41–50 of 148 posts
I'm not allowed to work offsite, but then again I work in defense, so you can probably put two and two together...
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).
It is quite weird that we have all these up-votes (including my own) but no answers. I think that the real answer might be something quite embarrassing, and politically incorrect.
What up-votes? I can barely read the Ask-HN question, it's such a light shade of gray. Someone really doesn't like it it seems. I gave it an up-vote anyway, because this is an interesting and highly relevant topic in the tech field, though I'm dubious of getting any substantive responses from anyone who's any kind of manager.
I have noticed some business owners emphasize how many people they employ, how they are "job creators".
On the opposite end, I have seen entrepreneurs who strive to be as lean as possible (automate everything), with employing another person seen as a last resort.
Do you think it depends if the org./dept. is results focused versus process focused?
Not exactly what you are asking for, but I'll throw it in here: I run a fully remote company, and most of the objections I've heard from others we've found workaround for. The biggest unsolved problem is whiteboarding - there is no good collaborative online whiteboarding solution that doesn't require a lot of expensive equipment to be deployed to everyone.
If you really must, give everybody a Wacom tablet + Paint + Screen sharing (or just a VNC server over the VPN so everybody can draw)
Not exactly what you are asking for, but I'll throw it in here: I run a fully remote company, and most of the objections I've heard from others we've found workaround for. The biggest unsolved problem is whiteboarding - there is no good collaborative online whiteboarding solution that doesn't require a lot of expensive equipment to be deployed to everyone.
Edit: I found another called deekit.com
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.
Looks like there are a few other options:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/groupboard-collaborative-whi...
This happened because I worked on-site for a year and I wasn't happy with the lifestyle the city I lived in provided (specifically SF/the bay-area, spent 5mo in SF then 5mo in SJ, still wasn't happy, so I moved to VN for 6 weeks).
I told my boss I needed a change of scene-ary and I really enjoyed working for and doing the things that I do at work, but I really did not like the bay and I wanted to live other places. He agreed to let me work remotely from Vietnam for 6 weeks, then Florida indefinitely. I think a few things that drove that decision were:
1. After working with me for a year, I am a known quantity that they like. With every new hire, there is risk and some people think more risk, since people won't be there.
2. The company is very small (10 people) and I play an important role in our platform. It would be expensive to replace me and they don't really want to, because of 1.
* Why does the person who does this job need to be on-site? Please be specific. Give me examples of things that can only be done if she were in the office.
Having been on site and remote, a couple of things that I feel that I am missing out are:
1. I feel like I have less klout in the office. When it comes to product design and company policy decisions, I am often left sitting on my hands while everyone else chats about it in the office.
2. Sometimes I miss spontaneous product discussions that happen within the office and am not typically told about that. This should be fixable, but it is about building good habits and keeping the team informed.
* Have you been in a position where you personally would be okay with an employee being a telecommuter, but a decision-maker deemed otherwise? How did you handle it?
No.
* How has the policy affected your company’s ability to attract candidates?
Since the office is in the bay, people fly from all over the world to work in our office. Has not been an issue.
* Have you hired someone for an in-the-office job, and later given permission for the individual to work from home? What happened to make the change okay?
me! see above.
* What would it take for the company to change the no-telecommuters policy, even if only for one specific position? When I got hired, there was a no-telecommuters policy and they were letting go both of our remote workers. I think I have been able to work remotely because of the points mentioned above.
I'm definitely not the person you're targetting, but I was interested in remote working for a long time- when I asked why I couldn't I was given a few reasons: 1) Spontaneous meetings become impossible, scribbling something on a whiteboard becomes much more difficult, the barrier to communication is too high. 2) We've had bad experiences with people who work in other studios/HQ. They tend to shirk responsibility, and…
It is quite weird that we have all these up-votes (including my own) but no answers. I think that the real answer might be something quite embarrassing, and politically incorrect.
What up-votes? I can barely read the Ask-HN question, it's such a light shade of gray. Someone really doesn't like it it seems. I gave it an up-vote anyway, because this is an interesting and highly relevant topic in the tech field, though I'm dubious of getting any substantive responses from anyone who's any kind of manager.