Maybe they don’t even want to rely on Microsoft Teams internally anymore…
[deleted]
Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
61–70 of 969 posts
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#62Terrible. Especially given that the Seattle area has terrible traffic and also issues with safety on public transportation (like many other cities in America). What is the point exactly of getting workers into an office just so they can be on Zoom calls (or Teams, in this case)? This seems a lot like what Amazon was accused of - a way to shake out some workers and get them to quit when they cannot rearrange their lif…
I worked at Microsoft pre and post-pandemic. Microsoft has an extensive shuttle network, but the public transit (Sound Transit) to the office was nicer in many ways. It ran more frequently and the seats reclined!
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a more nuanced take here. For low performing or junior employees, remote work was generally a terrible thing that led to less productivity (and more managerial overhead). For strongly performing employees with obligations at home, there were many who preferred working at home. I fall more into the latter camp (at least I hope so) and, given I've only worked in nice offices with catered lunches, gyms, video gam…
Remote work used to be an earned privilege. Then COVID hit and everyone got a taste of it. Including the folks who discovered they could get paid to stay home and play video games and jackin' off during work hours. In a way you could say this group ruined it for everyone. But that's usually how these things go. The hammer comes down on everyone because otherwise it leads to uncomfortable questions like "why does HE g…
If you talk to a teacher the rule of thumb is that 2 problem children in a classroom of 25-30 can be handled, but 3 ruins the whole class.
Seems like a similar situation here.
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#64It mentions this was based on some “data” (in emailsto employees) that it will yield better output but I somehow doubt it. I wonder what happens with the stock. It sort of makes it worse for the teams that are distributed and harms collab between sites in different zones like Europe/Asia and US/Europe. When you are working from home it is easy to stay later or start earlier and join calls. If you are in the office th…
It’s a common thing here on HN to believe that remote is superior for productivity, and I’m always reminded of Richard Hammond’s observations about open door vs closed door coworkers. He noticed over time that the closed door workers were more productive. He also noticed that the closed door workers were less impactful in their fields years later. His were observations in R&D settings, but I suspect they can be extrapolated. People who are interrupted get less done. This seems largely indisputable, but what is the other takeaway? People who don’t interract with peers don’t course correct enough, seems to be solid advice based on what we know about the OODA loop. People who don’t interact with coworkers don’t get enough time saving advice? I know I’ve saved lots of effort by having coworkers who know things I didn’t about related problems.
What complicated things, is return to work will cause all the best to rethink their employment. I’ve seen HBR surveys that suggest the top talent is ending up places that allow them to stay remote. I think this leaves businesses in a tight place. I have every reason to believe that companies with lots of employee interactions have better acceleration/trajetory than fully remote, but it’s a big hit to lose top talent. And remote may have so much velocity from gaining this talent that they don’t care about the acceleration tradeoff.
Further, concentration of talent in a region also cannot be discounted. Certain things can’t happen without the exchange of ideas (partly why I think cities/counties should ban non competes). I don’t know how much a given company can control this concentration of talent, but I know that Seattle wouldn’t be what it is without Boeing, and then Microsoft attracting very smart people.
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. I've been remote for 5 years across three different companies, and if anything I've had the opposite experience: my remote coworkers are far more responsive than my on-site coworkers, who are always in meetings, in transit, having in-person chit chat, or taking a break.
>> my remote coworkers are far more responsive than my on-site coworkers, who are always in meetings, in transit, having in-person chit chat, or taking a break. 1. In meetings - working 2. In transit - before and after working hours 3. Having in person chit-chat - working 4. Taking a break - remote workers should also take these >> I've had the opposite experience I think it depends on the type of people you're worki…
> 3. Having in person chit-chat - working
Having done years in both settings, random non-work related discussions were always more prevalent in office type atmospheres.
Only semi-related but in office at a cubicle is the least productive environment I've ever seen for companies. I cannot personally take a leadership team serious if they care about productivity & fiscal responsibility when they have cubicle farms of more than 10 people in an area.
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#66Commute time should be salaried time. Then the whole office/home work discussion could be taken with the true costs involved.
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#67AKA - Microsoft is trying to layoff employees without getting more bad layoff press while they make record earnings.
A company where most employees work digitally with people across the world is requiring people to sit at a desk in a physical location. The irony is blinding & shows an utter lack of transparency by leadership.
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#68I have mixed feelings cause on one hand moving from a remote first company to a primarily in person one has made a material difference in my general satisfaction and engagement. But also I wouldn’t want it to be forced. I like having the choice to work remote. And I like having coworkers who can work remote if they wish. I know many great engineers who live outside of the standard tech hubs and realistically won’t mo…
I don't think this is what you're saying but when I've seen debates over choice the pattern I've sen is:
1) The people who feel more engaged at home can stay home, those who feel more engaged at work can go there 2) The latter group fails to feel engaged at work due to everyone being home. They complain.
In other words, they weren't missing being in the office. They were missing being in the office *with others*. Which requires everyone else to either want to work in the office.
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#69> We’ve looked at how our teams work best, and the data is clear: when people work together in person more often, they thrive — they are more energized, empowered, and they deliver stronger results.
Ah the data is clear, without reference to the data collected or metrics used.
Re: Microsoft is officially sending employees back to the office
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> my remote coworkers are far more responsive than my on-site coworkers, who are always in meetings, in transit, having in-person chit chat, or taking a break. 1. In meetings - working 2. In transit - before and after working hours 3. Having in person chit-chat - working 4. Taking a break - remote workers should also take these >> I've had the opposite experience I think it depends on the type of people you're worki…
> 3. Having in person chit-chat - working Having done years in both settings, random non-work related discussions were always more prevalent in office type atmospheres. Only semi-related but in office at a cubicle is the least productive environment I've ever seen for companies. I cannot personally take a leadership team serious if they care about productivity & fiscal responsibility when they have cubicle farms of m…
> Having done years in both settings, random non-work related discussions were always more prevalent in office type atmospheres.
Whether you realize it or not, these are team-building exercises. It brings people closer, sometimes too close (I slept with one of them lol), but overall this is a net plus for team dynamics.
It's really hard to bond with people exclusively through chat. Especially if you hide behind an anime avatar or refuse to switch on your video.