News of Yahoo CEO, Marissa Mayer, eliminating workplace flexibility and forcing all employees to work in the office (even those that were already telecommuting) hit the Internet this past weekend with much backlash. Many people felt her decision negatively affects working parents and destroys chances of moving forward with modern workplace policies. In a time when families are often choosing between work and family and struggling to manage various aspects of life, I have to agree that the decision of Yahoo and their CEO was a bad one.

Granted, it is not Yahoo’s or Mayer’s responsibility to show the way for the entire workforce, but as with much in this world, big companies take the example of other big companies. You can be sure this decision to not allow employees to work from home, will become a case study of sorts that other CEOs and company managers will use to justify their own telecommute decisions. That’s the thing about leadership – even when you don’t mean to be a leader, by being in a leadership position (which CEO of a large technology company most certainly is), you are automatically looked to for leadership.

Marissa Mayer has had an opportunity to be a leader for women, especially, and has failed twice to seize those opportunities. Instead, the example she’s set both times have in many ways set women back when it comes to the struggles we face in the workforce. But, let’s be clear that it’s not just women affected by her decisions. These days, men are also wanting better work flexibility and the opportunity to be more present for their families.

Perhaps Mayer isn’t trying to be antiquated in her methods, but just trying to get a company back on track by bringing all employees together under one building. Maybe. But, as I told a friend in another online forum, Marissa Mayer could have (easily) individually assessed each employee’s status, work standards, and productivity level, and made the proper adjustments where necessary. If that meant some employees would no longer be able to telecommute, then as a CEO, she has a responsibility to retract that perk (for those individuals) in the best interest of the company. However, I’m sure there are some employees that are being more productive by telecommuting and having the flexibility, that will now suffer greatly (both at work and at home) in adhering to the new no telecommuting policy. Instead of creating a blanket policy that will affect all employees, Marissa Mayer could have taken a more staggered approach.

I don’t expect that one woman, or even one company, will fix the workforce issues women and parents face. But, I do believe that a person who leads should consider the message sent in making such bold decisions. And the message sent by Mayer and Yahoo is loud and clear – we are not flexible.

What are your thoughts on Yahoo and Marissa Mayer’s decision to not allow their employees to work from home? Do you feel it sets working parents back? Or is this just good business for Yahoo?

Photo: Victor1558/Flickr

In celebration of all women, and of Women’s History Month, MomsRising is bringing you this blog carnival — scroll down to see all the posts — where you can read the diverse perspectives of many people about contemporary women’s equality. Whether you like Sandberg’s new Lean In book (and concept) or despise it: It’s long past time to discuss women’s equality in the workplace and what still needs to be done. “Lean In,” “Lean Up,” “Lean Down,” or just plain “Lean,” it’s going to take all of us, leaning together, to build a better nation for women and families.

Allison O’Kelly, Mom Corps
As Women, We Are Our Own Best Source of Inspiration

Anonymous MomsRising Member
Marissa Mayer Edict Reinforces Regressive Work Place Practices

Aurelia Flores, PowerfulLatinas.com
5 Reasons Latinas Can (and Should!) Get Ready for Leadership

Cali Ressler and Jody Thompson, Why Managing Sucks and How To Fix It
Welcome to the Past: Best Buy Embraces Last Century Management Practices

Cali Yost, CEO and Consultant Speaker
5 Insanely Simple Work-Life Balance Shortcuts From People Who “Have It All”

Carolyn Edgar, Attorney and Publisher
Working Women Blues

Cheryl Stober, Busy Since Birth
Lean In to What, Exactly?

Dominique Browning, Moms Clean Air Force
We Can Be World Changers, Game Changers, and Diaper Changers. Why I Say: More Power to Sheryl Sandberg

Donna Schwartz Mills, SoCal Moms and MOMocrats.com
Lean In, Chin Up and Tune Out

Elisa Batista, MomsRising.org and MotherTalkers.com
Caregiving In the Face of Hostility

Dr. Elisabeth Kelan, Rising Stars: Developing Millennial Women As Leaders
Why Millennial Women Do Not Want to Emulate Senior Women and What To Do About It

Jennifer Lee, Feminist: Stories from Women’s Liberation
In Hollywood, the Numbers of Women Matter

Joan Blades, MoveOn.org, MomsRising.org, Living Room Conversations
Let’s Lean In to Updating Our Work Culture!

