choosing to require more of the staff to work in the office. I think that's pretty reasonable given the job responsibilities and climate.
I do NOT agree that in principle IBM has decided to somehow re-centralize amidst downsized real estate. We are making smart decisions like putting all the people working in Massachusetts into a single campus instead of twelve different facilities, but that doesn't mean we told people "come start working in the office again". Half my team does not and will not work from an office ever again; it's just not in our DNA (and that includes me).
How do you expand your relationships when working from home? It's clearly a different kind of ethos, but I see colleagues write blogs, participate in groups, do more local networking (outside of IBM but in the industry), speak at real or virtual conferences, etc. I have very good personal relationships with IBM colleagues all over the world because of these virtual extensions. Heck I even play scrabble online with a group of IBMers.
What does the other respondant have to say?
I think that will only impact a small number of employees at IBM in the relative scheme of things. I see certain teams where that would definitely be a benefit, but I have experienced a culture here that is very adept at working remotely. It certainly depends on the job. I would not be any more effective in an office than I am at home. In fact, I would argue that I would be less effective, due to the constant interruptions that are to be had, time lost due to commuting, etc. Like anything else, moderation is the key and what works well for one may not necessarily work well for someone else. I agree that face-to-face relationships are valuable in certain circumstances, but not having that available on a daily basis has not been a limiting factor for me in my career at IBM.
It looks like Cringely needed to do a little more research. Both of these individuals are able to function, quite well, without the daily face-to-face interactions. Both, I would venture to guess, also take the time to occasionally meet their management, peers, and, possibly, support staff. What is apparent to me is that they function very well without the need to commute to an office. A global assertation that IBM is moving all of their employees back to offices, based on delivery centers in certain parts of the USA, does not appear to be correct. Like asking two IBMers for their opinions and using that to show that Cringely is mistaken. But at least I asked someone at IBM.
Link: I, Cringely: You Can't Go Home Again
Powered By : Domino
BlogSphere V1.3.1
Join The WebLog Revolution at BlogSphere.net