Live data from Hacker News

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

bloomberg.com

581–590 of 597 posts

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

#581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno man, work is most of my life so it should be an enjoyable social experience for me otherwise it's just a mind-numbing time sink. For me its really important that I find a workplace with a good culture where I can have social interaction several days a week, because it's quite draining for me to constantly go to meetups and try really hard to make friends. There are some social spaces I try to go to regularly…

Sorry to hear about your personal issues, but this statement "100% wfh just punishes anyone who doesn't have kids." is you projecting. I work at a 100% remote company, and most of us are married (no kids) or single. We, or at least my specific r&d team have social lives outside of work and live in urban areas. Some of us even do a weekend dnd session online. Hybrid mostly doesn't work from an economic pov. If the com…

If you're married that helps too. I live in London, not the middle of nowhere, but I find it pretty hard to make friends here who aren't just closed off to new people and hard to get to know below the surface unless you are sort of around them for a long time. I dunno maybe the American culture of friendliness helps too. British people take months of consistency to get past the small-talk stage with.

Edit: Also I now work at a company that has a 3 day office policy, which is one of the top reasons I chose the job. I think they're doing fine and they have no intention fo changing. It's not impossible.

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

#582
post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) I'm not a robot. Humans exist in physical space and it is necessary for our mental health to see other people in person. We cannot get our social battery filled by virtual interaction alone. 2) Otther people don't participate in these things very often when I try to suggest them. People naturally talk to each other in physical spaces. Therefore, the solution is the office.

> Humans exist in physical space and it is necessary for our mental health to see other people in person. It does not follow that the deep social interaction that is beneficial to mental health has to happen at work. One can WFH and see people outside of work. Some people enjoy deep social ties with coworkers, others prefer keeping work at a distance from their personal life. > People naturally talk to each other in…

Seeing as we are forced to spend most of our waking hours working I would rather that I could get something out of that time other than wage slavery.

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

#583
post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, can you give examples of companies whose executives own the holding company their business leases real estate from?

It's common practice afaik, there's no secret there. I used to work for one and they are small peanuts. Edit: Acme inc owns Acme Real Estate Co and Acme Operations Co. Operations Co leases from Real Estate Co. There's no funny business, it's just how a business might split its assets and liabilities.

That's not an example of company executives personally profiting or being invested in the company's real estate though. The comment to which I replied implied that executives personally profited from the real estate.

> This doesn't happen because many C-suite people have commercial property investments

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

#584
post #477
post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This doesn't happen because many C-suite people have commercial property investments I keep reading this but have seen no evidence. Are you saying executives are invested in the buildings their companies occupy?

I don't know the big companies. But a lot of smaller firms I used to install software systems own their own buildings (basically, a big residential house or a small warehouse). The company owner owns the building, the actual company leases the building to the owner.

A company owning its own building is common. The parent comment said "This doesn't happen because many C-suite people have commercial property investments" which doesn't sound like a business owning its own building.

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

#585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have worked with people who needed explicit instructions for every step to perform, and if they complete what is assigned to them they will quietly sit and pass the time until they are explicitly told to do something. This isn't an "oh it's 4:30 and I'm not going to start something new", it's "It's 11am, and everyone else is busy, I will play solitaire until my manager explicitly tells me which of the 45 tasks they…

That's a good nuanced take, where actual productivity increases and hostility isn't created, for particular kinds of people.

Thanks. Unfortunately, you do get people who are just poor at their job sometimes, it might be ability or life circumstances (death/divorce/illness/?). The real problem is when there's a mismatch of expectations - if I hire a principal for my team, and expect them to be independent, if they require hand holding or guidance, it doesn't matter how good their code is. Similarly, if assign out bug fixes to someone, and they don't do them and instead do the "juicy" work, it's not going to work.

