Live data from Hacker News

Tragedy of return to hostile offices

benjiweber.co.uk

141–150 of 306 posts

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#141

In some ways, OP’s suggestions are a recipe for building hostile teams! Why would I be entitled to interrupt someone to review my code, just because they are sitting next to me? Always on zoom? No, thanks. It invariably devolves into micromanaging. Constant KPI awareness? Most companies cannot even agree on how a valuable KPI looks like. Remote pair programming? Honest question here, is pair programming still a thing…

> Remote pair programming? Honest question here, is pair programming still a thing?

I don't know about strict pair programming where one person instructs and the other person types, and then they switch after a while.

But.. if you mean two or more devs on a call looking at code.. then that is very much a thing.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#142
The author really doesn’t help their point by dwelling on the sacrifice of the individual for the team. A team that doesn’t maximize the value of the individuals by finding ways they complement each other in their differences will always be less than it could be. And too much have we asked individuals to sacrifice for too long for too little.

The way we used to work is an emergent reality that had begun to fray long before the pandemic, see multilocation strategies, selective remote working options, hotel seating with over subscribed occupancy. The cost of commercial real estate was already being eyed carefully. As a senior executive in multinational mega corps I can tell you definitively “bring your own office” in 2019 was seen as bigger than “bring your own device” in terms of potential to reduce cost, increase productivity, and maximize EPS. The biggest barrier was the 5-10 year real estate development and tax abatement cycles, but you were already seeing compression of available seating and over subscription with a 10 year plan to compress to only essential coworking. Further, while panned now, the WeWork model was seen as the future - essentially elastic occupancy as opex, burstable cloud like office space flexibly located where the talent lives.

The pandemic accelerated this stepwise from 20% to 100% overnight. I could see it in the eyes of the CEOs as they saw the culture they understood disappear overnight and the emotional entrenchment that “this can’t be allowed to persist.” Despite all the prior plans and agreement, an emotional reaction took hold. They saw the productivity improvements and were unswayed. It wasn’t about money, it wasn’t about productivity, it wasn’t about efficiencies. It was about a way of living being threatened, a way the CEOs were manifestly beneficiaries of, and was the only lifestyle they knew and understood. They didn’t want things to change. To buttress their desires, tax abatements and leases obligated use of the real estate. But make no mistake, the RTO movement is almost entirely driven by a near maniacal gripping onto a way of life the decision makers benefited from and can’t let go of.

Joy of the team, sacrificing the individual for the greater good, watercooler serendipity, “think of the kids,” etc, are all smokescreens for the real motivations: fear of an unraveling of the emergent reality that todays leaders owe their entire successful career to, and at that level, that’s all they have in their life. That office culture is literally the cornerstone of their identity, and being more or less all narcissists, they believe their identity is the cornerstone to the world.

The rest of the article is pretty good. I wouldn’t stop reading based on the intro.

The essence is there’s a continuum of work styles along a two dimensional system (in office - remote / sync - asynch). Each quadrant has its own benefits. They seem to assert the middle, hybrid, is the worst of all worlds, and it’s better to pick a style and lean into it. They offer a variety of ways to lean into a style.

IMO I think this is overly simplistic and the most efficient reality, and likely the emergent one we land in within 10 years, is a mixed reality. Coworking works well for some, doesn’t for others. The skills for a remote workplace benefit a multi location team, a hybrid team, or a fully remote team equally. Some tasks are async, some are sync. Once a team has one person not on site, the team only functions as a remote team; otherwise the person not onsite isn’t a part of the team. Recognizing that any team level work would be handled as if everyone were remote.

There will be a contingent who work best in an office. They will continue to have one, albeit a smaller space with fewer and fewer amenities as the occupancy cost / person is squeezed. Those that work best remotely will land at a place that values them for the way they work best. We will continue to refine our work protocols to accommodate this new way of working. The CEOs of today will become the CEOs of yesterday. The new CEOs will be the ones who emerged ahead during the pandemic. The new mid level will be the ones who excelled in remote school and remote entry level.

Bring your own office will become the buzz word. Boards will see the cold hard reality of occupancy cost per head in office rising relentlessly. Tax abatements and leases will have frayed. Then, either the weworks of today or its replacement will have its day.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine referring to good coffee, the substance that built modern America and industrialized the world, as a “distraction” and arguing that it doesn’t improve productivity. Can you imagine?

That's not what I said.

> Is your espresso machine improving your productivity, or is it a hobby to fiddle with throughout the day? What other distractions are at home that aren't at the office?

This is what you said. Spot the differences.

Trick question, there aren’t any.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#144
post #98
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notice how shi*y companies always seem to find that "unfairness" needs to be "fixed" by removing the benefit?

Similar to how the solution to work/life imbalance is never less work.

What else is it?

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#145

Having your own private bathroom is a really underrated perk of WFH. There are of course many more benefits to WFH, but using your own bathroom is something no office and their disgusting communal bathrooms could ever compete with.

