61–70 of 341 posts
Study finds that 34% of humans are strongly introverted.
This implies that your entire social life exists at your occupation which is the most depressing thing I've ever heard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Conversely, if an employer isn't willing to let employees do a job remotely after having had a year to see that they're perfectly capable of doing so, they clearly have no attachment to their employees.
Or, perhaps they had a year to clearly see they're perfectly incapable of doing so. Not every office job is software engineering folks... Imagine trying to manage a warehouse remotely... or bounce ideas off each other in real time at a marketing agency... or any of the other normal jobs that thrive with in-person interaction. Not to mention, 34% is a minority... we can't force the other 66% to work remotely just beca…
Also, I think the assumption that it only applies to jobs that can be done well from home is pretty much baked in already, otherwise it would be quite nonsensical to even ask.
And the phrase "full time" is also important. I very highly value the increased free time and reduced costs I've experienced over the last year, but do miss in-person meetings, casual proximity to colleagues, and social events. The ideal for me would be to work from home 2 or 3 days a week, and I'd favour that quite strongly in career decisions compared to either extreme. I doubt I'm alone in that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed on it being PM/Communications problems. Definitely easier in the office though. Another thing is that it's often harder to write your question/problem in text as a message, when in verbal communication it's a lot easier (personally, YMMV). But having to organise calls to get that verbal communication is a pain.
I would agree that sometimes a call or videoconf is necessary (which should be scheduled for only as much time is as absolutely necessary and the output of the meeting well documented), but it's good to flex the remote/async muscle to encourage communications best practices across an org. Communicating is a critical skill. A lot of folks are used to being lazy intra communications in an org, and imho, that shouldn't…
Maybe a drop-in thing could work, like Clubhouse. But then that's kinda invading your privacy if you have to stay on that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What used to be swivel in your chair and ask a colleague or going to whoever you need to speak to is now But your need for an instant answer often derails my work flow. I can get a lot more done now that I am not being interrupted as frequently and can address questions once I have wrapped up what I am doing or at least have time to write down where specifically I stopped.
Just asking this as a talking point. Does a quick interruption that unblocks me and allows me to continue working outweigh allowing you to finish your thing first? Because maybe you're unblocked but I'm blocked by you now, and the thing that's actually blocking me. So only 1 person is able to work.
In the first case, it does seem a lot more reasonable to interrupt and trade-off the productivity of the blocker in favor of the blockee. At worst, that's an even trade and at best it incentivizes not being a blocker.
In the second case, I'd rather not create a distributed denial of concentration scenario for SWEs who are rarely stuck to optimize for those who are more frequently stuck.
Study finds that 34% of humans are strongly introverted.
Eh, I'm not so sure it's just an intro/extro kind of thing. I and most of those quizzes (for whatever those are worth!) label me as an ambivert (an extroverted introvert- I'm good with people and excel at socializing, but it wears me out) and I'd still love to be remote for the rest of my life.
Goodbye, open office plans. Goodbye, coworkers that don't shower, play music without headphones, and eat tuna melts at their desks. Goodbye, two hour daily commute. Goodbye, wearing pants during meetings.
Okay, that last one was a poor attempt at humor, but I'd say the other three reasons are valid and not really related to introversion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or, perhaps they had a year to clearly see they're perfectly incapable of doing so. Not every office job is software engineering folks... Imagine trying to manage a warehouse remotely... or bounce ideas off each other in real time at a marketing agency... or any of the other normal jobs that thrive with in-person interaction. Not to mention, 34% is a minority... we can't force the other 66% to work remotely just beca…
It's hard enough in software engineering IMHO. What used to be swivel in your chair and ask a colleague or going to whoever you need to speak to is now * Send a Slack message/email and wait an arbitrary amount of time for a response. * Organise a Skype/Teams/whatever call in a few hours time and feel guilty about it, as it feels rude to just ring someone as they could be occupied or busy. I spend a stupid amount of t…
I don't believe it. I do believe that 34% of polled workers said they would quit rather than return to the office, but I do not believe even a majority of them would actually go follow through on that threat. Especially if you filter out high paid/high job-security developers and similar people who might have the financial security to do so. People, particularly Americans, are shackled to their jobs for many reasons…
Well yes, but if you dig down to what the authors of the study said: "1 in 3 professionals currently working from home would look for a new job if required to return to the office." They're not saying 34% of workers are going to quit instead of returning to the office, just that they will consider it. https://www.roberthalf.com/blog/management-tips/returning-to...
Executive leadership is now eating their hat and holding a town hall next week to talk about reversing that decision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or, perhaps they had a year to clearly see they're perfectly incapable of doing so. Not every office job is software engineering folks... Imagine trying to manage a warehouse remotely... or bounce ideas off each other in real time at a marketing agency... or any of the other normal jobs that thrive with in-person interaction. Not to mention, 34% is a minority... we can't force the other 66% to work remotely just beca…
In a similar vain of logic, 34% is a non-trivial portion. Why should a non-trivial portion be forced to work in an office just because another non-trivial portion wants to?