“I think a distributed workforce is the most effective way to build a company.”
WordPress cofounder and Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg made this claim in a 2019 installment of TED’s “The Way We Work.” He deliberately preferred “distributed” to “remote,” arguing that the latter can imply a headquarters where essential people sit and a periphery where others do not. Mullenweg’s case rested on intentional design. A distributed company can recruit across geography and give people flexibility, but it must document decisions, communicate asynchronously, create social connection, and avoid reproducing a hidden center through access to information or executive attention. Business relevance appears when the thought changes the allocation of time, attention, resources, or decision rights. The most informative test often compares experience across customers, roles, or locations rather than relying only on an overall average.
Organizations can write for colleagues in other time zones, record decisions with context, and reserve synchronous meetings for work that truly benefits from conversation. Promotion, pay, project access, and leadership visibility should be audited for location effects rather than assumed to be neutral. The next step should be specific enough that another person can observe whether it occurred. Differences can reveal where the idea depends on hidden support, unequal access, or unusually favorable circumstances.
Distributed work is not automatically effective for every task or person. Home conditions, caregiving, disability, internet access, security, equipment, and early-career learning vary. A flexible system should include resources, gathering options, and clear expectations instead of shifting office costs and coordination burdens onto employees. Good governance keeps dissent and correction available, especially for people closest to the consequences. A responsible owner has authority to change the design and an obligation to explain why the evidence led to that choice.
The post-pandemic debate often reduces work design to the number of office days. Mullenweg’s language offers a more useful question: is the organization designed so information, opportunity, and belonging reach everyone, or are distant workers asked to imitate a meeting culture centered elsewhere? Examine one important decision made in the past month. Determine who could see the context, contribute before commitment, and understand the outcome afterward. Improve the written record and participation window, then compare results for employees across locations and time zones. The final measure is whether the practice creates durable value without hiding costs elsewhere in the system. When the reasoning is accessible, disagreement can improve the next decision instead of remaining a private complaint or political contest. If the practice continues, the team should specify which old activity will stop; otherwise improvement is likely to become an added burden rather than a redesign.
Vint Cerf used this declaration as the title and central refrain of RFC 3271, published in 2002. The document celebrated the Internet’s open reach while warning that access, affordability, disability, language, security, privacy, and harmful uses could prevent the promise from becoming true.
“Everyone” is an architectural and institutional commitment, not a description of equal access already achieved. Networks gain value as participation expands, but markets alone may not serve remote, low-income, or marginalized communities. Standards and policy shape who can connect and on what terms.
Technology companies can design for accessibility, low bandwidth, multiple languages, device diversity, and interoperable protocols from the beginning. Metrics should examine meaningful use and reliability across communities, not only aggregate accounts or traffic in well-served markets.
Universal access does not require unrestricted harmful conduct or the collection of unlimited personal data. Security, privacy, child protection, and due process matter. Governance should be transparent and capable of addressing abuse without turning inclusion into surveillance or arbitrary exclusion.
Connectivity increasingly determines access to education, work, finance, health, and public life. Satellite systems, community networks, and lower-cost devices offer new routes, while shutdowns, censorship, and affordability gaps show that technical reach can still be politically or economically withheld.
Choose one digital service and test it under low bandwidth, assistive technology, older hardware, and the languages of underserved users. Publish the largest access gap, assign an owner, and prioritize the change that enables meaningful participation rather than a nominal connection.
Explore more "Quotes of The Day"
Discover more notable quotes from influential voices across politics, science, business, technology, sports, and culture. Each quote offers insight into how ideas, beliefs, and decisions shape the world around us.