Not to justify the policy, but at some point maybe big companies don't NEED as much "top talent" as big companies tend to eventually have less innovation, get process heavy and so on?
Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
141–150 of 190 posts
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#142Not to justify the policy, but at some point maybe big companies don't NEED as much "top talent" as big companies tend to eventually have less innovation, get process heavy and so on?
Less innovation is a result of having less "top talent", so how would you justify the cause by the effect?
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#143Not to justify the policy, but at some point maybe big companies don't NEED as much "top talent" as big companies tend to eventually have less innovation, get process heavy and so on?
Less innovation is a result of having less "top talent", so how would you justify the cause by the effect?
I think innovation starts with policies and leadership that allow for it.
Big companies get process heavy and often simply wouldn't allow it to occur anyway.
"We're going to be super innovative, now go get 8 non technical manager's approval!" It doesn't matter how innovative your people are at that point. Sometimes it's just the volume of people in the mix who can hold things up... big companies just have more opportunity for people to stifle innovation even if just out of misunderstanding, ignorance, etc.
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#1445 days a week RTO is just beyond the pale. 3 days, sure. 4 days, maybe. But 5 days in office is harsh. Top talent sees this as rude, lack of trust, unnecessary babysitting and middle managing. 3-4 days sure, good for networking, collaboration, etc. But give people 1 day a week flex at least to be trusted adults who can responsibly wfh.
Why is 3 seemingly always the minimum? Why not 2? I did 2 days in-office for 2 years—it was a great balance. All the meetings ended up on Tuesday/Thursday and M/W/F was solid get-shit-done time at home. You also never started or ended the week in-office.
My whole team (it's a large one) is doing one day in the office per week. It's the same day for everyone. I personally like calmness of the office, so I usually go two times. I don't see any fundamental problems with that arrangement.
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#1455 days a week RTO is just beyond the pale. 3 days, sure. 4 days, maybe. But 5 days in office is harsh. Top talent sees this as rude, lack of trust, unnecessary babysitting and middle managing. 3-4 days sure, good for networking, collaboration, etc. But give people 1 day a week flex at least to be trusted adults who can responsibly wfh.
I have no idea how i used to manage with five days in office. I am currently using myunch hour to see a doctor. A few weeks back I needed to see a plumber, and before that an electrician. Its five seconds out of the work day let them in and send them on their way but I guess we're looking at burning annual leave if I was stuck in office.
>I am currently using myunch hour to see a doctor
I'm not saying you do, but people abusing the WFH flexibility are probably a big reason for RTO push.
That, or the (possibly irrational) management fear that people may be abusing the WFH.
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have no idea how i used to manage with five days in office. I am currently using myunch hour to see a doctor. A few weeks back I needed to see a plumber, and before that an electrician. Its five seconds out of the work day let them in and send them on their way but I guess we're looking at burning annual leave if I was stuck in office.
>I am currently using myunch hour to see a doctor I'm not saying you do, but people abusing the WFH flexibility are probably a big reason for RTO push. That, or the (possibly irrational) management fear that people may be abusing the WFH.
I wonder how many managers realise working from the office doesn't mean working 100% of the time either... The real number is so much lower on average.
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#147My complete frustration with the RTO situation is that it is so backwards thinking. Instead of trying to enhance remote work to alleviate the negatives and enhance the positives, we just stop with "Zoom+Slack" and throw up our hands and stop innovating and trying to make better remote work.
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#148I'm the rare person who likes to be in the office (although I live in NYC where commuting is fast and easy).
I miss 2023 when that made it easy for me to find a job. Now, if you aren't top talent, you have acquiesced and accepted the fact you need to be in an office to be employed.
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Easily solvable by not locating your company HQ in overpriced trendy coastal cities. The trouble is that if you require in-person work, you're already artificially limiting your talent pool by 1000x. You just can't risk adding on another 1000x limiter onto that. Ultimately yes, you could HQ in Ponder, Texas and pay people 100K and say that's the same as san fran. But then you're gathering talent in Ponder, Texas. G…
Epic the EMR company requires very nearly all employees to work in Verona, Wisconsin and they somehow get people to move there.
Madison has a well-earned reputation as a great city to live in. Epic is able leverage their location in the Madison metropolitan area to attract talent that they couldn't attract in a more rural or less well-known city.
Re: Amazon RTO policy is costing it top tech talent, according to internal document
#1505 days a week RTO is just beyond the pale. 3 days, sure. 4 days, maybe. But 5 days in office is harsh. Top talent sees this as rude, lack of trust, unnecessary babysitting and middle managing. 3-4 days sure, good for networking, collaboration, etc. But give people 1 day a week flex at least to be trusted adults who can responsibly wfh.
Why is 3 seemingly always the minimum? Why not 2? I did 2 days in-office for 2 years—it was a great balance. All the meetings ended up on Tuesday/Thursday and M/W/F was solid get-shit-done time at home. You also never started or ended the week in-office.
If everyone agrees on 3 then you can't work two jobs at once.