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

401–410 of 597 posts

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

#401

Post by wubrr »

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…

> The whole matter is debated (understandably in a way) on big numbers and averages.

Is it though? My last employer (a FAANG) did publish (questionable) numbers suggesting WFH being more efficient when the lockdowns started. When RTO started they flatly refused to back it up with any numbers whatsoever.

> At the end of the day the decision C-suite have to make when planning projects is not remote vs non-remote and apply blindly rather in forming teams with people that by their own nature or preferences will thrive in the setup that's decided.

I think at the end of the day the C-suite has no idea whether WFH is better or worse. Middle management will come out and blame any lack of progress/productivity on literally anything that's not directly related to their own performance, so WFH is a natural scapegoat for incompetent management.

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

#402

Post by repeekad »

steveBK123 wrote: post #380
repeekad wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re touching on an important point though, mix of in person and in office is really challenging, because some people see each other all day while others are literally more disconnected. It creates a heterogeneous mix of work relationships, and I’m not so sure that handling mix WFH WFO is purely evident of poor team management, it’s just difficult to have a cohesive team when some are physically there and s…

I don't know how important all this social science stuff is to be honest. I've worked for 20 years in global teams, and written communication is very important. Having US/UK/Ireland/HK/Singapore split team isn't much different from remote. Over the years I've worked in smaller orgs with a higher % of local people. What I can tell you is that the amount of chatter grew exponentially. One place I used to call it "bilat…

Oh and to be clear I’m less commenting on productivity, more on the soft stuff like sense of belonging to the org, enjoying time at work, and building real relationships. These things are strictly local, no one expects to form relationships with the accounting team in Ireland, and having an explicit process for interacting with them is probably more important than an explicit process for interacting with your manager.

How important is that stuff, I have no idea, but if half the team are friends at work and the rest can only be reached over slack, that doesn’t sound like much of a team

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

#404

Post by wubrr »

spacemadness wrote: post #398
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’ve seen team managers blame design work being poor or unproductive on having remote workers when most of the team isn’t. And then when everyone is flown in they claim a great victory when the output is the same or worse. I think many managers with poor performing teams are using the opportunity to blame poor performance on remote with zero data to back that up. It’s simply a useful group to blame for all your probl…

Pretty much agree, but ultimately the onus on hiring the right people is on the hiring manager. The pattern here is management blaming their own incompetence on anything that doesn't lead back to themselves, such as WFH. Then you have higher level leadership eating this up because of their own laziness and incompetence. Incompetence all the way up.

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

#405

Post by zeroclicks »

michaelmrose wrote: post #399
pc86 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hyperbole and language like this is exactly why it's so hard to have this debate in any rational way. The onsite crowd says that all their WFH colleagues are playing video games and doing laundry all day while the WFH crowd says employers are stealing from their employees' children.

I don't think the WFH crowd minds others going into the office. The pro onsite crowd on the other hand wants others forced into the office because their choice is unsupportable if people are given a free choice. >98% of workers want to work remote at least some of the time 65% report wanting to work remote all of the time. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/remote-work-statisti... If 1/3 of your workforce meets…

> If 1/3 of your workforce meets 2 days a week your average utilization is about 14%

That's a good point. All that fancy real estate and coffee machines start to look like a wasted investment when they're used 14% of the time.

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

#406

Post by BeFlatXIII »

Gigachad wrote: post #118
nox101 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've chatted with a co-worker about all kinds of interesting topics related to our with the last few days. We both work on GPU related stuff, he's been optimizing compute shaders and finding out new and interesting things. The conversations are not conversations I've never seen in chat. He could make a formal presentation but that's not really the point. The point is, as I sat down into the seat next to him, it was o…

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.

Then mark me in the “I don’t want to talk to my coworkers ever if I can avoid it” column. My social life is already full. Don't make me commute for the benefit of those who are not so lucky.

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

#407

Post by mikrl »

coldpie wrote: post #307
bdw5204 wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason I can imagine that somebody would genuinely like a long commute would be if they hate their home life and are trying to escape from it. They'd probably be better off just getting a divorce instead.

My commute is about 40 minutes each way by bus, plus a 5 minute walk on both ends. I love it. I get outdoors for a short walk four times a day, I read books and magazines on the bus, see what's being built or new businesses opening around town, sometimes I get to meet neighbors and other commuters, or help out random strangers with directions or whatever. My commute to work is definitely a benefit to my life.

During the summer when I work from home I take a 20 minute walk at 8:30 (and water my tomatoes) and a 20 minute walk at 12:00 before settling back into my home office with lunch.

If I’m feeling up to it, I get another 30-40 minute walk in once it cools off in the evening.

I don’t mind driving in during the winter though, because then I don’t have to pay to heat my house (beyond 15C for the cat) for the day.

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

#408

Post by BeFlatXIII »

jvmboi wrote: post #151

I am fully remote and have been for a long time but I don't trust productivity studies, especially if they just find what everyone wants to hear anyway. If the market can do anything then it that has to be optimizing productivity. Every single company has a weighty incentive to work out what works best and so I fully expect that after a bit of churn the optimal remote/on-premise balance will be found on a job-by-job…

> If the market can do anything then it that has to be optimizing productivity.

Except if margins from the company's commercial real estate holdings are higher than the gains of remote productivity.

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

#409

Post by helboi4 »

mlrtime wrote: post #397
helboi4 wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, your story is an isolated and minor anecdote and my story is a massive social ill that I am furious that older people want to overlook and then wonder why younger peoples mental health and productivity is getting constantly worse. So I don't appreciate you bringing up your anecdote as if it has any relevance to what I'm saying. p.s. I spend most of my working day with headphones on, it is perfectly possible.

You're lack of appreciation maybe related to your fury. Younger peoples mental health has a lot more to do with wasting time in a office, but you can keep thinking that if it helps. I'd wager that younger people could learn a bit from older in this area. In the end, we do what we think is best and I'll continue heavily advocating for remote work. Good luck!

Nah mate, you pulled that one out of nowhere. It's pretty widely understood our mental health issues are due to lonliness and social isolation and social media (fake virtual socialising) mate.

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

#410

Post by miroljub »

zer0tonin wrote: post #310
pc86 wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

15 minutes is not significant.

15 * 2 minutes a day 5 times a week is 100h+ by the end of the year

You can read 10 books during that time. It's not like you need to sit there, do nothing and intensively hate your life 2 * 15 minutes a day.
Post reply on HN