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

Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 597 posts

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#111

Post by realusername »

safety1st wrote: post #43
randomdata wrote: post #7

> If remote work boosts productivity in a substantial way, then it should improve productivity performance Not necessarily given the methodology. For example, if remote work allows a worker to do their laundry in parallel where they would be otherwise unable to in an office, their productivity has increased, but the gains would not show up in the study. It observes industry productivity, not work productivity.

Sure, but then we're discussing remote work as an employee benefit, which is a different discussion driven by a different part of the company etc. Not as a thing which improves the company's bottom line which is where C suite and shareholders spend the vast majority of their attention. If it doesn't improve job productivity then at the level where decisions get made I can think of two really significant points regard…

> I think a lot of people with an employee mindset just don't want to acknowledge the existence of B

Because the outsourcing threat was a thing before remote working, remote working changes nothing to that.

Employers love to bring this up on the subject of remote working but if they could outsource your work to an Indian paid 10x less, they would have done it already. Those employers are deluded if they think remote work is changing anything here.

If anything it makes outsourcing of global talent even harder for them since now companies are competing globally for the best talent.

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#112

Post by 331c8c71 »

sangnoir wrote: post #100
Sparkyte wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water cooler chat used to be the big thing when I worked in an office.

90-minute lunches, extended ping-pong table visits, "attending" meetings one doesn't contribute to are various ways to waste time at the office, but no one is eager to banish those. It appears it's only a problem when people slack at home; on the flip-side, no one is offering bonuses for those when they work until 7 or 8 pm because WFH can blur division between work and not-work life.

There are many companies where long lunches are frowned upon (unofficially). People eating at their desks etc...

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#113

Post by Scarblac »

safety1st wrote: post #43
randomdata wrote: post #7

> If remote work boosts productivity in a substantial way, then it should improve productivity performance Not necessarily given the methodology. For example, if remote work allows a worker to do their laundry in parallel where they would be otherwise unable to in an office, their productivity has increased, but the gains would not show up in the study. It observes industry productivity, not work productivity.

Sure, but then we're discussing remote work as an employee benefit, which is a different discussion driven by a different part of the company etc. Not as a thing which improves the company's bottom line which is where C suite and shareholders spend the vast majority of their attention. If it doesn't improve job productivity then at the level where decisions get made I can think of two really significant points regard…

Well the laundry is indirectly part of

C. We can probably get away with paying remote workers less because they get other benefits from working remotely.

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#115

Post by [deleted] »

oceanplexian wrote: post #84
randomdata wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Work avoidance typically stems from fear of failure, not boredom. If workers are screwing around when there is work that needs to be done, that is indicative of an environment that doesn't provide the proper failsafes. That said, a lot of jobs simply don't have a constant stream of work that needs to be done, with the work available being dependent on when the customer chooses to engage. It is likely that for a lot o…

> Work avoidance typically stems from fear of failure, not boredom. For me work avoidance is a symptom of not having enough interruption free time. And in-person is actually substantially worse than remote. Most of the problems I’m working on you can’t bang out in 10 minutes. Reality is that for some problems you need a highly skilled engineer to spend 4-8 continuous, highly focused hours producing iterations or tryi…

[deleted]

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#116

Post by raizer88 »

californical wrote: post #62
g96alqdm0x wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that’s just fine and good for you, but please don’t impose your preferences on the rest of us.

Why not? Companies will eventually sort into ones where likeminded people are together. Some will be more friendly to remote than others. If I want to work in person with people, I’ll join a company that agrees. If someone wants to be remote, they might have to join a different company.

Because firms that are on-site-only don't scale unless they pay top of the line money to move people. Access to a remote workforce is a force multiplier that will be more relevant the more time we go forward.

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#117

Post by Gigachad »

caseyohara wrote: post #42
wodenokoto wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that why people are paid to work? Because it isn't interesting or meaningful?

This is a pretty dim view, especially here on HN. People are paid to work because their labor is valuable. That is in no way mutually exclusive with how interesting and meaningful the job is. Jobs at the intersection of employer value and employee interest are obviously the most desirable. I'd imagine every laborer attempts to maximize these two qualities of their day job.

The payment is a pretty big part of it. If you offered people the option to be paid the same amount for doing nothing, how many people do you think would stay doing their exact same current job vs leaving and perusing a hobby?

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#118

Post by Gigachad »

nox101 wrote: post #71
Sparkyte wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water cooler chat used to be the big thing when I worked in an office.

I've chatted with a co-worker about all kinds of interesting topics related to our with the last few days. We both work on GPU related stuff, he's been optimizing compute shaders and finding out new and interesting things. The conversations are not conversations I've never seen in chat. He could make a formal presentation but that's not really the point. The point is, as I sat down into the seat next to him, it was o…

This is just the truth. And the responses I get when pointing this out are either along the lines of “I don’t want to talk to my coworkers ever if I can avoid it” and “technically you can have those same conversations in the slack #random if you wanted.”

Working remote has sucked all the personality and humanity from work imo.

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#119

Post by atleastoptimal »

I'm just guessing but this makes sense to me

Boring email jobs where people are on their computer most of the time anyway and meetings are simply status updates, there's no reason why remote work is any worse, and likely just boosts productivity because of the mental health benefits of no commute, better environment, no distractions, etc.

In terms of jobs which require more creativity and collaborative rigor, I imagine remote work is where that element suffers.

Re: Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds

#120

Post by pdimitar »

ryanSrich wrote: post #32
goalieca wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some do it to get a break. Doing 40 hours of straight “creative” work is impossible.

Managing 50+ remote workers taught me that results matter, not hours. It's all about the output. Work asynchronously, focus on the end goal, and as long as it's legal and ethical, the 'how' and 'when' are often irrelevant. Traditional managers struggle with this mindset, often due to their own managers outdated approaches. The real game changer is axing all scheduled internal meetings. No standups, no weekly grooming…

I started work in a new company December 2023 and they did exactly what you said and boy, am I feeling great about this workplace! I do focus on my work, I achieve results, I make sure they are visible (some documentation and internal knowledge base management are involved but I don't detest it; it becomes the way to gauge my performance and I am not against it) and everyone is happy.

It's amazing how difficult this is for so many managers out there though.

Post reply on HN