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

The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

doist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 272 posts

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#11

Post by BigJ1211 »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #2

I tried sharing these studies at my ex employers in Europe hoping they'd spare me the hellish 40 minute commute in stop/start traffic and they weren't interested at all. Management there only values "butt time in seats" and the ability to come over and interrupt you by tapping you on the shoulder whenever they need something. As one of my ex CEOs put it: "If I don't see my employees stressing out at thier desks I get…

> As one of my ex CEOs put it: "If I don't see my employees stressing out at thier desks I get the impression they're not working."

This really hits the nail on the head, in my experience this is accurate for employers that are anti-remote, they want to be able to see people "work". I've argued that that means they are essentially paying people to be there 8 hours a day, not that they're working 8 hours a day. You see it a lot in stale offices, people are sitting at their desks appearing busy. Work doesn't get completed in the that time and they start hiring more busy drones.

It's absolutely baffling to me that we can't look at the statistics at a higher level and recognise that it's a highly inefficient way of working.

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#12

Post by PunchTornado »

I don't get it why the workplace is viewed as only a place to work. We spend 8h of the day there. That would be a sad life if you only worked in those 8h. The workplace is actually a place to socialize, to do the things that you love, chat with your friends, have fun.

I bet most people from those 8h work a maximum 4. The rest is chatting and socializing. I like it.

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#13

Post by jrockway »

lnsru wrote: post #6
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #2

I tried sharing these studies at my ex employers in Europe hoping they'd spare me the hellish 40 minute commute in stop/start traffic and they weren't interested at all. Management there only values "butt time in seats" and the ability to come over and interrupt you by tapping you on the shoulder whenever they need something. As one of my ex CEOs put it: "If I don't see my employees stressing out at thier desks I get…

I call this “general wants to see his army”. I can read Wikipedia all day, but I must be present. Funny thing, all managers are allowed to work from home. Developers not! There is open office with small desks for 8-12 people in one space.

I think this is because people don't understand how engineers spend their time. The stuff displayed on the screen makes no sense. Sometimes things that sound simple take weeks ("iOS Safari and Chrome behave completely differently!") and things that sound hard take an hour ("yeah that's just a flag flip"). What are "unit tests" and "code reviews"?

Even with 12 years of professional programming experience, I am only beginning to have an idea of how long things are going to take in the context of a small team. If you've never programmed before, I don't know how you could possibly come up with an idea of how long something should take. So it reduces to the heuristic of "well they're at their desk, I'm sure they're doing something."

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#14

Post by galfarragem »

BigJ1211 wrote: post #11
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #2

I tried sharing these studies at my ex employers in Europe hoping they'd spare me the hellish 40 minute commute in stop/start traffic and they weren't interested at all. Management there only values "butt time in seats" and the ability to come over and interrupt you by tapping you on the shoulder whenever they need something. As one of my ex CEOs put it: "If I don't see my employees stressing out at thier desks I get…

> As one of my ex CEOs put it: "If I don't see my employees stressing out at thier desks I get the impression they're not working." This really hits the nail on the head, in my experience this is accurate for employers that are anti-remote , they want to be able to see people "work". I've argued that that means they are essentially paying people to be there 8 hours a day, not that they're working 8 hours a day. You s…

Company's politics boil down to how the person in charge sees himself: as a boss or as a team leader. When it is like a boss, run and don't look back.

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#15

Post by hrbf »

jrockway wrote: post #10

Sometimes I wonder if the underlying issue is that there isn't enough actual work for people to do. I worry that I'm about to sound super out of touch, but hear me out; I'm not making a value judgement about anyone's job. It is assumed that everyone needs to do exactly 40 hours of work per week, but ask yourself this: for every person in your company, what do their next 40 hours look like? 40 hours worth of HR polici…

You’ll probably be interested to read about Bullshit Jobs. The authors’ name escapes me currently.

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#16

Post by choonway »

bogle wrote: post #4
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #2

I tried sharing these studies at my ex employers in Europe hoping they'd spare me the hellish 40 minute commute in stop/start traffic and they weren't interested at all. Management there only values "butt time in seats" and the ability to come over and interrupt you by tapping you on the shoulder whenever they need something. As one of my ex CEOs put it: "If I don't see my employees stressing out at thier desks I get…

This is my experience of British management over the last quarter of a century. I am an expensive contract resource but I still get paid for turning up and not so much for providing working software. When I am working remotely, due to the organisation's inability to measure productivity, fostered by their management's "bums on seats" culture, I can't demonstrate that remote work is a benefit to them.