To add to this, when there are annoying things like that in the office.. most places there's no people in charge. There are facilities teams but they don't really care if the toilet flush is not powerful enough, or if one of the taps is leaking, or a quarter of the chairs are wonky.. and you can't really say it to your direct manager since it is not work related.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you are incredibly lucky Says who? There's no more reason for an office space to be bad rather than good. And there's no reason to think that having a good one is based on luck. If office space dynamics and setup are important to you, then put it in your job search mental list and find a job that matches that.

>> you are incredibly lucky > Says who? Says anyone who has spent more than a decade in the workforce. > There's no more reason for an office space to be bad rather than good. And there's no reason to think that having a good one is based on luck. By “no reason”, you mean no logical reason. That might be true. Unfortunately a crafted reality controlled by sociopaths isn’t required to be logically consistent at every…

> Says anyone who has spent more than a decade in the workforce.

Well, no. I have worked almost double that, and I don't feel that way.

I tend to think there is mainly an echo chamber of somewhat entitled young north americans incorrectly correlating high compensation in a decade long hyped industry (tech) with social status.

> a crafted reality controlled by sociopaths

Well if that is your definition of reality, maybe you should consider whether you could be part of your issue with office spaces...

> shitty management trying to take it away

Definitely, that kind of remark reinforces my opinion that you should reflect on whether your look at the situation is biased.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#147

So, I have often worked remotely, think it's fine, and makes sense in some cases. But, honestly, this is a professional-class issue, and every article about it seems written from a viewpoint that has forgotten about most of the population. The waitress and cook never had the option of working remotely, nor did the factory worker, the construction worker, the taxicab driver, the truck driver, etc. etc. Most of the pop…

The thing is that the office is not what it was before. The hybrid office with its roaming desks is a nightmare. I hate it so much. Going to the office before the pandemic was totally different. Even though I did work from home regularly then too. But at the office I had the same colleagues around me (even though my direct colleagues were all in different locations). I had my own desk with my stuff. Now I just have a…

The thing is that the current environment is sort of what you'd expect if most people don't come in most days any longer. I think some companies are giving a permanent desk to people who come in most days but most coworkers are probably still not coming in regularly.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#148
post #19

I work in Cork, Ireland. My boss is in Dublin, his boss Singapore, my staff in Nova Scotia, Devs in Manila, clients in London and New York. I'm always working remotely, no matter where I am, as is anyone who works in any multi office company. The RTO is being entirely driven from the top by institutional investors wanting to avoid losses on property investments and from the bottom by those who have yet to grapple wit…

> the bottom by those who have yet to grapple with the fact they dont have friends or hobbies and need you in the office so that they dont feel like such embarrassing losers.

Projecting much?

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are in a positive office space, you need to understand that you are incredibly lucky and part of a tiny minority.

> you are incredibly lucky Says who? There's no more reason for an office space to be bad rather than good. And there's no reason to think that having a good one is based on luck. If office space dynamics and setup are important to you, then put it in your job search mental list and find a job that matches that.

There are lots of reasons why offices tend towards bad rather than good. If I sat and thought about it I could probably list a dozen systematic biases towards crappy office spaces. Here are just a few off the top of my head:

- Open-plan offices, hot-desking, and other negative patterns are more cost-effective for a given amount of space.

- Cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all spaces are "easier" to manage from a personnel/HR point of view. Less griping about who gets the "good office," as there is no good office. No need to think about differences between people, we can just treat them as fungible "human resources."

- Similar race to the bottom regarding amenities (coffee, break rooms, etc.). Just look in the other comments of this thread. It's easier to target the least common denominator than provide personalized/individualized benefits in a manner that's fair to everyone.

- Insecure, distrusting managers promote bad office spaces like open plans, hot desking, etc. in order to better micro-manage their teams. Good managers can push back, but in practice the bad managers tend to be the squeaky wheels and get the grease.

I've worked for 10 different companies so far in my career. All but one I would consider a good company. But of those nine "good" companies, I have had one good office space. That's why I've been remote for the last 6 years. For me personally it was either go remote or leave the industry. I'm never making a open-plan or even cube-farm layout my primary working space again.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#150
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep saying—if you want me to return to the office, give me an office . Or even a cubicle. Why even enforce a hot-desking setup when the space is 20% full? It makes no sense at all!

For all the memes about cubicles the one time I had it was actually pleasant. You could have a small meeting in the cubicle. The walls were tall enough to hang up reference diagrams. Those same walls meant that sound didn't travel when your PM was on yet another call. Not being able to see a window was a downside. As was there oppressive grey-beige monotony, but I imagine with the Google colour palette they'd be much…

The walls have another benefit: they act like noise canceling headphones for your eyes.

That’s one of the issues I have with open floor plan offices: people buzzing around in my peripheral vision can be incredibly distracting and detrimental to productivity depending on the day and my mental state, and there’s almost nothing that can be done to mitigate that.

Post reply on HN