Joan C. Williams and Katherine Ullman, Center for WorkLife Law at University of California-Hastings
MAKERS, A Cautionary Tale: Sandberg, Mayer, Slaughter and Feminism Today

Joanne Bamberger, PunditMom and the Broad Side
Sheryl Sandberg and Marissa Mayer: “Lean In” and Get Your Butt to the Office!

Kathy Korman Frey, The Hot Mommas Project
Are You a Member of the In Crowd – The “Lean In” Crowd?

Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, MomsRising.org
Think this Doesn’t Matter to You? Think Again.

Linda Meric, 9to5.org
Lifting Up not Leaning In is Key to Helping Women Get

Liz Watson, National Women’s Law Center
“Leaning in?” Women in low-wage jobs do it every day.

Melanie Edwards, Modern Mami
Marissa Mayer & Yahoo Send a Clear (Negative) Message To Employees & Working Parents

Morra Aarons-Mele, Women Online and The Mission List
Why ‘Lean In’ Makes Me Depressed

Nanette Fondas, The Custom-Fit Workplace
Teleworking Helps Mothers “Lean In”

Stephanie Coontz, Evergreen State College and Council on Contemporary Families
Assessing Sheryl Sandberg’s “Lean In”

Tanvi Gautam, Global People Tree and WOW Factor
There’s No Glass Ceiling On Twitter

Terri E. Givens, Soccer Mom, Professor, Entrepreneur, Athlete and Activist
Work, Life and Responsibility

Valerie Young, National Association of Mothers’ Centers
Sheryl Sandberg’s Most Important Words

Kristin Maschka,
4 Things Sheryl Sandberg Gets Right (and Wrong) in ‘Lean In’

Around the Web
“More Feminist Than Thou: Moving Beyond Self-Defeating “Choose-My-Choice” Feminism”, Andrea Grimes for Reality Check
“Why This Working Mom Agrees with Mayer’s ‘No Work from Home’ Policy”, Anonymous Writer for Modern Mami
“How Etsy Attracted 500 Percent More Female Engineers”, Anya Kamenetz for Fast Company
“In My Opinion: Where Are All The Latina Feminists?”, Carol Cain for Lifetime Moms
“The Sheryl Sandberg I know”, Ben Parr for CNET
“Many Working-Class Women Are Already Leaning In”, Ellen Bravo for The Atlantic
“Opinion: Yahoo’s Marissa Mayer just killed the telecommuting lifestyle buzz”, Julio Ricardo Varela for NBC Latino
“You Don’t Have to Be Marissa Mayer to Bring Your Baby to Work With You”, Nanette Fondas for The Atlantic
“A Mentor Is Not Enough”, Tanvi Gautam for WOW Factor

Fired up? Sign up to receive action alerts from MomsRising.org. It’s free!

So we think it’s unfortunate, if not downright silly, that Best Buy has made the decision to discontinue operating as a Results-Only Work Environment (ROWE) for corporate employees. They are sending a clear message that they are more concerned with having leadership excel at monitoring the hallways, rather than building a leadership team that excels at defining clear, measurable results, and holding people accountable for achieving those results. While we agree that Best Buy must take drastic measures to turn their business around, moving back to a 20th century, paternalistic ‘command and control’ environment is most certainly not the answer. It’s our hope that the Best Buy leadership team quickly recognizes that the managed-flexibility game is old news, and that organizations who will win in the 21st century will learn how to effectively manage the work, not the people. In fact, any so-called leadership team can effectively get ‘all hands on deck’, dictate hours and delegate tasks, while their people brag about how many hours they put in ‘at the office’. That’s easy. But only true leadership has the ability to get ‘everyone on point’ with a workforce vs. a workplace that’s fluid, nimble and focused on what matters: measurable results.

That’s why we wrote our recently-released book Why Managing Sucks and How to Fix It. Managing work, not people isn’t easy.  So our book is full of tips to help managers move forward, not backward. Perhaps Mr. Joly should pick up a copy.

Frankly, whenever we read things like ”It makes sense to consider not just what the results are but how the work gets done. Bottom line, it’s ‘all hands on deck’ at Best Buy and that means having employees in the office as much as possible to collaborate and connect on ways to improve our business” we just shake our heads and laugh. Sorry. That doesn’t make sense to anyone.

What’s your take? Are you a Best Buy employee? Get the discussion started in the comments below. We want to hear what you think!

National Telework Week buzzed about, ironically, bans on telecommuting. Last week, Best Buy announced the end of its work-at-home program known as ROWE (results-only-work-environment), on the heels of Yahoo’s ban on remote work a week before.

