That sounds like an unsecure manager who doesn't have a family. It's funny how people forget where they came from. Eventually as the younger born with computer generation moves to management we may finally see things change. Mobile bandwidth is sure to play a role because the ability to vitrually have face time will be easier.

I would bet everything in my wallet that this exec who "just says no" is a curmudgeon whose staff would rather be working for someone else.

That boss is probably from the old school and/or a micro-manager. If there is a way to monitor and measure production, what then is he afraid of?
He should get with the times. ~ Hunor

Remote access for staff is a great cost saving and I do not understand this complaint. We have closed many physical offices since most of our people have HSA. They became independent consultants.

I believe the article makes some valid points. However, you must balance those against the benefits of a telecommuting/remote workforce.

Traditional managers tend to have a difficult time working with remote employees. Also, some people rely heavily on visual cues for communication. Traditional managers also tend to dump menial tasks on employees who are in the office. I feel these are limitations of the manager not the remote employee.

With the appropriate management skills a telecommuting workforce competes well with the office based workforce. I've taken over traditionally managed teams and improved output and morale utilizing telecommunting as part of an overall strategy. It's not rocket science to understand that allowing better work/life balance creates a happier more motivated employee. Just removing 2 hours of daily commuting makes everyone happier. Plus does it make sense to have someone drive into work who's been on the phone with a customer or developer in another country since 2 AM due to time differences? These can be daily or weekly occurrences.

I'm not young so I grew up under traditional management styles but I know one thing for sure. If my teams don't deliver they'll find someone else to do my job. It's with that focus that I employ whatever techniques I can to ensure the success and happiness of my teams.

As someone who has telecommuted for nearly 12 years - I can offer the following:
* It isn't for everyone - some people need supervision. If you can't hold your own nose to the grindstone, don't telecommute
* Employers reap huge benefits - no sports pools, watercooler discussions, weather or traffic issues - they get more productive hours for the same pay.
* You must have the right kind of job - I write, research and consult for a living. If I were a customer service rep or bank teller, it would not work.
* "Just say no" is an idiotic policy, but so is "Just say yes"
* If management doesn't trust their employees, they shouldn't retain the employees, but the same holds true for micro-managers.

On the way from all-office to all-home working (7 years ago), I went through 1, 2 ,3 and 4 days at home. They were all worse than working full-time from home or full-time at the office. Papers were in the wrong place, my schedule (and head) was a mess, and the people I needed to talk to were always on a different schedule, so we lost most of the benefits of our ever being there.

I have to agree with Phil's point that the type of job you have is critical. I've telecommuted since 1996, including 6 years on staff at a magazine, and I've been a happier, more productive, more balanced worker because of it. But clearly, there are many industries--law enforcement, healthcare, retail--where telecommuting doesn't make much sense.

There's also the little matter of the person in question. Working at home is not for every personality. I consider myself a great fit for telecommuting--an independent creative professional who works mostly alone, values a flexible lifestyle, and enjoys being at home. And even for me, self-discipline can be a challenge. The temptations of home projects, exercise, playing with my son, or just general goofing off are ever-present. Not to mention that, as a gregarious type, I often long for the social aspects of being in an office with my colleagues. But in all, being given the gift of working at home has been the single best development of my career--and my most powerful argument in favor of the Internet's existence.

Getting back to this executive, I think he may be missing a huge consideration--that his "just say no" telecommuting stance could be causing him to pass on potentially great employees. I know that in my case, if I were to think about taking a real job, the ability to telecommute at least some portion of the time would be an absolute requirement. In other words, I'd "just say no" to working for this guy. And I may be biased in this case, but I believe that would be his loss.

Tony Kontzer

We practice agile and have a high productivity rate across a global team. We implemented something we call "swarm agile" in '08 with the notion that North American team members were given the option of "swarming out", working at home or a third place, a portion of each week. Currently 80% of our team "swarms out" with the average time out of office being roughly 50% of each work week. We have collected velocity metrics on each of our teams for years, so we have a good base to compare impact of policy changes on quality and the speed of rending functionality to the market. A review of the numbers indicate that with the implementation of swarm agile our productivity increased between 10 to 20% with no impact on quality. Our team members were appreciative of savings in commute time and gave a portion of that back to getting product out and, in certain situations, able to work longer "in flow", necessary for good production, when working in their offices . So, being a bottom-line manager, getting the best from a team for dollar spent, I'd say telecommuting is a win-win, works for the individual in enriching balance of life with less time spent on freeways and it yields more functionality to market.

This Exec is a perfect example of what a company should NOT look for in an Executive - someone who is incapable of looking at the facts of a situation and making a balanced judgement based on what is best for the business.
He is clearly incapable of sound business judgement over what he wants personally in the work environment, and for that, he should resign.
It is true that tele-commuting is not suitable for all workers but limiting everyone because some have a job that cannot be done that way is ludicrous and narrow-minded.