3 ms·

It's simple, if they are not productive, then you tell them they need to be more productive. If they continue to be, you put them on probation as per the standa

It's simple, if they are not productive, then you tell them they need to be more productive. If they continue to be, you put them on probation as per the standards, and they will have to come into the office. This isn't nuclear fusion. If this is difficult for a manager they shouldn't be a manager.

EpicEng 9y ago
Have you ever been a manager? Do you really think dealing with people, all of whom have different strengths and weaknesses, is this simple? Do you appreciate that putting someone on a PIP may very well lead to them quitting? Maybe they don't work well from home, but you still need them. Hiring has overhead, causes some amount of friction and (hopefully) short term loss of productivity as you ramp them up (bigger problem for small teams). >This isn't nuclear fusion. If this is difficult for a manager they shouldn't be a manager. That's what makes me think you don't actually have any experience here. That... or you've just been blessed with more luck in your management endeavours than I have (or maybe I am just bad, certainly a possibility.)
- ntsplnkv2 9y ago
  Don't put them on probation. Just simply ask them to work in the office because they are not meeting deliverables. Ahh, so I must never have done it, if I offer a different experience. I've managed teams before-with a mix of remote and onsite. And trust me-it is not that difficult, for competent managers. Managers are too often afraid to lead. The peter principle is very true. The fact is not offering WFH causes many people to move on as well. I've lost many team members to it. Just as low pay does. People leave. This is the new reality. Businesses want to disrupt but don't want to be disrupted. They want to commoditize workers-not be commoditized themselves. My problem is to ensure my team's success, and my team knows what their deliverable are by their deadlines. If you don't do anything for 20 days and finish it on 21 because it's easy? Fine by me. Just get it done.

EpicEng 9y ago

Have you ever been a manager? Do you really think dealing with people, all of whom have different strengths and weaknesses, is this simple? Do you appreciate that putting someone on a PIP may very well lead to them quitting? Maybe they don't work well from home, but you still need them. Hiring has overhead, causes some amount of friction and (hopefully) short term loss of productivity as you ramp them up (bigger problem for small teams). >This isn't nuclear fusion. If this is difficult for a manager they shouldn't be a manager. That's what makes me think you don't actually have any experience here. That... or you've just been blessed with more luck in your management endeavours than I have (or maybe I am just bad, certainly a possibility.)

ntsplnkv2 9y ago
Don't put them on probation. Just simply ask them to work in the office because they are not meeting deliverables. Ahh, so I must never have done it, if I offer a different experience. I've managed teams before-with a mix of remote and onsite. And trust me-it is not that difficult, for competent managers. Managers are too often afraid to lead. The peter principle is very true. The fact is not offering WFH causes many people to move on as well. I've lost many team members to it. Just as low pay does. People leave. This is the new reality. Businesses want to disrupt but don't want to be disrupted. They want to commoditize workers-not be commoditized themselves. My problem is to ensure my team's success, and my team knows what their deliverable are by their deadlines. If you don't do anything for 20 days and finish it on 21 because it's easy? Fine by me. Just get it done.