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

191–200 of 597 posts

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

#191

Post by brailsafe »

epolanski wrote: post #173

The fundamental issue I see in this debate is a lack of sensibility and nuance in human nature. The whole matter is debated (understandably in a way) on big numbers and averages. I could write a long post but I'll cut it short to this paragraph stating that humans differ. For some commuting is stressful, the offices are noisy and full of distractions and those individuals may thrive in a remote setup. There's people…

> Some people require micro management and constant oversight

Aside from having an actual assistant, is this just hypothetical or do you know someone that prefers being micromanaged?

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

#192

Post by VoodooJuJu »

SoftTalker wrote: post #2

Most employees can screw around websurfing or shopping just as well at work as at home. They mostly do it because they are bored. Give them interesting, meaningful work and they will be productive.

Bullshit jobs.

If people are so bored and idle to the point that they can just screw around on the internet until the clock strikes 5 while the world keeps turning, then that's a huge red flag they're in a bullshit job.

The answer isn't to invent work for them to do. If there's nothing to do, then there's nothing to do. They should probably go home and spend time with their family, write a novel, do some home improvement, tinker, maintain their tools, do some chores. Now that's meaningful work.

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

#193

Post by maxehmookau »

I've been working remote for 5 years, so this is anecdotal.

But it's also incredibly obvious and intuitive. It relies on the right company values, the right processes and the right incentives. But when done right, this will always hold true IMO.

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

#194

Post by sensanaty »

rebeccaskinner wrote: post #39
ryanSrich wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 managing a team with the “no meetings, let people do good work” philosophy and I can just say that I’m glad I was given the space as a new manager to find my feet, because I didn’t find that it worked well when taken to an extreme. Remote work offers very little structure. As someone who thrives on autonomy and chafes at process this always felt great to me, but a lot of people thrive with a bit of structur…

I'd blow my brains out if I has to sit through 6 hours of useless meetings a week.

I've found a singular Slack message at the start of the day more than enough for stuff like daily standups or whatever, literally no reason to drag people into a meeting for crap like that.

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

#195

Post by [deleted] »

Levitz wrote: post #123
californical wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Assuming that there are no differences in productivity, working on-site is borderline morally evil. It's unhealthier (loads of sleep deprivation out there), it's bad for the environment and its costs are higher. We can argue all day if the perks of in-person work are worth the cost, but if there aren't any perks besides "I just prefer it that way" I don't think there is even a valid discussion to have. We are talking…

[deleted]

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

#196

Post by helboi4 »

Mordisquitos wrote: post #162
Levitz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming that there are no differences in productivity, working on-site is borderline morally evil. It's unhealthier (loads of sleep deprivation out there), it's bad for the environment and its costs are higher. We can argue all day if the perks of in-person work are worth the cost, but if there aren't any perks besides "I just prefer it that way" I don't think there is even a valid discussion to have. We are talking…

Assuming that there are no differences in productivity, working remotely is borderline morally evil. It's unhealthier (loneliness, lack of work/life separation, physical inactivity), it's bad for the environment (climate control of a 100-people office is less energy intensive than that of 100 individual homes), and its costs are imposed on the worker rather than the business. To be clear, I don't honestly believe the…

I agree with your example paragraph. I think it is only beneficial for highly motivated senior engineers with families to work remotely. As a junior who doesn't know what I'm doing half of the time and feels demotivated without support, and as a single young person without a family that got cut off from building a community because of COVID, when I have worked mainly remotely I've been severely depressed. Not seeing people or leaving my house for most of the week makes me want to die not work harder.

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

#197

Post by helboi4 »

aurareturn wrote: post #5
SoftTalker wrote: post #2

Most employees can screw around websurfing or shopping just as well at work as at home. They mostly do it because they are bored. Give them interesting, meaningful work and they will be productive.

>Give them interesting, meaningful work and they will be productive. How much meaningful and interesting work do you think exists in this world? Every time this topic gets brought up, someone will say "Just give people interesting work, pay them well, don't micromanage them!" as if these jobs grow on trees. And even if these jobs do exist, they're usually reserved for workers who are extremely motivated and capable -…

I would also raise the point that actually having relationships with your colleagues and team can make work a lot more meaningful and make you more motivated. It is impossible to do that if you don't meet them. The idea that corporate work can be motivating at all when you exist in a vaccuum in your bedroom is idiotic. Almost no work is ineherently interesting.

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

#198

Post by helboi4 »

maxmorlocke wrote: post #17
goalieca wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Seriously. As an engineer and engineering leader, I cannot maintain focus to code, sit in meetings, and a variety of other tasks for more than 2-3 hours without a break. It is good to get up, move around, catch up on the news, etc. Taking appropriate breaks and conducting self care gives my mind an opportunity to decompress, allowing me to come back to work more focused and productive. Very long sessions (5+ hours) w…

Or you can be in the office and speak to people. I've never been in an office for a professional job where chatting, popping down to the canteen, stepping outside for a bit etc are not completely normal things to do and not frowned upon. For young people without families and pets, having a thriving office where we can take social breaks sometimes is important. Otherwise I literally just sit in my room and want to die. This is why I'm glad my company has 3 days compulsory.

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

#199

Post by helboi4 »

lloeki wrote: post #137
Gigachad wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Working remote has sucked all the personality and humanity from work imo. A platoon of conventionally acceptably dressed drones sat at generic desks furiously typing in a nondescript openspace where soundproofing creates cathedral silence causing the slightest noise to be annoying so every single one is glued to their screen with headphones on is what sucked all the personality and humanity from work imo. I find it…

Bro what sort of dystopiian offices have you been working in. I've never had that experience. People are always somewhat intersting and like to actually talk. There are some off days but it's never like that. And never ever have I had a colleague spontaneously try to have casual zoom conversation with me while remotely working. I've had people never turn their cameras on. And meanwhile, I'm here, a childless 20-sth, not having spoken to a human in days, wanting to hang myself with my headphone cable. The pro-wfh people just don't care that young people are still growing up in this time I swear.

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

#200

Post by CPLX »

brailsafe wrote: post #191
epolanski wrote: post #173

The fundamental issue I see in this debate is a lack of sensibility and nuance in human nature. The whole matter is debated (understandably in a way) on big numbers and averages. I could write a long post but I'll cut it short to this paragraph stating that humans differ. For some commuting is stressful, the offices are noisy and full of distractions and those individuals may thrive in a remote setup. There's people…

> Some people require micro management and constant oversight Aside from having an actual assistant, is this just hypothetical or do you know someone that prefers being micromanaged?

Yes. Like a thousand times yes. I learned this lesson as a manager very slowly because I hate being micromanaged.

It made me a bad manager to not have that in my tool kit. There are a lot of people who just want you to tell them exactly what to do.

Post reply on HN