4 ms·

Though the processes like agile promote co-location of teams. I tend to agree. Co-location makes a lot of discussions much more efficient. Everybody in one room

Though the processes like agile promote co-location of teams. I tend to agree. Co-location makes a lot of discussions much more efficient. Everybody in one room still communicates faster than with remote communication tools which break up, break down, or are just harder to follow because you don't see the person(s) (even with cam). Also interruptions are much harder to follow remotely. Next, you don't get the coffee table buzz. You don't get insight in your trouble by these random meet ups with people which you don't work with daily but you still share your work with. Quite often they happen to know someone who did the same already (especially in enterprises) or can help you out. Yes, you can have too many meetings but working from home is not the only solution to fix that problem. Also, why is the part on how a home office should look like in the picture. Everybody should make their own work environment but it must be tidy? What kind of freedom is that?

rimliu 9y ago
Maybe some want to have some work done instead of endless discussions and coffee table buzz? Remote tools work very well, and what's more: you have logs, even you were not present at the time. You get a nice async mode without falling out of the loop.
- bastijn 9y ago
  The time logs were an accurate capture of what was spoken of are virtually nonexistent. Sure, it captures whatever the writer thought important but it also didn't capture all the little side talks which will save you two weeks later when you remember a person mentioning it. As I said, you can also simply decline the meetings you know. Just go to the ones that have an agenda that suits you. If there is no agenda, don't go. If you work from home to escape meetings it is definitely not worth it. I'm convinced remote meetings are a downside of the remote working, not one of its pros. It has pros, like no commute. But when the commute is only 15-20 minutes I'd say it pays off to have your workers in one spot. Just don't set any expected hours. If a person wants to leave at 2pm don't ask questions. He obviously has something to do. Groceries, doctors appointment, exercise, having a beer in the garden; it shouldn't matter.

rimliu 9y ago

Maybe some want to have some work done instead of endless discussions and coffee table buzz? Remote tools work very well, and what's more: you have logs, even you were not present at the time. You get a nice async mode without falling out of the loop.

bastijn 9y ago
The time logs were an accurate capture of what was spoken of are virtually nonexistent. Sure, it captures whatever the writer thought important but it also didn't capture all the little side talks which will save you two weeks later when you remember a person mentioning it. As I said, you can also simply decline the meetings you know. Just go to the ones that have an agenda that suits you. If there is no agenda, don't go. If you work from home to escape meetings it is definitely not worth it. I'm convinced remote meetings are a downside of the remote working, not one of its pros. It has pros, like no commute. But when the commute is only 15-20 minutes I'd say it pays off to have your workers in one spot. Just don't set any expected hours. If a person wants to leave at 2pm don't ask questions. He obviously has something to do. Groceries, doctors appointment, exercise, having a beer in the garden; it shouldn't matter.