The only real problem are the people who I can only describe as maliciously incompetent. They do the bare minimum that is asked of them, take advantage of all of the freedom and lack of definitions (no core hours meaning I don't work 10-4 Monday through Friday, that sort of thing), and when you try to reason through it together they jump to the most hostile action possible and weaponise your flexibility and grace against you.

The only solution for these people is for them to be part of large companies with rigid policies that they are guardrailed into and have no way to test the boundaries of. If you have one of these people on your team you need to get rid of them. My experience is that there's usually one in every 40-50 people. If you get one early on your team, you're in big trouble.

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

#586
post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Then let's say "developed world". Saying US is a global outlier is silly when much of the globe is underdeveloped.

Perhaps, but we can say that there are certain reasons why the public transportation can be not very good in the developing world. Imagine that we but every country and their development index and their public transportation development index on a XY graph? Would US still stand out? Let's assume that it does. Then we can say that US is a global outlier.

I now see where you are coming from and based on your definition, it makes sense that US is a global outlier. However, the dimension of developed status of a country was not at all apparent in the original context which was only about WFH, commute and public transport.

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

#587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, an hour spent commuting is an hour stolen from one’s children.

What about all of us that don't have children. who need social interaction outside the house to be sane? who have just started our careers and need friendly colleagues around us who will support us? who have been cast out of adolescence into a world where everyone tells us to stay in our room alone and maybe download an app if you don't want to be suicidal. not everyone is a middle aged parent my guy

You shouldn’t depend on work for a social life, or even social interaction. Moreover, it’s not the responsibility of your coworkers to provide that to you.

If you need mentorship, your employer may offer that as a formal program. You also might be able to reach out directly to more senior people. Frankly, I find more and better opportunities to provide mentorship over Zoom than I did in the office.

Good luck with your career and mental health, my guy.

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

#588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good nuanced take, where actual productivity increases and hostility isn't created, for particular kinds of people.

Thanks. Unfortunately, you do get people who are just poor at their job sometimes, it might be ability or life circumstances (death/divorce/illness/?). The real problem is when there's a mismatch of expectations - if I hire a principal for my team, and expect them to be independent, if they require hand holding or guidance, it doesn't matter how good their code is. Similarly, if assign out bug fixes to someone, and t…

I think what you've described here is some sort of circular dependency on the mismatched expectations you described, and probably a failure of communication in both directions.

I could probably fit the description of the malicious person you described, but only because it wouldn't map to what my manager knows exactly how to work with, almost always defaulting to a doubling down of otherwise unnecessary tests of my competence, as defined by their uncommunicated expectations in terms of how they differ from what I'm doing and why. More specifically this seems to manifest as micromanagement. It's quite shocking to watch, it doesn't take much to set things on a bad course, and it's very difficult to recover from.

In the case of my last job, I was working remotely from the the PST timezone with people in Vietnam, Spain, and Germany where the manager was. At first I was waking up for a 6am morning meeting every day to have a little overlap with the rest of the team, but later I'd discuss it with my manager and change it to 3 days a week. I made it clear that despite being in a wildly different timezone, I'd do my best to be in attendance at the most important of the new meetings that were accumulating as the result of org change and boilerplate agile, and be available for a few hours in the morning and a few hours later at night that overlapped with other developers who needed to chat in real time with me, so I could get a block of relatively uninterrupted focus time in the evening or late afternoon. This actually worked pretty well, I kept up with responses on Jira, code reviews on Github, and delivering the features and bugfixes I committed to. I was originally hired as a contractor and then moved reluctantly to employment, which is when my boss started asking I keep core hours, which I agreed to. Things kind of kept moving along fine, but he seemed to be accumulating resentment about something, which impacted his ability to communicate respectfully. He started "checking in" during strange hours for no tangible reason, and when I didn't respond immediately, he would just keep sending more messages. Whenever I did respond, he'd seem to come up with an excuse for why he needed my attention, such as for a status update on something I'd already visibly commented on. My response was always to try and be more communicative, but surprisingly he kept getting more toxic, and more passive-aggresive, in what seemed to be an effort to remove what agency I had to get work done.

