IBM MBIs (Moves Back In)
June 7, 2017 7:02 AM Subscribe
IBM, remote-work pioneer, is calling thousands of employees back to the office
No one seems to think that this is a good idea for anyone, and others point out that IBM still says that remote work is a good thing.
No one seems to think that this is a good idea for anyone, and others point out that IBM still says that remote work is a good thing.
IBM seems determined to kill off any job satisfaction its employees have left.
posted by Ausoleil at 7:14 AM on June 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
posted by Ausoleil at 7:14 AM on June 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
I have assumed that these moves are a way to decrease their total workforce without actually "laying off" the workers who will quit rather than stop remoting.
posted by the antecedent of that pronoun at 7:15 AM on June 7, 2017 [46 favorites]
posted by the antecedent of that pronoun at 7:15 AM on June 7, 2017 [46 favorites]
This reminds me of another dying company.
posted by vacapinta at 7:17 AM on June 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
posted by vacapinta at 7:17 AM on June 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
A theory among some employees is that IBM is using co-location as a downsizing effort
Well duh. Seems like an end-run around the WARN Act.
posted by uncleozzy at 7:18 AM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
Well duh. Seems like an end-run around the WARN Act.
posted by uncleozzy at 7:18 AM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
“It’s time for Act II: WINNING!” read the subject line of Peluso’s blog post on the company intranet.
I'd be inclined to quit just because of the title, even if the post turned out to be announcing free ice cream
posted by thelonius at 7:19 AM on June 7, 2017 [26 favorites]
I'd be inclined to quit just because of the title, even if the post turned out to be announcing free ice cream
posted by thelonius at 7:19 AM on June 7, 2017 [26 favorites]
Well, I think they're going to have trouble moving back into the Kingston plant...
posted by mikelieman at 7:23 AM on June 7, 2017
posted by mikelieman at 7:23 AM on June 7, 2017
I can attest to the importance of innovation being driven by core teams working closely together but I also think there needs to be flexibility as well in allowing people to co-locate teams in the places that make the most sense and let those teams have some say over how they will collaborate.
Like, if you have 25 offices around the the world, then let the workers decide where their innovation pods should be located.
The reason I say this is that I know a ton of bad ass trans women tech workers that I'd love to hire, but they can already work remotely and they damn sure aren't moving to Texas. If I could choose to have my team based out of say, London, Madrid or the PNW then I'd have way better success at finding and retaining innovative talent.
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:26 AM on June 7, 2017 [17 favorites]
Like, if you have 25 offices around the the world, then let the workers decide where their innovation pods should be located.
The reason I say this is that I know a ton of bad ass trans women tech workers that I'd love to hire, but they can already work remotely and they damn sure aren't moving to Texas. If I could choose to have my team based out of say, London, Madrid or the PNW then I'd have way better success at finding and retaining innovative talent.
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:26 AM on June 7, 2017 [17 favorites]
The indirect downsizing theory is discussed in the FA, and dismissed as foolish and counter productive. Ina any case, IBM has not been shy about direct layoffs to date. Why be shy now?
posted by notyou at 7:32 AM on June 7, 2017
posted by notyou at 7:32 AM on June 7, 2017
"It’s time for Act II: WINNING!”
I teach a course in business writing, and I think I'll use this as an example of ineffectively and unethically breaking bad news to employees. The dishonesty and callous disrespect is shocking.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 7:33 AM on June 7, 2017 [38 favorites]
I teach a course in business writing, and I think I'll use this as an example of ineffectively and unethically breaking bad news to employees. The dishonesty and callous disrespect is shocking.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 7:33 AM on June 7, 2017 [38 favorites]
I have assumed that these moves are a way to decrease their total workforce without actually "laying off" the workers who will quit rather than stop remoting.
It's funny you should say that. That has not occurred to me in the past, and as I was glancing at the article, it just -- struck me. Maybe because that picture looks like a building you'd expect to see people carrying boxes out of.
I don't know IBM from the inside out, and I haven't even paid attention to their stock, etc., but I think we sometimes make the assumption they're a steeply declining company because their consumer products became irrelevant. They are huge players in AI and digital commerce.
Thing is, I'd hate to be the salesperson who has to make a call right now on behalf of IBM to tout their remote technology solutions.
I stopped by a co-working space to see a friend yesterday and the owner of it told me a story about how the local tech employers leaned on the Chamber of Commerce to get them to lean on him a little bit: "ease up on those entrepreneurship classes you've been doing with our support." Said the tech employers are scared people starting their own little companies will dry up their applicant pools.
I'm becoming more Calvinist by the minute.
posted by randomkeystrike at 7:33 AM on June 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
It's funny you should say that. That has not occurred to me in the past, and as I was glancing at the article, it just -- struck me. Maybe because that picture looks like a building you'd expect to see people carrying boxes out of.
I don't know IBM from the inside out, and I haven't even paid attention to their stock, etc., but I think we sometimes make the assumption they're a steeply declining company because their consumer products became irrelevant. They are huge players in AI and digital commerce.
Thing is, I'd hate to be the salesperson who has to make a call right now on behalf of IBM to tout their remote technology solutions.
I stopped by a co-working space to see a friend yesterday and the owner of it told me a story about how the local tech employers leaned on the Chamber of Commerce to get them to lean on him a little bit: "ease up on those entrepreneurship classes you've been doing with our support." Said the tech employers are scared people starting their own little companies will dry up their applicant pools.
I'm becoming more Calvinist by the minute.
posted by randomkeystrike at 7:33 AM on June 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Yeah, the idea that IBM of all companies would somehow attempt to disguise layoffs as not layoffs is laughable. Trust me when I tell you, they never had any trouble visibly, vocally laying off huge swaths of their workforce. I left without getting laid off, mainly because I was still young and cheap, but in the 8 years I was there, there were at least 4 rounds of significant layoffs that saw other members of my team be let go.
posted by jacquilynne at 7:35 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
posted by jacquilynne at 7:35 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
If you're not in the office every day, how will you optimally participate in bus-under-throwing and back-stabbing activities with your coworkers?
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 7:40 AM on June 7, 2017 [16 favorites]
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 7:40 AM on June 7, 2017 [16 favorites]
Wouldn't this be a much cheaper way to shed a bunch of people though? If those people are resigning rather than being fired, that seems like a big savings on severance/healthcare for IBM.
posted by strange chain at 7:41 AM on June 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by strange chain at 7:41 AM on June 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Maybe they haven't been slow to do a legit layoff before but they're trying something new. Attempting to innovate in an area they have a lot of expertise in so they don't get stuck always firing people in the same old ways?
