Discussion on:

Huh? Yahoo puts kibosh on employee telecommuting

It has been widely noted elsewhere that the real intent of this move is probably to get rid of a bunch of workers without having to pay severance benefits. After all, the company will have offered them continuing employment; the fact that it requires relocation, and living in a city where the employee can't afford to live, is irrelevant.

BINGO!

It's no secret that it's much, much easier to force telecommuting employees to take an unpaid day off than it is to force site based employees to clock out.

Sure, rounding up the troops and making them interact face to face can generate ideas and team building. At the same time it can kill innovation due to office politics and the distance that allows workers to do some thinking.

FORCING the troops to breathe each other's air is more likely to do the latter.

Not everyone is cut out for either scenario. Genious isn't a forced thing and sometimes we try too hard to make others like ourselves.

Some of the best decisions and insights come from hallway and cafeteria discussions, meeting new people, and impromptu team meetings. Speed and quality are often sacrificed when we work from home. We need to be one Yahoo!, and that starts with physically being together.

Having spent 40 years in Fortune 500s R&D and large education institutional research environments, I completely understand the purpose of the above directive. Absolutely nothing makes parasitic managers (especially those with little to no technical understanding) more nervous and fearful for their jobs - than not have constant access to the creativity and productivity of their underlings - which they can claim as their own to their superiors (including boards) - therefore and apparently justifying their existence. Nothing more, nothing less.

I wrote the first book on Telecommuting: The Future Technology of Work - here's the free ebook http://techtionary.com/books/telecommuting/index.pdf in 1986 - seriously this is crazy to stop this critically important aspect of work and life. For many going to work ruins their life because of their family and other reasons such as today someone is doing to die just driving to or from work.

if I still used Yahoo, or if I ever did...

Yes, we got that message at our company too.

Ironic. When management wants to sell us on outsourcing and the benefits of collaboration, we live in a global economy where teleconferencing is a great thing. On the other hand, when management wants to sell us on the advantages of physical face-to-face communication, physical location becomes all important and teleconferencing is a bad thing.

Management once again impresses us with its facility for talking out of both sides of its mouth. What this really comes down to is management's desire to keep employees under its control and under its thumb.

How many layers of middle management would be sitting on their hands if there are no employees to "supervise".

Really? More productive? Its 2013 for Chrissake! If a tech company that is barely holding on makes such a draconian switch, my guess is that there is some other reason behind their decision. My experience is that 99% of those hallway, cafeteria and impromtu meetings are not about work. Just saying....

The author does not appear to understand the reasoning behind this decision, as his reference to this as a "feel-good workplace policy" and several other statements attest. I think many innovative ways of thinking and ideas are not coming to light based on the isolation of working from home and literally "phoning it in" (yes, in addition to the implication of that phrase, as well).

If a company has a policy allowing telecommuting for purely economic reasons (no commute, lower overhead, etc.), then they are probably not getting the big picture regarding how many decisions are made and information is truly exchanged in a highly communicative organization. I have lost count of the number of ideas and projects that have been proposed or generated as a result of my discussions with upper management either immediately before or after meetings, or even through chance meetings in my office of approximately 110 people, including the 3 family members that are owners of my company.

I do believe that telecommuting may be appropriate for some and a total ban may be a bit over the top. However, doing it because everyone else is doing it and have been for a while and it saves money and the technology exist to do so and the US government is doing it does not necessarily make it right or the best business decision. Yes, you may save relocation costs and "real-estate costs" (whatever those may be), but perhaps you are losing more in the lost innovation and creativity that does come from face-to-face discussions and exchanges of ideas.

And who knows, maybe our floundering housing market may benefit from people actually buying and selling houses in order to have to go to an office to work. Said a bit tongue-in-cheek, but you never know.

If you had to have a meeting to have and idea - I suggest you didn't have the idea. I'll agree that association prospers through discussion of ideas. However, as someone dealing with intellectual property on a daily basis - I want all my ideas and responses to them on paper, recorded in multiple places and not floating around in the air for anyone (like you) to claim or build upon without crediting and appropriately rewarding the source of the original idea.

I agree that in intellectual property circumstances, and many others, documentation is crucial and necessary, but I do not and have not laid "claim" to anything (quite the opposite...see below). Open communication in many instances is clearly superior to closed, hush-hush conversations so someone gets the "credit", as opposed to what could and should happen for the betterment of the company as a whole.

