6 ms·

Did anyone struggle with converting to remote work themselves? Or was everyone already comfortable with it?

tjr225 7y ago
I've found almost everyone struggles converting to remote work and empathized a lot with my colleagues as we on boarded together. Some of them didn't like it and went back to Amazon or Google or some other startup. My advice if you're starting a remote job for the first time- give it a chance even if goals and communication seem unclear at first. You have to develop an entirely new way of communicating and it is hard.
- muratk 7y ago
  Did they prefer the huge company because of perks/salaries/tech, or actually because of being office-based? If remote, what was their #1 issue?
  - bostik 7y ago
    As someone who did 7 years remote-only, I have gathered some insights. 1: Synchronisation of effort for a team is absolutely crucial. 2: The top priority is for the teams to communicate amongst themselves fluently, and feel comfortable to communicate with practically anyone at the company at large. 3: If you don't live in a tech hub or a large city (which, to be honest, are mostly the same things), the life as a remote-only can get really lonely. 4: In a profession with a pretty big fraction of existentialists, learning to keep office hours and being able to turn off from work mode is essential for long-term stability. 5: You need a separate workspace for an office. I learned this the hard way. The ability to walk away from work after the day is important. And you really should have a separate computer for work, so you don't even accidentally look up the work stuff outside of office hours. 6: Everyone needs hobbies. If a person lives their life through their screen, it is very unlikely that they are suitable for long-term remote-only work. If you're a manager at an office, you usually want to know what makes your team members tick. If you're a non-junior at a remote-only company, it is absolutely essential that you learn what makes your team mates tick. 7: Teams need to meet up in person frequently. A day or two every 3-4 weeks is good. Several days at least twice a year is essential. Because there are no watercooler or office corridor moments, the company needs to provide an environment where something like this can take root spontaneously. 8: Meta-review for code review can be surprisingly helpful, even after the onboarding. The truth is, not everyone is cut out for remote work. Because long-term mental health depends on being able to turn off and walk away, you are automatically selecting for wealthier individuals. I know this sounds really harsh, but it's true. A person who can afford the space for a dedicated office for their working hours is several times more likely to stay around and grow into a bigger role in the company. A person whose hobbies involve physical activity and getting out of their house is far more likely to be a good remote-only employee than someone who at the end of the day switches from emails and code to computer games and Netflix. Loneliness and detachment are the biggest problems, at least in my experience.
    - muratk 7y ago
      Hm, some of those points I've experienced, too, or make sense to me. 3: You mean “professionally lonely” as not physically meeting enough other, say, devs? Why can't you get your tech interactions online and satisfy your need to meet people with non-tech people? That would remove the requirement for a tech hub. 8: That isn't specific to remote? I very much agree that remote work isn't for everyone. But then, nothing is. Not even mango float, and that's a _fantastic_ dessert. I don't agree with your reasoning, though. Many people are in horrible office-type jobs and their sanity would depend on them walking away. They don't, often for the same reason. Wealth helps because it gives freedom, but this isn't specific to remote. Also, depending on what you define as remote work. In a not-so-rich country, remote work helps people in more remote and hence usually poorer regions get jobs. Yes, those aren't always great jobs—but they're in line with qualifications, and they do enable people to live better lives.
      - bostik 7y ago
        For number 3, I mean lonely in general. I've experienced it myself and witnessed a number of good people get burned. As engineers, makers, tinkerers and creators, we tend to find our social networks among like-minded folk. When I was remote, I was living in a smaller town, where not much happened. There were a number of IT employers, but nothing particularly interesting. So I didn't have much "professionally aligned" groups to hang out with. Working from home also allowed to skip trivial outdoorsy stuff, and the weather being inhospitable for >6 months a year didn't help. At the office we meet like-minded people all the time. Those at the company who lived in large cities (3 in the entire country that qualify) could meet in person outside of company activities, and they had groups of other makers to socialise with. Where you have a tech scene, you tend to have lots of nicely aligned activities. Living in a more distant location, you're alone. As for number 8, you're of course right. It's not specific to remote, but I've found that at an office environment talking about some tricky problem that has surfaced during code review happens automatically, and discussing wider aspects of the code review in general tends to be part of workflow/tooling. Yes, I do review code review at the office but it's not essential. (Important, sure.) But when your communication channels are not in-person, going over code review as matter of course becomes critical. Not being able to walk over and chat about engineering practices is something you will only miss once you've seen both sides for long enough. The selection for wealth? Here I'm talking about jobs that require deep concentration. Tech is notorious for our constant search for the flow state. Interruptions and bad ergonomics can be devastating. But more than that, in order to remain mentally stable at a remote-only job for a long time, you need to be able to respect office hours and have a clear way to cut yourself off of the work environment. If your work machine is the same as your personal use machine, those lines can get awfully hazy. Not good for mental wellbeing in the long run.