I hope all the workers newly crammed together take advantage of their physical proximity to associate themselves into a strong union.
posted by mattamatic at 7:41 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
I hope all the workers newly crammed together take advantage of their physical proximity to associate themselves into a strong union.
posted by mattamatic at 7:41 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
*contintously presses button on an air horn called ABOLISH THE WAGE SYSTEM*
posted by The Whelk at 7:44 AM on June 7, 2017 [24 favorites]
posted by The Whelk at 7:44 AM on June 7, 2017 [24 favorites]
Also unemployment insurance payments.
I doubt it was the driver of the decision, but was it considered a net plus when all was considered? That seems very likely.
posted by praemunire at 7:50 AM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
I doubt it was the driver of the decision, but was it considered a net plus when all was considered? That seems very likely.
posted by praemunire at 7:50 AM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
Wouldn't this be a much cheaper way to shed a bunch of people though? If those people are resigning rather than being fired, that seems like a big savings on severance/healthcare for IBM.
The articles specifically says they are offering severance to the people who choose not to relocate.
Also unemployment insurance payments.
"I live in West Virginia and my job moved to Atlanta" is going to be considered a valid reason for quitting for UI purposes, I would think.
posted by jacquilynne at 8:00 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
The articles specifically says they are offering severance to the people who choose not to relocate.
Also unemployment insurance payments.
"I live in West Virginia and my job moved to Atlanta" is going to be considered a valid reason for quitting for UI purposes, I would think.
posted by jacquilynne at 8:00 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
I feel like there's probably some relationship here to politicians, who, when shouting about "states' rights," make the statement that if people don't like their state's policy on whatever then they can just move.
posted by jferg at 8:04 AM on June 7, 2017
posted by jferg at 8:04 AM on June 7, 2017
IBM can be doing this for more than one reason. Even if staff reduction as a primary goal, they may see it as planned benefit; even when this means the expense of a new recruitment campaign to replace lost talent, the replacements will be cheaper employees. This will be a reflection on the company's interest in retaining domain knowledge. It's possible that Marketing might not be interested in that if they're in the midst of a corporate makeover.
Left unmentioned in the article is how IBM will deal with field staff. One of the reasons why somebody reporting to White Plains might live in Detroit is because they're in daily contact with customers and prospects there. It's going to be much more expensive to pay for somebody's expenses to travel from New York to Detroit regularly, and it's going to be a lot more wearying for the staff doing it.
As for the recurring benefits of their open office plans, this is almost always a bullshit and class-based manouver that I've also ranted about before.
posted by at by at 8:07 AM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
Left unmentioned in the article is how IBM will deal with field staff. One of the reasons why somebody reporting to White Plains might live in Detroit is because they're in daily contact with customers and prospects there. It's going to be much more expensive to pay for somebody's expenses to travel from New York to Detroit regularly, and it's going to be a lot more wearying for the staff doing it.
As for the recurring benefits of their open office plans, this is almost always a bullshit and class-based manouver that I've also ranted about before.
posted by at by at 8:07 AM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
My husband read a headline about this and his gut reply was, "oh, guess remote work hardware and software stopped being a profit center and they can finally shed those women and old people they've been barely tolerating as remote workers for the last decade."
Pretty reasonable reaction. For a long time I'm sure they used their huge remote workforce to show they were eating their own dog food.
posted by potrzebie at 8:10 AM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
Pretty reasonable reaction. For a long time I'm sure they used their huge remote workforce to show they were eating their own dog food.
posted by potrzebie at 8:10 AM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
Trust me when I tell you, they never had any trouble visibly, vocally laying off huge swaths of their workforce. ... after 1985.
Before that they pretty much never laid anyone off, even during the Great Depression.
When I was in IBM, I was a Field Engineer, so I never had the option of working from home.
Now I have the opposite problem. My current employer closed my local office, which was 10 miles away, and I now have to work from home.
It was OK when it was an option, but I'm not adjusting well to not getting out of the house.
My alternative is to move from rural Vermont to the MA128 corridor. Hmmm...
I actually have major productive days when I'm down there 'rubbing shoulders', but there's no way I can go back to real traffic.
posted by MtDewd at 8:12 AM on June 7, 2017
Before that they pretty much never laid anyone off, even during the Great Depression.
When I was in IBM, I was a Field Engineer, so I never had the option of working from home.
Now I have the opposite problem. My current employer closed my local office, which was 10 miles away, and I now have to work from home.
It was OK when it was an option, but I'm not adjusting well to not getting out of the house.
My alternative is to move from rural Vermont to the MA128 corridor. Hmmm...
I actually have major productive days when I'm down there 'rubbing shoulders', but there's no way I can go back to real traffic.
posted by MtDewd at 8:12 AM on June 7, 2017
The unemployment insurance payment angle is mostly moot, as a vast majority of remote workers are working on contract. So many contract workers are employed by IBM that they have an outside company that handles all the on-boarding, or at least did when I worked remote for big blue.
Also, internally, they never talk about layoffs or firing. They simply say that person has been 'resourced'.
As in:
"Hey everyone, welcome to the conference call, first up is Bill who wants to give us the run down on last month's numbers, Bill?"
"..."
"Sam, Bill's been resourced."
"Oh, ok, ah, Teresa, do you have the rundown?"
~~~
Being able to see if someone's desk has been cleared out might be one possible benefit for having everyone local.
Of course, having worked in other large beehive style buildings, knowing who's still there and employed vs out on maternity/laid off/fired, can still be difficult.
posted by dreamling at 8:14 AM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
Also, internally, they never talk about layoffs or firing. They simply say that person has been 'resourced'.
As in:
"Hey everyone, welcome to the conference call, first up is Bill who wants to give us the run down on last month's numbers, Bill?"
"..."
"Sam, Bill's been resourced."
"Oh, ok, ah, Teresa, do you have the rundown?"
~~~
Being able to see if someone's desk has been cleared out might be one possible benefit for having everyone local.
Of course, having worked in other large beehive style buildings, knowing who's still there and employed vs out on maternity/laid off/fired, can still be difficult.
posted by dreamling at 8:14 AM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
The dishonesty and callous disrespect is shocking.
