HP has joined Best Buy and Yahoo! in an attempt to turn back the clock on remote working. Like the other two wounded, flailing giants, HP undoubtedly yearn for the late 90s, when they all were flying high. But reenacting the work principles of decades past is not likely to make mana rain from the sky again.
Neither is the hilarious corporate doublespeak that’s being enlisted to make the case. Here’s a choice bit on just how important employees are to the Vapid Corporate Slogan of The Day.. uhm, I mean HP Way Now:
Belief in the power of our people is a core principle of the HP Way Now. Employees are at the center of what we do, we achieve competitive advantages through our people. HP has amazing employees who are driving great change.
So we have great people, but we can’t trust them to get anything done unless we see butts in seats from 9-5? Who cares whether all these great people have designed a lifestyle around not having to commute long hours or live in a given city. That’s all acceptable collateral damage in the “all hands on deck” playbook for sinking companies.
Here’s a few thoughts: Perhaps HP isn’t sinking because Jane works from home, avoids the commute, and has more time to spend on hobbies and family? Perhaps HP is sinking because of strategic and managerial mismanagement? Perhaps morale won’t actually improve until the beatings stop?
It’s sad when you see once-great companies reduced to this smoldering mess of mistrust and cargo culting. But hey, at least we know now the pitch of the whistle that says its time to abandon ship. It’s “all hands on deck”.
Diogo
on 08 Oct 13I had a fully flexible work arrangement while at HP. Our whole team had. We used to visit the office once a week, mostly to have lunch together, and that’s when the least work got done. And our offices were actually quite good, but nothing beats working from home/wherever you want.
Siebert Tenseven
on 08 Oct 13Strategic and managerial mismanagement you say?
The reality of the situation appears to be that the rats don’t want to perish on the sinking ship alone.
Ahmed
on 08 Oct 13Next thing they’ll target is casual dress code as a cause of their corporate inefficiencies
Adrian L
on 08 Oct 13What if part of the reason HP is sinking is because Jane is in fact NOT trustworthy to get her job done if she’s not being supervised directly and in person from 9-5?
Thing is, the 37Signals remote work ethic works perfectly in situations where you’ve hired people who are able to produce in that environment. So what then? Maybe it’s better to fire Jane (and all the rest) and hire Mary (and replace a bunch of the rest), who is capable of working in a less supervised, more self-reliant way.
Then everyone can piss and moan about how HP doesn’t value it’s employees and is just tossing them aside in it’s attempt to rejig for a new reality. Which course of action is showing more they value employees more?
Not everyone is capable of effectively working remotely, and I’m willing to bet that when HP hired a lot of those people, this was not something they were looking for in a prospective employee. Remote working is a relatively new thing, and obviously hiring practices in many larger companies haven’t caught up to this new way of thinking about things.
Adrian L
on 08 Oct 13Would love to be able to edit out that extraneous “more” in the last sentence of the third paragraph. Alas :)
Erik
on 08 Oct 13Agreed that not everyone works effectively from home (aside: I work from home, rather effectively).
Agreed that HP, etc., was likely not selecting for this quality during hiring.
Agreed that HP, etc., probably have not had their pick of top talent for years.
In addition, even smart, self-motivated people who can manage themselves and their time effectively are impacted by the effects of de-motivation (i.e., you work for a failing company) and become less reliable at home. It’s much easier for people to deliver themselves consistently when working for a successful and exciting company.
Add to all of that the self-awareness of being in a failing company and the fact that what often keeps people from spending their days sending out resumes are watchful eyes. Sure, they may still make their deadlines and deliver their work AND send resumes out, but then those are the people that leave (your best people). It’s easy to understand if they are trying to at least decelerate the exodus.
Of course at the end of the day, there’s a reason why failing companies usually continue to fail until they are obsolete… the above can be slowed but it’s very hard to stop!
David
on 08 Oct 13Hp is another firm that uses stacked ranking. Why should anyone be surprised that this is the direction they are going.
Tim
on 08 Oct 13Try working for a company that filters every single line you put in your address bar and babysits your browsing habits. This art is porn! This WordPress documentation on securing your websites is hacking material! Let’s block everything and increase productivity! Oh, look what happened, the exact opposite.
JF
on 09 Oct 13Why isn’t this type of behavior being called out for what it really is: stealth layoffs. The flailing company gets the positive PR of “moving the company forward and enabling collaboration” while making remote workers, typically on the older side with families and higher salaries, look like poor performers.
If remote performance was truly this poor, and for this long, then it’s management’s fault for letting poor performers linger. If they aren’t able to effectively track remote workers, then it’s management’s fault for not putting controls in place before allowing telecommuting.
This “return to the mothership” mentality is a disgusting penny-pinching practice dressed up in productivity clothing.
Anonymous Coward
on 09 Oct 13As I commented years ago in a company that was bleating “All Hands on Deck”— All hands on deck just means closer to the rail (and the lowering lifeboats).
