How work is viewed


A large portion of being able to shift to a successful remote environment is centered around how work is defined within the organization. Many companies still operate in an outdated fashion- employees that are present in the office from 9-5 are productive. If managers are able to see employees, they assume that is enough. It’s not.
Work should be focused on product, not presence. Every individual has an optimal time and preference of production. If all employees are asked to occupy the same time and space in order to produce, then the majority of productivity is lost. Productivity is no longer based on a Fordist concept of parts per hour, so there is a need to redefine what product looks like. Product should be defined per industry, organization and individual, not to be confused with physical presence.
Collaboration is an important factor in any organization. With the virtual collaboration tools that are available however, physical presence is not as important as shifting an organizations understanding about how collaboration happens.  Face time is important in team building, as I mentioned in this post, but day to day collaboration can still exist in the virtual realm.
Being able to clearly define work based on product, and to clearly define the collaboration process is pivotal to engaging successfully in a remote environment.

Comments

Singledad said…
Chantel, this is the first time I have seen a mention of Fordism since my street fighting years. You're right. Employees are seen as inventory, and what they do as "Work In Progress" (See, I did remember something from Norms' lectures after all!) In an ideal Post - Fordist world, work would be done "Just In Time" and there would be no time wasted just sitting around the office. By contrast, when I was a Realtor, NOT being in the office was a sign of being busy and getting the work done.
November 27, 2011 at 11:39 PM
AH said…
I like where you are going with this post. Yet, I remember during my solar internship this summer I was at a company that was very liberal with their work time structure. They believed in the concept of product over presence. However, I noticed that I was coming into work later and later and couldn't help but feel that if I was there during regular business hours, I would have been more productive with my time. This type of mentality works well for those who are very organized, ADHD folks might have trouble with the lack of structure. Interesting thoughts though!
November 29, 2011 at 4:51 PM
Anonymous said…
Separating productivity from presence, in my experience, also relies on an organization having a robust performance management system. However, not many companies invest enough (or any) time and energy into effective performance reviews. I feel that in American corporations, there is also a lot of us-them between management and employees, and the lack of trust on both sides makes it difficult for managers to see that productivity is not necessarily driven by presence.
December 7, 2011 at 5:59 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Your own worst boss

Working remote takes some getting used to. Managing your own time is not a skill that is fostered in traditional work environments where employees are expected to fulfill certain hours of the day instead of producing a defined amount of measurable work (more in this post ). When switching to a remote environment, people need to learn how to manage their time and any conflicting diversions. Learning to prioritize is the first step. Knowing your goals, and tracking your own ability to produce will help to hone in on how and when to work.  It is actually more common for employees new to a remote environment to overwork. It is difficult to set clear boundaries. There is often a general assumption that if work is not seen it is not done. However, there is actually nothing more effective than personal accountability.  No manager will ever be able to manage an employees time or hold them accountable as well as any one person may do for themselves. From the book "The intellig...
Read more

Why Remote

Office buildings are expensive, very, very expensive. The average annual per seat cost in the U.S. is around $15,000 (this varies per study/industry, but not by much). Now multiply that by the number of employees in your company, and you get my point.   On top of the financial implications the environmental impacts are huge.   Depending on the physical footprint of an office building, the carbon footprint of operating it increases the expense many times over. Unfortunately, those expenses are not always accounted for. Throw in the cost of commuting, and maintaining homes that remain empty all day, and the expenses just keep building up. Why? Because this is “how it’s done”? Well, the way work is done has shifted. Technology allows people to connect, communicate, engage, and work from anywhere. Even professions that seem absolutely tied to physical space, or are based on human interactions are able to become increasingly virtual. This is not a bad thing! Virtual doe...
Read more