Remember, this is IBM; so while that behavior is terrible, it shouldn't really come as a surprise.
posted by Greg_Ace at 8:37 AM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
Remember, this is IBM; so while that behavior is terrible, it shouldn't really come as a surprise.
posted by Greg_Ace at 8:37 AM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
I definitely recommend folks RTFA on this one - it discusses how remote work comes with both pluses and minuses compared to co-location, acknowledging that they both have their plus sides, and it discusses how this is probably an impractical choice if cost-cutting is the primary or sole aim (since it's very hard to predict who would take severance).
I've gone into depth before about how much I dislike distributed teams and work-from-home culture, although I acknowledge it's really awesome for some other folks. I do have experience with a company where teams like HR and marketing are mostly distributed in their home offices all over the country or the world and it's...not great for functioning and for any sort of informal knowledge transfer (which is something where I didn't realize how much I relied on it until I did't have it). Among other things, unless you have a reason for formal interaction with someone, you literally never meet them - and even if you do have a reason for interaction, it tends to stay pretty specific to whatever question is at hand. It's awful - I would never willingly choose to work for a company with such a strong work-from-home culture again, and I have to say that I understand this change. Of course, it all depends on job roles - I realize community and collaboration is essential for some while also a distraction for others.
posted by R a c h e l at 8:37 AM on June 7, 2017 [22 favorites]
I've gone into depth before about how much I dislike distributed teams and work-from-home culture, although I acknowledge it's really awesome for some other folks. I do have experience with a company where teams like HR and marketing are mostly distributed in their home offices all over the country or the world and it's...not great for functioning and for any sort of informal knowledge transfer (which is something where I didn't realize how much I relied on it until I did't have it). Among other things, unless you have a reason for formal interaction with someone, you literally never meet them - and even if you do have a reason for interaction, it tends to stay pretty specific to whatever question is at hand. It's awful - I would never willingly choose to work for a company with such a strong work-from-home culture again, and I have to say that I understand this change. Of course, it all depends on job roles - I realize community and collaboration is essential for some while also a distraction for others.
posted by R a c h e l at 8:37 AM on June 7, 2017 [22 favorites]
IBM is paying for moving costs and trips to the cities to which each employee has been assigned. It will also pay severance to employees who decide not to move.
This is what I was looking for when I read the article--it's almost at the end. The decision to pay relo I think supports the idea that while workforce reduction may be an expected and acceptable outcome of the co-location process, it's not the primary motivator. IBM has never had trouble straight-up laying people off, and they could just as easily decide not to pay relo and cause a higher percentage of employees to leave rather than foot their own relo bill.
Having a senior role related to innovation in a Fortune 200 company, I can see why IBM had decided to make this move. We have remote teams here, and it is definitely a double-edged sword. Making a remote team effective requires more manager expertise and agreement from team members, and even then there are some benefits of in-person collaboration that are lost. But it's still a tough move to make, and this kind of major change in direction will no doubt cause people to leave.
On preview, what R a c h e l said.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 8:38 AM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
This is what I was looking for when I read the article--it's almost at the end. The decision to pay relo I think supports the idea that while workforce reduction may be an expected and acceptable outcome of the co-location process, it's not the primary motivator. IBM has never had trouble straight-up laying people off, and they could just as easily decide not to pay relo and cause a higher percentage of employees to leave rather than foot their own relo bill.
Having a senior role related to innovation in a Fortune 200 company, I can see why IBM had decided to make this move. We have remote teams here, and it is definitely a double-edged sword. Making a remote team effective requires more manager expertise and agreement from team members, and even then there are some benefits of in-person collaboration that are lost. But it's still a tough move to make, and this kind of major change in direction will no doubt cause people to leave.
On preview, what R a c h e l said.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 8:38 AM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
Perhaps my perspective is poisoned by working in an industry that has changed surprisingly little in centuries. . . but this doesn't seem too unreasonable. The opportunities for casual interactions and real collaboration when you deal with people in person in the hallway are pretty hard to overlook. If your job is an incredibly well specified task with measurable outcomes and few unsolved problems, then it probably doesn't matter where you do it. If your job involves coming up with new ideas, being around interesting people working on similar things is hard to beat. There's a reason so many great things happen first in dense cities, and it isn't just population and probability.
posted by eotvos at 8:49 AM on June 7, 2017 [15 favorites]
table-style desks have been pushed together in clumps throughout wide open rooms to create small podsNevermind. Not throwing gasoline on the open-plan office and burning it to ashes before calling in your remote workers is inexcusable. If you didn't force people to work in an open-plan office, you mind find fewer of them begging to work from home.
posted by eotvos at 8:49 AM on June 7, 2017 [15 favorites]
If you're not in the office every day, how will you optimally participate in bus-under-throwing and back-stabbing activities with your coworkers?
Grain alcohol, and Twitter.
posted by urbanwhaleshark at 8:50 AM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
Grain alcohol, and Twitter.
posted by urbanwhaleshark at 8:50 AM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
Grain alcohol, and Twitter.
The politics thread is thataway.
posted by RolandOfEld at 8:57 AM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
The politics thread is thataway.
posted by RolandOfEld at 8:57 AM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
RobotVoodooPower: "If you're not in the office every day, how will you optimally participate in bus-under-throwing and back-stabbing activities with your coworkers?"
That's what Slack is for.
posted by chavenet at 9:00 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
That's what Slack is for.
posted by chavenet at 9:00 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
Trust me when I tell you, they never had any trouble visibly, vocally laying off huge swaths of their workforce.
Well, this was before the IBM CEO agreed to serve on Trump's business advisory panel, even as folks like Elon musk step down in disgust. If you recall, Trump's jobs saving plan involves public shaming (which sometimes works and sometimes doesn't), and IBM is largely committed to selling of anything that looks like manufacturing while pushing for more H-1B, and more offshoring.
IBM's financial position has been one of many years of declining revenue, and their productivity is kinda crap. Apple, Google and Facebook all have profits north of $400k per employee. For a bit of perspective, Wal-Mart has $5k profit per employee. Clocking in at $29,000 per employee, IBM is closer to Wal-Mart than a tech company in productivity terms. Simply put, they're in a diminished position to compete for talent, when you consider that AWS is carrying a non-performing online retailer, and there's been a handful of massive cloud compute entrants recently ready to lay down cash now to become another GoogleBookSoftpple a decade from now.
