Remote work doesn't seem to affect productivity, Fed study finds • Hacker News Board

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

#231

Post by halfcat » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:02 PM UTC

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?

It’s not a preference to be micromanaged.

It’s a preference to not execute two different skill sets when you lack one of them. That’s stressful.

You might be a good developer, but not great at talking to users and figuring out the priority and the solution and executing on that independently.

Or you might not be good at delivering eloquent speeches. Or whatever. Everyone lacks some skillset which they’d prefer someone more qualified handle for them.

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

#232

Post by mlrtime » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:06 PM UTC

helboi4 wrote: post #199

lloeki wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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,…

For every positive that I can possibly read about in office work. Not one can combat my horrible situation of working next to a colleague with post nasal drip. Imagine every 60s hearing the sound of phlegm being sucked through a throat.

I have sympathy for this person, but I can't work in this environment. Headphones can't be worn 8 hours a day.

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

#233

Post by hospitalJail » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:06 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #225

intended wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would add one major change that the work from home experiment has achieved - its made the opportunity cost of the work commute clear. This is a time cost paid for by the worker. As you stated, this is variable. If you have a short commute, or you like it, or you get some exercise - office is great. If you hate your commute, if its 3 hours in pollution and traffic - not so much. Earlier the position was that WFH was…

During my last job change I gave concrete numbers to recruiters on what getting me into an office would cost. In the end I ended up working remote, which is what I preferred, which wasn't surprising given how much the commuting time was worth to me.

For me it was:

>Company A is 2.5 hours of drive time

>Company B is remote

Pay is the same.

lol I imagine that Company A will find some sucker, but instead of getting A+ workers that can realize company B> company A, they are going to get the leftover workers, their second choice. To be fair, leftover workers seem to stick around at a company for 10-20 years.

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

#234

Post by marcosdumay » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:07 PM UTC

raizer88 wrote: post #135

331c8c71 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In many places on Earth one would need to pay a substantially higher rent/price to get an extra room to use as an office. And in a family situation one would ideally need two extra rooms...

Yes, but in a remote work family you can buy an house everywhere. You pay a lot less in rent outside the city.

You don't have work anymore as a constraint, but it's not the only constraint to where people live.

If you are single and want to live alone, you can certainly optimize the hell out of housing costs. But of course, each single constraint you remove will probably let you reduce your costs by a bit.

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

#235

Post by arein3 » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:09 PM UTC

gumballindie wrote: post #203

arein3 wrote: post #189

Based on my experience working in IT on complex projects, it is better to work together in the same room/office, if you have a team that is not all seniors and if you work on a greenfield project where you have a lot of structure to put in place. Often with people that are doing something new to them, they might have a "mental barrier" of doing something new, because there are a lot of things to take into account, an…

> IT on complex projects, it is better to work together in the same room/office I guess it depends. If the most “complex IT projects” out there can work without ever meeting in person so can your team.

Depends from case to case. It might be a complex project, but the lead/architect already has the right answers and there will be smooth sailing. On the contrary it might be a project with constantly changing requirements, new portions of tech stack for all the team, tight deadlines, some tool chosen for a task does not support something, bugs, estimations did not meet reality. In that case (a challenging project) I would prefer the team in the office.

Also if you are a begginer, I would recommend to search for work in office if it works for you.

I dislike commuting more than half an hour, however I would like the team to be together if it's something challenging.

I know it is hard to commute long time, especially if you have other responsibilities, but that does't change my opinion on what is the best for the team.

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

#236

Post by jen20 » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:09 PM UTC

mlrtime wrote: post #215

intended wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would add one major change that the work from home experiment has achieved - its made the opportunity cost of the work commute clear. This is a time cost paid for by the worker. As you stated, this is variable. If you have a short commute, or you like it, or you get some exercise - office is great. If you hate your commute, if its 3 hours in pollution and traffic - not so much. Earlier the position was that WFH was…

I definitely agree here. For most of my career I was fortunate enough to not have a "real" commute. at most a 20 min walk to the office. The worse commute is when it was raining or snowing. The problem becomes now my home is tied to my work place. If the company moves or I change companies, I have move or stress at a new commute. I did move once during a job change, and it didn't last long. Another compounding issue…

I wouldn’t call 2.5% of the day (including night) nothing. 20 minutes is way past the upper bound of a daily commute I would consider reasonable!

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

#237

Post by jen20 » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:10 PM UTC

raxxorraxor wrote: post #218

intended wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would add one major change that the work from home experiment has achieved - its made the opportunity cost of the work commute clear. This is a time cost paid for by the worker. As you stated, this is variable. If you have a short commute, or you like it, or you get some exercise - office is great. If you hate your commute, if its 3 hours in pollution and traffic - not so much. Earlier the position was that WFH was…

I absolutely let my employer pay for my commute. Indirectly of course, but my income requirements are dependent on how much hours I have to put into work, which includes my overall time investment. Same with all other costs I have because of work. That said, time is important to me and I have a 5min commute, 20min if I walk. For that reason I do prefer the office. Better meals and better coffee and nice colleagues. I…

Better coffee is definitely situational, especially if your employer buys over roasted beans.

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

#238

Post by KptMarchewa » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:11 PM UTC

intended wrote: post #185

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…

I would add one major change that the work from home experiment has achieved - its made the opportunity cost of the work commute clear. This is a time cost paid for by the worker. As you stated, this is variable. If you have a short commute, or you like it, or you get some exercise - office is great. If you hate your commute, if its 3 hours in pollution and traffic - not so much. Earlier the position was that WFH was…

Exactly. For me, there's nothing better than 15 minute walking commute.

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

#239

Post by wsc981 » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:12 PM UTC

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?

Seems if you have staff that needs constant oversight and micromanagement, it's a waste of your own time. Do you really want to check someone 8 hours a day, 5 days per week to make sure they do what they are supposed to do?

I think in such cases it might be better to get rid of such staff, for your own sake and theirs.

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

#240

Post by gambiting » Thu, Jan 18, 2024, 1:12 PM UTC

haizhung wrote: post #98

caseyohara wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pretty dim view, especially here on HN. People are paid to work because their labor is valuable. That is in no way mutually exclusive with how interesting and meaningful the job is. Jobs at the intersection of employer value and employee interest are obviously the most desirable. I'd imagine every laborer attempts to maximize these two qualities of their day job.

It’s not completely wrong though. To be clear, I think basically any role can be meaningful to someone, depending on their views and upbringing. However, some roles lend themselves more easily to find meaning in them, think e.g. roles with patient contact in health care. Or the gaming/entertainment industry. As a consequence, the competition on the labor side is much fiercer, and as a consequence of that, pay is lowe…

>>As a consequence, the competition on the labor side is much fiercer, and as a consequence of that, pay is lower and the chance for exploitation is higher.

Well, again - there are these golden jobs that offer both. As an example, if you're good enough as a rendering programmer with video games experience, you can command almost any kind of salary, work wherever you want, and change jobs at a whim - because any games company will pay you your weight in gold to employ you. And (while not a given) the opportunity to work on something meaningful/interesting there is very high.