Your assumptions about my intentions are obviously based on your vast knowledge of me, my company, and my job position, but just in case you do not have this information, I will enlighten you. We are a 5th generation family-owned company, the largest in the world for many of our products, with an excellent safety history (I am the Safety Director for all of our operations) in one of the most hazardous industries in the US. We have been ahead of the curve regarding environmental and safety compliance for many years and have been actively involved in guiding state and national policy in many aspects of these two areas.

Since I started with the company, we have seen a our marked improvement in safety performance and safety culture for many reasons. I do not and have never claimed responsibility for this improvement (and I correct anyone that congratulates me personally), as it is everyone's efforts that have lead us to this improvement and continued performance.

As for 'taking credit', I have had 2 specific instances just this year where one of our owners suggested some improvements that we may be able to make (did not say we had to do them, just to think about it) and after implementation, showed them to him and thanked him for the suggestion and our discussion. No this was not brown-nosing; it was recognizing that sometimes casual conversations can generate ideas that may save a person from having an injury or becoming a fatality. That was the point of my initial post.

Hey, Shep. Since you're such a business mogul, why can't companies host open video conferencing for employees ? An open door policy by internet for ideas would seem to work also. Control seems to be a little too important to you. Good management involves inspiring teamwork and listening to what these people are saying , (it is an unpopular idea for numerous reasons) and not handing out collars for your leash.

Hey, Mr. Wrinkles. You must have hit the wrong reply button, as your response has absolutely nothing to do with what I have posted. In case you were, however, I never claimed to be a business mogul. My company hosts numerous video conferencing sessions and meetings and they are cumbersome and often inefficient (not always, but fairly often), in my opinion, as well as having an open door policy via several means, including Internet, for exchange of ideas.

In an effort to correct your mistake, I will look for posts referencing 'control' and 'leash' for this article and forward a request to the admin to have this comment attached to same.

... is using technology to virtually meet and discuss things, either formally or informally. Your earlier statement about "phoning it in" may just indicate rather old-fashioned ideas about telecommuting that today's technology can improve on.
Perhaps this discussion is somewhat related to companies trying to offload communications/computing costs to their employees - for instance companies thinking that all they need to support telecommuting is a computer and a phone at their employees premises, and they can often offload even those costs on their employees. Accountants are probably slathering over the capital savings from the BYOD movement, especially as more and more computing power can be carried in the employees' purse or pocket. I predict the failure of these initiatives due to unconsidered costs - just like telecommuting will fail if the company fails to provide an adequate support environment.

I telecommute and was recently involved in the conception of a new cell of telecommuters for the company I work for. The person put in charge of the operation was site based. He decided to not allow a certain tool to the new employees that was available to all the other telecommuting cells, evidently thinking that they would never be the wiser. Never, ever underestimate the ability of people to utilize social networking and other digital forms of communication. It was a matter of days before these brand new employees discovered that they had not been granted access to a tool that all the other telecommuters were allowed to use. So the lack of communication argument is ridiculously outdated.

What does this comment have to do with what I posted?

In today's technology environment that offers very good teleconferencing and intstant messaging facilities there is absolutely no reason for people having to meet face to face. Having worked for large enterprises like HP where there may be thousands of people working on projects in some form all over the globe you could not get them in one room anyway and you end up teleconferencing. Therefore, there can be only one reason as stated elsewhere, insecure below par workers need others around so they can try and make up for their weaknesses.
I for one telecommute and I am much more effective and productive than working from an office; often I get an idea late at night and go to my computer to work on it there and then. Something I would never do if I had to work from an office.
Yahoo? Who needs them they are probably dieing anyway and this is probably the first sign of their demise.

Note going to be pleasant for some to read, but "work from home" is often way over sold. I suspect that this perk of the last decade is about to go and often for good reason, productivity. Lots of younger employees will fell "management abuses, power grab, not fair etc", but suspect management across the nation is starting to sense they can get more real work at office then at home. Know this is not popular concept among many as they have this ego problems of "creative, highly talented, special folks" etc, but reality is now going to find out what is actually being done for the bucks. Having had jobs both ways, I rather think that "at the office" will win out for productivity, as looking the person in eye and listening across table not same as via computer.
' Now many many not like it, but this is going to be a coming trend, and just might be justified by increase in products, quality and profits. Will have to wait a bit, but if Yahoo does it, other management will follow, kind of means the benefit is gone and choice is rather simple, go along or leave, same as has always been as only badly managed companies have more then couple of employees critical to their success's, others can be replaced. So that is the reality, sorry but this thing was fun, but over now for most. Suspect some basic time/work studies behind this one.