Vicki
on 09 Oct 13I am not an Anonymous Coward. I just hit return too quickly.
Karl Katzke
on 09 Oct 13Out of the light of day, trivial wounds like a mutual dislike between two coworkers can fester and turn into an organizational problem. It hasn’t happened at my current job yet, but it’s happened at past consulting gigs.
I would say that it’s exactly true that sick companies need to have everyone working from the same office in order to contain the rot. Sick people need to be in places where they get care to prevent secondary infections and illnesses related to being sedentary or bedridden. Healthy people, and companies, don’t.
What I have yet to see is an example of a large company that got well again.
Maia Donohue - Austin, TX
on 09 Oct 13Unfortunately, this syndrome is not restricted to failing companies. In his book, “one from many”, Dee Hock laments how managers can see something that is thriving and say, “wonderful! Let’s clamp down and take all the fun away.”
It’s truly mesmerizing.
Mark
on 09 Oct 13This whole back to the 90s thing is just a reflection of what our governments are doing. In the UK all we hear about is the “tough decisions, tough action, tough love” that the government has to dish out to the people it serves, and if you don’t like it, tough shit. I think large business is just following suit – they are all rewinding to the last point in time when they had any kind of success/popularity, pressing Play and hoping for similar results. Reminiscent of a 90s band making a comeback – the fans want them to recapture the magic but inside know they won’t, and the non-fans (David in the case ofHP) want them to fall on ther ass and disappear.
Aurélien
on 09 Oct 13I think Adrian L got a point there but the root cause and the solution are more deep seeded.
Indeed, there is differences between employees and not everybody got to be a remote worker.
When one is unsure that his management staff will be able to recognize who’s able to work remotely and they FEAR their workers they send one big message to everyone. Big companies lack a direct contact between the top and the bottom of the organisation so they rather rely on policies to drive their management force and workers.
Policies are driven by FEAR and the will do simplify management task, since they can’t say “remote work is the company policy” they say “all hands on deck”. Can you discuss about exception when you are talking to thousands of employees? You can’t. Can you slowly infuse a company culture that is linked to success with remote work, office work being mixed? Yes, it is much more complicated and the risk of failure exist too.
Again, FEAR of being pointed at as the root cause of failure. To change, they need CONFIDENCE in their shareholders, managers, banks, partners, suppliers, customers. This is not a trust issue with employees AT ALL.
For small companies the situation is much more complicated, you have to discuss everyone’s situation face to face and deal with individuals. You can also choose to discard those who are not able to work remotely and adjust both the work hours to the company & worker needs. You only need CONFIDENCE in yourself and the values you are fighting for. No shareholders, no managers.
The situation is very much like the one depicted in Moneyball (Michael Lewis) where a manager can choose between looking dumb and have a chance to actually WIN or do just like everybody is and have a larger change to survive at his position.
Sorry about the CAPS and my English may need improvement.
Michael
on 09 Oct 13Karl makes a good point about dick companies. There’s a book called The Five Dysfunctions of a Team (followed by The Advantage) that walks through healing a company, but everything takes place in a conference room. Now, part of the book’s philosophy was that a company retreat is healing and transformative and 37S does exactly that and doesn’t see it as opposing remote working. However, the bulk of the healing has to happen outside of the retreat. How this is done without proximity is not explained in any business book I’ve ever read. How does a remote company heal its employees and its culture when it’s sick?
Michael
on 09 Oct 13Yeah, that’s “sick companies” in the first line there. It kind of works, though.
Paul
on 10 Oct 13Great post, maybe? Personally as a consumer I always kind of liked HP they never felt as oppressive as that Gates Gang. Different spheres but tied together in time by a platform.
Here’s the thing though Dave – 37signals is great fuzzy and lovely. I pay for two of your products. I run a business on two of your products. I grew the business on your products. In the 18 to 24 months that we have got to know one another I have to come to like your products and they make me smile with the brilliantly executed simplicity of use. Where is the “thing” I mentioned?
I want to remain a customer – that’s the thing.
Guess what?
I’m not sure that we can…forever….even though we want to.
Why?
37S are not delivering everything that we need under one cloud. I think I will call this lack of deliverables…...shortcomings.
Is there a point to this diatribe?
37S are in my worthless opinion among the first of the great cloud wave riders. You were there man, you should have seen it from my perspective. It was beautiful the way it rose out of nowhere on a rail. There were businesses that just drowned below it, washed away by it’s brilliant madness of offering true freedom to workers. Awesomeness at its most awesome.
No chance of a wipeout….It allowed a window gazer like me to sack off the day job, sit on the beach and make thoughts turn into frameworks that in turn became an international business – albeit a small one. You helped unlock my personal jail.
Moral of the story. You are regarded as a shrewd guy. Game changer. But it is easy to kick a business on the floor, stick the boot in. Kick them ‘til they fart. In fact it’s a good laugh until it’s you!
Keep on writing, keep writing in the same generally erudite style but just be careful to watch clients like me who will fuck off in the blink of an eye because the eye was crying with laughter at the self manufactured misfortune of another conglom-gone.
