Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#51

Post by douche » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:25 PM UTC

throwaway1112 wrote: post #32

BadassFractal wrote: post #3

Are there any success stories of early stage high growth startups that were started by a remote team? At least in the startup world, most people are concerned that you will miss that zeal and watercooler chat magic that is critical to early stage companies. I don't think anybody cares too much about your 1000th engineer being remote, the organizational DNA has already been set a long time ago.

As someone who is remote about 90%, I contend the watercooler chat magic is overrated and a waste of time. I was previously in office full time. I was one of the first tech hires. I am mostly a programmer, with a good deal of overlapping ops and analysis thrown in. I'm part of a very small engineering staff (under 10) in an overall small company (under 30 people). My work output in our open office drops to around 10%…

I agree 100%, this matches my experiences pretty closely. I worked 80% remote for a six months a while back, and it was astonishing how much better productivity was, as well as the quality, if not necessarily the quantity of communication. Now I've basically flipped that ratio, and it is depressing how much of my time is wasted by low-quality communication, interruptions, as well as the low-grade stress and irritation of having to be in the office.

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#52

Post by nitrogen » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:25 PM UTC

reikonomusha wrote: post #13

At a few companies I've worked at, remote wasn't viable due to hardware development. It was difficult and expensive to replicate test setups for remote employees when unit costs for some of these devices range from 10 to 100k USD (e.g., VNAs).

I once set up a remote testing rig for hardware approximately ranging in the $1-10k order of magnitude for my own development. The setup time, cost of remotifying hardware, and convenience were much cheaper than replacing the hardware elsewhere.

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#53

Post by mark212 » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:26 PM UTC

_ix wrote: post #25

I admit that I'm not a great manager and more of a technician. I just happen to have the authority to make hiring and firing decisions for my tiny engineering team. I prefer on-site employees to remote for two reasons: 1 - I find that on-site employees are a bit easier to manage. The bar to communication is lower when they're so accessible. Also, I'm working with legacy hardware and software, and there is so much to…

just curious -- but if one of your team said, Hey my spouse has a great opportunity in another city/state/country, and I love the job. Would you let her/him work remotely?

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#54

Post by toomuchtodo » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

BadassFractal wrote: post #3

Are there any success stories of early stage high growth startups that were started by a remote team? At least in the startup world, most people are concerned that you will miss that zeal and watercooler chat magic that is critical to early stage companies. I don't think anybody cares too much about your 1000th engineer being remote, the organizational DNA has already been set a long time ago.

Zapier if I recall correctly.

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#55

Post by nitrogen » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #28

NobleSir wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for whiteboarding: onenote on surfaces? (which syncs almost real-time) This is what I use, for those kind of things, as someone working remotely

Not a bad idea, but it means deploying a surface to everyone, and frankly most people want to use Macs, so I'd have to give two devices to everyone, one of which would only get used for whiteboarding, which doesn't happen that often.

Tablets can be slightly cheaper than houses near the office.

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#56

Post by dudul » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

Answering for the hiring side at an organization where remote work is not allowed.

The reasons given by the founders to only allow local workers are: * we want everybody in the room to build the culture and for people to learn how to work together * whiteboard sessions/intense discussions are difficult to do remotely * for lead positions: face time is important to properly lead the team

I feel like it's a disastrous policy to find candidates. I'm in MA and we compete with a lot of companies over a rather small pool of candidates. The worse is that the "local only" comes with a "please, go easy on the WFH" policy. Recruiters literally laugh at us, and tell us that we will never be able to compete if we don't allow flexible hours/locations.

We did manager to hire a couple developers, but we had to lower our standards (and one could question them, but it's not really the point here).

Interestingly, after a while the "limit the WFH" policy was relaxed. And now people are still local but can take a couple days to stay home every week. I think it's just because the team delivered, worked hard and built trust. It's just sad that it took a long time, and that still has not changed the no full-remote policy.

I think the candidate would have to be extraordinary and, more important, fill a position that had been open for a long time to allow remote workers. Enough time to convince upper management that we had to consider a wider pool or we would never find anybody.

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#57

Post by iwallace » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

BadassFractal wrote: post #3

Are there any success stories of early stage high growth startups that were started by a remote team? At least in the startup world, most people are concerned that you will miss that zeal and watercooler chat magic that is critical to early stage companies. I don't think anybody cares too much about your 1000th engineer being remote, the organizational DNA has already been set a long time ago.

I can't find a reference anywhere for this to back it up, but I recall reading that Stephen Wolfram (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Wolfram) started Wolfram Research (Mathematica) with 100% remote employees.

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#58

Post by dasil003 » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #10

BadassFractal wrote: post #3

Are there any success stories of early stage high growth startups that were started by a remote team? At least in the startup world, most people are concerned that you will miss that zeal and watercooler chat magic that is critical to early stage companies. I don't think anybody cares too much about your 1000th engineer being remote, the organizational DNA has already been set a long time ago.

37Signals (now Basecamp)

Were they really remote in the beginning? Remember, they started as a "New Media" agency in the late 90s, and built up their following in their blog before pivoting into SaaS. It's hard to imagine having a creative agency all remote, and everything I've read from them—and I have been reading them since that early Zeldman era where they first rose to prominence—indicates that they started hiring remote to find the best people to work on their core products, not for client work.

Not that I don't think you can start a good startup as all-remote, but I just don't think that's how 37S bootstrapped.

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#59

Post by mountaineer22 » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

_ix wrote: post #25

I admit that I'm not a great manager and more of a technician. I just happen to have the authority to make hiring and firing decisions for my tiny engineering team. I prefer on-site employees to remote for two reasons: 1 - I find that on-site employees are a bit easier to manage. The bar to communication is lower when they're so accessible. Also, I'm working with legacy hardware and software, and there is so much to…

Please don't consider these questions a criticism.

In instance 1, could you use a remote screen sharing app to sit side saddle with a new junior dev? (and then record the session to allow the dev to replay the session later, come up with follow-up questions)

In instance 2, how often do you check on the progress of a dev? Is it a longer period of time for a remote vs an on-site employee?

Re: Ask HN: If you don't permit telecommuting, why?

#60

Post by dudul » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

jdc0589 wrote: post #34

brobinson wrote: post #2

How many decision makers are willing to admit that they are subconsciously using "chair time" as a measure of productivity?

hilariously, some companies with remote workers have "activity monitors" installed that tell coworkers you aren't doing anything if your mouse/keyboard goes inactive for a few minutes.

Is that for real?