The real first advantage in a long time that small companies and startups have over big FAANG players and similar is 100% remote. The edge on hiring is real and by putting remote-OK in your job description you get a much better swath of employees willing to get paid less to avoid the commuting nightmare and live anywhere.
The damaging results of mandated return to office
21–30 of 348 posts
Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#22Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#23I wish we stopped with the "companies should do this/should do that". Existing big companies are too comfortable and lazy for the remote work revolution. Remote work is a radical change in culture and work organization. It will take new companies with new workflows and organizational ideas to make it work well. We're not there yet. Managers don't understand yet how to do it, they need to read a lot of documentation (…
Why do the people living in those cities feel so strongly that this isn't the case[1]? How does the city administration deal with skyrocketing rents?
[1] https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/05/12/proto-gentrifies-...
Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your parent does not really say that though. Assuming that WFH/RTO preference is distributed equally across highest and lowest performers his statement will be true. As lowest performers will be stickier (regardless of preference) and highest performers won't be so you may lose 50% of your highest performers but a lower amount of lowest WFH-loving performers. Effectively averaging down the skill level of your company…
Is there a study that breaks down whether high performers are more or less likely to want a return to office?
Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#25I wish we stopped with the "companies should do this/should do that". Existing big companies are too comfortable and lazy for the remote work revolution. Remote work is a radical change in culture and work organization. It will take new companies with new workflows and organizational ideas to make it work well. We're not there yet. Managers don't understand yet how to do it, they need to read a lot of documentation (…
Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your parent does not really say that though. Assuming that WFH/RTO preference is distributed equally across highest and lowest performers his statement will be true. As lowest performers will be stickier (regardless of preference) and highest performers won't be so you may lose 50% of your highest performers but a lower amount of lowest WFH-loving performers. Effectively averaging down the skill level of your company…
Is there a study that breaks down whether high performers are more or less likely to want a return to office?
What we do know is anecdotal evidence of very influential and high performers at various FAANG type companies that have ended up leaving due to forced RTO.
Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#27We'll get a lot more hybrid offices: some people in the office, others at home. This is far from ideal, but it's what we'll get. Managers will get to keep some of their precious oversight—err, excuse me, serendipitous collaboration—but workers with any leverage will stay home if they want. Over time, we'll hit an equilibrium that is less WFH than today, but more than in 2019. > A late-stage SaaS startup decided to em…
> it's what we'll get Only if we're not willing to fight for more.
Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#28I wish we stopped with the "companies should do this/should do that". Existing big companies are too comfortable and lazy for the remote work revolution. Remote work is a radical change in culture and work organization. It will take new companies with new workflows and organizational ideas to make it work well. We're not there yet. Managers don't understand yet how to do it, they need to read a lot of documentation (…
Except almost all white-collar offices (in the US at least) went remote during the first 2-3 years of COVID. Most did so successfully. Yet, many now want to return to traditional office work with little evidence that’s a better way to work.
There’s a lot of nuance being glossed over here and I don’t think this is clear cut.
Successfully for who? All stakeholders? Every department? Customers and suppliers too?
Does this success translate to a non-pandemic environment with lower expectations by everyone given the circumstances?
Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#29"Unispace finds that nearly half (42%) of companies that mandated office returns witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated." My guess is that you're also more likely to lose your best performers - since they will have higher confidence in being able to find a remote-friendly job somewhere else.
There's a belief among folks who already favor RTO that the highest performers will also dislike permanent WFH, it seems to me. And given how notoriously difficult it is to reliably measure developer quality, that may be a belief they can harbor long past when you'd expect evidence to have mounted against it.
Re: The damaging results of mandated return to office
#30"Unispace finds that nearly half (42%) of companies that mandated office returns witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated." My guess is that you're also more likely to lose your best performers - since they will have higher confidence in being able to find a remote-friendly job somewhere else.
There's a belief among folks who already favor RTO that the highest performers will also dislike permanent WFH, it seems to me. And given how notoriously difficult it is to reliably measure developer quality, that may be a belief they can harbor long past when you'd expect evidence to have mounted against it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36501068
We’ll just find out in a couple years or decades by observing who is still standing.