Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
economist.com
Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
1–10 of 109 posts
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#2Remote works makes me more lazy.
Half of the work is fighting your laziness.
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#3The line between at work and “Not at work” has become very blurred at home. Especially with everyone in different time zones. I find that in the Midwest I need to start at least 2 hours early, and stay 2 hours late, to accommodate both coasts. It was easier when people were at the office. They’re either at their desk or not, and if not, then it’s not my job to track them down. Now if someone is not at their desk, I have to wait because they might be taking a break, or something with family.
In short, working from home has reduced productivity and maybe made some folks lazy.
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#4Efficiency is for robots. I deliver value to my company on a continuous basis and if taking a nap in the afternoon means I work an hour or two in the evening then I don't see what worries The Economist should hold about the situation.
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#5[deleted]
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#6Doesn't seem that way to me, but when I work longer hours at home I feel happier, less stressed and my day fits better.
Ever since I had to go back to 3 days a week I'm getting less done, I'm more stressed and I dread the days of commuting and having to sit on my tiny desk with sub par peripherals and all the distractions.
So it's anecdotal, but chalk one up for longer hours at home being a preference, even if I don't think it's true.
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#7“It’s best for you AND the company” sorry but every time I’ve heard this exact phrasing, it was only good for the manager voicing it, not for me NOR the company.
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#8Efficiency is for robots. I deliver value to my company on a continuous basis and if taking a nap in the afternoon means I work an hour or two in the evening then I don't see what worries The Economist should hold about the situation.
I don't see what worries The Economist should hold about the situation
The readership of the Economist is worried about commercial real estate.
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#9The line between at work and “Not at work” has become very blurred at home. Especially with everyone in different time zones. I find that in the Midwest I need to start at least 2 hours early, and stay 2 hours late, to accommodate both coasts. It was easier when people were at the office. They’re either at their desk or not, and if not, then it’s not my job to track them down. Now if someone is not at their desk, I h…
Sounds more like a problem with expectations than where you are sitting.
Re: Remote workers work longer, not more efficiently
#10This barrage of anti-wfh rhetoric from the economist is getting tiring