Then snowstorms hit the midwest and east coast, closing schools and businesses, and people turned to — you guessed it — teleworking to stay productive and safe. When the snow melts, will the backlash against teleworking continue? The temptation for companies to mimic one another always exists, but this one should be resisted. Here’s why.

The Census reports that in 2010,13.4 million people worked at home at least one day per week. This represented 9.4% of all U.S. workers and was an increase of 4.2 million over the previous decade.

More and more people prefer jobs that offer telework and other options for working flexibly. In The Custom-Fit Workplace, a book I co-authored, we report that parents are not the only workers who crave flexibility in when and where they work: One in three workers say being able to flexibly balance work and life is the most important factor in choosing a job. Workers of all ages and ranks want MORE flexibility and will take a pay cut to get it.

The business benefits of telecommuting are well-established in both the private and public sector. In an increasingly globalized world, it ranks more as an essential competitive business tactic than a disposable employee benefit. One reason is that telework allows some organizations to expand their talent pool and recruit from anywhere, seeking the best candidates regardless of location. Further, in dual-career families, one spouse does not get displaced automatically when the other must relocate. The majority of families in the U.S. today need two earners to make ends meet.

But the advantages don’t end there. The secret is that the value of workplace flexibility to employees creates a virtuous cycle for employers and their businesses. People who are trusted by their employers feel job satisfaction and commitment. This translates into productivity, retention, and turnover cost savings — estimated to be as high as three times an exiting worker’s wage.

But it’s more than the dollars saved by retaining key employees. It’s about the loyalty engendered and how that translates into bottom line results for business. For example, it’s estimated that workers who telecommute, work on average, 5-7 more hours per week than office-exclusive workers. A recent Gallup poll found teleworkers more engaged than their in-office counterparts; and a Stanford study found them 13% more productive.

A meta-analysis of 46 studies on remote work featuring 12,883 employees found telework increased their autonomy and resulted in more satisfied, productive workers who were less likely to quit their jobs. In addition, some autonomy, control, and flexibility in when, where and how work gets done combats stress, burnout, and associated serious health risks such as cardiovascular disease. Saving lives, helping families, reducing health care costs: the benefits to individuals, businesses, and society all begin to pile up.

To be sure, telework is not a panacea. Some people may be ill-suited for the discipline it demands. Managers must be trained to manage for results and they must be comfortable relinquishing some control. And there is no doubt that some collaborative processes require in-person contact, just as surely as some cognitive processes (thinking!) require solitude.

Teleworking does not work in all jobs or companies all the time. The common tie between Yahoo and Best Buy ending their remote/work-at-home options is that top management is struggling to find the best practices to turn around results in an age of mobile, online, internetworked competition from every corner of the earth. But thousands of other companies use telework as an essential part of their portfolio of management practices to engage, motivate, and reward employees while, at the same time, boosting the bottom line.

Indeed, there is over 60 years of business scholarship on creating a fit between an organization’s strategy and organizational practices to enhance company performance — both financial results and human relations. “Workers are your most valuable asset” is trite but true, and global competition requires employee needs be part of the mix for an organization to thrive.

Remote work programs may not be “working” right now for Yahoo and Best Buy, but there are other forms of flexible working arrangements that could fit: implementing more flexible hours for workers in-office, allowing a babies-at-work program, or letting parents create non-standard career tracks. Outside of these two companies, there are 13.4 million reasons not to ditch the promise remote work — or another type of flexible work arrangement — offers the American worker and economy.

At MomsRising, we celebrate mothers in leadership and value leaders like Sheryl who encourage and mentor other women to lead. This said, leaning in is not always possible, especially when work policies make it more challenging rather than less to meet responsibilities both at work and at home.

Early in our careers we are least likely to have resources that give us the capacity to lean in. And pregnancies are not always uncomplicated, nor the children that follow. We salute women who have the capacity to “lean in” when pregnant and raising young children. We also ask organizations to step back and realize that career tracks and work culture can be structured in ways that are more compatible with the realities of the modern work force. Fact is smart organizations are learning that they gain a great deal when they make it possible for new parents and workers with family responsibilities to slow down temporarily without being thrown from their top career track.

While some work places are embracing policies that are a better fit for the modern work force, others are in denial and this undermines the economy and our families. Recently, Yahoo announced that it is ending its policy of allowing employees to work remotely. The fact that an Internet company, which has contributed to the ability of people to work from home, a capacity that helps mothers in particular, would end this long-standing practice is troubling, especially given the extensive data that affirms the advantages of remote work options.