> when you try to reason through it together they jump to the most hostile action possible and weaponise your flexibility and grace against you.

All 1on1s concluded with him seemingly re-affirming his belief that frequent supervision is what he should do, ignoring anything I had to say, and this just kept compounding what almost resulted in burnout and depression.

At one point for example I had added and finished a ticket for a simple typo fix in a route, but noted that there was another ancillary issue worth looking at, not specifically related to this ticket and should be looked at independently at another time. He commented and said the ticket was incomplete until the ancillary issue was looked at, even though there were much higher priorities. So it sat paused or in-progress for some time while I finished my priority work, meanwhile he continues DMing me almost daily asking for status updates on this and other ongoing work. I eventually get around to investigating it, conclude that there's a good but undocumented and unbroken reason things were like that, and it's not something to pursue at this time, ensuring that I documented my findings thoroughly and visibly. He then assigned it to himself, realized he didn't have time to work on it, and then asked in the general slack channel if anyone would look into this, "because ___ refuses to", subsequently backing off only after I called him out on it and he wasted his time concluding exactly what I did, almost as if I'm a capable software dev

After that, he'd proceed to start moving meetings around to hours I couldn't possibly attend, cancelling 1-on-1s, and eventually I'd get laid off. Honestly it was insane and I hope he gets his head checked. The only reason I didn't burn out was because I mentally denounced his behaviour as laughably petulant and I shouldn't do anything beyond what I'm doing to appease it.

I've had other instances at other companies, and I do believe I'm the problem, but me as the problem wouldn't exist if people who had good communication skills and empathy were promoted to management. I've had 1 on 1s with spineless people approximately my age who spent the entire meeting prodding me with vague questions to try and get me to admit some pet wrongdoing, only to deny it upon being asked what they're looking for, when just stating it clearly could have helped work through the issue. Managers often avoid confrontation and resort to passive-aggresion.

Forgive the typos here, wrote it on my phone and it's a bit to review.

Edit: from his perspective, I understand that he was probably faced with home life problems and an issue of someone not conforming. So my point is that things appear wildly different depending on what your sense pf normal compliance is, especially if you have no apparent difficulties with shifting focus for example

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

#589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although you’re probably right, I think you’ve got the motivation of the pro office crowd wrong. They want folks in office because if any significant part of your team is remote then you are effectively working remote, even if you’re in an office.

Yep. Bingo. I want to interact with human beings otherwise my mental health tanks. I don't want to work remote and I even less so want to work in an empty office. If the office is empty I'm not going there because its twice as depressing.

This is basically what I said. The partially/fully remote crowd is the overwhelming majority. The only way to satisfy the minority is to submit the majority to the minorities preference. This doesn't seem altogether reasonable.

An ideal situation would be different companies with different philosophies in proportion to preference but this isn't really what's happening. You had a plethora of options during covid now you have a bunch of old people trying to force everyone back into the office.

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

#590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Bingo. I want to interact with human beings otherwise my mental health tanks. I don't want to work remote and I even less so want to work in an empty office. If the office is empty I'm not going there because its twice as depressing.

This is basically what I said. The partially/fully remote crowd is the overwhelming majority. The only way to satisfy the minority is to submit the majority to the minorities preference. This doesn't seem altogether reasonable. An ideal situation would be different companies with different philosophies in proportion to preference but this isn't really what's happening. You had a plethora of options during covid now y…

I think a good compromise is just partially remote. I 100% see the benefit of not being in the office every day. I like going in 3 times a week. My company has a policy that every person must come into the office 3 days on mode (so like, if some weeks you don't reach 3 it's okay as long as most weeks you do), and allows 2 days for people who live far away. It works really well and satisfies my desire to be in the office and see other people there. Most people seem to enjoy it.
Post reply on HN