CIOZone.com - Professional Network for CIOs and IT Professionals

Reprinted from Keep the Joint Running.

According to the KJR Manifesto, relationships precede process (Guideline #4) — before employees can work together effectively they first have to establish trust.

That’s hard enough when employees work in the same locale. Such factors as working on different floors or for rival managers can be enough to prevent it.

It’s harder when there’s no face-to-face interaction, as is the case when some employees work remotely, or when the entire enterprise is virtual. While telepresence technologies have improved, web conferencing software like WebEx and GoToMeeting, Instant Messaging (a necessity, by the way), e-mail, shared files … even teleconferencing … aren’t remotely close to what Dave Taylor, Sr. Manager, Technology Services calls “That synergy you feel when you’re brainstorming with a group and the discussion ‘magically’ leads to an answer that no one had thought of before walking into the room.”

“People and interactions are the most important thing to successful projects. Phone calls and instant messaging aren’t quite a substitute,” added Scot Mcphee, who’s tried both. Another virtual team participant added, “Email communicates facts, but it doesn’t build teams. Teleconferencing permits the exchange of ideas, but not the connection of co-workers.”

And even if current telepresence technologies were up to the task, remote collaboration still requires planning and preparation, and is simply more formal than dropping by someone’s cubicle to sketch ideas on a whiteboard.

Kelly Williams, who has been both CIO and an Army Master Sergeant, added, “I’m a huge advocate for building teams (”real” teams, not groups of people who share an organizational title), and that’s a task made much more difficult by geographic separation.

“I saw the same dynamic in the military: A remote detachment, nominally part of a larger organization, becomes more and more isolated — and starts creating a unique self-identify — when left to its own devices.

“That can work well for a sub-team that necessarily works away from the Home Office, but it can be deadly in the context of individuals. One of the biggest challenges a manager faces in a telecommuting environment is how to create and sustain a team dynamic in the absence of “normal” face to face contact between team members.”

Worst is a team with both in-office and remote employees, because the remote employees reliably become passive participants. Quite a few factors contribute to this, but the clearest, and probably the most difficult to solve, is that whether interacting through a teleconference or a webcam, remote employees have a much more difficult time breaking into a discussion to make a comment.

There’s nothing sinister about this. It’s just that people in a face-to-face group intuitively recognize the body language that says, “Give me room to speak, please.” There’s no equivalent when you’re teleconferencing in.

Web conferencing technology does have an equivalent — the “raise your hand” function. It works quite well when those in the meeting pay attention to it and is worthless when they don’t.

Which brings up the larger point that web conferencing technology greatly enhances the ability of remote participants to be part of team interactions when, for everyone involved, operating the technology is second nature.

When it isn’t the technology becomes a distraction, taking attention away from the conversation instead of facilitating it.

Any company that plans to rely on a remote workforce while failing to invest in a web conferencing system … and in training both remote and on-site employees in its use … is a company that’s planning to fail.

Scheduled telecommuting — the 80/20 solution

Once trust has been established, telepresence technologies greatly enhance the ability of employees who are remote from each other to collaborate.

That’s why, of all the forms of “telework,” scheduled telecommuting — working at home most of the time while spending one or two days in the office each week — is the easiest to implement.

Scheduled in-office time allows for team meetings, impromptu collaborations, general-purpose schmoozing, and making sure employee and manager are still “real people” to each other. The time at home allows for the better focus, travel-time-and-cost savings, and other benefits of telecommuting.

Sadly, scheduled telecommuters cost more than on-site employees, because they need both on-site facilities … a fully equipped work cubicle (hoteling won’t do) … and the added expense of telecommuting infrastructure and support.

Which brings up the question, why bother?

The answer: It’s the logical first step in moving to a remote workforce. And that, implemented well, does save cost, and increases flexibility and productivity too.

Making it happen, though, is like sculpture.

You have to chip away patiently, or you’ll turn your organization into a pile of rubble.

Next week: More tips and techniques for making telecommuting work for your organization.

Robert Lewis is president of IT Catalysts, Inc., a consultancy focused on improving IT organizational effectiveness and integration with the enterprise. Contact him at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

Copyright 2009, IS Survivor Publishing, all rights reserved.

Comment on this article

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.