Live data from Hacker News

Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

fortune.com

241–250 of 366 posts

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normal people get showers and wear deodorant dude. How do you feel about sitting next to someone at a bar?

I'm struggling to identify how it's not glaringly self-evident that the person you're replying to would not enjoy sitting next to people at bars.

Ha, fair.

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#242
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious if you've considered that there is a pretty major cost difference between the two options? (at least for the company) Would you conclude that In Person is much better , in excess of the additional costs ?

Weirdly, companies don't seem to care about this kind of cost. I don't think I've ever seen "we're going remote first to save costs"? More likely is the "prestige HQ" which is deliberately made more expensive than it needs to be for status.

That's the trend in commercial real estate - prestigious, luxurious, eye-wateringly expensive class A space is doing well, but the bottom has fallen out of the market for practical, cost-effective class B space:

https://therealdeal.com/new-york/2023/06/05/jeff-blau-to-cla...

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more conditions that pertain Remote Work is better if 1. You do not have home problems that you will end up focusing on when you are there - so if you are single and do not own your home, or you have a great relationship and you do own your home but there are no problems the remote work is probably better. But just like being in an office and going into a private room can help productivity if you have probl…

There are more conditions that pertain Remote Work is better if 1. You prefer remote work This always gets to be such a dogmatic discussion that will to someone claiming anyone who likes working in an office has no social life. It’s just a preference. Remote work is not overall objectively better than office work (but you can create a set of goals for which this is true). Office work is not the right choice (but you…

For an autonomous IC who does not need to lead or contribute to thinks like whiteboarding, strategy discussions, client visits, etc, that is true.

There are jobs where in-person is just better, full stop. Remote can be accommodated, but it is not always exclusively about what the employee prefers.

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more conditions that pertain Remote Work is better if 1. You do not have home problems that you will end up focusing on when you are there - so if you are single and do not own your home, or you have a great relationship and you do own your home but there are no problems the remote work is probably better. But just like being in an office and going into a private room can help productivity if you have probl…

#1 can be solved by renting a co-working space if troubles at home are really that severe. I doubt that #2 is really any different than if you are unmotivated while in the office. If anything, one unmotivated employee in the office can more easily spread that lack of motivation to their co-workers.

>I doubt that #2 is really any different than if you are unmotivated while in the office

ok but I know from my own experience that #2 can be really different. And really I don't understand how anyone could doubt it - in the office if you are unmotivated you have a limited range of things you can do to pass the time. at home there is no limitation.

At some point in the office it becomes reasonable to just do the work and get it over with.

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It might be useful to "all be in the room" when brainstorming. Really? what does it bring that you can't do remotely? I can hardly think of a problem where "being in the same room" is a requirement to have a productive discussion

I'm pro work from anywhere so long as shit gets done but... Picking up on social cues. Bouncing ideas around using a whiteboard. Speaking quickly without that ever so slight lag on Zoom which means you struggle to get a word in without potentially talking over somebody. Having food or drinks before or afterwards to unwind and build relationships and kick things around informally. There's lots more.

The differences with in person are that conversations have a much higher fidelity. There can be spontaneous multiple conversations going in the same room which is impossible virtually without spinning up another videoconf session, people leaving, people re-joining, etc. So it really is much better for brainstorming and doing the “figure things out” mode of software engineering. Once you’ve figured things out, the implementation can be dome remotely.

Sharing meals during this time together also helps build relationships and trust within a team. I mean as you work, or even offsite at a restaurant - go out to breakfast or lunch during the work day.

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#247
post #16

A friend of mine who is a PM at google was telling me about this the other week. Her job situation sounded so tenuous, in that a lot of it hinged on how cool her manager was with her living situation not being in SF. Also having to ask a friend to swipe her badge because she couldn't afford living in SF.

How can she not afford to live in SF on ~$300k a year?

Because it "afford", not afford. Clearly it would be possible, but not for the QoL they prefer. For $300k/yr you're buying a SFH in many other parts of the greater bay area.

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In-person is much better if you don't know what you need to build, are trying to "figure it out as you go along", and are relying on the implicit fast feedback loop of standing next to each other. true. > For large companies like FAANG, I actually think they mostly fall in bucket 2 Also true most fall in the "figure it out" bucket... But here's where it gets funny: just meet in-person you say? No, this is FAANG. Yo…

A lot of companies want the benefits of distributed teams, but also want to force everyone to come to offices and do conference calls in meeting rooms instead of work remote. It's mind boggling to me. All I can think is that there is a lot of ego tied up in offices for some reason.

Because people with "people skills" need people in the office to justify their existence. It is beyond ego for them, it is about their survival.

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more conditions that pertain Remote Work is better if 1. You do not have home problems that you will end up focusing on when you are there - so if you are single and do not own your home, or you have a great relationship and you do own your home but there are no problems the remote work is probably better. But just like being in an office and going into a private room can help productivity if you have probl…

> You do not have home problems that you will end up focusing on when you are there Not sure why this needs to be repeatedly brought up.. I mean it is called "home office" for a reason. If you don't have a real one, remote can suffer.. no surprise.

FWIW, my wife takes our home office and I work from the main room or our screened in porch, but she often will work alongside me. It’s not really a problem.

I’m much more productive working from home; my only qualms are that team cohesion and sense of shared mission seems lower than it has at in-person jobs I’ve had. That may not even be causal.

Re: Google uses in-person office attendance as part of employee performance reviews

#250
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google pays by where you live, as determined by your work location. If people move back, they get a bump assuming they took a cut in the first place.

This is not true. My understanding was that some 'office regions' are paid less than remote workers in the same state. https://archive.is/FQsXB

You're correct. This famously (within Google) came up in three scenarios: 1) people living in parts of Contra Costa County who were remote, and then paid 10% less than those living in the same place who commuted into a Google office in the bay area, 2) similar situation regarding NYC mapped employees living in Connecticut, and 3) NC-based employees being absolutely abused by being classified as "low cost" and given a 25% haircut in both base salary and equity refreshes.
Post reply on HN