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

Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

soatok.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 913 posts

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#861

Post by tedivm »

layer8 wrote: post #650
tedivm wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's absolutely silly for the RTO people to force their preferences on everyone. The fact that RTO folks only consider it a win if everyone comes back, rather than trying to build out flexibile working conditions that make everyone happy, is the real problem. People who want an office to work in are just as valid as people who want to work from home. It's the people who want to force RTO on everyone that are real ass…

It’s difficult if you have teams split between WFH and RTO though. The compromise is for all team members to be in the office at least some days per week, or else to just have RTO companies vs. WFH companies. I agree that everyone should be able to choose their preferred mode of working, but you can’t just arbitrarily mix people with different modes and expect that to cause no issues.

That's not a compromise, that's RTO.

Also, I've been in this industry for 17 years. Malwarebytes (VP), Vicarious (VP), Rad AI (VP), Explosion AI, Aptible, and now Comcast. Every one of those companies except Vicarious had a remote or hybrid culture, and it's worked great for all of them. You absolutely can "arbitrarily mix people with different modes" as long as you have good management.

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#862

Post by lazide »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #537
lazide wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, people forget. Heard about Blackwater lately? Or was it Xe? Or Academi? And they always complain about stuff like that, even when they aren’t playing games!

Yes and no. What needs to be factored in is, does the best / top talent forget? Or are they ones with more focus and memory? Does their marketability allow them to be more selective? I think you see where this is going :)

Oh I'm well aware. How many downturns have you lived through?

It's rarely so easy when times get lean, but everyone has a different experience for sure!

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#863

Post by navane »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #573
runako wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Walking over and talking to someone is still far superior to any online communication. This is an example of a local maximum. This form of communication is better for the person doing the walking, but worse when looked at through most other frames: - worse for the person being asked, who was interrupted - worse for the people who weren't privy to that conversation but perhaps could have learned or contributed excep…

> - worse for the person being asked, who was interrupted Generally, only in terms of personal output. I find that the organization benefits overall. Of course, this is problematic when performance/compensation is tied strictly to personal output, but that is a separate discussion > - worse for the people who weren't privy to that conversation but perhaps could have learned or contributed except that they were OOO th…

>> - worse for the people who weren't privy to that conversation but perhaps could have learned or contributed except that they were OOO that moment.

> Which is why working at the office is important.

What about the guy who just walked over to someone else, now both parties were absent in eachothers conversation.

This is actually a good example of: Falls flat if everyone starts doing it. So many times I walk up to someone in the office to ask him something, but he is doing the same so I can't find him.

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#864

Post by SantalBlush »

sokoloff wrote: post #651
SantalBlush wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be right, but there should be more concrete evidence than arbitrary percentages and "just work better" before I'll be convinced to make the enormous life changes for RTO. What is the value differential--in dollars--of these in-person conversations? All I'm seeing are vague speculations.

People and companies who want to associate in a certain way should be allowed to. People and companies who want to associate in a different way should also be allowed to. That lets some people and some companies choose RTO, others choose hybrid, and others choose remote-only. I shouldn't be able to force my beliefs onto you, nor you onto me (we probably largely agree; I'm pro-remote overall); to the extent that there…

They already are allowed to. And I am allowed to voice my disagreement with widespread RTO mandates, just like some others are voicing that they prefer RTO. We are all allowed to do these things.

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#865

Post by dalyons »

DrScientist wrote: post #844
dalyons wrote: post #718

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its discussed literally every time a remote work/rto post comes up on this site. And then the usual responses about how international offshoring has been tried before various times and it mostly doesnt work for XYZ reasons etc etc

So the interesting question is - are those reasons XYZ - also reasons against remote working per se?

Sort of - the outsourcing problems are usually described as in descending order: cultural differences, timezone differences, language challenges, general communication overhead and talent availability.

All those could be true with remote, but that’s probably why most companies limit remote to same culture (eg nth am) , close timezone, same language.

You’re left with “just” general communication overhead in that case.

