I don't want to undermine anyone's desire for independence, but I'm sympathetic to Radoslaw's sentiments. There is an advantage to regular proximity. I can't count the number of times I've overheard colleagues discussing an issue of that impinges on me. The problem with depending on any sort of overt communication--using whatever technology--is that you yourself have to know what to communicate. That is a one-sided perspective.
I've been on both ends of this issue: a manager type with distributed reports and a trench rat located in the hinterland. I would be reluctant to dictate a concentrated configuration, but I have experienced its benefits as well as the downside of dispersion. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Steve Smith Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 6:44 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks 1. Purely imaginary. Besides being too random to be useful, those "meetings" are about family, dogs, and favourite comedies. Business interaction is often better facilitated with electronic communication (see your #3). 2. Purely imaginary. You cannot "see" much of anything. A manager's job is to get results, not to baby-sit (monitor) their team. If the manager hires people who need to be constantly supervised, well then, that's on the manager. 3. Agreed. Every office I've worked in was apparently designed to prevent me from concentrating on anything. I'm far, far more productive in my quiet, distraction-free home office. I also liked going to the office (mostly), and seeing everyone. But I was able to actually work maybe 50% of the time there. sas On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Radoslaw Skorupka < r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl> wrote: > Well, it is not my company, so let's leave the decision to the owners > and managers they hired. > > However if it was my company I would demand to be present in the office. > Some well justified exceptions apply, but mostly temporarily, and > everytime final decision would belong to managers, not employees. > > Reasons? > 1. Meetings at the coffee point (and other places) is very big > opportunity to exchange ideas, thoughts, opinions. > 2. It is much easier to see and control how the emploee spends a time > - is he really busy as declared? No timesheet replace it. > 3. Some people do work more effectively when they have no external > "disturbants" (a dog, neighbour, postman, favourite comedy on TV...) > > BTW: most of my co-workers claim they absolutely prefer to work in the > office, with the team. > BTW2: multi-site office is still better than home working, We do have > good video-chat systems for in conference rooms, except personal a/v > equipment in every PC. > > My 0,02€ > > -- > R.Skorupka > Lodz, Poland ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