If this isn't a stealth layoff, it probably should be?
posted by pwnguin at 9:00 AM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
Well, this was before the IBM CEO agreed to serve on Trump's business advisory panel, even as folks like Elon musk step down in disgust. If you recall, Trump's jobs saving plan involves public shaming (which sometimes works and sometimes doesn't), and IBM is largely committed to selling of anything that looks like manufacturing while pushing for more H-1B, and more offshoring.
IBM's financial position has been one of many years of declining revenue, and their productivity is kinda crap. Apple, Google and Facebook all have profits north of $400k per employee. For a bit of perspective, Wal-Mart has $5k profit per employee. Clocking in at $29,000 per employee, IBM is closer to Wal-Mart than a tech company in productivity terms. Simply put, they're in a diminished position to compete for talent, when you consider that AWS is carrying a non-performing online retailer, and there's been a handful of massive cloud compute entrants recently ready to lay down cash now to become another GoogleBookSoftpple a decade from now.
If this isn't a stealth layoff, it probably should be?
posted by pwnguin at 9:00 AM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
Of course, it all depends on job roles - I realize community and collaboration is essential for some while also a distraction for others.
Depends on not just the role but the team. I've been at HQ and am now remote. I have fantastic working relationships spanning years with people I've yet to meet in person. Some folks I need to make a point of catching a beer or coffee with if I'm in town. If anything, going remote allows me some perspective away from the day to day annoyances and allows me to really focus on what matters to a much greater degree than when I was based in-office.
Having lived both ways - IMHO innovation comes from the people involved. In my own experience a group that works well together does so at about the same level either in person or remotely. In fact, I've started to think about this all in reverse terms: most people can be forced to think collaboratively if locked into a room together or if they're constantly bumping into each other in the hallways. People who are very good at collaboration don't need that level of physical proximity to continue being effective given webex and group chat.
My read on IBM's move is part shadow layoff, part lazy management. If I'm being charitable, maybe they're trying to force a culture change, but most culture change efforts are again, really just lazy management in disguise.
posted by NoRelationToLea at 9:04 AM on June 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
Depends on not just the role but the team. I've been at HQ and am now remote. I have fantastic working relationships spanning years with people I've yet to meet in person. Some folks I need to make a point of catching a beer or coffee with if I'm in town. If anything, going remote allows me some perspective away from the day to day annoyances and allows me to really focus on what matters to a much greater degree than when I was based in-office.
Having lived both ways - IMHO innovation comes from the people involved. In my own experience a group that works well together does so at about the same level either in person or remotely. In fact, I've started to think about this all in reverse terms: most people can be forced to think collaboratively if locked into a room together or if they're constantly bumping into each other in the hallways. People who are very good at collaboration don't need that level of physical proximity to continue being effective given webex and group chat.
My read on IBM's move is part shadow layoff, part lazy management. If I'm being charitable, maybe they're trying to force a culture change, but most culture change efforts are again, really just lazy management in disguise.
posted by NoRelationToLea at 9:04 AM on June 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
"If you're not in the office every day, how will you optimally participate in bus-under-throwing and back-stabbing activities with your coworkers?"
In my experience, people who do those things on the regular can do it very effectively via email. In some cases, it's their preferred medium.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 9:07 AM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
In my experience, people who do those things on the regular can do it very effectively via email. In some cases, it's their preferred medium.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 9:07 AM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
Plenty of cynicism and IBM bashing above, but the article makes some really telling points that apply beyond IBM:
Even if IBM is worthy of general mefi critique, maybe this is actually a smart strategy?
posted by Chipeaux at 9:11 AM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
“It turns out the value of innovation is so strong that it trumps any productivity gain... [Remote work] was a great strategy for the 90s and the 80s, but not for 2015.”My job is highly flexible; working from home is a daily option. But my experience aligns entirely with the cited HBR study that "employees who have more chance encounters and unplanned interaction perform better". There's a reason innovation pops up around dense urban environments, or coffeehouses through history.
Even if IBM is worthy of general mefi critique, maybe this is actually a smart strategy?
posted by Chipeaux at 9:11 AM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
Yeah I've worked remotely for most of the last six years and am strongly in favor. You know what's rad about working remotely? a) dramatic reduction of petty time-sucking bullshit just 'cuz we're all here in the building b) don't have to hear coworkers' -isms c) no weird looks when I go to the pisser because I don't look like I belong in either one. I'm going to be real here. I've suffered through a nonstop party of odd work environments and while I completely understand the necessity of humans being in a place for a number of activities, when I see it at my level colocation seems more like power-tripping than anything else.
Also being a minority can get you shut out of a lot of the casual face to face interaction that 'drives innovation'. Ask me how I know! Lmao fucking chance encounters. Jesus christ.
posted by nixon's meatloaf at 9:14 AM on June 7, 2017 [37 favorites]
Also being a minority can get you shut out of a lot of the casual face to face interaction that 'drives innovation'. Ask me how I know! Lmao fucking chance encounters. Jesus christ.
posted by nixon's meatloaf at 9:14 AM on June 7, 2017 [37 favorites]
I worked at IBM for the first few years when they were encouraging people to work from home full time (and closing floors in our building) and I'd never work in an environment like that again. You never had any idea who was doing what or where they were or who they worked for. You had these giant conference calls that never got anything done and it took days to ever get any question answered because of the communications turn-around time.
I'll never work anywhere where team-members are allowed to work from home more than a day or two at a time. I can turn my chair around and see my whole team and we talk through issues a hundred times a day. I can't imagine going back to working with non-colocated teams.
posted by octothorpe at 9:15 AM on June 7, 2017 [11 favorites]
I'll never work anywhere where team-members are allowed to work from home more than a day or two at a time. I can turn my chair around and see my whole team and we talk through issues a hundred times a day. I can't imagine going back to working with non-colocated teams.
posted by octothorpe at 9:15 AM on June 7, 2017 [11 favorites]
What's going unsaid here that got said a lot anonymously when Yahoo did it, is that there's a general belief that there's a ton of deadwood on the org chart: people who've arranged sweet remote work gigs for themselves, and then let institutional inertia pay them for what's basically become a do-nothing job. IBM has no problem doing layoffs, but they do it at the department or division level; at the individual level, managers have an incentive to retain headcount, so it's not that hard in large, spreadsheet-driven organizations to hang on in a rotted branch--after all, if they find you, they'll just lay you off, and until then, nice work if you can get it.
