51–60 of 68 posts
Unpopular take: Regular work should be done in the office. We are only creating more jealousy from other sectors otherwise. If you want to work from home, start your own business.
(A) From what I can see, the more tech heavy a given role, the more remote is OK. For non-technical roles, I see fewer remote options. Especially during Covid times, when I spoke with CTOs, they all mentioned how well fully remote works for their teams. Which is quite different to the results in other functions.
(B) Is pretty much a decision from the founding team and the early members of the business + how well the collaboration works. I see fundamentally different approaches here and all can lead to great results.
I currently also often see a somewhat hybrid model, i.e., companies trying to have the staff in the office e.g., on a Tuesday and Thursday...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it very interesting that the WFH crowd is advocating for what works for them, and is not demanding that everyone work from home. The RTO crowd, however, is demanding that everyone conform to their own preferences and work from the office.
Both remote mandates and RTO mandates upset people. They are both demands that everyone conform to something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there's no evidence that this is the case, and there's a lot of lived experience saying that it isn't.
>lived experience So anecdotes?
That's also not evidence, of course, but I'm not the one trying to convince people to return to a less-than-ideal working environment.
It's a power play. Plus, companies have all this real estate that they need to justify. I've listened closely to all of the pro-RTO people, and have yet to hear a single reason proposed that makes any sense at all. The only thing I'm left with that makes any sense is that this is about power and money.
You don't want to hear other reasons. There are tons of people that now work on 2-3 companies at the same time -> productivity decreased. They do all other stuff around the house and they get caught up on it -> productivity decreased. Company culture doesn't make sense anymore and teams are less connected -> productivity decreased. There are many other reasons, not just power like people here say just because they ar…
Untrue. I've listened, and continue to listen, with an open mind. However, I haven't found the arguments being put forth to be very persuasive. Being unconvinced is not the same as "not wanting to hear".
If an employee's productivity has become unacceptable, then you address it with that employee to correct the situation. If it can't be corrected, you fire them.
This is no different working from home than working in an office.
I work from home 100% but I sort of miss office and socializing there. It is easier to discuss a problem over cigarette break/lunch/happy hour than an ad hoc Zoom meeting. I have been working from home since 2017 but I had an office nearby. On days when I felt lonely, I could go to office. I would join company's social events, etc. I made some lifelong friends working from offices.
Yes most of these reasons are personal/social. Not for an increased business value. It is hard for me to see business value when working from an office other than social cohesion and politics.
If companies and employees care about the planet, they may provide better options to socialize over long distance like schedule a lunch hour everyday. Or subsidize working from local co-working places. Encourage and provide support for employees to join local social groups such as sports leagues, neighborhood groups, etc.
We used to have lunch breaks with my other friends who work from home but lately it seems most of them have to work from office few days a week or they just want to work through lunch and get done with work early. I think companies should be encouraging employees to take lunch breaks for healthier workforce.
Remote works for some people, for most it probably doesn't work. There is a reason why everyone doesn't have six pack abs - the same reason why people are, in general, more 'productive' when they have people in their immediate vicinity to hold them accountable. Instead of having the possibility of playing videogames at home, while being online on Slack. It's kinda common sense - humans have a limited amount of willpo…
If I can't trust you to work on your own whether it is in the office or at home you are not someone I want to hire. Babysitting employees is a waste of resources.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I can't trust you to work on your own whether it is in the office or at home you are not someone I want to hire. Babysitting employees is a waste of resources.
I can't trust ME to stay on task when there are so many distractions at home.
Go to a college campus, go observe a freshman/sophomore level lecture for a general education (read: fluff) class, then take a look to see what percentage of students are diligently taking notes vs doing literally anything else.
A lot of people are on task, and a lot are browsing the web, playing games, on their phones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, the reasons mentioned in this thread of execs trying to re-establish previous power hierarchies pre-COVID.
Why do you think execs have less power remotely?
As a silly, anecdotal example - consider the phrase 'smile in my face, then stab me in the back'. People are quick to talk trash about someone when they aren't in the same room, but act completely different when in person.
Executives rely on this to enforce favorable behavior in the workplace.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both remote mandates and RTO mandates upset people. They are both demands that everyone conform to something.
The WFH people aren't demanding that everyone work from home. They're just demanding that they be allowed to.
If I'm the only one in the office and 20 people are working from home, that isn't what I'm looking for. So either I decide if I can deal with it or find a new job. And the company decides whether they can live with it or if they're going to mandate remote work, or mandate RTO.
Pro-WFH people like to portray their stance as clearly right. But there is no right or wrong here. It's a question of what a company chooses to do and then what their employees choose to do.