Flexible work environments are highly effective for many jobs and a boon not just for parents or others with family obligations, but for anyone. Now, after two weeks of backlash, the end of remote work at Yahoo sounds a bit less hard and fast. Perhaps they realized that they would lose valuable employees and be less competitive when attempting to hire new talent with a “no remote work” policy — not to mention, the respect of their customers.

Yahoo is not the only company retreating to old school work culture. Best Buy recently announced that they are terminating their Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) program, a ground breaking management program based entirely upon a worker’s performance. ROWEs have no requirement to track time, only to track outcomes. The program has a history of eliminating non-performers, increasing productivity and reducing turnover. Nonetheless, Best Buy is returning to a more traditional management model. There is a new CEO at Best Buy and he no doubt feels the need to redecorate, CEO-style.

Best Buy is struggling because the marketplace for electronics has changed radically in the last decade. Online competition is potentially deadly. Lacking the capacity to change this leadership has brought back old fashioned management practices. Now employees must ask managers for permission to work from home, go to the doctor or pick up a child early, which feels safer and more “businesslike” to old school leaders. (Don’t worry, no permission slip is required to go to the bathroom.) Once again, workers with responsibilities outside the workplace are likely to be most hard-pressed by this change.

It is disappointing to see leaders lose sight of the basic principle that when employees are empowered to meet their responsibilities both at work and outside of work, everyone benefits. Technological advances have redefined where and how it’s possible to work productively. Widespread access to the Internet makes it possible for many people to work effectively from nearly any location.

In response to these realities more and more employers have introduced work-from-home and other flexible work policies which have made work fit better for a broad swath of workers. This has even created important opportunities for people who otherwise could not work for pay outside the home. Now is not the time to roll back its workplace practices to the 1950s or even the 90s. This direction hurts employers and employees alike.

Instead of diminishing remote work options and employee self determination, employers would be well advised to expand these policies to include more workers. Overall, from the highly paid to those making minimum wage, far too few people in America have flexible work options—almost three-fourths of working adults say they don’t control their work schedules at all. [1] In fact, the top reason identified by highly educated and trained women for leaving the “fast track” is the lack of family time. [2]

This is a major loss to businesses. Smart employers such as Deliotte and the University of California Berkeley have redesigned their career tracks with the express intention of retaining talented women and men who choose to or need to slow down for whatever reason. The ability to work remotely and flexibly is a key component of the ability to modernize the design of most career tracks.

Thank you, Sheryl Sandberg for highlighting the need for more women in leadership. Let’s make sure that our employers lean toward modern work policies that better fit our modern workforce in addition to supporting young women who want to “lean in.”

[1] AFL-CIO, “Family Friendly Work Schedules.”
According to the AFL-CIO, “One study found that flex-time is available to nearly two-thirds (62 percent) of workers of more than $71,000 a year but to less than one-third (31 percent) of working parents with incomes less than $28,000.” American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, “Family Friendly Work Schedules,” www.aflcio.org/issues/workfamily/workschedules.cfm.
[2] 7. Hewlett and Buck Luce, “Off-Ramps and On-Ramps,” 5.

So, once again Yahoo! CEO Marissa Mayer moves a pinky and the 24-hour news hounds start fanning the flames of discord among the working world’s haves and have-nots – pitting parents, non-parents, caretakers and others against one another. (For those who missed it, Mayer has issued a June 1 deadline for Yahoo! employees who work remotely from home to work from the office.)

Don’t be fooled into thinking this is about workplace communication, how one goes about finishing a task, face-time, new versus old way of performing work, and other similar issues — all of which have been studied for more than 30 years by such entities and efforts as the U.S. Department of Labor and the Sloan Foundation’s National Workplace Flexibility Initiative, to name just a few.

No, what this latest edict points out is what a woefully outmoded
workplace paradigm that establishes the direction of power in no uncertain terms.

When Marissa Mayer was hired as Yahoo’s sixth CEO in six years, she had to make some sort of offer of profitability to her prospective board. This latest edict makes perfect sense as a great way to eliminate (reduce?) payroll and therefore increase the bottom line, without “actually” announcing a layoff and thereby “encouraging” perceived non-performers and non-conforming employees to leave on their own. I wonder how many companies are going to use this move in the next few years?

