August 20, 2018

While Some Companies Move Away From Remote Work, Others Double Down

cloud accounting

Last year, IBM decided to “co-locate” its 2,600 member US marketing department. Translation? IBM is eliminating remote work.

The news is especially shocking as IBM is one of the pioneers of remote work, installing work-from-home terminals for some employees as far back as the 1980s.

As more businesses move toward embracing remote work, others are resisting the change or reversing course. But why?

IBM hasn’t said much on the matter, but its reasoning appears to be part of a larger reconfiguration effort around business agility. Facing stiff competition from startups and cloud-based vendors, it’s possible IBM believes focusing on in-office, face-to-face collaboration will help them innovate faster.

But we wanted to know what others had to say about the movement away from remote work. So we asked some of the leading experts on cloud accounting, and here are the responses we got.

Hybrid isn’t for everyone

Caleb Stephens, Controller, Automattic, believes some companies just aren’t built to support a partially remote/partially in-house staff.

When your primary work environment is based on locations, and all of your infrastructure supports that model, there’s no real effort or infrastructure to properly support a distributed workforce,” he says. “It kinda needs to be one or the other, or be functionally aligned. All support personnel can be distributed, but finance/developers/marketing functions are location based. Or vice versa.”

Happy employees > Employees looking annoyed

According to Patti Scharf, Co-Founder and COO of cloud accounting firm Catching Clouds, IBM and others like it are plainly on the wrong side of history.

“I do agree there’s a different (and beneficial) dynamic in getting people together in real life, but I see that more as a ‘water cooler’ benefit,” she says. “It helps build the team’s trust and collaboration. But I don’t think you need that every day to get the results you want.”

Furthermore, Scharf cites the advantages of employing a remote staff as a net positive for business.

“There are real benefits in allowing your team to work from home,” she says. “They’re happier. They have more time (no commute). They are available for the needs of their families. And relaxed minds lead to creative thoughts. Yes, people meeting in person has some benefits, but do they outweigh the benefits of having a happy team? I’m not convinced.”

Scharf isn’t sure having staff on-site leads to greater productivity, as many of them will probably be pulling a George Constanza at least part of the time.

“I think when you work in an office with other people, you can ‘look’ busy, and it can help mask what’s not actually getting done,” she says. “When people work remotely, the managers must have crystal clear awareness about what they expect and have to be excellent communicators about those expectations.”

Oversight and security concerns

Bruce Phillips, CEO and Founder, HPC, believes the movement away from remote may have more to do with trust than productivity.

It’s harder to trust your staff when you don’t have a close knit team,” he says. “(These businesses) could have concerns about nexus and not increasing their footprint due to having employees in additional states.”

And with data breaches in the US at an all-time high, Phillips wonders if protecting company and customer info isn’t the real motivator behind the change.

“Security is a bigger concern for these larger companies with larger databases too, and it gets back to trust/oversight of such a big workforce,” he says.

Downsizing in disguise?

Blake Oliver, Senior Product Marketing Manager, FloQast, offers two theories: one sinister, one a bit more forgiving.

The cynical take is that it’s a way to downsize without having to lay people off,” he says. “The slightly less cynical take is that when new leaders come into a stagnant business they feel the need to shake things up, and forcing everyone to co-locate is one way to do that.”

But ultimately, Phillips doesn’t think the movement away from remote is the right way to go.

“I don’t believe there’s much empirical evidence to suggest that remote work makes teams less effective overall — it’s just a different way of working together,” he says. “And there’s plenty of evidence that shows that employees who get to work from home are more productive.”

Looking for remote talent?

Despite the risks, utilizing remote workers has a net positive effect. If you’re looking for the best cloud accounting talent, look no further than our sister site, Accountingfly.

Find remote account talent >

Related articles

Firms Sponsoring Golfers – An Analysis

Accounting firms don’t do much advertising. It’s got something to do with ethics and since the CPA exam is ancient history for some we can’t talk specifics.
Firms do like to sponsor stuff related to golf. Tournaments, players, etc. One recipient of accounting firm cash has been widely followed here but now we recently discovered another firm sponsoree that, we feel, may rouse as loyal of a following as Phil.
natalie.jpgThis is Natalie Gulbis who is sponsored by RSM McGladrey.
Natalie works with RSM in partnering with the Special Olympics Golf Program and will be a contributor to RSM’s new golf blog.
We’re not really into golf so we can’t really debate who has a better game or who garners better exposure for their sponsor so, after the jump, we’ve presented a more superficial analysis:


phil-mickelson.jpgnatatlie 2.jpg
We admit that we know nothing about promotion or advertising but if you’ve got opinions on which firm seems to have found the better golfer to sponsor, discuss in the comments.

McGladrey & Pullen Might Want to Think This Whole Divorce Thing Over

gulbis3.jpgThe accounting firm soap opera between McGladrey & Pullen and RSM McGladrey continues as RSM has filed notice terminating the two firms’ agreement and, under no circumstances, will they allow M&P to come crawling back to them without RSM’s involvement.
This was all included in a filing with the SEC, made by H&R Block, who is obviously the pimp in this whole love triangle.
Personally, M&P should probably consider going back to RSM’s sorry ass just to take advantage of the Natalie Gulbis exposure.
Judging by the firm’s response to our earlier mistake, they won’t be listening to us. Poor thing is caught in middle of this whole mess. Natalie, if you ever need to talk, don’t hesitate.
RSM McGladrey wants say in any reconciliation with McGladrey & Pullen [KCBJ]