The buzz about their work from home program was that people were abusing it and not doing actual work. I agree, they should be able to work from home, but when she did this, she was basically firing a buncha losers. They should allow people to work from home again, though.
What proof is there that these people were "losers" and slackers as you put it? Either way, you're right about needing to open it back up. The impact to morale overall must have been huge when these people had to scramble to protect their livelihood.
>What proof is there that these people were "losers" and slackers as you put it?
Maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with the whole "work in our offices or quit" memo sent to virtual employees a while back not paying the dividends she had hoped. Adding insult to injury, perhaps her build-out of a full private nursery in the executive suite staffed with her personal nannies while simultaneously requiring staff to stop working remotely, even part time, had a deleterious impact on morale and w…
The buzz about their work from home program was that people were abusing it and not doing actual work. I agree, they should be able to work from home, but when she did this, she was basically firing a buncha losers. They should allow people to work from home again, though.
Well not every job is well suited for remote work. As a developer, you know if they're not cranking out code. You miss sprint goals. Sprint demoes are a disaster. You don't see commits. When QA or design work from home, it's not as easy to tell whether or not they're actually working. That's been my experience at least.
That said, I think it was a poor choice to abolish the WFH policy.
Maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with the whole "work in our offices or quit" memo sent to virtual employees a while back not paying the dividends she had hoped. Adding insult to injury, perhaps her build-out of a full private nursery in the executive suite staffed with her personal nannies while simultaneously requiring staff to stop working remotely, even part time, had a deleterious impact on morale and w…
The buzz about their work from home program was that people were abusing it and not doing actual work. I agree, they should be able to work from home, but when she did this, she was basically firing a buncha losers. They should allow people to work from home again, though.
So fire the people who are abusing it, along with people working on site who aren't hitting the performance Yahoo wants. Don't tar everyone with the same brush
> how long should one try to make a new job work? Depends on your mandate going in. Stick-to-itivness is a desirable leadership quality. Most industries consider business cycles in annual terms. If you can't move the needle in 24-36 months, do everyone a favor and move-on. A 3 week stint however, is not worth putting on your CV.
> Stick-to-itivness Tenacity.
"Stick-to-itivness" is a perfectly cromulent word.
What does Yahoo do? Microsoft has Windows, Office and Xbox. Amazon has massive web server and product distribution platforms. Apple has OS X and iPhone. Google has Android, search, ads, and an online office suite. What does Yahoo do? I guess they have some long-time email users and a well-liked stock tracking platform?
Clearly you've never experienced the joy and wonder of Yahoo Answers
Why does my arm shake and turn bright red when I'm eating dirt?
What does Yahoo do? Microsoft has Windows, Office and Xbox. Amazon has massive web server and product distribution platforms. Apple has OS X and iPhone. Google has Android, search, ads, and an online office suite. What does Yahoo do? I guess they have some long-time email users and a well-liked stock tracking platform?
They also have, as I understand it, a metric fuckton of content sources (not including Flickr, Tumblr and so on) and a very highly-tuned content and advertising presentation system, plus the default footprint on various browsers. Essentially, they have a lot of default eyeballs and use that for advertising. Unfortunately, they've relied on rent-seeking in that space, and Apple and Facebook's recent moves may bite directly into their one profit center.
What does Yahoo do? Microsoft has Windows, Office and Xbox. Amazon has massive web server and product distribution platforms. Apple has OS X and iPhone. Google has Android, search, ads, and an online office suite. What does Yahoo do? I guess they have some long-time email users and a well-liked stock tracking platform?
Yahoo Sports and Yahoo Finance are quality products.
I'm curious: how bad is it to leave a new job soon after starting (because you realize the product isn't as great as what you thought it would be/too much competition in space)? When you are a high performer, you really don't want to waste everyone's time if you end up in this bad situation. What is the professional thing to do? Asking because the article mentioned some people staying only for a few weeks. In a small…
It only really matters in the eyes of potential future employers, so consider how it looks to them. Having done interviews and resume screening myself, I wouldn't balk too hard at one quick departure, but I would want to hear a good explanation for why you left so soon. The job and/or company being very clearly something different from what you were told would be a good one. Multiple quick departures in a row are kin…
It matters to the people you leave, too. When people spend a lot of energy recruiting you, doing due diligence on you and you on them, it (hopefully) builds a fair amount of trust and mutual respect. When you leave after a short time, that trust is violated, often in both directions. Barring something somewhat unusual (cough Clinkle cough), people are generally going to be very transparent with people they hire to help with a turn-around. When you have every opportunity to determine whether or not you're up for a challenge and then 3 months later are like "nah, actually, too hard" it will probably have some effect, at least with people that were closely involved in your hiring.
Maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with the whole "work in our offices or quit" memo sent to virtual employees a while back not paying the dividends she had hoped. Adding insult to injury, perhaps her build-out of a full private nursery in the executive suite staffed with her personal nannies while simultaneously requiring staff to stop working remotely, even part time, had a deleterious impact on morale and w…
It doesn't seem that any of the people who left were remote workers. I mean--maybe they had felt some solidarity with their remote-working coworkers--but I suspect that Yahoo's problems run a little deeper.
The company promised a turnaround that hasn't happened. The people leaving largely seem to have been in positions to have a strong sense for when and how such a turnaround would come to fruition--and their actions suggest to me a lack of confidence.
I do agree that the memo didn't really help the company in any notable way. Whatever it could have helped was surely more than offset by what it could have--and did--hurt.
Maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with the whole "work in our offices or quit" memo sent to virtual employees a while back not paying the dividends she had hoped. Adding insult to injury, perhaps her build-out of a full private nursery in the executive suite staffed with her personal nannies while simultaneously requiring staff to stop working remotely, even part time, had a deleterious impact on morale and w…
The people leaving according to article are quite high ranking. I don't think they would care for work from home and in case they do yahoo would make exception for them.