mmastrac 7y ago
I found that almost everyone quickly got used to working remotely - at least within the first few months. We hired more on the senior end, so that might also be a factor. Managing performance and setting expectations is probably a little more important than in-office work. Learning how to "yield the floor" for more extroverted team members and how to find a quiet moment to pop in for more introverted members is something that remote workers _need_ to learn quickly. Offering remote employees a stipend for a co-working space is something we do today at FullStory. Some of my team members choose to make use of that to get more socialization. Others will just occasionally work from coffee shops. I think that managers are the ones who struggle most in the conversion - you need to trust that people are getting work done and that can be difficult.
- numbsafari 7y ago
  The stipend for co-working is a good one. In general, if you are hiring remote, it’s good to plan to do things like this, plus have stipends for office supplies / equipment (buy people a nice chair and/or standing desk, send them good headphones). Replace the “free lunch and beer” budget with things like that. It helps with retention and a sense of belonging and team identity... eg, if you send a “branded gift box” with AirPods Pro to each team member unannounced, they’ll probably really appreciate that, plus you can toss in some swag, like a branded case or bag, t-shirts. Just because folks are remote doesn’t mean you should treat them any less like an employee. Retention is key.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    Agreed. It’s a nice touch to receive swag as remote worker. At my company they often forget the remote people with stuff like this. But most people are onsite and only a few are remote.
    - dvtrn 7y ago
      At my company they often forget the remote people with stuff like this. This is my biggest fear having recently been asked to make a few infrastructure changes to allow remote workers. My company is beginning to allow support staff to work and connect to key systems remotely, and while I can’t say how effective the individual workers will be, after a few years here (and soon about to depart) I have to place a vote of no confidence in my leadership to actually put any meaningful weight behind their words of “we are now supporting remote workers”. the reality is they’re now allowing remote workers in a part of the company that sees the most attrition, has the lowest promotion numbers and historically has not received near the same treatment as other departments. I don’t have confidence they’ll be well supported judging from how other remote teams are “supported”, mine included.
nickbauman 7y ago
Currently managing an all remote team. All senior devs and a fantastic product manager, QA and analyst; all people I've known for more than a decade. I honestly don't know how I would do this with junior devs. Not their fault; my fault. The only problem was my father died while I was visiting relatives in France in December and it really threw people on the team off what they were supposed to be doing heading into the holidays. I was focusing on how to store a dead body from across the ocean for about a week. My takeaway: uncertainly can knock you for a loop in an expensive, subtle and quick way. Work to eliminate uncertainly for your team and if they're good, they will be happy and healthy.
- mmastrac 7y ago
  > I honestly don't know how I would do this with junior devs. Not their fault; my fault. Ditto. I'm still pondering how working with junior folks might work. In-office teams _may_ be able to absorb and level-up more junior people. Would love to spitball ideas on this with anyone else interested in that topic.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    That’s a good point. All my remote experiences have been with pretty experienced and self sufficient people. I would think that bigger remote companies like basecamp or Gitlab or Automattic have experience with onboarding junior people. Or maybe they also hire only experienced people.
    - nickbauman 7y ago
      I know a bit about basecamp's hiring from a few years back through a friend of an employee. They have a lot of trouble getting people hired. Mostly because they seem to have a unicorn list of things each hire has to come in the door with.
    - jeanduplessis 7y ago
      I’m a hiring manager at GitLab and we currently don't hire junior engineers: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/career-development/#junior-engineers https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/career-develop... That said we are trying to bring in more junior engineers via our internship program: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/internships/ https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/internships/ If our internship pilot is successful we hope that this will be a feasible way to bring in more junior engineers.