So this is, at least partly, just a weeding-the-garden moment because not many people are going to relocate just to show up and get laid off because it becomes obvious you don't do anything.
posted by fatbird at 9:16 AM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
So this is, at least partly, just a weeding-the-garden moment because not many people are going to relocate just to show up and get laid off because it becomes obvious you don't do anything.
posted by fatbird at 9:16 AM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
You had these giant conference calls that never got anything done and it took days to ever get any question answered because of the communications turn-around time.
"Is someone playing Pac-Man in here?"
posted by thelonius at 9:23 AM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
"Is someone playing Pac-Man in here?"
posted by thelonius at 9:23 AM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
table-style desks have been pushed together in clumps throughout wide open rooms to create small pods
This really is the rub. Many productive, hard working people simply can't get anything done when forced into a privacy-free "pod" setting, filled with constant interruptions and distractions. In my experience (as someone with ADHD), I'll happily show up to the office if I have a door I can close behind me. If I don't have that? I get much less done and am constantly stressed out about it.
Companies who want to attract top talent and keep that talent productive need to have options that work for both people who enjoy noisy/social environments and for those who need quiet and few distractions to produce.
(I am both awed by and a little incredulous by people who claim they prefer to work in cafes and public spaces with lots of people talking - but you keep claiming you exist, and so I believe you. But I do not, can never, understand you.)
posted by faineg at 9:39 AM on June 7, 2017 [28 favorites]
This really is the rub. Many productive, hard working people simply can't get anything done when forced into a privacy-free "pod" setting, filled with constant interruptions and distractions. In my experience (as someone with ADHD), I'll happily show up to the office if I have a door I can close behind me. If I don't have that? I get much less done and am constantly stressed out about it.
Companies who want to attract top talent and keep that talent productive need to have options that work for both people who enjoy noisy/social environments and for those who need quiet and few distractions to produce.
(I am both awed by and a little incredulous by people who claim they prefer to work in cafes and public spaces with lots of people talking - but you keep claiming you exist, and so I believe you. But I do not, can never, understand you.)
posted by faineg at 9:39 AM on June 7, 2017 [28 favorites]
In orgs like mine, the teams are highly distributed anyways, so its a moot point. Regular calls occur between people in 5 different timezones. In that case, it doesn't matter whether they are taking the call from their home or at a local office.
As mentioned above, this allows you to hire the people you want, regardless of where they are located. Nobody is forced to relocate.
posted by vacapinta at 9:43 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
As mentioned above, this allows you to hire the people you want, regardless of where they are located. Nobody is forced to relocate.
posted by vacapinta at 9:43 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
I worked at IBM for the first few years when they were encouraging people to work from home full time (and closing floors in our building) and I'd never work in an environment like that again. You never had any idea who was doing what or where they were or who they worked for. You had these giant conference calls that never got anything done and it took days to ever get any question answered because of the communications turn-around time.
I'll never work anywhere where team-members are allowed to work from home more than a day or two at a time. I can turn my chair around and see my whole team and we talk through issues a hundred times a day. I can't imagine going back to working with non-colocated teams.
Isn't this ideally what Slack is for?
posted by leotrotsky at 9:51 AM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
I'll never work anywhere where team-members are allowed to work from home more than a day or two at a time. I can turn my chair around and see my whole team and we talk through issues a hundred times a day. I can't imagine going back to working with non-colocated teams.
Isn't this ideally what Slack is for?
posted by leotrotsky at 9:51 AM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
What a step back. Pluses and minuses considered, it is not sustainable for companies to require all employees to live near a small number of large, expensive cities. I say this as a committed urban dweller. It's like an energy company recommitting to fossil fuels because they had trouble with green energy solutions. It'll serve them in the short-term, but they're missing out on getting to decide what the future looks like.
posted by Emily's Fist at 9:51 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
posted by Emily's Fist at 9:51 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
Is there research around what kind of work suffers when people try to perform it with distributed teams?
posted by nixon's meatloaf at 9:52 AM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by nixon's meatloaf at 9:52 AM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
Oh, and for anyone overthinking this plate of beans, here's an example of constructive dismissal: "move to NYC or leave the company". I'll grant you that consultants need to move.
> What's going unsaid here that got said a lot anonymously when Yahoo did it, is that there's a general belief that there's a ton of deadwood on the org chart
Can't speak to the internal politics of the place, just outside observations. But the data underlying the productivity numbers I mentioned are relevant. IBM and Facebook had the same profit ($11B), but IBM did it with 20x the number of employees (12,000 employees vs 380,000). Obviously they have different business models, so it's impossible to say with certainty that there's any weight to be cast off.
> (I am both awed by and a little incredulous by people who claim they prefer to work in cafes and public spaces with lots of people talking - but you keep claiming you exist, and so I believe you. But I do not, can never, understand you.)
There was an alphachat podcast the other day about open offices being terrible, and on the subject of cafes, the point was made that it might be easier to filter out conversations around you because they have no relevance to your job or life. Nobody other than the barista is likely to call your name, or mention Jenkins CI being down.
posted by pwnguin at 10:10 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
> What's going unsaid here that got said a lot anonymously when Yahoo did it, is that there's a general belief that there's a ton of deadwood on the org chart
Can't speak to the internal politics of the place, just outside observations. But the data underlying the productivity numbers I mentioned are relevant. IBM and Facebook had the same profit ($11B), but IBM did it with 20x the number of employees (12,000 employees vs 380,000). Obviously they have different business models, so it's impossible to say with certainty that there's any weight to be cast off.
> (I am both awed by and a little incredulous by people who claim they prefer to work in cafes and public spaces with lots of people talking - but you keep claiming you exist, and so I believe you. But I do not, can never, understand you.)
There was an alphachat podcast the other day about open offices being terrible, and on the subject of cafes, the point was made that it might be easier to filter out conversations around you because they have no relevance to your job or life. Nobody other than the barista is likely to call your name, or mention Jenkins CI being down.
posted by pwnguin at 10:10 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
Isn't this ideally what Slack is for?
