> From: Tamara Abbey <Abbey at abbeyink.com> > > Aardvark poses some very interesting questions that given the > prevalence of e-mail, teleconferencing, etc., I find surprising. what of it do you find surprising? no amount of telecommuting can account for things like training and judging strengths and weaknesses... those require interaction that goes beyond voiceless or faceless back-and-forth... doesn't mean it can't be done, but i think it can't be done as effectively... [...] > I know aardvark's taking a very hard line here to make a point, but > under what circumstances would some of you consider a telecommuter? actually, it's not a *very* hard line... those are all questions i've asked and seen asked... there are many more, though... > Under what circumstances would a part-time telecommute/pat-time > in-house be acceptable? that's an interesting question, and much different than a full-time telecommuter... i just assumed we were talking full-time... part- time might not be worth it for me, in fact... but i'd have to judge on a case by case basis... > Would you rather never see that person's face? nope, i'd want to interact with my employees regularly... i've found some of the best training i've given is spur-of-the-moment... a client has a question, or a project has a problem, and everyone can come in and learn from the solution... that's why it's called "on-the- job" training, methinks... > Why? because i said so.