I've found almost everyone struggles converting to remote work and empathized a lot with my colleagues as we on boarded together. Some of them didn't like it and went back to Amazon or Google or some other startup. My advice if you're starting a remote job for the first time- give it a chance even if goals and communication seem unclear at first. You have to develop an entirely new way of communicating and it is hard.

muratk 7y ago
Did they prefer the huge company because of perks/salaries/tech, or actually because of being office-based? If remote, what was their #1 issue?
- bostik 7y ago
  As someone who did 7 years remote-only, I have gathered some insights. 1: Synchronisation of effort for a team is absolutely crucial. 2: The top priority is for the teams to communicate amongst themselves fluently, and feel comfortable to communicate with practically anyone at the company at large. 3: If you don't live in a tech hub or a large city (which, to be honest, are mostly the same things), the life as a remote-only can get really lonely. 4: In a profession with a pretty big fraction of existentialists, learning to keep office hours and being able to turn off from work mode is essential for long-term stability. 5: You need a separate workspace for an office. I learned this the hard way. The ability to walk away from work after the day is important. And you really should have a separate computer for work, so you don't even accidentally look up the work stuff outside of office hours. 6: Everyone needs hobbies. If a person lives their life through their screen, it is very unlikely that they are suitable for long-term remote-only work. If you're a manager at an office, you usually want to know what makes your team members tick. If you're a non-junior at a remote-only company, it is absolutely essential that you learn what makes your team mates tick. 7: Teams need to meet up in person frequently. A day or two every 3-4 weeks is good. Several days at least twice a year is essential. Because there are no watercooler or office corridor moments, the company needs to provide an environment where something like this can take root spontaneously. 8: Meta-review for code review can be surprisingly helpful, even after the onboarding. The truth is, not everyone is cut out for remote work. Because long-term mental health depends on being able to turn off and walk away, you are automatically selecting for wealthier individuals. I know this sounds really harsh, but it's true. A person who can afford the space for a dedicated office for their working hours is several times more likely to stay around and grow into a bigger role in the company. A person whose hobbies involve physical activity and getting out of their house is far more likely to be a good remote-only employee than someone who at the end of the day switches from emails and code to computer games and Netflix. Loneliness and detachment are the biggest problems, at least in my experience.
  - muratk 7y ago
    Hm, some of those points I've experienced, too, or make sense to me. 3: You mean “professionally lonely” as not physically meeting enough other, say, devs? Why can't you get your tech interactions online and satisfy your need to meet people with non-tech people? That would remove the requirement for a tech hub. 8: That isn't specific to remote? I very much agree that remote work isn't for everyone. But then, nothing is. Not even mango float, and that's a _fantastic_ dessert. I don't agree with your reasoning, though. Many people are in horrible office-type jobs and their sanity would depend on them walking away. They don't, often for the same reason. Wealth helps because it gives freedom, but this isn't specific to remote. Also, depending on what you define as remote work. In a not-so-rich country, remote work helps people in more remote and hence usually poorer regions get jobs. Yes, those aren't always great jobs—but they're in line with qualifications, and they do enable people to live better lives.
    - bostik 7y ago
      For number 3, I mean lonely in general. I've experienced it myself and witnessed a number of good people get burned. As engineers, makers, tinkerers and creators, we tend to find our social networks among like-minded folk. When I was remote, I was living in a smaller town, where not much happened. There were a number of IT employers, but nothing particularly interesting. So I didn't have much "professionally aligned" groups to hang out with. Working from home also allowed to skip trivial outdoorsy stuff, and the weather being inhospitable for >6 months a year didn't help. At the office we meet like-minded people all the time. Those at the company who lived in large cities (3 in the entire country that qualify) could meet in person outside of company activities, and they had groups of other makers to socialise with. Where you have a tech scene, you tend to have lots of nicely aligned activities. Living in a more distant location, you're alone. As for number 8, you're of course right. It's not specific to remote, but I've found that at an office environment talking about some tricky problem that has surfaced during code review happens automatically, and discussing wider aspects of the code review in general tends to be part of workflow/tooling. Yes, I do review code review at the office but it's not essential. (Important, sure.) But when your communication channels are not in-person, going over code review as matter of course becomes critical. Not being able to walk over and chat about engineering practices is something you will only miss once you've seen both sides for long enough. The selection for wealth? Here I'm talking about jobs that require deep concentration. Tech is notorious for our constant search for the flow state. Interruptions and bad ergonomics can be devastating. But more than that, in order to remain mentally stable at a remote-only job for a long time, you need to be able to respect office hours and have a clear way to cut yourself off of the work environment. If your work machine is the same as your personal use machine, those lines can get awfully hazy. Not good for mental wellbeing in the long run.