What really matters – and here’s the rub – is that this decision, made
at the altar of money, reinforces a mentality of work that is over 80 years in the making, and so antiquated and out of step with the evolution of present society, that we should NOT be asking “How could a woman, do this?” (Perpetuating the stereotype that this is still a gender issue, when it has not been one for at least 20 years) but, rather, we should be asking “How is it that business leaders are not shamed publicly for these actions in 2013?”

The answer is simple: businesses have taken to assuming, and acting on this assumption, that a division of labor exists and you (the worker) or your partner are going to figure it out. For decades, services, schools, businesses, households have been pushed, prodded, squeezed, contorted and adjusted to fit the square peg of work dictums – 40 hours pay (now close to 60+ but still paid at only 40), low wages, high-costing benefits.

Meanwhile services are now open on weekends because a typical two-job
household cannot take time off during the week, schools offer before — and after care as do senior centers and the lists go on of the adjustments we’ve all had to make in the face of the un-evolved employer requirements.

The stark reality is that most employers decree the amount of time one has to oneself and offer very little in the way of support to justify the fact that we spend roughly 50 to 60 hours at work per week, 40 hours sleeping (that is if you actually sleep 8 hours), and are left with 30 hours to take care of our lives. Yet, Ms. Mayer feels that reinforcing this paradigm is legitimate and within her purvey.

Secondly, I find it laughable that a person raked publicly over the 24-hour news cycle for her chronic lateness to meetings removes one of the most studied and acknowledged means of keeping employees loyalty and maximum efforts. I’m not about to sit here and pretend to know what her strategy is, but what I do see is one more CEO – age, gender matters little – with ample means (time, money, both) – to afford all the ancillary help needed to address all of life’s emergencies, necessities and nuisances. You know, those things like laundry, grocery shopping, cooking, calling the insurance company to fix a wrong charge, lining up a plumber , dealing with your kids’ teachers, taking your elderly parent to a specialist, finding a daycare center (elderly or infants, or both) and the list goes on.

I am sure that any CEO in the U.S. can afford at least three people to help with any of these chores. Or, they have a partner who will do it while they are at work. Which brings me to my next point, and that is that all those previously cited items above that we don’t attend to have costs (if we hire it out to others – even Task Rabbits cost) some may even come with life-changing non-monetary consequences. But, if a partner does all this “other” work, the effort is totally devalued and unpaid, and businesses feel entitled to assume that “someone else” is going to do it all, because your time is theirs for 50 to 60 hours a week.

What is even more insidious is the idea that work continues to prevail, monopolize and abuse its role when compared to any and all other responsibilities for an adult, no matter what their position, familial situation or age. This is a lop-sided equation that somehow continues to be used in this country as meriting society’s tacit acquiescence and acceptance all while we all bash our heads against the proverbial wall of status quo, and voicing our frustration to the lack of equanimity between working life and personal life.

There are over 30 years of studies that show that a measure of
transformation and equanimity is long overdue in this country, starting with work laws, companies urged to change their policies, and adoption of career tracks that support change as one’s life changes. Yet, the majority of employers continue to resist any of these changes – some industries being positively antediluvian – while, here and there are a few shining examples of change, alas too few and far between to be noticed but for those of us that are looking.

In the end, by virtue of who she is, the role she has, and – unfortunately – her gender, Ms. Mayer will continue to grab headlines and feed the 24-hour cycle who will grab the chance to use her actions to once more point out our differences and fan our frustrations. Don’t be fooled! Her tactics are tied to a very old master: profitability.

But, is it not time that we all ask ourselves why is it that a society of the 21st century reflects the values, mores and actions of the early 20th or even, I dare say, the late 19th century?

It’s the paradigm that needs changing. That which once served us, is no longer an acceptable means of conducting our lives in a balanced manner.

If we were truly equal, the fuss over Marissa Mayers’ no-telecommuting directive at Yahoo! would have been focused on the protests of ALL affected employees, instead of just the mothers. And Sheryl Sandberg would not have needed to advise young women to “Lean In” to get ahead in the workplace.

The website for Sandberg’s new Lean In community states that they are “committed to offering women the ongoing inspiration and support to help them achieve their goals” and that “if we talk openly about the challenges women face and work together, we can change the trajectory of women and create a better world for everyone.”

I see nothing wrong with that and I applaud Sandberg for whipping up support to solve a problem. But I also understand why there’s been so much criticism of the effort as one that isn’t going to help the majority of women in the workforce — because most of us are not or will ever be on the executive track. We just need to support our families.

The way I see it, our unequal state in society is too big a problem to be tackled by just one initiative. The glass ceiling is real, as is the perception that some successful women don’t do much to help the younger women who follow. Sandberg’s book and support group may help put that issue to rest.