Slack does serve that function but its primary purpose is to stimulate your adrenal gland and trigger the release of adrenalin and cortisol.
posted by GuyZero at 10:50 AM on June 7, 2017 [8 favorites]
Slack does serve that function but its primary purpose is to stimulate your adrenal gland and trigger the release of adrenalin and cortisol.
posted by GuyZero at 10:50 AM on June 7, 2017 [8 favorites]
I thought Slack was primarily for posting animated gifs.
posted by octothorpe at 11:39 AM on June 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 11:39 AM on June 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Having lived both ways - IMHO innovation comes from the people involved. In my own experience a group that works well together does so at about the same level either in person or remotely. In fact, I've started to think about this all in reverse terms: most people can be forced to think collaboratively if locked into a room together or if they're constantly bumping into each other in the hallways. People who are very good at collaboration don't need that level of physical proximity to continue being effective given webex and group chat.
This has been my experience as well. I'm mostly working with remote colleagues, and we get the work done just fine with a combination of Slack, email, video conferencing, and yes, even old fashioned phone calls. Yet my organization is merely remote tolerant instead of remote first. Not everyone collaborates well, and that's true for a variety of reasons, but colocating everyone isn't necessarily the fix that managers think it is.
If you're not in the office every day, how will you optimally participate in bus-under-throwing and back-stabbing activities with your coworkers?
Yeah, this is another reason why some folks prefer working remotely, because some of their coworkers are very, very toxic.
posted by jazzbaby at 11:48 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
This has been my experience as well. I'm mostly working with remote colleagues, and we get the work done just fine with a combination of Slack, email, video conferencing, and yes, even old fashioned phone calls. Yet my organization is merely remote tolerant instead of remote first. Not everyone collaborates well, and that's true for a variety of reasons, but colocating everyone isn't necessarily the fix that managers think it is.
If you're not in the office every day, how will you optimally participate in bus-under-throwing and back-stabbing activities with your coworkers?
Yeah, this is another reason why some folks prefer working remotely, because some of their coworkers are very, very toxic.
posted by jazzbaby at 11:48 AM on June 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
(I am both awed by and a little incredulous by people who claim they prefer to work in cafes and public spaces with lots of people talking - but you keep claiming you exist, and so I believe you. But I do not, can never, understand you.)
In grad school I was able to get lots of work done in cafes. But now I work in an open office and it drives me crazy because I can't get anything done at the office; I'm more productive when I work from home. In the job before this one I worked in an open office and was actually reasonably productive. Perhaps the difference is that I've gotten older.
But I think at least part of the difference is that in grad school, my work was pretty much independent - so I knew that the things going on around me were not relevant to my work. But now the things people are saying around me might be relevant to me (although they rarely are), so some part of my brain has to pay attention to what they're saying. The job before this one was at a smaller company, and I was usually working on the same project as the people I sat next to, so the "collaboration" benefits actually outweighed the distraction. Now I work for a company with as many employees as there are people in some small European countries1, and I work in a group that does internal consulting so the people sitting next to me are consulting on something different than me, so the distraction outweighs the collaboration. But we do the startup cargo cult thing nonetheless.
1. I count Iceland as European, even though it's not on the mainland.
posted by madcaptenor at 12:47 PM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
In grad school I was able to get lots of work done in cafes. But now I work in an open office and it drives me crazy because I can't get anything done at the office; I'm more productive when I work from home. In the job before this one I worked in an open office and was actually reasonably productive. Perhaps the difference is that I've gotten older.
But I think at least part of the difference is that in grad school, my work was pretty much independent - so I knew that the things going on around me were not relevant to my work. But now the things people are saying around me might be relevant to me (although they rarely are), so some part of my brain has to pay attention to what they're saying. The job before this one was at a smaller company, and I was usually working on the same project as the people I sat next to, so the "collaboration" benefits actually outweighed the distraction. Now I work for a company with as many employees as there are people in some small European countries1, and I work in a group that does internal consulting so the people sitting next to me are consulting on something different than me, so the distraction outweighs the collaboration. But we do the startup cargo cult thing nonetheless.
1. I count Iceland as European, even though it's not on the mainland.
posted by madcaptenor at 12:47 PM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
the company collected 8,088 patents last year
That... that can't be a coincidence, can it?
posted by Clandestine Outlawry at 12:56 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
That... that can't be a coincidence, can it?
posted by Clandestine Outlawry at 12:56 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
I've worked with and on lots of software teams both co-located and distributed and distributed teams suck big time. A team that all sits together and makes the effort to come in to the office at least 3-4 days a week is so much easier to deal with in every way. Camaraderie, off-the-cuff meetings and ideas, quick decisions, less email, all that. Right now I coach multiple distributed teams in 4 time zones and it's just ... there's zero upside except that the developers in some of the countries are cheaper on paper. Sitting on WebExes all morning, team retrospectives using online tools like RealtimeBoard (which is nice) ... it's all a giant pain in the ass that I wouldn't wish on anyone.
Though I would say:
* certain kinds of "lonely work" like writing documentation or calling clients ... perfect for home offices, etc.
* lots of offices do a bad job of designing spaces, which means people want to WFH just for the peace and quiet. Open team spaces are the fad for agile teams for example, but that team needs to not also be in the same big open space with people not on their team.
* I like the idea of companies allowing a full team from a suburb to work as a group off-site (someone's giant house, shared space, whatever).
Commuting certainly sucks. But people who have office space within say 20 miles who are all constantly working from home ... yucko. At that point you may as well just outsource all the jobs to someplace cheaper. Face-to-face communication is where it's at. And if you try to code during our team retrospective I'm gonna reach through the internet and slap you. Pay attention dammit! (It's very hard to have a "no devices" team working agreement for meetings when every person is literally on a device so that they can see you.)
posted by freecellwizard at 1:06 PM on June 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Though I would say:
* certain kinds of "lonely work" like writing documentation or calling clients ... perfect for home offices, etc.
* lots of offices do a bad job of designing spaces, which means people want to WFH just for the peace and quiet. Open team spaces are the fad for agile teams for example, but that team needs to not also be in the same big open space with people not on their team.
* I like the idea of companies allowing a full team from a suburb to work as a group off-site (someone's giant house, shared space, whatever).
Commuting certainly sucks. But people who have office space within say 20 miles who are all constantly working from home ... yucko. At that point you may as well just outsource all the jobs to someplace cheaper. Face-to-face communication is where it's at. And if you try to code during our team retrospective I'm gonna reach through the internet and slap you. Pay attention dammit! (It's very hard to have a "no devices" team working agreement for meetings when every person is literally on a device so that they can see you.)
posted by freecellwizard at 1:06 PM on June 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
the point was made that it might be easier to filter out conversations around you because they have no relevance to your job or life. Nobody other than the barista is likely to call your name, or mention Jenkins CI being down.