What I find most irritating about Corp/LLC's is not this thing, but their nearly total lack of hammering the elected for more competitive world class educational standards, K-12 and colleges.

I'm gonna guess your way over 50.

This entire thing is someone in management doesn't feel they are getting enough brown nosing. They are so sick and twisted thet they desperately need brown nosing in order to feel like they matter.

You should indeed never trust anyone over 50 if you're out for quick profits from existing, yet virtually outdated products (e.g. the traditional motorcar or family house).

Older inventors have the experience and knowledge to invent products that are way ahead of their times -- should this be a reason to discard them?

I'm 70, and 30 years ago I invented a revolutionary rotary-wing concept -- hence I like the metaphor of the caterpillar transforming into a butterfly in the secrecy of the cocoon, a solitary process called metamorphosis...

It takes 20 days from caterpillar to butterfly, yet 20 years at least from motorcar to personal aircraft...

Are you irresponsible enough to think we can get humanity out of the mud without that kind of metamorphoses?

Amusing post, on the 50 thing, but since at one time or other we all either heard it or said, not to worry, you will grow out of it and be worth something to company, self and nation and then some day some mouthy type with little real experience will say same about over 50 and you will smile.

About 14 years ago, I started my own Engineering Company. I worked from Home for about 4 month, then, I rented office space. The reason was simple. I got twice as much done.

At home, there were too many distractions. Kids, the dog, the wife, with something that just had to be done right now. With an office, I could have clients over, work undisturbed, and have private phone and internet access with no interruptions. There was also more space for CAD station and storage of drawings.

It also made it easier when I needed another drafter.

Working from home is good for some, but, there is a reason why working from an office is better.

Oh, and for the response about a tie, it depends on who you will be working with. Some Clients expect a suit and tie. Some do not. For me, a Bolo Tie works. That's because I live in Arizona, where the Architects and factory administrators who were my main clients often didn't wear suits.

The rule is 'Always dress for the job. Dress to meet your Clients expectations. Never be the worst dressed nor the best dressed in the room." blue Jeans and work boots with a button shirt or a polo shirt are fine for a job site, but not for a corporate board room.

If you couldn't find yourself the space that you need at home, or have family that won't accept the discipline you should have imposed; or you needed a special space for special tools; or you needed space for another employee (I'm assuming you didn't have the technology for him to telecommute); or you needed a physically impressive space to woo clients, then neither you nor the job you needed to do were good candidates for telecommuting. There are lots of cases where telecommuting is impractical - like brain surgery, or construction, or hair-dressing. But there are many jobs where a lot of money can be saved, as long as the worker is provided with both the tools and the supervision (yes, you can supervise telecommuting employees).
I have a feeling that Yahoo's problem may relate to failure to provide the right tools, or failing to develop the right supervision and management for its home workers, probably with the expectation that they were going to save a bundle by not providing these prerequisites.

Yahoo! won't do
What they sell you?

Have a NICE net.

I wonder if Yahoo is admitting what many in my industry have said all along. Working from home is a security nightmare.

Being the ultimate insider as a remote services provider, I think Yahoo has given us a glimpse at what they see happens behind the telecommuting curtin. And they are scared by it.

Personally I think this has nothing to do with the hollow "bash the big company" comments being made above.

This is not about management wanting people in the building.

This is not some draconian corporate power play or big brother company wanting to chain people to their desks.

In fact, I think many of the comments above reflect how shallow and entitled people have become that the notion of getting off your back sides and going to a place of work is abhorrent to you. Suck it up boys and girls. This is what it is like to work a real job.

I think this is a major player in the telecommuting, remote services industry, firing a warning shot of what they think of their own industry. They do not like where it is going.

I would heed the warning. If I was one of the sheep that went down the telecommuting fantasy path.

You won't be able to stop them from communicating on the sly just by forcing them to report to a central location at this point. That ship has sailed.

Shut off all systems that provide remote access.

The company I work for has recently cut back on the number of users with Smartphone access to corporate email after a PCI audit called the percentage of remote users "dangerously high" causing "unnecessary vulnerabilities."

It is common that a companys public statements do not reveal the real reason why changes are being made.

In our case it was a PCI audit that drove the decision. Publicly it was pitched as an effort to reduce the number of people doing 'after hours' work.

