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

Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

blog.fogcreek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 128 posts

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#21

Post by jacques_chester »

seiji wrote: post #13
utnick wrote: post #3

This seems like a lot of rules... and kind of unfriendly. Especially for just a short stint working remotely. Whats the worst that could happen if one of the workers has a less than ideal setup while temporarily working remotely for a few days? Would it really affect company outcomes? If not, I think developer happiness would be improved by having a more laissez-faire attitude from management.

Yeah, it's an insane number of rules. (is video chat required? why video chat?) Down the page they mention The burden is on you to show that you’re being productive. -- that just sounds outright authoritarian and demeaning. Strict policies calling people out as "do this ... or else" don't exactly engender trust. I think they cover most of our complaints in the poorly worded Known availability and overlap with your te…

> Yeah, it's an insane number of rules.

I think this is hyperbole. They all basically boil down to: if you work from home, please work from home. And keep in touch.

I work from home. As a rule, the best-running projects are those with daily video meetings. The 2nd best involve phone calls. The worst involve emails.

Faces have enormous bandwidth. Voices a bit less. Email has bugger all for the things that matter.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#22

Post by jacques_chester »

sigre wrote: post #9

This reads like yet another autocratic, micro-managing HR document. "Have a room with a door that shuts." Seriously? How about this: hire smart people you trust, give them whatever tools and support they need to do their jobs most productively, then get out of the way.

> "Have a room with a door that shuts." Seriously?

Yes. Seriously: http://www.dorsethouse.com/books/pw.html

> How about this: hire smart people you trust, give them whatever tools and support they need to do their jobs most productively, then get out of the way.

Good idea: http://www.dorsethouse.com/books/pw.html

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#24

Post by legutierr »

sigre wrote: post #9

This reads like yet another autocratic, micro-managing HR document. "Have a room with a door that shuts." Seriously? How about this: hire smart people you trust, give them whatever tools and support they need to do their jobs most productively, then get out of the way.

Rules like this usually exist because there were people who did the opposite at some time in the past. It's a simple enough requirement; isn't having it better than disallowing remote work, or disciplining someone for problems created by not having a door (kid runs in in the middle of a staff or client meeting) when no such requirement was previously specified?

I would say one of the tools required to be productive as a programmer is a focused work space. You can give that tool to people who come to the office. But if someone works from home, that's the one tool they have to provide themselves.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#25

Post by mberning »

This is true old school thinking at its worst. If my employer is going to put up all these rules and barriers maybe I should put up a few of my own. I bet the managers or whatever they fancy themselves to be at Fog Creek have very little appreciation for all of the small yet tangible things that employees go out of their way to do for them. Things like answering important emails in the evening, especially when it is for a high profile client or partner. Staying late when critical bugs come up. Etc. I bet all that kind of stuff is just expected of the employees.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#26

Post by parennoob »

jacques_chester wrote: post #22
sigre wrote: post #9

This reads like yet another autocratic, micro-managing HR document. "Have a room with a door that shuts." Seriously? How about this: hire smart people you trust, give them whatever tools and support they need to do their jobs most productively, then get out of the way.

> "Have a room with a door that shuts." Seriously? Yes. Seriously: http://www.dorsethouse.com/books/pw.html > How about this: hire smart people you trust, give them whatever tools and support they need to do their jobs most productively, then get out of the way. Good idea: http://www.dorsethouse.com/books/pw.html

I don't understand -- if you could give some rational, reasoned argument or study that shows that smart people are very less productive on an average if they are working remotely instead of repeatedly chanting the link to a book whose reviews read "Bill Gates has built a company full of managers who read Peopleware" (that is supposed to be a plus?), your argument might make more sense.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#27

Post by ISL »

sigre wrote: post #9

This reads like yet another autocratic, micro-managing HR document. "Have a room with a door that shuts." Seriously? How about this: hire smart people you trust, give them whatever tools and support they need to do their jobs most productively, then get out of the way.

One co-founder of Fog Creek has this to say, as a goal for the company [1]:

"* great work environment, with the goal of every engineer having an office with a door that closes"

And, in an oft-cited "Joel Test" [2]:

"8. Do programmers have quiet working conditions?"

Furthermore, the company itself says [3]:

"The average Fog Creek developer has 694 square inches of screen real-estate, 2 desktop computers, and an Aeron chair. Most have private offices with windows and doors."

Googling for "Joel on software door that shuts" will turn up similar results.

A shutting door is clearly important to the management, remote or no.

[1] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000038.html

[2] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000043.html

[3] http://fogcreek.com/about/

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#28

Post by kevin »

wging wrote: post #8
utnick wrote: post #3

This seems like a lot of rules... and kind of unfriendly. Especially for just a short stint working remotely. Whats the worst that could happen if one of the workers has a less than ideal setup while temporarily working remotely for a few days? Would it really affect company outcomes? If not, I think developer happiness would be improved by having a more laissez-faire attitude from management.

Seems targeted at people who are remote long-term. Maybe a little more reasonable in that light. But for short-term people, >Approval from your team lead. Basically, just tell someone well in advance if you’re going to be altering your work arrangement, temporarily or permanently. seems counterproductive. Sometimes problems come up and you suddenly need to be at home tomorrow to meet the cable guy, who has committed…

I think "approval" is less formal than you might imagine for a company like Fog Creek and most startups. Sending a quick email to let the person in charge know that you're going to be some place unexpected is totally reasonable.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#29

Post by seiji »

jacques_chester wrote: post #21
seiji wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's an insane number of rules. (is video chat required? why video chat?) Down the page they mention The burden is on you to show that you’re being productive. -- that just sounds outright authoritarian and demeaning. Strict policies calling people out as "do this ... or else" don't exactly engender trust. I think they cover most of our complaints in the poorly worded Known availability and overlap with your te…

> Yeah, it's an insane number of rules. I think this is hyperbole. They all basically boil down to: if you work from home, please work from home. And keep in touch. I work from home. As a rule, the best-running projects are those with daily video meetings. The 2nd best involve phone calls. The worst involve emails. Faces have enormous bandwidth. Voices a bit less. Email has bugger all for the things that matter .

Working from home also means: less stress because you don't have to be constantly "on" and playing the visibly social game eight hours a day (or pretending certain morons in the office aren't morons), slightly less availability (or non-interruptable availability on your schedule, not theirs) to get more focused work done, and no pants.

Perhaps "insane number" is wrong. I probably meant "insanely specific requirements."

The 1 wasn't even running to rector st this evening, so I couldn't get to work even if I wanted to.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#30

Post by vinceguidry »

I don't think I would enjoy the work environment here, and it's not because of the rules or whatever. Good development seems to me to be a very solitary activity. The more people you involve, the more friction you create, the more time and energy you burn in meetings, the more you end up arguing about things you really shouldn't be arguing about.

I'm the sole back-end Rails developer at my company and I like it that way. At my last job there was one other guy I could have been working with, but it was much faster just doing everything myself. (we weren't just coders) When I freelanced, I ended up having to run a front-end guy off a project because his work wasn't good enough and it was holding everything up. Once I redid his work the rest of the job went swimmingly.

I'm the kind of dev you can hand a vague idea to and leave me for three weeks and I'll come back with a finished project that's exactly what you were looking for and more. It just seems like that's the right way to make stuff, and I don't think I could work any other way anymore. I couldn't work at Fog Creek because I can just tell I wouldn't be half as productive there.

Post reply on HN