You understand that's not how the ADHD/APD brain works, right?
posted by ApathyGirl at 1:06 PM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
You understand that's not how the ADHD/APD brain works, right?
posted by ApathyGirl at 1:06 PM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
I can turn my chair around and see my whole team and we talk through issues a hundred times a day. I can't imagine going back to working with non-colocated teams.
I've been working mostly or entirely remotely for several years now, and as much as I appreciate the upsides, this is the thing I really miss.
I used to keep a whiteboard by my desk that became the de facto brainstorming space for my team, and I learned so many things so much faster and more easily because I had people I could constantly talk them through with and bounce ideas off of. These days I'm mostly doing okay, but wrapping my head around new issues and tools and concepts without having a team right there to talk to... man. It's significantly more challenging. Chat/Slack/similar tools just don't meet the same need in the same way.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 1:59 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
I've been working mostly or entirely remotely for several years now, and as much as I appreciate the upsides, this is the thing I really miss.
I used to keep a whiteboard by my desk that became the de facto brainstorming space for my team, and I learned so many things so much faster and more easily because I had people I could constantly talk them through with and bounce ideas off of. These days I'm mostly doing okay, but wrapping my head around new issues and tools and concepts without having a team right there to talk to... man. It's significantly more challenging. Chat/Slack/similar tools just don't meet the same need in the same way.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 1:59 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Commuting certainly sucks. But people who have office space within say 20 miles who are all constantly working from home ... yucko.
I have a cubicle with half-height perforated metal walls in an open plan office 30 miles south of my home, but I haven't put a toe in it for nearly a full calendar year, because the other members of my team are in three different locations in a time zone two hours ahead of me and the clients whose projects I manage are scattered all across the country. Why put on a bra and deal with some of the shittiest traffic in the country when I'd have to be using remote-worker communication strategies to do my job anyway?
posted by palomar at 3:02 PM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
I have a cubicle with half-height perforated metal walls in an open plan office 30 miles south of my home, but I haven't put a toe in it for nearly a full calendar year, because the other members of my team are in three different locations in a time zone two hours ahead of me and the clients whose projects I manage are scattered all across the country. Why put on a bra and deal with some of the shittiest traffic in the country when I'd have to be using remote-worker communication strategies to do my job anyway?
posted by palomar at 3:02 PM on June 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
I've seen it suggested elsewhere that this works well as a stealth way to get rid of older employees. Twentysomething and Big Blue says move? Sure, why not, close out the lease on the apartment and move to a new town!
Not as easy in your late forties with a house, kids, school assignments, etc. Those workers are likely to find it easier to leave IBM, without all the messy legal entanglements that a layoff focused on them would bring.
posted by bitmage at 3:27 PM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
Not as easy in your late forties with a house, kids, school assignments, etc. Those workers are likely to find it easier to leave IBM, without all the messy legal entanglements that a layoff focused on them would bring.
posted by bitmage at 3:27 PM on June 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
I've been working remotely for a couple months now. Doing software development for a company with maybe 30 developers in the office I was working with, and more in Europe.
It has been good for me, but I'm also mostly working on things that no one else is working on so the collaboration effects aren't that strong.
The office was open plan and I'd get to work at 7:15 and get most of my work for the day done by the time (usually around 10) that everyone else got in - after that I still got things done, but nowhere near as effectively as things get noisy and busy.
Yes, there's much to be said for the face to face encounters you get in an office, and the way that knowledge transfers, but I do audio calls for standups every day (though my team lead insists on doing it with his phone which provides terrible audio quality) and video/screensharing calls a couple times a week. And I'm really the only one working remotely regularly and there are people in my group who don't understand that it requires a bit more effort for everyone (including me). I am expecting to go back to the office for a few days later this month maybe, and catch up, catch others up.
But being at home also means that the viruses that spread through the office regularly don't spread to me (and the person sitting face to face with me who insisted in coming in to the office while coughing and sneezing heavily is now 1000 miles away).
posted by Death and Gravity at 3:34 PM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
It has been good for me, but I'm also mostly working on things that no one else is working on so the collaboration effects aren't that strong.
The office was open plan and I'd get to work at 7:15 and get most of my work for the day done by the time (usually around 10) that everyone else got in - after that I still got things done, but nowhere near as effectively as things get noisy and busy.
Yes, there's much to be said for the face to face encounters you get in an office, and the way that knowledge transfers, but I do audio calls for standups every day (though my team lead insists on doing it with his phone which provides terrible audio quality) and video/screensharing calls a couple times a week. And I'm really the only one working remotely regularly and there are people in my group who don't understand that it requires a bit more effort for everyone (including me). I am expecting to go back to the office for a few days later this month maybe, and catch up, catch others up.
But being at home also means that the viruses that spread through the office regularly don't spread to me (and the person sitting face to face with me who insisted in coming in to the office while coughing and sneezing heavily is now 1000 miles away).
posted by Death and Gravity at 3:34 PM on June 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
I've seen it suggested elsewhere that this works well as a stealth way to get rid of older employees.
I suppose but IBM apparently has more employees in India than the US right now and as other have mentioned they fire huge groups of people regularly so I dunno if they really need to be sneaky about getting rid of people.
posted by GuyZero at 3:42 PM on June 7, 2017
I suppose but IBM apparently has more employees in India than the US right now and as other have mentioned they fire huge groups of people regularly so I dunno if they really need to be sneaky about getting rid of people.
posted by GuyZero at 3:42 PM on June 7, 2017
Former IBMer here, still very involved with many current ones.
Some context: working from home culture is embedded deeply in IBM, this isn't changing that, and banning work from home; it's really changing remote working, and probably part of a push shutting down a bunch of regional offices that are no longer needed as the company moves away from services . And it's just the marketing dept.
Most IBMers I know/knew work from home at least one or two days a week. Its basically a given. A few do more like three or four. But there is a significant minority of people that basically never come into the office.
You don't know what they're doing, or how well they are doing it. Despite working remotely they are not available on Sametime (IM), and aren't answering their phones.
They should be performance managed for sure, but remote working does facilitate this kind of thing when it's abused. And it does get abused, a lot. Many, many teams have at least one person who is like this to a greater or lesser degree.
