A Short Rant About Working Remotely • Hacker News Board

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#201

Post by markshead » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:15 PM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #168

markshead wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I'd welcome a remote employee under one condition: They're required to be on a constant video call so their on-site team members can see and talk to them at any time. > Completely laughable. Do you have closed circuit TV recordings of everywhere in the office? I'm actually working with a distributed team that does this. Everyone is on a shared video conference eight hours a day. If you want to talk to someone you…

That actually sounds pretty effective, and would get around a lot of the inefficiencies I've had in the past with remote workers. Curious, is it just a window with all the other video feeds that you keep in the background? Or a thumbnail version of to the side? Or a second monitor? I'm curious as to the difference between it being always visible, or something you have to pull up.

Most of the people from home have it on a second monitor. There are about four team rooms on the call as well. They usually have one or two 30 to 50 inch televisions showing the other members.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#202

Post by hosh » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:15 PM UTC

adrianhoward wrote: post #43

(lightly edited copy of my usual plea for evidence on this topic ;-) Pretty much all the evidence (rather than anecdote) I can find shows that co-located teams in a single team room environment are the most productive - all other things being equal. (And I'm saying this as somebody who spends a lot of their time working from home, and talking to other folk over Skype, etc. There are reasons for telecommuting - person…

Whether or not there are some measurable benefits to the company for telecommuting does not matter.

What matters is this:

(1) The software company needs your software skills more than you need the company.

(2) You decided and plan your life around telecommuting.

(3) So telecommuting is non-negotiable.

Non-telecommuters tend to be wary of remote workers, not because they are any more or less productive. There's an underlying fear and a need to control risk. A manager who is not used to this want to reassure himself that things are going smoothly. You address that, then things fall into place.

In other words, the managers, speaking for the company say they want more "productivity". What they really need is more control and reduction of risk. They feel a certain level of assurance when they can see people walking into the office on time, every day. It assures themselves of their own continued employment. Give the manager what he needs (the assurance), and this conflict goes away.

As for recruiters, at the end of the day, they are salespeople trying to close a commission. There are only a few exceptions where a recruiter acts more like an agent, rather than trading you like a commodity. Obviously, such people are worth keeping contact with.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#203

Post by yb66 » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:16 PM UTC

Irregardless wrote: post #162

Yhippa wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think after reading the tone of your response I can determine that I would have a difficult time working with this type of personality. As a developer interruptions are a huge productivity drag. I have to stop whatever I'm doing, answer your question, and figure out where I left off and get back into the right mode to program which can take a while. Right now I have a few work-from-home days a week and I find I'm e…

Like a few others who have responded, you're not seeing the forest through the trees. That's somewhat alarming for a group of people who are supposed to be creative problem solvers. Team productiviy > your individual productivity. It's that simple. Do you think your team members interrupt you just for the fun of it? No, they interrupt you because they need your help to accomplish something. As a resource to the team,…

It's a problem of personal organisation. If you have an urgent problem, then by all mean interrupt someone for it. If not, schedule a time. This works whether they're local or remote. The difference is, most people are phenomenally bad at

* asking to schedule times

* rebuffing people who interrupt

hence it makes it easier for people when they're local to get their answers, but this also impacts on the interrupted person's productivity. So yes, your "Team productiviy > your individual productivity" formula wins out. On the other hand, if you take the win-win route of being organised well, everyone's productivity will go up, wherever they are based, team or individual.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#204

Post by AaronBBrown » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:18 PM UTC

Irregardless wrote: post #183

jaggederest wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People make those choices knowing it limits their career options. Since when are companies expected to accomodate every lifestyle and location employees might desire? That's pretty self-centered. Companies make the choice not to hire remote workers knowing it limits their hiring options. Since when are workers expected to accomodate every workplace and management decision an employer might desire? That's pretty myo…

It has nothing to do with measuring productivity or making sure they're at their desk instead of watching TV. It's about creating a virtual presence in the office to reduce communication barriers. I don't see anything ridiculous about that -- several people on HN have mentioned that their company does it.

Having worked nearly half my career as a remote employee, I find Skype mostly eliminates this problem...

Onsite Employee: "Hey, got a second?" Me: "Yep" Video chat commences

It's a horrible work habit to get into to interrupt someone like that, but sometimes it's necessary. Plus, sometimes it's nice to just chitchat with your coworkers, just like you would in an office setting.

The bottom line is, I'm good at my job and if you're not willing to let me work remotely, you are welcome to discriminate based on geographic presence and eliminate 90% of qualified employees and I'll just go work for the increasing number of enlightened companies that have figured that they can get better talent by making telecommuting a reasonable option. Not all awesome engineers live within a commutable distance to a major metropolitan hub.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#205

Post by gyepi » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:18 PM UTC

Irregardless wrote: post #107

seany wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I need to ask a teammate a question, I turn my head slightly to the left and ask them. Avoiding this is the primary reason I like working at home. Getting distracted by things like that are a productivity killer for me.

