4 ms·

> it's easier to schedule and conduct meetings, there are far fewer slackers, etc. That's a lot less a problem with telecommuting work and a lot more a problem

> it's easier to schedule and conduct meetings, there are far fewer slackers, etc. That's a lot less a problem with telecommuting work and a lot more a problem with your company not being able to hire effectively. If employees are incapable of being responsive, or even productive, without someone over their shoulder, I'm really not seeing where that is any issue but one of personal responsibility/capability, and if that's a question mark in enough employees to render a telecommute policy ineffective, I have to wonder how these people make it through the door.

jandrese 9y ago
Even if your company was able to hire only people who work well from home, all of those other people have to work somewhere. Plus, how is a recruiter supposed to measure someone's productivity at home?
- Tehchops 9y ago
  > Even if your company was able to hire only people who work well from home, all of those other people have to work somewhere. Well sure. I don't think going completely decentralized is something most larger orgs can embrace yet. But there's no reason that some engineering staff could not perform their work remotely. If on-site staff complain it hampers their productivity, then I ask why productivity is predicated on the "drive-by" model of engagement, which is universally disruptive to programming flow. Most companies are paying for a combination of Slack/HipChat and WebEx/Zoom/Bluejeans, and you should make use of them liberally. > Plus, how is a recruiter supposed to measure someone's productivity at home? They're not. Their job is to ingress a pool of potentially suitable candidates into the hiring process based on experience, acumen, and career interests. The job of determining productivity, and ultimately fit into the environment, is up to the hiring manager/s and the interview process. If you're already conceding that you can't determine whether an employee will be a productive contributor in their potential employment environment, remote or otherwise, that's a problem with your hiring process.

jandrese 9y ago

Even if your company was able to hire only people who work well from home, all of those other people have to work somewhere. Plus, how is a recruiter supposed to measure someone's productivity at home?

Tehchops 9y ago
> Even if your company was able to hire only people who work well from home, all of those other people have to work somewhere. Well sure. I don't think going completely decentralized is something most larger orgs can embrace yet. But there's no reason that some engineering staff could not perform their work remotely. If on-site staff complain it hampers their productivity, then I ask why productivity is predicated on the "drive-by" model of engagement, which is universally disruptive to programming flow. Most companies are paying for a combination of Slack/HipChat and WebEx/Zoom/Bluejeans, and you should make use of them liberally. > Plus, how is a recruiter supposed to measure someone's productivity at home? They're not. Their job is to ingress a pool of potentially suitable candidates into the hiring process based on experience, acumen, and career interests. The job of determining productivity, and ultimately fit into the environment, is up to the hiring manager/s and the interview process. If you're already conceding that you can't determine whether an employee will be a productive contributor in their potential employment environment, remote or otherwise, that's a problem with your hiring process.