The old ' the company feels when you are home you should focus on family time' line. It makes the company look like it cares about it's employees.

And patronizing too.
At 60 years of age, I'm hardly "boys and girls".
One advantage to working at a centralized spot could be the satisfaction of letting a dinosaur know face-to-face how unacceptable your attitude toward your co-workers is.

And how immature and selfish most responses have been here, I felt the term boys and girls was appropriate for the people complaining about their right to work from home being challenged by this move.

The many security concerns of telecommuting have been brought up. No discussion.

The changing cost effectiveness of telecommuting based on the expensive enhanced security requirements has been brought up. No discussion.

Legitimate concerns about the extent of telecommuting hurting Yahoos performance has been brought up. The response has been nothing but rhetoric of the oppressed worker. There has been no discussion of how Yahoos sorry state as a company COULD be in part a result of the lax corporate telecommute mentality. Instead people are angry that telecommuters are being called out to justify their existence in a failing company.

All there has been is self entitled bashing of management denying them of something they feel entitled to. Most of the posters sound like a bunch of spoiled brats.

Personally I hope the telecommuters here do get called back to work. I am tired of carrying the load for them. Most of them have not put in an honest days work in years.

Anyone who telecommutes is arguably replaceable by a chap in [insert foreign country here].

Hmm.

That has not been the recent trend. It is cheaper to replace site based employees with foreign employees than it is home based employees.

Score one for us humans being together at work, and functioning like the social species we are instead of turning into O's and 1's at home. Cheers!

... neck ties, shined shoes and crisply pressed trousers. And you, over there, get a haircut. Ladies will wear skirts and heels. The best decisions and insights are obtained when we all portray a professional appearance.

Yahoo quickly forgot the hygene issues of the nerd employees that led them to allow telecommuting in the first place. It won't take long for them to get a wiff of reality.

and you are threatening them with coming back with more of your odorous ways.

I worked in the civil engineering division of a multi-business type Company. After the CEO got embarass by a punk dressed kid in the marketing department when traveling in the same lift with some important guess on a Friday morning, he set a a new dress code of including not allowing to jeans and trainers when entering the Company HQ building. This prove to be totally idotic and everyone end up trying to slip through the bace door and delivery lobby. Similiar case here I guess

Another reason to NOT work for Yahoo!!

Typical stupid upper management decision. Obviously they are attempting to cut payroll, but they will lose their best people doing it. Their best people will have no trouble finding a new job where they can telecommute, so they will leave. Its their worst people that will stay. Kind of luck cutting costs by getting rid of the highest salaries. Counter productive.

jobs is very fierce.

Yah Who?

Yahoo was the absolute top of their game at one point, but then someone built a better mouse-trap and they have lost relevancy in the market place. I am trying to see the angle being worked in this idea that might restore them to their former glory..... I'm not seeing it? Anyone else got any ideas on how bringing everyone back to the office could help Yahoo as a company to compete?

I agree that this is a disaster move, a Hail Mary pass, an act of desperation.

In the mid 90's, I was at a company that mandated hotelling for all the sales staff. They were supposed to be out seeing customers and only come in once per week. They called in first to reserve a desk where their phone extension would be forwarded for the day. Their rolling file cabinet was stored in a personal locker and rolled to their assigned desk. Once per month, each department had a meeting. The quarterly meeting was nuts. All the sales people came in and there were not enough desks for them. They doubled up on desks and phones. We engineers were given tasks in the lab so our desks could be used. The strategy was effective. The sales staff tripled without the office space increasing. They got to manage their own time, and still report in person. The social interaction was there, as well as the workplace flexibility. And that was before the internet and smart phones. But it could not rescue a company with an uncompetitive product. We went out of business.

My present employer does not allow telecommuting because of security concerns and antiquated union rules. But we do have flex time. So there are reasons why an employer would need all the staff on site. But Yahoo is probably not one of them. So it sound to me that they are desperate to try something, anything, to stay alive. If this is the best they can do, I would sell their stock now.

(I in no way have any relation to any professional investing anything. This is totally my own opinion.)

struggling to survive. Sometimes, even telecommuting can be a luxury that helps to drain the energy out of a company.

I notice that a large percentage of the "commuting is bad and Yahoo is good posts and replies in this thread are from one person. Hmmn.

and I only use their e-mail service, mostly because I've used that service for well over 10 years, and some habits are hard to break. Other than e-mail, I hate everything they stand for, especially with their liberal views and liberal articles, and I wish for them to go away or get taken over.