No wonder Singapore is like that too. 50+ years after independence from the British is not enough to change culture.

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#17

Post by dspillett »

TheThickOfIt wrote: post #7

Anecdotal but I'm the opposite. I hate working from home and love having a team around me, sharing goals and ideas and hyping each other. Different strokes etc.

I'm similar, but perhaps for less positive reasons.

Being able to work from home if I need to is nice, and I sometimes take advantage of it, but generally I like to be in the office so I can have a better idea of what is going on.

This is partly paranoia due to astonishingly (often deliberately) terrible communication under a previous regime where for instance I discovered my own line manager was leaving two days before he did by overhearing it mentioned in a conversation between people who worked on a completely different project, though even now under a much better environment I feel being in the office keeps me better abreast of things I need to know, before it becomes an emergency that I don't know them.

It also creates opportunities for unplanned collaboration whereby I hear a problem that I can help with, saving others time banging their heads against it, and sometimes works the other way around for me too.

And contrary to many of the other anecdotes here, I have far more attractive distractions at home than my colleagues could hope/fear to provide for me! Though maybe that speaks more about my will-power than it days about my work & home environments...

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#18

Post by dkersten »

PunchTornado wrote: post #12

I don't get it why the workplace is viewed as only a place to work. We spend 8h of the day there. That would be a sad life if you only worked in those 8h. The workplace is actually a place to socialize, to do the things that you love, chat with your friends, have fun. I bet most people from those 8h work a maximum 4. The rest is chatting and socializing. I like it.

> The rest is chatting and socializing. I like it.

The problem I have with this is that I don't really get to choose who I can chat and socialize with -- I like my work colleagues, but they're not my main social circle and never will be because I find it unhealthy if your colleagues are your core friends since if you ever want or need to leave (or get fired), it makes it all the more painful and makes an already stressful situation even more stressful. I'm a firm believer that you should enjoy the company of the people you work with, but that you should have a strong social life outside of work too so that you don't feel socially trapped in that job.

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#19

Post by oh_sigh »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #2

I tried sharing these studies at my ex employers in Europe hoping they'd spare me the hellish 40 minute commute in stop/start traffic and they weren't interested at all. Management there only values "butt time in seats" and the ability to come over and interrupt you by tapping you on the shoulder whenever they need something. As one of my ex CEOs put it: "If I don't see my employees stressing out at thier desks I get…

Maybe the problem is you were trying to invalidate their e tire management worldview with those studies. Instead, a more effective strategy might have been convincing management that while their methods were generally fine, for your specific case you might buck the trend. At least, that's how I've had luck with this problem. And also reassuring(and proving through my actions) that they wouldn't need to devote special time just to managing me vs managing the horde.

Re: The benefits of a more asynchronous workplace

#20

Post by bryanlarsen »

jrockway wrote: post #10

Sometimes I wonder if the underlying issue is that there isn't enough actual work for people to do. I worry that I'm about to sound super out of touch, but hear me out; I'm not making a value judgement about anyone's job. It is assumed that everyone needs to do exactly 40 hours of work per week, but ask yourself this: for every person in your company, what do their next 40 hours look like? 40 hours worth of HR polici…

Many, if not most, jobs have a peak utilization rate well below 100%. The most obvious example is fire fighting. IIRC, a firefighter should spend less than 10% of their time fighting fires. If they're spending more than that, then they're likely to be busy when you need them.

Sure, they're likely to spend a good chunk of the other 90% working, but it's just busywork. That busywork might be important: they spend a lot of time inspecting and maintaining their fire trucks, for example. But it's not their "real job". Their real job is to be close to the fire truck so that they can respond when an alarm rings.

It's much the same for the rest of us, except that the line is grey, not black and white like it is for firefighters. We have a priority list, and stuff on the bottom of the list will never get done unless it bubbles up in priority for one reason or another. That stuff at the bottom is real work, but since there's always stuff that's more important it's comparable to "washing the fire truck".

And even the stuff at the top of the list is busywork in a way: it's always possible for more important stuff to come in and bump it out of the way. A server can go down, or an important customer can call, or ...

Post reply on HN