Managing Telecommuters

As more and more employees are leaning towards telecommuting practices, it is important that other workplace dynamics shift simultaneously. As mentioned in my first post, the group of people that are seemingly having the toughest time adjusting to this shift is middle management. The argument can be made that upper management, especially at larger companies, telework often, due to their necessity for travel, managing and integrating global branches, time management, etc. However, traditional middle management is the link between employees and upper management, and they seem to be having a problem with letting go of their attachment to a worker's physical presence in the office. Having employees physically present means that a manager can "see" them "working." Telecommuting removes that perk, and thus makes managers more apprehensive when it comes to measuring productivity and effectiveness. I put the word "working" in quotes above because even if an employee is physically present in the office, that does not necessarily mean they are accomplishing much. Their presence gives off the illusion that they're working, but numerous studies keep surfacing regarding the decreasing productivity rates of workers in the office. This could be due to an idea mentioned in a previous post, namely that in the office, employees experience a series of work moments instead of a full workday due to constant interruptions. Or, it could be due to the fact that workers are forced to work in a space that, simply put, doesn't encourage productivity in their eyes (something I look forward to exploring in a later post).

But, back to managers. In their eyes, if they can't see you working, then you must not really be working. How can they trust you? How can they, dare I say, continue to micro-manage? (Am I right, Dilbert?)

In order for this new management relationship to work, managers need to show their employees more trust and respect. Schedule weekly one-on-one check-ins so that the employee can update his/her manager on progress. Managers should establish an open line of communication with their workers, so that workers feel comfortable asking questions when necessary, and seeking guidance in-between check-in meetings if warranted. In addition, several workplaces are moving towards a results-oriented practice. While I see the value in this, (If you're working, you'll produce results. If you're not working, you won't. Sounds simple, right?), I believe it's simpler in theory than it is in actual practice. This is namely because in some cases, results can be difficult to define or measure. Jobs that are less "numbers based" are hard to quantify and track. What does "results" mean to your manager? Clearly spelling out those goals and expectations are key to success. Sales jobs are easy to track by results, as are monitoring the number of calls made by individual employees at a call center, etc. Not all jobs and projects are as clear cut. This is also why getting to know your team is essential as well. Managers need to know who they're managing, and need to spend time cultivating those relationships. The rest -- trust, respect, open communication, increased level of comfort -- will follow.

And for those managers who just can't seem to let go, there's this arguably shady thing I found called BossEye. It's essentially a way for managers to see what screens their employee has up on his/her computer, and literally engage in real-time employee monitoring. I dub this as shady because the description in the site is filled with English errors (sup, grammar mistakes), and it just seems like spy ware posing as employee monitoring. In fact, I just tried to check some reviews and it seems like a scam, which is why I did not provide any links for it. So...that was a fail. But is it? If managers actually had that kind of tool, that'd be just plain creepy, and you'd be the worst manager ever if you used it. So, I suppose that's a win that it doesn't really exist. Also, like, privacy issues.