Acronym

I can’t explain the argument against telecommuting, but I can argue for it. I telecommute. The amount of productive work I accomplish from home is incredible. A project that can take me seven hours to do in the office takes me about two hours from home. I tend to save my harder work for my telecommute days because I know I will do a better job and get it done a lot faster than in the office. I don’t get the interruptions I get in the office and I can work on my home computer (which is five years newer than my office computer and a whole lot faster and more productive).

On a personal level, it’s nice not having to fight traffic eight hours a week. Think of it: Eight hours is whole work day spent in a car accomplishing nothing instead of spending time with my family, volunteering, or even working.

Telecommuting is one of the greatest benefits my association offers I can't understand why in this day and age, an employer would blanket ban it.

I have yet to hear a valid argument, aside from performance issues or the need to have someone physically present to take packages or greet visitors. Every argument I've ever heard is fear-based: What if he/she doesn't get her work done? How do I know they are working? How do we know they have the right equipment? How will we collaborate if we're not all in the same place? How will we have meetings? How do you effectively supervise? Questions that are all valid, but often presented as reasons to prohibit telecommuting. I'd suggest that if you're that worried about these issues now, you probably already have a problem that needs to be addressed.

Right, Kristi took the words right out of my mouth: Most resistance comes from fear, or rather fear of the unknown. Related, many managers are good at managing bums in seats (ie, "if my workers are in the office, they must be productive"). It is the same thing like being extremely draconian on managing everyone's time/schedule.

These are easy metrics to measure and manage. Alas, setting goals and measuring progress, and making management more outcome oriented seems to be quite challenging to many traditional managers.

Then again, perhaps I'm unique in that I'm the executive director, and I'm the one that works remotely - 100% of the time!

Telecommuters, unite! I've been working from home since 1992, and can't imagine having to commute at this point.

I agree that it has more to do with fear than anything else.

But keep in mind that telecommuting isn't right for everyone. Some people are just "people people" who don't function well in isolation (even with constant phone/e-mail/IM etc. contact). Others will prove those fears out and be off running errands instead of getting their work done. It does happen. Others won't know when to turn it off and will burn themselves out. That happens, too.

The other downside of telecommuting, especially for new hires, is that it is more difficult to learn the organization's culture and the quirks of colleagues. None of that comes through well remotely.

That said, I think every organization should be open to the idea, and willing to at least discuss the possibility, even just part-time, for those who are interested and whose jobs don't require them to be physically in the office. At this point, it's still a pretty big perk to some people, though I can see it becoming a norm for certain types of jobs (like mine) in the not-so-distant future.

I'm all for telecommuting, but as someone who flew into DC today for a two-hour ASAE & the Center brainstorming session, I will say that some collaborative efforts in the creative realm are still enhanced by F2F interaction. But when the need to do so is real that can easily be scheduled in with/for the commuters.

Caron: Thank you for sharing your experience with telecommuting! How sad for organizations that refuse to allow anyone to try telecommuting, that they would miss out on creating an employee experience like yours has been.

Kristi and Jason: I think you're both absolutely right--fear of the unknown seems to be a big issue here. I think, as Jason says, it can really challenging for some managers to measure performance without "face time" as a major element. But I think that we as managers should be required to get over that and learn to manage in different ways--even if it's difficult. We should learn to that even if we don't have any telecommuters--every staff person is different!

Sue: You're absolutely right that it's not for everyone. I even think it could be right for someone at one time in their life and not right for them five years later. As long as we as workers are self-aware about the pluses and minuses, and we choose the approach that best suits our association's/organization's needs and goals as well as our own, that's the important thing.

Jeffrey: I definitely don't want to make the argument that everyone should work from home and do everything virtually. Face to face interaction can be so important! The key is to think carefully, like you said, about when the need is real and when it's just a tradition to do something face to face.

BTW, popped into the bookstore today and noticed this new one:

"Why Work Sucks and How to Fix It: No Schedules, No Meetings, No Joke--the Simple Change That Can Make Your Job Terrific"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591842034

Reading the back cover, the premise is focused mostly on the authors' emphasis on "results oriented work ethic"...

As with anything in associations, it's so hard to generalize. I'm working with a facility management association now on their periodic study of 'alternative workplace strategies' and mentally stepping away from that project, I think of how we have many of the same challenges as their members, who cover the spectrum of office types (and warehouses, and schools and ... )

In associations we are really 'small busineses' operating a diverse range of business units and/or we run a variety of different functions simultaneously, so naturally our personal needs for work-life balance vary considerably, as so our employers' needs for adequate performance, including directly measurable 'things we do' and also the less tangible 'things we addd to' that collectively comprise our internal culture, work environment, and the net output by which our members and customers judge us.

For example if one's title was 'communications manager' in a 10-person shop that might mean that we have to provide an inbound presence for press, help with some member contacts, help fill in for another staffer who quit or is on maternity leave, participate actively in staff meetings ...

That being said I always worked in associations with 100+ staff, some larger departments but also a wide variety of specialists performing very specific tasks. Back then employers were less supportive of allowing telecommuting. Even in my last position (a huge charity/NGO) I wasn't very supportive becuase so much of our work was interactive--in marketing we were pulling sample files, asking our web guy to queue up a few slices of video to see what we could excerpt for copy, asking our analyst to refresh counts for a new campaign. So even though I liked telecommuting personally so much I eventually made a career of it, I also saw where anyone who missed a day in person was basically unable to contribute effectively to a truly interactive, fast paced department where we couldn't afford delays or poor interaction.

So I'm probably hypocritical, or at least conflicted, and possibly old-fashioned, but sometimes our systems, interpersonal needs, deadlines and the imperative to deliver great service to our members DO conspire to take less advantage of the telework opportunities than we might otherwise ....

I worked for an organization that prohibited telecommuting. I was their membership marketing consultant - thankfully - not their employee. Instead of trying to be proactive by setting core days; and core hours for in-house work, they prohibited it because they felt that the in-person interaction on a daily basis improved their service/focus on member needs. Their board simply was not comfortable; mostly composed of a different generation that felt telecommuting was inappropriate. I might mention however, that they did provide a metro-reimbursement so that the employees were provided an incentive to use public transportation.

This is a good topic to hang on for sometime..Telecommuting does have some pros and cons, though! I do agree with the fact that personal interaction will yield better results than interacting over phone or mail. Is it not?
Steve