The only part that I agreed with, and that you are apparently too dense to notice, is their telecommuting policy.

There is one thing where I agree with Obama about, but I dislike 99.99999% of what he stands for. That one little thing doesn't make me an Obama lover, unless you believe that, that once in a million is the same as loving Obama.

okay, I will. Your example is actually one in ten million. : )

and common sense is about, most times, doing the right thing, and Ms. Mayer is doing the right thing.

when the rest of the world disagrees with what you call the "right thing".
Probably try to pass laws about some minority or another you think is vulnerable to your questionable morality.
I can tell by the sensitive way you insult anybody who disagrees with you.
Right, moron?

but, my comments are about common sense, and nothing to do with morality, and what people like you equate with morality, is pure idiocy.

If you feel insulted, then, I know I said the right things, and the moral things, and the appropriate things, since you and all like you, aren't capable of understanding that, it's your side that is lacking morals and common sense.

That doesn't mean the concept is bad. Just means the executive dropped the ball.
Can they get it back with this new policy?
Maybe - given the hole they've dug themselves into.

Some of the best decisions and insights come from hallway and cafeteria discussions, meeting new people, and impromptu team meetings. Speed and quality are often sacrificed when we work from home. We need to be one Yahoo!, and that starts with physically being together.

I've always been told that this is called wasting time away from your desk!
Although I've read some of the comments and I see one that definately fits the bill.
The boss that wants to steal your ideas and ideas from the rest of his "team" so he can shine in front of his boss!

This will set them back not forward...they'll lose talent to those on board with how convenient telecommuting is. You can convene electronically.....in fact if they're worried about just improve employee electronically convening. this is DUMB but let them lose and let others show the way.

especially in a bad economy, where losing a job could mean being unemployed for years, and the older employees might find themselves completely out of the work force completely, and becoming part of the uncounted unemployed.

Is the CEO of Yahoo in her 70's?? The thought process behind this decision reflects an elderly, and inflexible, mind. In addition, is she giving up her executive suite? After all, she can't be "physically together" if she is walled off. And how "physically together" does she want the employees to be??? Hmmmm....

This looks like a knee-jerk response to a management and leadership issue with an attempt to control people. So much for innovation. Sometimes when leaders don't know what to do, they try to go back to an older way of doing things. I predict more struggle and then a swing back to telecommuting over time. I also predict that the first people to start telecommuting again at the company (in the closet) will be the top leaders. What sucks is that this decision will impact the entire company and set them back even further in their struggle.

They might think this will be a company edict, but there are going to be those people who won't start commuting and Yahoo will make exceptions. If they had a senior developer with years of experience on a critical system who said he/she would leave if forced to commute does anybody really think they'd keep an arbitrary rule in place? Like the saying goes - "rules are made to be broken". This isn't a law, it's just a dumb idea that they could have managed much better by simply managing effectively.

and for many good reasons.

Not all employees have the discipline to work on their own. Many need the supervision to make sure that they're doing their jobs as expected, and that they're productive.

Also, there won't be as many distractions as can be found by working from home. Nowadays, there are a lot more distractions than before the modern computer age and the internet age combined. The internet offers too many distractions, like Facebook and Twitter and chat/discussion sites, and YouTube, and porn, and even news and information sites, and many other "attractions". That kind of distraction cannot be monitored remotely by supervisory or management personnel. While some might feel that they can control their urges stray into the distractions, chances are that, they too will not be able to resist.

Also, when working from home, their are families with little or young ones needing attention, and that too will be distracting, and will render the employee less productive.

Plus, there is always the TV, which in itself, will be very disruptive to many who will be tempted by the daytime shows (I know first hand about that, when a lady I used to work with admitted that she was hooked on the soaps and daytime talk shows, and she ended up being canned when her work suffered).

Plus, Yahoo (Marissa Mayer), is absolutely correct when she explains that, the workplace, with the highly interactive environment, is the place where ideas originate the most for a company. We've heard it said before that, many heads are better than one; a leisure conversation can lead to the next great idea for a company, or to a solution to an existing problem. One other fact is that, what an employee does at home, is not completely known to the employer, and there could be many cases where an employee will reveal secret company information to other or to the competition. Another matter is where an employee might come up with his own idea, and will develop it, on company time, and once "finished", takes off on his own and either sells the idea or develops and implements it for his own purposes. Even if the employee had take a 1/2 hour or an hour per day from the company time, that is still company property.

