3 ms·
Speaking as a proponent of remote work, I think the reason is that remote workers are less productive in a _non-remote enabled culture._ And by default most com
by apatters 10y ago
Speaking as a proponent of remote work, I think the reason is that remote workers are less productive in a _non-remote enabled culture._ And by default most companies are not remote enabled. They don't even understand what that means.
This is totally reasonable, as we still have very few examples of large, successful teams that are fully remote. Many of the ones we do have aren't actually companies, Linux kernel development being a good example. I don't think we yet have a single case we can point to of thousands of full-time employees working together remotely. Which means at the end of the day, enterprises still have to build or lease a huge box and stuff it full of people -- there is no well-understood alternative. They naturally end up building or leasing boxes that are nearby boxes built or leased by similar companies, and here we are.
The only real barriers to ever larger remote teams, though, are information, training and precedent. I doubt the tech industry will ever be more concentrated in a few megacities as it is today. Remote work in one form or another is on a 30 year upward trend.
- fader 10y agoDefinitely. Companies can either "allow remote work" or be "remote first". I've worked at both types. The ones who are "allow remote work" are entirely office-focused and view remote workers with suspicion. A remote worker is very unlikely to get promoted, be able to take on interesting projects or large responsibilities. And they'll be out of the loop as far as what is going on in the company. (Even at a large company with probably 15% of the workers remote, it was frequent that people would just forget to open up a conference line for company-wide announcement meetings.) On the other hand, "remote first" companies structure themselves around tools to enable remote working. So meetings happen online (via phone or web conference), project discussion or just water cooler chat happens in a messaging system like Slack or IRC, and projects are documented in a system accessible to everyone. In these environments remote workers are first class citizens and are as much a part of the company as any other. I was at a "remote first" company that grew out of the open source development world for close to 5 years. I went to a company with the "allow remote work" model and lasted barely a year before leaving for another "remote first" company. It was a painful year, but at least now I know what to look for.
- swyx 10y agowhere do you find these "remote first" companies? sites like weworkremotely.com? (am just starting out)
- fader 10y agoIt's been luck for me, honestly. The way I found my current position was by looking for who was sponsoring meetups in cities around the world in a field I was interested in. From there I found a blog post by one of the founders explaining their "remote first" mentality, and I knew I had struck gold.
- hkmurakami 10y agoYes it's more about expectstikns and standards of communication rather than "getting the work done" that gets in the way.
- tropo 10y agoAlso "no remote" of course, and then... what would you call this? I'm at a place that is heavily into IRC. Documentation goes in a mediawiki wiki. There is also video conferencing and email. You could almost call it "remote first", except... all of this is happening on a non-Internet network and nearly nobody is at home. It's separate offices connected over encrypted links. The few people at home (mostly due to health and family issues) need special hardware to get on the network, along with separate non-Internet computers.