Tl;Dr working from home not changing, working remotely full time is getting the flick. And I think that's a pretty defensible decision - and I'm not one to defend IBM at every turn. Show up at the office once or twice a week. It will help everyone in many different teams.
posted by smoke at 6:17 PM on June 7, 2017
Some context: working from home culture is embedded deeply in IBM, this isn't changing that, and banning work from home; it's really changing remote working, and probably part of a push shutting down a bunch of regional offices that are no longer needed as the company moves away from services . And it's just the marketing dept.
Most IBMers I know/knew work from home at least one or two days a week. Its basically a given. A few do more like three or four. But there is a significant minority of people that basically never come into the office.
You don't know what they're doing, or how well they are doing it. Despite working remotely they are not available on Sametime (IM), and aren't answering their phones.
They should be performance managed for sure, but remote working does facilitate this kind of thing when it's abused. And it does get abused, a lot. Many, many teams have at least one person who is like this to a greater or lesser degree.
Tl;Dr working from home not changing, working remotely full time is getting the flick. And I think that's a pretty defensible decision - and I'm not one to defend IBM at every turn. Show up at the office once or twice a week. It will help everyone in many different teams.
posted by smoke at 6:17 PM on June 7, 2017
For what it's worth, IBM is one of the best places to get laid-off from. I got a nice severance, six months of health insurance, resume coaching and a bunch of other fabulous parting gifts when I got shit-canned from big blue. Not only that but I was just finishing up grad school at CMU and laying me off cancelled all my obligations to IBM for $60K of school bills.
posted by octothorpe at 7:09 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by octothorpe at 7:09 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
> For what it's worth, IBM is one of the best places to get laid-off from.
Were you laid off from the same IBM that contributes their 401k match on Dec31st, so they don't have to pay out to people who quit / are canned before then?
posted by pwnguin at 9:14 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Were you laid off from the same IBM that contributes their 401k match on Dec31st, so they don't have to pay out to people who quit / are canned before then?
posted by pwnguin at 9:14 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Clandestine Outlawry: "the company collected 8,088 patents last year
That... that can't be a coincidence, can it?"
Why wouldn't be? The 8088 isn't a particularly significant processor for IBM.
smoke: "it's abused. And it does get abused, a lot. Many, many teams have at least one person who is like this to a greater or lesser degree.
"
Those same people are the slackers in person too. Coming late, leaving early, having long lunches, twice daily 30 minute pee breaks, wondering around distracting others with small talk, playing minesweeper, making personal calls, surfing metafilter..
posted by Mitheral at 9:43 PM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
That... that can't be a coincidence, can it?"
Why wouldn't be? The 8088 isn't a particularly significant processor for IBM.
smoke: "it's abused. And it does get abused, a lot. Many, many teams have at least one person who is like this to a greater or lesser degree.
"
Those same people are the slackers in person too. Coming late, leaving early, having long lunches, twice daily 30 minute pee breaks, wondering around distracting others with small talk, playing minesweeper, making personal calls, surfing metafilter..
posted by Mitheral at 9:43 PM on June 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
I worked remotely for years. What I found was that a) 90% of the time, I worked more effectively at home, but b) face to face was critical for some kinds of meetings, and it was good to press the flesh a bit while I was there. Basically "tempered remote" is what seemed to work best.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:57 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Chrysostom at 9:57 PM on June 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Automation used to be the robot putting the car together. It's much more complex now and it's hitting corporate levels now.
I worked for a telecommunications giant. When you return something to them, anything, it goes through a batch automation process. It's all computers and code. When it fails the fallout is given to the team I was on to analyze and refund. The failure rate is so tiny that this refund department for the HUGE MONSTER telecommunications giant was handled by less than ten people. And those ten people were contractors because they were constantly tweaking the code which we had to help with screen shots and reports of what we were seeing, working to help make ourselves unemployed. The companies goal to have as few bodies as they need across all departments because that's how profit goes up. No refund department should make money, but we did.
The IT department is shrinking because now they don't hire anyone who can't code. Your department needs something? Code it or fix it yourself. Goodbye IT.
Customer Service is just sitting around helping people? We will create a new role that combines customer service and sales and create an automation program so precise that a customer just clicks through all these questions and helps themselves, layoff our 900 customer service guys in this region, and hire back 13 in this new service /sale position.
The work is essential to the workplace, telecommuting by a telecommunications giant is almost nil now. Don't get attached to your office or home, because every 5 years if you aren't progressing up and moving departments requiring actual moving, then you're rotated out.
Corporate is just now feeling what other industry has already been dealing with.
posted by 80 Cats in a Dog Suit at 3:31 AM on June 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
I worked for a telecommunications giant. When you return something to them, anything, it goes through a batch automation process. It's all computers and code. When it fails the fallout is given to the team I was on to analyze and refund. The failure rate is so tiny that this refund department for the HUGE MONSTER telecommunications giant was handled by less than ten people. And those ten people were contractors because they were constantly tweaking the code which we had to help with screen shots and reports of what we were seeing, working to help make ourselves unemployed. The companies goal to have as few bodies as they need across all departments because that's how profit goes up. No refund department should make money, but we did.
The IT department is shrinking because now they don't hire anyone who can't code. Your department needs something? Code it or fix it yourself. Goodbye IT.
Customer Service is just sitting around helping people? We will create a new role that combines customer service and sales and create an automation program so precise that a customer just clicks through all these questions and helps themselves, layoff our 900 customer service guys in this region, and hire back 13 in this new service /sale position.
The work is essential to the workplace, telecommuting by a telecommunications giant is almost nil now. Don't get attached to your office or home, because every 5 years if you aren't progressing up and moving departments requiring actual moving, then you're rotated out.
Corporate is just now feeling what other industry has already been dealing with.
posted by 80 Cats in a Dog Suit at 3:31 AM on June 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
Were you laid off from the same IBM that contributes their 401k match on Dec31st, so they don't have to pay out to people who quit / are canned before then?
No, that must be a newer policy. Not really surprising though.
posted by octothorpe at 4:15 AM on June 8, 2017
No, that must be a newer policy. Not really surprising though.
posted by octothorpe at 4:15 AM on June 8, 2017
« Older The technologies transforming our lives | Poet on the Shore Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by thelonius at 7:10 AM on June 7, 2017 [14 favorites]