Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 366 posts

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

#261

Post by mcv »

extr wrote: post #20

After going back and forth between in-person and remote jobs, my conclusion: * Remote work is much better if you know what you're building and "just" need to execute. * 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. Obvious, right? But I think what I've realize is the d…

> My instructions when I joined were something like "Yeah so just talk to a bunch of people and look for opportunities to contribute". WTF? No wonder remote is not working well for them. You had to go 5-6 layers up the reporting chain to find anyone with any sort of holistic sense of what needed to be done, and they were not exactly empowered to share that vision lest it conflict with someone elses.

That just sounds like poor leadership to me. If you've got a holistic sense of what needs to be done, please share it with the people who need to be doing it.

That, or cut it up into concrete chunks and tell people to build that. But telling people to "figure it out" and then not sharing the overall vision, sounds incredibly dysfunctional to me.

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

#262

Post by no_wizard »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #207
extr wrote: post #20

After going back and forth between in-person and remote jobs, my conclusion: * Remote work is much better if you know what you're building and "just" need to execute. * 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. Obvious, right? But I think what I've realize is the d…

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…

Why does it have to be because some want to go in an office so we all do?

If you want to work in an office go work in one. Join a co-working space or if there is sufficient momentum have everyone who wants an office join the same one in your area.

But don’t force it on everyone. Let people choose. That’s the thing I hate about these conversations is it should just be personal choice for the individual. Make async practices and communication better and re-tool the culture if need be, but remote first thinking benefits office workers too.

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

#263

Post by mcv »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #207
extr wrote: post #20

After going back and forth between in-person and remote jobs, my conclusion: * Remote work is much better if you know what you're building and "just" need to execute. * 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. Obvious, right? But I think what I've realize is the d…

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…

During the Covid lockdowns and everybody was forced to work from home, the single people in the team seemed to be the most depressed about the situation. Some of them were really eager to get to the office as soon as possible. The people with families were stressed if they suddenly had to homeschool their kids, but otherwise they were fine.

Of course if your spouse also works from home, it's important to have a home with more than a single room. Not everybody has that luxury.

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

#264

Post by LiquidSky »

rubicon33 wrote: post #253

Worked from home ~5 of my ~10 years in development. Obviously, the "pros" of WFH are massive. No commute. Comfortable office. Food in the fridge. Daytime exercise + showers. Etc. etc. I found however that too much of a good thing, is bad. For me, the lack of in person communication started to atrophy my enjoyment of life. I wouldn't have been able to really tell you it for the first few years, but I was slowly moving…

>For me, the lack of in person communication started to atrophy my enjoyment of life.

I would suggest that it's possible to interact with people outside of work. It's genuinely sad to me how many of these "if I don't go into the office I have no one to interact with" posts I see.

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

#265

Post by cbarrick »

jkukul wrote: post #219
fhd2 wrote: post #124

Quick search on this thread didn't reveal the word "flame" (as in "flame war"), so I can´t resist: That's what the remote vs on-site debate is. About as interesting and ultimately inconclusive as Emacs vs Vi. Neither is universally better. It depends, _primarily_ on the people involved and their preferences. My advice would be to try and work with people that are on the same page about this with you - if possible. If…

> Quick search on this thread didn't reveal the word "flame" (as in "flame war"), so I can´t resist: That's what the remote vs on-site debate is. About as interesting and ultimately inconclusive as Emacs vs Vi. Neither is universally better. It depends, _primarily_ on the people involved and their preferences You nailed it. Ideally, both employees and employers should have the freedom to choose whether to work onsite…

> Using your analogy, it would be like initially giving your future employees the choice between Emacs and Vim, but later giving Vim users extra points in performance reviews.

That analogy doesn't quite apply to this Google situation.

Google has a distinction between "full remote" and "hybrid" employees. Attendance will NOT be considered in the performance reviews of full remote employees.

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

#266

Post by bentlegen »

llm_nerd wrote: post #259
rubicon33 wrote: post #253

Worked from home ~5 of my ~10 years in development. Obviously, the "pros" of WFH are massive. No commute. Comfortable office. Food in the fridge. Daytime exercise + showers. Etc. etc. I found however that too much of a good thing, is bad. For me, the lack of in person communication started to atrophy my enjoyment of life. I wouldn't have been able to really tell you it for the first few years, but I was slowly moving…

The obvious counterpoint is that many people were and are miserable commuting into a workplace and then putting in the grind. It's actually humorous that most tech "social media" like HN, Reddit, Digg, and so on were much busier back when most of us were in offices, because we all would bide our days doing anything but work. You could see the bursts as the primary demographic timezones started their "work" days. Not…

> It's actually humorous that most tech "social media" like HN, Reddit, Digg, and so on were much busier back when most of us were in offices, because we all would bide our days doing anything but work.

Do you have a source on this? I’m both curious and skeptical.

(And ironically, for many in Europe and Eastern NA/SA it’s the work day right now.)

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

#267

Post by the_gipsy »

ekianjo wrote: post #188
logicchains wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's bizarre how this is purely about making life worse for the engineers without any rational reason There's absolutely a rational reason: many people in management went into management because they enjoy having power over people, and they can have more power over employees who are physically in office.

> and they can have more power over employees who are physically in office. that's superficial power

Not at all. It's physical power.

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

#268

Post by deelowe »

euiq wrote: post #192

The title is essentially clickbait. From the article: > Google is the latest company to tighten its return-to-work policies to get workers to commute more often. In an internal email, the company said it could make office attendance an element of an employee’s performance review if they did not comply with the three-day minimum for in-office work, reports the Wall Street Journal. Why, yes: if you don't come to the of…

It's not that simple. Previously, remote versus in office was sort of at the discretion of the various organizations and leaders. This change which states there will be an expectation or regular in-office work, and that not complying would impact performance, was announced company wide a few days ago. I know someone who literally just hired an employee who must be remote for at least a year and was told that after the year some in office work would be expected, but would be infrequent. Now they have to go back and tell this same person that they probably need to figure out how to come on site several days a week and this will need to be sorted out in the next few months. If this employee decides to comply, it likely means his spouse has to quit her masters program. The manager who hired this person is afraid he's probably violating some sort of labor law/verbal contract given what was stated during the offer period. HR is really helping.

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

#269

Post by deelowe »

laurentlb wrote: post #157
KKKKkkkk1 wrote: post #111

Sounds like Google is eliminating remote work. Has VP Urs Holzle returned from New Zealand? https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/google-exec-remote-work-wfh...

No, remote work is still allowed. It might be a bit more difficult to switch to a remote work contract now (but still possible), but people who are already remote will continue like this.

> people who are already remote will continue like this

My understanding is that everyone has to get approval even people who are currently remote. For those who are near an office, they are being told to expect to be asked to come in frequently.

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

#270

Post by JamesLeonis »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #223
72f988bf wrote: post #94

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.

Wall Street is pressuring everybody for Return to Office to shore up their collapsing commercial real estate holdings.
Post reply on HN