Of course this could never happen to you or 37S that would just be naive ;-)
TJ
on 10 Oct 13Well stated…
TC
on 10 Oct 13It’s easy for a young guy with an agenda to work from home who could retire right now to be “railing” against tried and true measures all the time. Adrian L has great points. Frankly, what works for 37signals doesn’t work universally, yet David, probably naively, thinks it should. It’s nice to be small. It’s a different beast being large. I know of many young tech companies that have no work-from-policy, especially as they make growth pushes. That’s just how it works in the real world…a bit different from the reality of a blogger’s head.
TC
on 10 Oct 13To add to my post, most people are not of the entrepreneurial bent. Those who are think working at home is fantastic, as do I…for myself, and get a lot done (even I struggle sometimes from home when the sun’s shining). I see others who don’t have that mindset or passion who’d rather be at home to be available for life rather than be available for their work. Other life tasks start taking priority. It’s not about trust. It’s about human nature when we’re free and unaccountable.
JF
on 10 Oct 13@TC: Isn’t that same problem (bad hires of irresponsible people) just as prevalent in companies that disallow remote work? There is nothing magical about being in an office, other than management’s illusion of control. An illusion that they are incentivized to maintain, no less.
If you can’t track your remote workers effectively, then don’t allow remote work. If you can’t track your remote workers effectively, there’s also a good chance you’re unable to track your in-office workers either. Let’s be honest.
TC
on 10 Oct 13@JF, there aren’t enough of those quality people for large companies to hire for widespread work-at-home policies and maintain an effective workforce. I’d say they’d rather maintain that illusion in an office where they can assemble people faster. Sure.
“If you can’t track your remote workers effectively, then don’t allow remote work.” Right. That’s why companies are pulling people back in. I don’t think they care as much to track in-office workers. In my company, those workers get extra leeway.
Chris Johnson
on 10 Oct 13So, Dave look: remote is a valid option. We’re a seven figure company that exercises the remote option.
But if there was a culture where we didn’t know the value of our assets, where we didn’t know what was going on I’d probably move people to the office to correct that. It would be a way to see people together, and I’d have more information.
It’s an option. Remote works for us, but we welcome the times where we can all get together.
Paul
on 11 Oct 13Cheers TC. I think Dave and 37 Signals have some mileage left in the tank, and this wave feels to me at least like a revolution compared to the dogma of the past.
There is without doubt a new world order slowly gathering the confidence to go alone and create micro businesses but now thanks to web apps it’s even easier.
However the point everyone seems to be going on about regarding remote working is very valid and yet will prove to be the paradox as people are lazy bastards. I know because I’m a professional lazy bastard! I have to quite regularly have a word with myself to stop wandering around the internet and concentrate on producing the goods for the business.
This is where remote fails and will continue to fail as joking aside the only reason we succeed is that we are a husband & wife team that have expanded. So we are a team and we work in our office. Our team work alone and there is a tangible difference in attitude that is beyond remote working and stems from not having access to the team (just is not financially viable which is a pain that we need to endure). It makes sense as we are of course communal as a species but again this is a contradiction that will be recognized by everyone that has worked in an office because they endure office bullshit!
I have an answer but again it is not a practical fit for everyone; be happy. I think this is where the whole scenario hinges and backs Dave: If you can help make the people happy and included they produce more and can work remotely, which we have found to be true.
There is more to it but I have to do some work 8)
Michael H. Lupper
on 11 Oct 13One thing that 37Signals never was able to understand, is you can’t compare a small company like they have with HP or Yahoo!
These companies have most of their workers on development positions, while at 37Signals most of the remote workers are from support service.
Remember that a few month ago, 37Signals hired an iOS developer but to act in loco.
Please guys, getting in real!
Romain
on 11 Oct 13Development positions are creative positions, and the output can easily be planned and tracked through measurable milestones. It doesn’t matter how a dev. does it as long as he delivers on time.
So these are actually ideal positions for remote work.
If a dev. cannot perform from home it will quickly be discovered and he can then be asked to work at the mothership (or let go ;-) )
Periodic get-togethers are certainly useful, though for team building, and for ideas-sharing and planning .
Joe
on 11 Oct 13There’s an underlying question in David’s post.
When HP says they have “amazing employees who are driving great change”, do they really believe it? Or is HP acting as if they are stuck with the employees they have, even if they’re not that amazing or driving great change?
If they’re not amazing employees, then the question is, why do they still have a job?
Anonymous Coward
on 11 Oct 13How about both?
They have amazing employees and deadweight.
Like other companies, of say, about 40.
Michael
on 12 Oct 13Also, this is one of the best discussions on a SvN article in awhile. Remember when this was normal?
JF
on 14 Oct 13@TC: There were two parts to that quote :) If they can’t track remote workers effectively, they probably are doing just as poorly with in-office workers.
Many of us have been quite successful remote and aren’t lazy bastards :)
This discussion is closed.