Because team work is all about you , right? Quite a myopic view. How dare anyone try to increase the productivity of the team by stealing precious seconds from you! Teams are more productive when they're in the same location. That is a fact. Your individual productivity may suffer at times, but the team will do better overall if you all work together in one location.

I've noticed quite a few responses in this vein. It may be worth considering that indeed, personal productivity is part of the benefit people get out of this kind of work.

I, too, am much more productive working at home. So much so that I started working from home 3 days a week and eventually just switched to remote work. I understand the need for team productivity but there are ways to solve it that don't require constant face time. When I, as a remote worker, had to hire employees to work for me at the office, I made sure to hire people who were good enough not to require constant supervision and did not need to ask a question every 5 minutes. After the initial orientation, I made sure to be available by email, IM, phone (in that order) which worked out just fine.

I think part of the reason for the strong differences of opinion is that both can be right. The right team, colocated, can be very productive. However, I have seen many colocated teams fail, sometimes horribly. Conversely, I've seen remote teams do extremely well also. In fact, all remote teams I've worked with have done quite well. Obviously some of that may be due to their motivation, skills, experience, etc. But the fact remains. As I say to everyone who asks, remote work is not for everyone. We're used to the norm of working on location, but that, too, isn't for everyone.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#206

Post by VonGuard » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:19 PM UTC

adrianhoward wrote: post #43

(lightly edited copy of my usual plea for evidence on this topic ;-) Pretty much all the evidence (rather than anecdote) I can find shows that co-located teams in a single team room environment are the most productive - all other things being equal. (And I'm saying this as somebody who spends a lot of their time working from home, and talking to other folk over Skype, etc. There are reasons for telecommuting - person…

Yeah the biggest difference here is that this is about software development. A room full of people is great when you all need to talk a lot and discuss things and plans and exchange info really quickly and casually.

But for programming, I find the best environment is an empty room, no distractions, headphones on, and NO ONE bothering you. That's not gonna happen at an office. Programming requires intense concentration, hard to get in a room full of people.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#207

Post by 7402 » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:21 PM UTC

Maybe the problem is that the VERY FIRST question you ask is, "Are you open to remote workers?"

I've always found that to be kind of a turn-off when I've interviewed people for software engineering positions. It's NOT that it's not an important question - it's that it shows a bit of social cluelessness. It's the same if the first question someone asks me is "How much vacation time do I get?" or "How much money do you pay?" Of course those questions should be discussed eventually! But I'd like to get to know the other person a little, first.

Ya, I know. It's a seller's market, you're busy, you don't want to waste your time with unproductive job possibilities, etc.

BUT EVEN IF non-telecommuting is a deal-breaker, maybe you should start off asking about the project, the company, the other people you'd be working with. If the work looks promising at first glance, start off by selling yourself first, rather than immediately focussing on the "OK, tell me what's in this for me, before I waste any more time on you and your company" side of things.

Simply as a matter of strategy, you might do better to postpone that question after a round or two. If they like you, then even if they don't have universal telecommuting, they may want you enough to be happy to have you as a telecommuter.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#208

Post by kjhughes » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:21 PM UTC

I agree with the OP and would go so far as to propose a generalization of Joy's law ("No matter who you are, most of the smartest people work for someone else" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joys_Law_(management)):

  "No matter where you are, most of the smartest people are somewhere else."

An employer or business partner insisting on full-time face-time will be at a disadvantage compared with competitors who are more geographically flexible.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#209

Post by supercanuck » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:21 PM UTC

zwass wrote: post #191

erichocean wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When they suddenly need a top-level engineer to solve a hard problem, they hire one who consults for three months, works remotely, and visits once or twice. You've essentially described every job I've had since college. That's exactly my experience of how companies actually work in practice.

How does one acquire the connections to be called in as this type of engineer?

1. Time

2. Networking, Networking, Networking

3. Be willing to talk about yourself a lot.

4. Act Confident in the face of uncertainty.

Re: A Short Rant About Working Remotely

#210

Post by snowwrestler » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 6:25 PM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #63

adrianhoward wrote: post #43

(lightly edited copy of my usual plea for evidence on this topic ;-) Pretty much all the evidence (rather than anecdote) I can find shows that co-located teams in a single team room environment are the most productive - all other things being equal. (And I'm saying this as somebody who spends a lot of their time working from home, and talking to other folk over Skype, etc. There are reasons for telecommuting - person…

co-located teams in team-room like settings are much more productive Whenever I've seen this done, the very best employees leave. I am a firm believer that you can train yourself to hop in and out of a reasonable facsimile to the "zone" in much less than 20-30 minutes (I do it all the time)[1]; but the level of distraction of the warroom type environment massively favors your more extroverted engineers. My experience…

I think the hardest part of product development is deciding which hard problem to solve. A team can often be better than a single very smart person at doing that, by virtue of bringing different perspectives to the conversation.

IMO the best working environment places the team in conversational proximity, but provides an option for individuals to find isolation (either in a dedicated room or at home) when it is necessary to solve a hard "real zone" type problem.