121–130 of 282 posts
A lesson from Valve, which supposedly has no org chart: a company with no hierarchy has politics instead. I'm certain other companies that have tried that model have the same problem.
well, i think you mean there are always politics
> > Our early analysis of performance data suggests that engineers who either joined Meta in-person and then transferred to remote or remained in-person performed better on average than people who joined remotely. This analysis also shows that engineers earlier in their career perform better on average when they work in-person with teammates at least three days a week. This requires further study, but our hypothesis…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other deep irony is that many tech companies ruined the office by forcing open office designs. It was no secret that employees found them difficult places to be productive. And now they wonder why nobody wants to go there.
One counter argument to this take is: If cube farms or offices with doors are so much better, where are the companies without open-offices and outsized performance financials. I suspect most employees just aren't that productive for it to matter much. There is probably some small percentage who are more productive, and even fewer who are much more productive, but their needs are overwhelming by larger business decisi…
Then again peacooks have like huge swag backs for no good reason other than looks.
I feel the concept of open offices are abit like agile. It is a virtue signaling "cult".
It doesn't matter it is counterproductive. You just need it to get the female peacooks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is anyone meant to respond to that? Can’t you apply this thinking to any company?
Office structure doesn't affect what products people are willing to pay for.
Everything is rolling along smoothly, and then, bam: > High caliber, experienced employees probably get just as much done at home at the office, or maybe more… “Probably” is the key word, here. It signals to me that the author is tired of writing at this point and throws in something with little conviction or defense. I care about this point, and am inclined in the opposite direction: I think less work is done in off…
> That means that I’m putting in extra hours outside work to achieve the same > level of pre-RTO productivity. I’ve heard the same from others. Together, we’ve > expressed concerns about the sustainability of these efforts.
I agree with this observation. WFH gives you the ability to mute chat where as with the office if you don't respond, its show up and discuss(aka interrupt). I've had some days in the office where I've left not knowing what exactly was done for the day but being mentally exhausted. I would say its the intangible items or project status such as all the information you dispensed or clarified, stopped people looking at the wrong problem, figured out the real problem, commented on a proposal, etc that is over-looked and not counted towards "work". This "glue" is what employers are really paying you for by being in the office, but don't want to recognize, instead basing what they pay you on the language you know, vendor products, projects, etc. With WFH you don't have to make the "glue" as much since you can focus on your project, setup the meetings you need, when you need, and you don't have to use non-work time for work. This makes other employees less effective, more-so caused by the organization than the individual, which leads to the perception/feeling that "more gets done" when people are in the office.
In my job experience good management recognizes the glue, can make the glue, account for needing glue or provide the justification for someone else to make glue. Poor management can not, thus everyone back to the office.
A line manager ought to be in the trenches, handling oncall, writing some code now and then, automating the bits of drudgery away, project managing, product managing, code reviewing and generally being an engineer. None of these things have to be done all the time and to the highest level of performance, but the idea that managers delegate all of these responsibilities leads to yes-men being promoted. If, as a manager, you do none of these activities, how on earth do you evaluate your people? You become the Vladimir Putin of your team, fed horseshit by people who have agendas or loudmouths while completely missing out on the concerns of people who do the actual work, with absolutely no idea of the actual performance and problems of the team.
I just have to point out the irony that a company which believes so much in virtual work that they renamed themselves after the "metaverse" is now thinking to require employees to return to the office.
I just have to point out the irony that a company which believes so much in virtual work that they renamed themselves after the "metaverse" is now thinking to require employees to return to the office.
it just shows that the management don't have a clue what they're doing. they just fomo into trends.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They built an entire metaverse office with little conference rooms full of avatars. It was comical.
Who doesn't like bringing everything terrible about the real world into the virtual one? Next thing you see they'll be having virtual commutes with virtual cars waiting 40 minutes just to go to your virtual office. But hey it's all metaverse, which means it's awesome and shiny, right?