But that is just one tiny part of a huge problem that is somewhat invisible, even to women ourselves — until we give birth to our first child. That’s when we discover how widely our national policies veer away from our political rhetoric. It seems like the more lawmakers talk about “family values,” the less likely they are to vote for policies that support the families they supposedly care about. Women need support climbing the corporate ladder. Women and families also need equal pay, options for flexible and/or part time work, affordable universal daycare, universal healthcare, paid parental leave, and a path back into the workforce once time has been taken to raise a family.

Does this sound like a fantasy? Only in America. Many of these ideas are actual policy in other industrialized nations.

I had hoped to convince my supervisors to allow me to officially work from home a couple of days per week after my daughter was born, but that was not to be. After three frustrating years, I ended up walking away from that job and became a full-time, stay at home mom. At the time, I thought I would be able to find some part time work that made sense, but soon discovered that (a) no one was willing to pay me even close to what I was earning full-time on an hourly basis, (b) once I factored in the cost of child-care (which I would still need), clothing and transportation I would be LOSING money and (c ) staying home with a sick child would likely mean getting fired.

The question of how to break through glass ceiling is useless to women who never moved beyond the pink collar — or who, like me, were forced to decide between work and family and really had no other choice than to stay home and raise the kid. I worked for 20 years and worked at home for 16. And now, I cannot even break back into the kind of entry level office job I had as a new college graduate.

My job search has resulted in little more than an endless stream of emails from employment agencies who never allow me to make it through to an interview. Nonetheless, I am subjected to a daily stream of emails with job leads that are purportedly tailored to my experience.

Most of them are for nanny positions. Because once you’ve spent several years caring for children, I guess that’s all you are good for any longer.

“The employers I work with don’t want people who have been out of work longer than two years,” one agency told me when cancelling the interview I had set up over the Internet. And that seems to be a national trend. Re-entering the workforce after taking time off to raise a family has always been a challenge. It’s even harder now.

I know a lot of women who gave up careers to raise their families, women who will face this same issue when their kids have grown. We are an underutilized national resource. We can make a solid contribution. But as of now, there are no COOs writing books and starting support networks for us.

Sandberg advises women to stop trying to have it all, and that’s where I see red. No one questions whether or not men can have a successful career and a family. Fifty years after the second wave of the women’s movement, why is this still an issue for us?

The Mayer memo said Yahoo! needs workers side-by-side to foster creativity, innovation, and effectiveness — despite its stature as an Internet path breaker. Emotions ran high, fueled by a passion for working flexibility many Silicon Valley workers feel. Parents, in particular, prize flexibility in times of child care snafus — for example, when schools have a snow day, half-day, or send your little love bundles home with head lice. Beyond parents, though, more than ever, employees crave any type of workflex: One in three says being able to flexibly balance work and life is the most important factor in choosing a job. Workers of all ages and ranks — even Fortune 500 executives — say they want MORE flexibility and will forgo pay for it. And let’s not forget the working class in this debate: low-wage workers are 30 percent less likely to quit their jobs within two years if they have some flexibility.

On one side of the debate stand proponents of the well-established business case for giving workers some flexibility in where and how they work. An entire field of study—organizational-behavior examines how a virtuous cycle forms when employers trust and empower employees to do their jobs. Trust-based management practices energize employees, which translates into more and better end products and ultimately productivity improvement. When employees have some discretion, they also feel more job satisfaction and commitment to their organizations, which reduces turnover costs. Productivity up, costs down, bottom line improves.

On the other side of the debate sit realists reminding us that Yahoo! and Best Buy’s businesses are in trouble, hence, “when a ship is going down, it is not unreasonable to demand all hands on deck.” Failing companies cannot invest more in what’s not working. While workflex options attract and retain top talent, some product development (and other organizational) processes require forms of collaboration that benefit from — if not depend on — in-person, face-to-face contact.

When a company aims to renew its culture, management must alter any practices impeding performance — even beloved family-friendly flexibility.

Still others object that Marissa Mayer plays by different rules than the workforce upon which her success depends because she takes her baby to work. Her financial and managerial clout empowered her to customize her childcare situation with an option other mothers can only envy: she built a private nursery next to her office.

