7 ms·
Your argument seems to be that optimal/ideal office working is better than remote: "An environment where people can find meeting rooms when they need them, can
by mft_ 7y ago
Your argument seems to be that optimal/ideal office working is better than remote:
"An environment where people can find meeting rooms when they need them, can find peace and quiet when they need... and don't be a cubicle farm. Yes, if you think the alternative to remote work is an anonymous grey cubicle on the 5th floor of an anonymous office block (or just as bad, the 'trendy' exposed ducts open plan office)... I'd also recommend being somewhere with good public transport and have flexible working hours so people aren't forced into long commutes..."
Of course this ideal would be great!
But this also totally misses the point that in reality, the reason that people are often attracted to remote-working is precisely because their experience and environment fail on some or many of the ideals you list.
As such, you've not constructed an argument against remote working - just a (valid) argument against most office writing environments.
- moorhosj 7y agoWhat percentage of those remote work setups are “ideal”?
- jessemillar 7y agoI would argue that if a remote worker is dissatisfied with the physical setup of their remote office, that's on them, not the employer. Having a team that does not prioritize remote-first-style communication is another situation entirely.
- hnal943 7y agoIf the variance is tighter, it doesn't matter.
- fnord77 7y ago> the reason that people are often attracted to remote-working is precisely because their experience and environment fail on some or many of the ideals you list. Disagree. They want to live someplace that doesn't have the highly paid jobs that, say a city or tech center would have. A San Francisco salary with a Modesto cost of living. Or they want to do the digital nomad thing. Companies these days bend over backwards to make the office experience as optimal as possible.
- thinkmassive 7y ago> Companies these days bend over backwards to make the office experience as optimal as possible. I’ve worked at many companies who spent a huge budget on the office, but I was never offered my own office with a door. Anything less is far from optimal.
- mabbo 7y agoWhen I was an intern at Microsoft in 2009, I had my own office with a door. A month into the summer, a teammate (another intern) moved in to share it, but we still kept the door closed and basically stayed out of each other's way (she was pretty awesome though, wish I'd stayed in touch). Productivity was incredible. And if I got stuck, it was more worth my time to stay put a few minutes at least trying to solve it on my own than to bug anyone else. As a full time dev in one of the world's most valuable companies, I don't even have a cubical wall between me and my teammates. If anyone wants to speak, we all get interrupted. I did not know how good I had it back then.
- the_watcher 7y agoEven rooms of 4-5 people with a door would be an improvement on an open office if those environments bother you.
- ryanianian 7y ago> Companies these days bend over backwards to make the office experience as optimal as possible. The "open office" has been repeatedly studied and proven sub-optimal on many aspects that impact both employees and companies. Yet companies continue to design new offices with these designs. I would love a fully-remote gig mostly because it would be respite from the open-office.
- geggam 7y agoFully remote requires a huge amount of discipline to not end up working 16 hr days 6-7 days a week. I do agree open offices kill productivity but a blend of remote and onsite is best IMO. disclaimer : I currently travel mon - thurs to be onsite everyweek
- PopeDotNinja 7y agoI assume I'm going to have to work with remote people now. In essence, the people in an office might as well be remote. There's almost always someone working from home. And when everyone is in physically in the office, many people don't like being disturbed, so you gotta hit them up on Slack and wait for people to respond.
- sethammons 7y agoI'm a remote worker. The office I was in is as described. Fantastic place to work. I went remote because I don't want to live in a high cost city and I don't want an insane commute. I was commuting 2-3hrs each direction for years to allow myself to live in the mountains and forest but still have a good job in Orange County, CA. I've now gone fully remote and it has been fantastic for my work life balance that I'm still trying to get right.
- ibz 7y ago2-3 hours each way for years? That's pretty crazy. Depending on the road though, you probably had many moments of deep introspection by spending that much time alone in the car. And plenty of time for audiobooks / podcasts. Interesting life!
- sethammons 7y agoa fair bit was by train, and that was a tremendous help. I have consumed a whole lot of audiobooks, haha. I prefer multi-book series, where the longer each book is, the better. Plenty of 40hr+ books. I figure I went through maybe 150 such books. As part of the commute was by train, I could work or do other things there, but for driving, audiobooks all the way.