Live data from Hacker News

Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

washingtonpost.com

41–50 of 111 posts

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#41
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s the job. There a lot of downtime as a programmer.

You mean for sleep? Yeah, I suppose. But I never had a job programming where there wasn't something valuable to spend my time on

I find that stepping away from my desk for a little while is the fastest way for me to solve a problem I’m struggling with. Kind of like how Dr House always solves his cases while doing other random stuff.

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#42
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They wanted to go back to working in an office setting?

They were not ordered to go back to the office? They were ordered not to go back to the office?

I suppose being blatantly obtuse and extremely literal worked as an argument this time, pray it'll work again for you the next time you want to employ this argument.

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#43
post #36

Since there are a lot of founders here, I'm curious about what your positions are whether you have any guides/references to creating a good environment. My own experience has been that with junior talent, they don't gel with the team and don't have anything in common with the rest of the employees outside of the project they're working on.

I have been a remote employee (starting years before the pandemic) at a number of companies. The biggest thing I've noticed is the importance of communication. More specifically, you need a chat-first workforce. Seeing some places that were awful at remote and some that were really good, it really comes down to how comfortable people were communicating via chat. If I were building a remote company I would hire people…

> you need a chat-first workforce

I second this. Worked for a large retail operation and people used to sometimes move between departments. These had very different communication styles: one group had communal rolling chats about all sorts of stuff all the time. Others only chatted if they had planned to do so, or created a specific private chat for a topic. Far easier to work in the department in which you could just fling out a question or comment any time and people would get back to you almost instantly and hash things out.

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#44

Spend 10+ hours and extra expenses commuting, you want to retain valuable staff you have to make that a good value proposition for them.

A lot of offices in London closed their gyms over the pandemic and never brought them back. I always thought that was pretty stupid. A lot of people who could WFH even before then used to come in for the free gym at least.

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#45
post #36

Since there are a lot of founders here, I'm curious about what your positions are whether you have any guides/references to creating a good environment. My own experience has been that with junior talent, they don't gel with the team and don't have anything in common with the rest of the employees outside of the project they're working on.

I have been a remote employee (starting years before the pandemic) at a number of companies. The biggest thing I've noticed is the importance of communication. More specifically, you need a chat-first workforce. Seeing some places that were awful at remote and some that were really good, it really comes down to how comfortable people were communicating via chat. If I were building a remote company I would hire people…

> Finally, pay well. I think the standard early startup pay range (180k + 1%) will not get you the technical talent you need. Maybe I am overestimating the technical challenges many companies face, but I would not build a business off of $180k engineers. I would rather pay double that (while being selective about talent) and get something (better) built with fewer people.

This was my view, too, but I've been trying the 'fewer, better' route for a while now and seniors seem to be only marginally ahead of the curve, if at all. Now I wonder whether hiring twice as many juniors and aggressively promoting the ones who prove themselves wouldn't be more effective. (This isn't a good idea for other, pragmatic reasons, but I do wonder if it would work.)

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#46
post #36

Since there are a lot of founders here, I'm curious about what your positions are whether you have any guides/references to creating a good environment. My own experience has been that with junior talent, they don't gel with the team and don't have anything in common with the rest of the employees outside of the project they're working on.

I have been a remote employee (starting years before the pandemic) at a number of companies. The biggest thing I've noticed is the importance of communication. More specifically, you need a chat-first workforce. Seeing some places that were awful at remote and some that were really good, it really comes down to how comfortable people were communicating via chat. If I were building a remote company I would hire people…

> but I would not build a business off of $180k engineers. I would rather pay double that (while being selective about talent) and get something (better) built with fewer people.

Where are these 360k jobs posted? I never see anything close to that.

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#47

Since there are a lot of founders here, I'm curious about what your positions are whether you have any guides/references to creating a good environment. My own experience has been that with junior talent, they don't gel with the team and don't have anything in common with the rest of the employees outside of the project they're working on.

I'm a junior.

First I worked at a small company that was oriented towards remote work. At the beginning I would show up in the office, but the company had a policy "instead of talking to me, can you write a message on public Slack channel, or even better, make a github issue I'll get back to later?", which made me furious because I'm a naturally talkative person. So I spent two years working remotely. Not gonna lie, that was amazing, I had work on one screen and porn on the other at all times.

Then I moved to a much bigger company that's remote-friendly. I make a point coming to the office every day, although never for full 8 hours, more like 3, and I'm slowly making some friends. There's people I can talk to beyond "howareyou howareyou", which is a huge thing, because we're social animals and as an immigrant, I just don't have the out-of-office social network most people do.

What I have noticed is that I'm always on much better terms with people I actually talk to, and in the office it's much easier to have these random chats about everything and nothing. These chats are incredibly important because they allow us to see coworkers as human beings rather than API calls.

A friend of mine lives with her boyfriend who's working fully remotely, the company doesn't even have an office in his area. She complained to me about the guy just not doing well in general. His entire social life is her, and that's not a healthy dynamic.

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#48
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been a remote employee (starting years before the pandemic) at a number of companies. The biggest thing I've noticed is the importance of communication. More specifically, you need a chat-first workforce. Seeing some places that were awful at remote and some that were really good, it really comes down to how comfortable people were communicating via chat. If I were building a remote company I would hire people…

> Finally, pay well. I think the standard early startup pay range (180k + 1%) will not get you the technical talent you need. Maybe I am overestimating the technical challenges many companies face, but I would not build a business off of $180k engineers. I would rather pay double that (while being selective about talent) and get something (better) built with fewer people. This was my view, too, but I've been trying t…

I worked at a company whose business model was hiring students for internship. Not even juniors, just students. The place was bad, the product was bad, everything was bad, but they're still in business, which means that this model does work. I checked their website and they even started offering IT outsourcing services.

My prayers to whoever signs a contract with them.

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#49
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been a remote employee (starting years before the pandemic) at a number of companies. The biggest thing I've noticed is the importance of communication. More specifically, you need a chat-first workforce. Seeing some places that were awful at remote and some that were really good, it really comes down to how comfortable people were communicating via chat. If I were building a remote company I would hire people…

> Finally, pay well. I think the standard early startup pay range (180k + 1%) will not get you the technical talent you need. Maybe I am overestimating the technical challenges many companies face, but I would not build a business off of $180k engineers. I would rather pay double that (while being selective about talent) and get something (better) built with fewer people. This was my view, too, but I've been trying t…

If you are creating an MVP, this strategy may work. You could then hire more experienced people to rewrite everything if the product takes off.

Re: Ordered back to the office, top tech talent left instead, study finds

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Finally, pay well. I think the standard early startup pay range (180k + 1%) will not get you the technical talent you need. Maybe I am overestimating the technical challenges many companies face, but I would not build a business off of $180k engineers. I would rather pay double that (while being selective about talent) and get something (better) built with fewer people. This was my view, too, but I've been trying t…

I worked at a company whose business model was hiring students for internship. Not even juniors, just students. The place was bad, the product was bad, everything was bad, but they're still in business, which means that this model does work. I checked their website and they even started offering IT outsourcing services. My prayers to whoever signs a contract with them.

Komarch (a very large Polish IT company) is famous for this. They don't have any products of their own, they specialize in box-ticking, contract work and winning tender offers from the government. Because of how tender offers work, anything which cannot be measured doesn't matter, and any system which fulfills the pre-established requirements has to be accepted, no matter how bad it is. This usually means terrible UX and terrible code quality.

There's even a "law of Komarch", "anything that can be done by one senior can also be done by 50 interns."

Post reply on HN