There is a way, however, for parents who are not millionaire chief executives to take their babies to work — and I’m not talking about on-site day care centers. Babies-at-work programs are springing up around the country — and in Canada, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, too — in companies small and large, in 30 different industries. I wrote about it at The Atlantic:

It works like this. Parents-to-be often initiate a conversation with employers about bringing a baby to work, though managers are often grateful to hear innovative suggestions to retain a key employee once parental leave has ended. While researching my book, The Custom-Fit Workplace, I found managers eager to maintain consistency in service to the important clients a new parent serves and to prevent valued parents from off-ramping only to return to work later for a competitor. With that as motivation, managers set up a program that says who is eligible, for how long (usually until a baby starts crawling), and how to handle liability concerns and problems that could arise. Office workers bring the baby there; cubicle workers either keep the baby in their work area or are sometimes temporarily given an office to use while the baby comes to work. The baby is cared for as needs arise, reducing the chance of meltdown crying. While parents with babies at work are expected to get their jobs done, their work methods change — “power spurts” is a way one woman described it. Another said she would email, edit, conference call, and update the firm’s web site while breastfeeding her infant. Co-workers voluntarily pitch in and parents take work home. “It takes a village,” remarked many of the people involved with babies-at-work programs.

Babies in Business Solutions offers a wealth of information about how a baby-at-work program works and how to start one at your company, what types of companies offer these programs, and how media attention creates positive returns for a business. Parents participating in the program—yes, dads, you too can take your baby to work — report working more efficiently and their job satisfaction and loyalty benefits the business. And here’s a part I like: co-workers of parents bringing babies to work report that the infants create a humanizing presence in the workplace and morale improves. Organizations need that. Humans need that!

So while some companies may see the Yahoo and Best Buy bans on flexible working-from-home as an invitation to imitate and reduce workplace flexibility for employees, let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Over two-thirds of American families have two parents in the paid labor force. Let’s all — workers, managers, owners — “lean in” to the many ways of solving work-family challenges. Taking infants to work is one creative solution. Ingenious, entrepreneurial Americans surely can think of even more ways to work flexibly.

The Facebook COO talks about an updated women’s movement and the ambition gap that is limiting women’s ability to advance in the workplace. But advance to what degree – the chief executive level? That is not the goal of millions of professional women. They are looking to be successful on their terms and to raise a family in a way that aligns with those terms. Her book is an interesting read and great for young women starting out and those who want to get to the top, but it really doesn’t speak to the other 99 percent of us not willing or able to approach work in the way Sheryl outlines.

I recently wrote an opinion piece for WorkingMother.com about the importance of women supporting other women as we make our preferences known. I also offer a couple suggestions and insight for making it all work. I hope you find something here that you can use and pass along.

I confess, I turned 40 this year. The anticipation was a little unnerving, but now that I’m here, I’m really eager about the reputed other side of the hill. I’m in a good place right now. My kids are learning and growing, my business is thriving, and my relationships (both personal and professional) are becoming more rich and authentic. Beyond my newfound “maturity,” could it be that finding alignment between work and life has made me more content? Either way, I’ll take it!

Something else I’m really appreciating more: smart, intrepid women who have something to say, exciting ideas and a desire for sharing with the rest of us. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting some of these women specifically in the past year and have taken at least a bit of advice and insight from each of them. Arianna Huffington, Cali Yost of Flex+Strategy Group, Ellen Galinsky of Families and Work Institute, and my Ernst & Young 2012 Entrepreneurial Winning Women class, to name a few. I am grateful for what they have contributed and inspired by their success.

Someone I came across last week piqued my interest. Former Cosmopolitan editor-in-chief, Kate White, writes in this endearingWorkingMother.com post about “My 6 Best Gutsy Tips for Working Mothers.” Perhaps this is so likeable because throughout the piece Ms. White shares stories and lessons learned from her time as a working mother, wife and the head of arguably one of the most successful women’s magazines. In some ways, we can all relate to her. In other ways, we can’t. But that’s all part of the fun.

Inspired by the advice I’ve received and the approaching New Year, I thought I would share my top three tried-and-true tips for finding better alignment and flexible work scenario in 2013. I hope to pass along an idea, a reflection or perhaps a little motivation to make a change if you need one.

•  Think of the workday as a 24-hour clock. Take an hour off here or there to be with your kids, then get back on the computer in the evening and wrap up your workday. When the kids get off the bus, be there to ask them how their day was and what they learned in school. Kei Nomaguchi, PhD, associate professor of sociology at Bowling Green State University says focused attention is best in this article: ”Kids want focused time with their parents. It doesn’t have to be long – 20 minutes may be enough – but give them all your attention.” Getting back to work after these little breaks won’t be as hard when you’ve spent those few extra minutes with them.

