WT Business Beat

By Nick Wakeman

Blog archive
Nick Wakeman

Once a telework pioneer, IBM pulls employees back to the office

Something is brewing over at IBM that goes against the grain of what we typically expect of leading technology companies – they want their people to come to the office.

Official word from the company is that its marketing organizations are being asked to work in one of six U.S. locations – New York, Raleigh, N.C., Austin, Texas, San Francisco and Atlanta. My understanding is that the federal marketing team will stay in the D.C. area.

Those who don’t move and return to the office will need to find other jobs, either at IBM or elsewhere.

The company has created “state of the art spaces” to promote agile collaboration. The idea is to rapidly iterate programs in real-time, based on performance.

But this move to bring remote workers back to the office isn’t just about the marketing team but is part of a broader trend across IBM, according to an article on Quartz, an online global business news site.

IBM was a trailblazer in the 1980s when they installed terminals in workers’ homes. According to Quartz, by 2009, 40 percent of IBM’s global employees worked at home. They claimed to have shaved office space by 78 million square feet and saved about $100 million annually.

What IBM is doing bucks the trend but they aren’t alone as the Quartz article points out – Apple, Google and others encourage workers to come to the office. They relay the somewhat legendary story of how Steve Jobs wanted to put all the bathrooms at the same end of a building because it would force people to walk and would precipitate spontaneous meetings. The so-called water-cooler effect.

 Other parts of IBM have already gone through this shift or are well on their way, including the teams working on Watson, Watson Health, Watson Internet of Things, and Cloud development.

The Quartz article also reviews the volume of research that suggests remote workers are more productive and log more hours. But they also explore the counter-argument: innovation may suffer as a result of remote workers.

As Quartz describes it, “Team proximity appears to help foster better new ideas.”

So while working remotely brings one set of benefits (productivity), working together brings other benefits (innovation).

It’s a balancing act – what does your company need? More productivity or more innovation?

For IBM there also is the bottom line. The company has struggled through quarter after quarter of disappointing results, so the move is part of a strategy to invigorate both top and bottom line growth.

The article is definitely worth a read. It says a lot about how a large organization sometimes has to make bold moves to move forward.

IBM like a lot of large companies has had challenges with growth, but Big Blue has proven that it is never shy about making a drastic change. How smart was it that they sold their PC business and later their servers?

Another thing I found interesting is that the article compares IBM to much younger firms – Google, Apple, Yahoo. I think that says a lot about IBM’s ambitions and also its ability to stay relevant. Not bad for a company with a history going back to the 19th century.

Posted by Nick Wakeman on Mar 22, 2017 at 7:42 PM


Reader Comments

Sat, Mar 25, 2017 NORTH CAROLINA

It was a cheat Resource Action to force employees to uproot their families with no regard to employee circumstances or lives. The morale is lower than I had ever seen it, so I left. Fortunately I was able to retire.

Fri, Mar 24, 2017 Bill

Very difficult to reverse tele-working programs. Employees do not want to commute and have altered their lifestyle as tele-workers. Good luck IBM but expect a fair number of productive employees to seek employment elsewhere.

Thu, Mar 23, 2017 Ronald Mobkas

This is a very well written article. I am surprised that no one has commented. Are comments allowed?

Thu, Mar 23, 2017

The hidden agenda is for IBM to shed more older workers. They are counting on some of their employees to decide to not relocate, and be let go.

Thu, Mar 23, 2017 Larry W

Sir, you need to look at the company's trend in stock prices (much less favorable than just about any other tech company). Also look at its trend in Federal contract revenues. Again, subpar by a great degree. Federal work has never been a significant part of the company's revenue, and it has show scant or no growth in most years. Were it not for certain technical and intel contacts, the company would make no profit in the Federal arena

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

What is your e-mail address?

My e-mail address is:

Do you have a password?

Forgot your password? Click here
close

Trending

  • Dive into our Contract Award database

    In an exclusive for WT Insider members, we are collecting all of the contract awards we cover into a database that you can sort by contractor, agency, value and other parameters. You can also download it into a spreadsheet. Our databases track awards back to 2013. Read More

  • Navigating the trends and issues of 2016 Nick Wakeman

    In our latest WT Insider Report, we pull together our best advice, insights and reporting on the trends and issues that will shape the market in 2016 and beyond. Read More

contracts DB

Washington Technology Daily

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.