161–170 of 345 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The sad reality is that it’s not (at least for knowledge workers)… it kills productivity and the output is always lower quality. Is this actually a fact that you can prove, or simply a belief?
[flagged]
I left Amazon a month ago (voluntarily) for a fully remote role because they asked me to move to Seattle/Arlington. When I joined them, I was already in a different state because of my wife's work. So I told them, I cannot join if they don't give me remote exception; it took them ~4-5 weeks to get the sign off for remote exception from the VP. I took the job and 9 months in, Jassy decided to force everyone back to th…
How much of a TC cut did you have to take between Amazon and your current employer?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are real. What they are missing is that said person wasn't working much before. They only noticed their lack of output when working remotely, as busyness was no longer visible.
Except no one can actually measure or confirm these apparent hordes of lazy slackers that are totally out there. Just legions of secret non-working people.
Maybe all the big companies have measured and all concluded that on average WFH is less productive.
Individual productivity of office workers is nearly impossible to properly measure but aggregate productivity is easier though certainly far from perfect.
does anyone really find RTO surprising? I know several people personally who just blatantly don't work. it's more obvious in roles where the work is less quantifiable, but even in engineering roles everyone hears stories the alternative seems to be aggressively metricize and cut-- but that seems bad for different reasons
> I know several people personally who just blatantly don't work. I'm confused. If you cant figure out people aren't working remotely then how do you figure out they aren't working in the office? Randomly check their screens? Check the check-in/out time?
At the risk of sounding cyncial, this is to be expected. Management, especially C-suites have put themselves on a pedastal where they can do no harm. Its almost always blamed on the employees.
Example, the recent Boeing fiasco is being portrayed as an employee failure[1] by giving employees safety lessons, while ignoring the years mismanagement and cost cutting.
[1]: https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-737-workers-will-stop...
Is it possible for someone to 1. Be a really good 'in person' manager (able to foster a good in-office culture, motivate and coach people effectively in real time). 2. Be a really bad 'remote' manager. Not saying RTO mandates are a good idea, but to say it's masking poor management as a black and white statement lacks nuance.
Stock Market returns during WFH vs Stock Market returns during RTO. (free money, zero-interest rates, meme-stock mania had nothing to do with it apparently)
It's a click-bait article to attract gen-zers and HNers and it has worked like a charm
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except no one can actually measure or confirm these apparent hordes of lazy slackers that are totally out there. Just legions of secret non-working people.
How do you know that no one can measure ? Maybe all the big companies have measured and all concluded that on average WFH is less productive. Individual productivity of office workers is nearly impossible to properly measure but aggregate productivity is easier though certainly far from perfect.
They say they don't have it, but tell people to do it anyway.
https://fortune.com/2023/08/03/amazon-svp-mike-hopkins-offic...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
a videoconfering system that is reliable and easy to use is essential to remote management. You need to have as little friction as possible to propose a 1-1 or a 15 min roundtable to quickly brainstorm something orally. Then you need remote "telemetry", meaning access either to chat messages, email, tickets, etc. and a way to process it at scale (without reading everything) in order to defuse sticky situations based…
So, teams?? Basically industry standard
So research is finally coming to the same conclusion that a lot of people, myself included came to over a year ago. Well managed companies don't care where you work, it simply doesn't matter. The problem is that management is a lot harder than many thought, but you could sort of hide the fact that you're bad at it when everyone is at the office. There simply isn't enough talented managers around. We're not solving th…
I feel like this is true for so many jobs these days. Like I think that a lot of people (in high skill jobs) are really not good enough for their jobs. But we simply don't have enough good people for all the jobs.
Just as a programmer, so many people that are paid to do it are... bad. Managers, same. PMs (I think) same. I wouldn't be surprised if others in other professions feel the same.