Anyhow, there are likely a few more negatives, and a few more positives, but, overall, Mayer is approaching the matter correctly. Besides, a company that is not doing so great, has to take charge of all of its assets in a no nonsense approach, and that includes all of its people.

One also has to agree that, the socializing within a corporate or business environment, leads to many other benefits to the business and to the personnel of that company.

Plus, (and this is an aside, but an important one), imagine the benefits to the economy at large, where those millions of telecommuters will become a stimulus to an economy which is stagnant and even going towards recession. Millions more people needing to get gasoline for commuting or to spend on bus or train rides, and millions needing to get breakfast and lunch, and millions needing to purchase clothing and shoes. Yeah, there are some negatives surrounding the commuting to work, but, for a company, the positives do outweigh the negatives.

Does your boss know that your posting here? Unless your a blogger I doubt that its even relevent to your job. Maybe you are one of those "employees who lack the discipline to work on their own."
I guess its just as easy to be distracted at work as at home heh?

And, after several decades in the corporate world, as an regular employee and supervisory and management, I know quite well of what I'm talking about when I talk about discipline. I was also in the Marines, where discipline was and is a key ingredient for getting things done.

On the other hand, someone like you is apparently intent on just attacking others, rather than learning from those others.

Now, get back to your playground activities and try to take in a few lessons in life.

As a product manager at a software company, my job function requires a lot of cross-functional interaction. Depending on which projects I'm working on at the moment (some more collaborative than others), I generally find myself to be more productive in the office than if telecommuting from home (which I do on occasion).

Marissa Mayer is also responsible for the terrible changes to the home page at Yahoo.

For 17 years, as an employee (not yahoo) who worked with our international offices, I was communicating by phone and e-mail starting at 3:30 AM every morning and eventually in the office only to leave at 1:30 or 2 in the afternoon. Sometimes the international offices would forget the time change and call me at 9 pm or midnight to "chat" about an issue. Broken sleep became the norm.
Thank goodness I was able to work from home when I was in the States for several hours a day to continue to support our global efforts. Miz Mayer's attempt at onsite continuity simply shows she's out of touch with what's been going on a very long time. I never "cheated" the firm out of time nor did I complain about my hours. I wanted the opportunity to work internationally and this is what I did to live my dream.

Miz Mayers doesn't trust her staff and evidently wants to rule Yahoo with a clenched, iron fist.

Based on the comments, this is obviously a hot topic. I'd be interested in seeing follow up articles to this one in the form of interviews of Yahoo employees (on the record), in say 6 months or a year. This might put to rest a lot of the speculation I see in the comments above. Has this move actually been good for Yahoo? In 6-12 months the data points will be out there.

and if they do, it might be advisable for them to wear masks and to disguise their voices. Not saying that Yahoo might fire them, but, anything is possible. Besides, what Yahoo management decides, employees should abide by, and if they have problems with the company's rules, then they are free to leave and find what they're looking for elsewhere, including the availability of telecommuting. I doubt that any employee wants to chance losing their jobs in a rotten economy, and Yahoo and most other major corporations know that.

I've worked in the tech industry in Redmond and the Silicon Valley for almost 30 years and never had a problem with working at home occasionally. I have never encountered a workplace that had rules specifying whether or not you could work from home, but always left it to your manager's discretion. Being a designer, I have always felt that I needed to be in the office for face time, to show designs and get feedback. Oftentimes there were people working at home and it was awkward to interact via Skype or WebEx or whatever, so instead, I waited until the person was back in the office. I tried accounting for this by working it into my schedule.

But there were always those who took advantage of the leeway they were given and rarely came into the office, but still wanted to have a say in everything. If you're not there, you lose continuity, an din my opinion, you also lose having a say in everything.

It always seems that whenever there is anything good in the workplace, like no rules, some people have to take advantage of it, and sure enough, the rules get put into place to control this. I mean, it is a business and we are working to make a better product than the competition, and the company expects us to do the job. Telecommuting is a perk, not a guarantee. I'd hate to lose the option to work from home when I needed to, just because upper management felt the need to implement restrictions as Yahoo is doing.

In my lengthy experience in corporate engineering offices, the most common "water cooler" (actually, coffee machine) banter is complaining about the horrible traffic.