•  Let your kids know you love what you do. Showing that you have interest in something and take great pleasure in your work helps your little ones respect you as a mother and as your own person. While your family life is a top priority, don’t feel guilty about having a professional life that is rewarding and important. When your children see you excel at something, it will inspire them to follow suit. In fact, studies show that loving your job contributes to a healthy, happy home.

•  If you have it in you, be an entrepreneur. According to our recent survey, 67 percent of working adults believe that it is possible to “have it all” when it comes to work/life balance. But like Ms. White’s gutsy tip number one, no one at the office is going to remind you to get home at 5:30 to be with your kids. You have to make that happen. Through business ownership, you have infinitely more control of how you divide you work and family time. Even if being an entrepreneur isn’t for you, find what works for you and your family and put it into practice.

Let us resolve together to be supportive, share ideas, and strengthen our voice to advance the progress we want to see. Want to work at a company that understands flexibility is just as good for them as it is for you? Want to know that other working mothers are out there fighting that same 6 p.m. witching hour? Want to share your success in asking for that flex schedule? Want to know how others did it? Let us all be part of the conversation.

Lean in! Take charge! No fear!

Out with flex-time! In with face time!

These are the messages two of the highest-profile working mothers in America are sending to the rest of us. If Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s Chief Operating Officer, and Marissa Mayer, Yahoo!’s Chief Executive Officer, have their way, women in the workplace will remake themselves in their C-Suite images which, sadly, is looking like something from the 1980′s movie Working Girl. Their sentiments sound an awful lot like what I heard as a young journalist and then as a new attorney in a large law firm decades ago. Is this a case of “what’s old is new again?”

Whether it’s fair or not, I expect more of high-powered women leaders who also happen to be mothers when it comes to understanding what’s realistic for most women in the workforce — especially when the online community of women has rallied around them in the past, as happened when Mayer announced shortly after becoming Yahoo!’s CEO, that she was pregnant and would only be taking a couple of weeks off for maternity leave.

As for Sandberg, her new book, Lean In: Women Work and the Will to Lead, (which I read after borrowing an advance review copy) makes some good points about women needing to take charge of their careers, and not being afraid to “lean in” to the challenges of managing a professional life with family responsiblities, but it’s hard to focus on her positive points when, for most of the book, she tries really hard to portray herself as just another ordinary working mom who’s overcome the same problems the rest of us face. That’s a tough sell, as she shares anecdotes like the one about how happy she was that on a business trip with her kids, she was on a private jet and not a commercial flight when she discovered her daughter had head lice (WHEW! Dodged a bullet on spreading those nits!).

As for Mayer, Yahoo! announced late last week that all flex-time and remote working arrangements would be rescinded, and if you want to keep your job at Yahoo!, you have to be in the office every day. Even though there is plenty of research that shows employers and employees benefit in productivity when certain flexible work arrangements are in place, in a lively Facebook discussion, I questioned how many women must be feeling who came to Mayer’s defense of her personal parenting/career choice when she said she was only taking two weeks off after having her baby. Her baby, her decision. Sure, we all knew she had a boatload of help, but whatever works for her, right?

As one friend who is been a working mother in the corporate world remarked about Mayer:

While I do understand that this is first and foremost a business decision that Mayer has made for Yahoo!, impacts both men and women, and may be in the best long-term interests for the company, it is impossible to not also view it through a feminist lens that understands that working mothers and two-income families have been among the chief beneficiaries of flexible working arrangements. And it is a shame that we can’t incorporate these values into business success.

Mayer, in making her corporate decision, and Sandberg, in trying to craft a new social movement by using her life as example, are both blithely ignoring the realities of life for the vast majority of working families today.

Pregnancies have complications. Babies might be easy in some senses (they are portable for a while), but kids have issues and problems and illnesses and conditions. There are families who having double care-giving obligations — for young kids and for aging parents. Yes, we should expect our spouses and partners to be involved in dealing with these things and all the other complications of life, but it is never as easy as it sounds. Both Mayer and Sandberg, at a time when they are trying to demonstrate their own leadership abilities, have made their tone-deafness abundantly clear.

Mayer and Sandberg may be very well-intentioned — looking out for shareholders and encouraging women to aim for more — but the ways in which they are going about these two goals will only take us back to the time when women had to sneak out of the office if they needed to be home early (oh, wait, even Sandberg admits she did that) and bringing back that mom guilt I thought we’d all agreed wasn’t good for anybody.