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

91–100 of 128 posts

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#91

Post by mistermann »

lucisferre wrote: post #54
mistermann wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just picking your comment at random out of this thread...do you know Joel Spolsky who runs Fog Creek? I'm reading all these critical comments in this thread and reconciling it in my head with what I know of him (from his extensive blogging and podcasting) and I'm thinking, have so many years passed that no one knows who this person is they're criticizing? For example: > I bet the managers or whatever they fancy t…

I don't think anyone needs to know anything about Joel to criticize these policies. Having an opinion about Joel should really have no bearing on the discussion.

Certainly it does. If the tone of the message is inconsistent with his many years of writing, then you should suspect that there is a high possibility that the message came out wrong, or you misinterpreted it.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#92

Post by tghw »

LordHumungous wrote: post #32

>at Fog Creek, it’s sort of assumed that everyone’s working steadily and diligently. In the absence of new information, the assumption is that you’re producing. Well that's a dumb assumption. The managers at Fog Creek don't do code reviews, don't look at commit logs, don't look at the features that developers have built? They just assume that everyone is being productive because they are in the office. >When you step…

> The managers at Fog Creek don't do code reviews, don't look at commit logs, don't look at the features that developers have built?

Correct. The only managers are the founders and maybe one other person. Everyone else is part of a dev team. The managers trust the teams to do what they need to do.

> At my job productivity is shown by the code I commit and the features I build, not the time that I visibly appear to be typing away at my keyboard.

What gives you the impression that anyone is counting time at the keyboard? Having been both an on-site employee and the first remote dev, I can tell you it was very much about getting your code written, nothing more.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#93

Post by cpayne »

RogerL wrote: post #61
mistermann wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just picking your comment at random out of this thread...do you know Joel Spolsky who runs Fog Creek? I'm reading all these critical comments in this thread and reconciling it in my head with what I know of him (from his extensive blogging and podcasting) and I'm thinking, have so many years passed that no one knows who this person is they're criticizing? For example: > I bet the managers or whatever they fancy t…

This blog post was not written by Joel, nor does not sound like Joel. I think the comments are justified; the blog post feels quite abrasive to me. It's a little hard to put my finger on it, but the repeated distinction between work and vacation is a bit grating. Contrast this with a company like Netflix that don't count vacation days, and that assume that it their job to ascertain the productivity of their employees…

It's HR policy document! Which part of any HR documentation isn't abrasive?

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#94

Post by tghw »

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.

Do you really think this is a literal rule?

"Can I work remotely?"

"Will you have a room to work in?"

"Yes"

"But does it have a door?"

"Well, no, it's a desk in the living room, but I'll be home alone all day."

"Sorry, no door, no remote work."

Consider, Fog Creek has spent substantial funds making sure that their on-site devs have offices with doors that close. Is it unreasonable, then, to expect a remote worker to have a distraction-free work environment?

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#95

Post by venomsnake »

I have been working remotely for 7 years now.

What made it possible:

1. Strict work hours - I must be online at 0900 and respond on IMs and such until 1800. You can work outside of that time if feeling like it and the occasional long lunch break is not a problem as long as you have a phone with you.

2. Fast broadband.

3. Dedicated room.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#96

Post by bloodorange »

vinceguidry wrote: post #30

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…

However, if you really "click" with another developer, you can achieve more than double one person's output by pair-programming (if you also take quality into account). This can't work by pairing any two developers arbitrarily.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#97

Post by trustfundbaby »

I was excited about reading this, but came away very very disappointed. I guess I was expecting Fog Creek to be a lot more gung-ho about working remotely and they weren't, but it wasn't just that, but the fact that they sounded the way the large companies I have worked with sound about remote arrangements ... like they're doing you a favor, instead of giving you a way to be awesome.

To be fair,I have never run a company of any appreciable size, so I really can't argue with the way Fog Creek chooses to run things (they know what works best for them) ... but it just left me a little dismayed because either all the aspirational ideas I have about work will eventually be dashed when I do get to a position to run a company of my own, and I'll have to write things like "The burden is on you to show that you’re being productive" in the company handbook or Fog Creek just stopped being a company I looked up to in terms of company culture, neither of which is good.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#98

Post by cs02rm0 »

tghw wrote: post #82
parennoob wrote: post #20

"You still have stuff like chat, commit messages, code reviews, cases, Trello boards, etc. Be a little paranoid for this time about showing your work. It will help you feel good about your time, and us feel good about granting it." Run through a de-weaselizer, this reads: "Be a good little pet, and do an extra set of tricks when we take you out to the park, so you feel good about running around in the park and we fee…

As Fog Creek's first full time remote employee[0], I fully disagree with your assumption. Coming from Fog Creek, that statement has no weasel words in it, it's a genuine sentiment. Back when I was working for the company on site, my father had his leg broken by an out of control snow boarder right before Thanksgiving. When I was home for the holiday, I realized he needed help around the house, so I asked to work remo…

I think the concern though is that the policy doesn't tie with the attitude you have experience of. The company I work with wouldn't have a problem with me going somewhere and finding video didn't work, so stepping down to audio, then IM. And if that wasn't sufficient, then not booking the hours. Having to Google Hangout with some random where you've booked a room is virtually saying don't bother asking to work remotely.

I'd rather pursue my own startup than have to do Google Hangout checks everywhere!

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#99

Post by tghw »

happywolf wrote: post #16

I am just curious what is the impetus to all these rules. To me it seems the system has been abused until the management decided to define boundaries. In fact, these rules make sense, to the point if one could be hired by FC, they have no reason not to know these. If rules need to be explicitly spelled out, I am worried the issue would be far more subtle than written rules can address. (hint: cancelling WFH by Yahoo)

I am. At least partly. I was the first remote dev at Fog Creek, and I can see very much where some of these rules came from.

There are essentially two main themes here. The first is communication. When I started work, we hadn't been doing video chats, since everyone was on site. A lot of communication happened in HipChat and everything else was either at the weekly stand-up or impromptu meetings between two devs. However, once someone is offsite, all of the in-person communication is cut off. This removes context from the chat rooms, and filling in that context over chat is often more difficult than just explaining it. In our case, this was compounded by us being forced to abandon our chat software to find a new system and going through two inferior systems, which cut me off even more from the teams. If regular video calls had been policy, it would have been much easier to work out the chat situation.

The second is distraction-free work environments. Early in my remote work, I went to visit my significant other in another country for several weeks, working remotely while she was at work. Unfortunately, there was a problem getting her internet installed before I got there, so I spent the first week working from a McDonald's (it had the most reliable wifi). I know my productivity suffered for it during that week. Fortunately, we got internet working and I had a better environment to work from after that.

I left the company about 18 months ago, but from what I understand, none of these policies are due to any intentional abuse of the system, but more from experience with the difficulties of remote work in a company that is used to having everyone on site.

Re: Fog Creek’s Remote Work Policy

#100

Post by dangero »

I'm kind of surprised that remote working issues haven't been completely solved at this point and it seems like there's still a big opportunity there to start a business in that space. There are a lot of cultural barriers there I think that still need to be overcome.

What if your company gave you 2 options: 1. Work in the office. 2. Work wherever you like, but let us install software on your computer that will monitor what you are doing at all times.

Would you be offended? Would you consider the work from home option?

Post reply on HN