Even when in an office setting, most of the real work gets done via email and IM and various collaboration apps (code reviews and task managers etc.).

This nonsense about the "next big idea" being hatched in the hallway is pure imagination.

I also call bullhockey on the notion that we are "social animals" that need to bump into each other to feel good. This varies widely among engineers. In my experience it varies from "almost normal" to "I hate being around people". In the aggregate, engineers prefer less human interaction than "normal people". Indirect communication (via electronic means) is often their preferred connection to "the hive".

Business people (such as the Yahoo CEO) on the other hand tend in the other direction. They need people around so they can "hold court" and "see and be seen" and impress people with their shallow understanding of the obvious.

Ms. Mayer and Yahoo may be wrong on this one, maybe not. The trend itself continues to accelerate because of the huge economic efficiencies, associate (worker) satisfaction increases-by a magnitude. Maybe a better way might be to take advantage of current technology like Go-To-Meeting, Polycom, Cisco Telepresence, and others coming that make "virtual water coolers and coffee pots" more available, and more economical, every day.
Notwithstanding the spontaneity factor Yahoo wants to encourage, might virtual collaboration make sense and be a reasonalbe substitute? We'll soon add holograhic telepresence to the mix, and given the necessary bandwidth, and solving management (in)security issues, the over 11,000,000 full and part-time teleworkers will increase exponentially. For a fuller information offering see http://writinghood.com/writing/cloud-computing-cloud-commuting-and-your-new-home-office/

For GOD's sake all you people you are outraged by this - GTFOY. This is a bold and incredibly intelligent move to cut the "fluff"! Yes, far too many of you WFH folks are fluff like it or not. Many people simply cannot or will not manage themselves appropriately in a WFH scenario.And yes many of the PO'd will quit. Have fun finding a job. You would be better sutied and served if you humble yoursleves and learned to interact, communicate and participate. And QUIT WHINING!

In these times where technology is king, Smartphone technology is high on the agenda to have people mobile and working it does not make sense for a company such as Yahoo who is really owned by Microsoft to scrap a telecommuting policy all for the idea of passing ideas in a hallway or gossiping around a water cooler. My bet is that with the cost of fuel rising and everybody raising their prices on just about every consumer good you can think of, people that have telecommuted for the company will not sit in traffic in the highways and byways of this country waiting to get to the office to pass ideas around the water cooler only to turn around 8 hrs later and dorn that same ole traffic commute. Those smart people will leave Yahoo. I thought people were getting smarter than this. I have an idea, place a camera around the big ole water cooler you have or in the hallway and as people pass the objects yell out their ideas so that the camera can pick it up and record it at a central location. Then have the telecommuters do the same thing at home. But everybody does it at the same time similar to a conference style type of call or meeting. Then nothing is lost. Don't try to tell educated people that you are scraping telecommuting because ideas are being lost in discussing around a water cooler and chaining them to a cubicle, when a simple phone call, sms, e-mail will work just as well. And if they don't answer within a reasonable time then make the non-responding person loose their telecommuting option. Responsibility in the work place would be a much more effective way of dealing with the issue instead of making a blanket policy of no more telecommuting. Shame on you non-responders. Their could have been other mitigating circumstances as to why an answer was not returned such as a person being sick, or in the hospital but it is that persons responsibility to state they will be out of touch. Not penalize your whole team. Just when I was starting to like Yahoo, what a set back for sure.

Why would Yahoo instituting a no telecommuting policy, get you to dislike them? If you liked their products and services, and you weren't an employee, why the heck would it matter to you? Would Yahoo services suffer or be better because of the no telecommute policy? I go with a product and service which serves my needs and wants, and I don't care what their internal or employee policies are. Having said that, Yahoo doesn't serve my needs and wants, but, I'm just questioning your "reasoning", which stinks.

If it means their systems actually work for a change, or we get responses to our problems.

I have mixed feeling about the 'work from home and work from office' In my view, work from home is working happily in 'your' zone but that's when many a times things start slipping down a bit.

We don't always want camera surveillance zooming in and out at our screen and other shoulder surfing business while we are 'trying' to work, but at the same time, quality monitoring of individuals help eliminate many loopholes. Work from home is only for the seniors and in exceptional case but otherwise i am very much with Yahoo's Marrisa Mayer.

No matter they sit next to each other or 1000 miles away.
Forcing them to sit together will make things worse

they are often the first to go.

Now remind me why I would want to work for Yahoo?