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#866

Post by chiefalchemist »

lazide wrote: post #862
chiefalchemist wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and no. What needs to be factored in is, does the best / top talent forget? Or are they ones with more focus and memory? Does their marketability allow them to be more selective? I think you see where this is going :)

Oh I'm well aware. How many downturns have you lived through? It's rarely so easy when times get lean, but everyone has a different experience for sure!

Compromising in the short term to meet immediate needs isn't the same as forgetting. Once the tough times have passed, the memory rejuvenates and those who can do (i.e., leave).

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#867

Post by soco »

lazide wrote: post #857
soco wrote: post #841

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then what? Okay you can prove them liars, but that won't surprise anybody and won't change anything in the course of the company. I don't even mention the likely personal repercussions from speaking truth to power: "not being a team player" and and and.

If one is already being fired or forced out due to broken promises, depending on their personal circumstances and how well documented such broken promises are it could be worthwhile suing them for it. You are quite correct that continuing on with the company (or in that corner of the industry) may - well, likely will be - impossible afterwards. Few things say 'burnt bridges' like a lawsuit. That said, being fired bec…

As I wondered in some other place: do you consider a promise made in a newsletter or an all-hands meeting a binding contract? Would a court consider it binding, or rather an information about the current course of the company? And changing that policy in the subsequent newsletter or all-hands, wouldn't nullify anyway whatever binding value the previous one had? (I'm not talking about employment contract changes, yes those are binding)

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#868

Post by DrScientist »

dalyons wrote: post #865
DrScientist wrote: post #844

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the interesting question is - are those reasons XYZ - also reasons against remote working per se?

Sort of - the outsourcing problems are usually described as in descending order: cultural differences, timezone differences, language challenges, general communication overhead and talent availability. All those could be true with remote, but that’s probably why most companies limit remote to same culture (eg nth am) , close timezone, same language. You’re left with “just” general communication overhead in that case.

You could collapse all those to communication - apart from talent availability.

So remote working increases talent availability and increases communication overhead ( through one mechanism or another - language, timezone, shared culture ).

So the right balance then depends on how important communication is for the particular role versus talent, factored by how good the talent is at communicating.

One of the things I've heard about remote working is it helps people stay focused on task and hence be productive. These people like the reduction in communication ( noise ).

The other side I've heard is that it atomises the organisation to those headline tasks, but loses the element of the sum being greater than the whole - the stuff that happens off task.

If you truly believe in remote working, then you could argue that companies shouldn't exist in terms of perm employees - you contract everything out on a per task basis.

The idea of minimising communication overhead being central to the existence of companies comes from the work of Ronald Coase. eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Problem_of_Social_Cost

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#869

Post by Throwawayh89 »

strict9 wrote: post #26

>If I had to give only one bit of advice to anyone ever faced with an ultimatum from someone with power over them (be it an employer or abusive romantic partner), it would be: >Ultimately, never choose the one giving you an ultimatum. This is such great advice. When you are given an ultimatum it is very revealing. Pretend to comply as the author advises, then find something else. Your sense of self-worth is more valu…

Every moment in your life is an ultimatum because you can not do two things at once.

So while I like the concept of this advice, its hard to execute in practice. I'd adjust it to "never choose the one who is unwilling to discuss and come to a compromise"

Re: Return to Office Is Bullshit and Everyone Knows It

#870

Post by myroon5 »

unnouinceput wrote: post #856
myroon5 wrote: post #819

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mackenzie worked for Jeff at D.E. Shaw

Mackenzie did NOT worked for him. She worked in same floor for different department. She fell in love with his laugh, because she would heard him laugh in the meetings in the meeting room taking place near her office. That's when she noticed him. Do watch her interviews, they are free on youtube. She's the one that pursued him, if you want to talk about a strong woman and showing initiative. The idiot downgraded, sho…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacKenzie_Scott#Personal_life claimed "She met him while working as his administrative assistant at D.E. Shaw in 1992"

Regardless if she was his assistant or another executive's assistant, there's clearly a power dynamic between a senior vice-president and an assistant

Post reply on HN