mmastrac 7y ago

I found that almost everyone quickly got used to working remotely - at least within the first few months. We hired more on the senior end, so that might also be a factor. Managing performance and setting expectations is probably a little more important than in-office work. Learning how to "yield the floor" for more extroverted team members and how to find a quiet moment to pop in for more introverted members is something that remote workers _need_ to learn quickly. Offering remote employees a stipend for a co-working space is something we do today at FullStory. Some of my team members choose to make use of that to get more socialization. Others will just occasionally work from coffee shops. I think that managers are the ones who struggle most in the conversion - you need to trust that people are getting work done and that can be difficult.

numbsafari 7y ago
The stipend for co-working is a good one. In general, if you are hiring remote, it’s good to plan to do things like this, plus have stipends for office supplies / equipment (buy people a nice chair and/or standing desk, send them good headphones). Replace the “free lunch and beer” budget with things like that. It helps with retention and a sense of belonging and team identity... eg, if you send a “branded gift box” with AirPods Pro to each team member unannounced, they’ll probably really appreciate that, plus you can toss in some swag, like a branded case or bag, t-shirts. Just because folks are remote doesn’t mean you should treat them any less like an employee. Retention is key.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  Agreed. It’s a nice touch to receive swag as remote worker. At my company they often forget the remote people with stuff like this. But most people are onsite and only a few are remote.
  - dvtrn 7y ago
    At my company they often forget the remote people with stuff like this. This is my biggest fear having recently been asked to make a few infrastructure changes to allow remote workers. My company is beginning to allow support staff to work and connect to key systems remotely, and while I can’t say how effective the individual workers will be, after a few years here (and soon about to depart) I have to place a vote of no confidence in my leadership to actually put any meaningful weight behind their words of “we are now supporting remote workers”. the reality is they’re now allowing remote workers in a part of the company that sees the most attrition, has the lowest promotion numbers and historically has not received near the same treatment as other departments. I don’t have confidence they’ll be well supported judging from how other remote teams are “supported”, mine included.

nickbauman 7y ago

Currently managing an all remote team. All senior devs and a fantastic product manager, QA and analyst; all people I've known for more than a decade. I honestly don't know how I would do this with junior devs. Not their fault; my fault. The only problem was my father died while I was visiting relatives in France in December and it really threw people on the team off what they were supposed to be doing heading into the holidays. I was focusing on how to store a dead body from across the ocean for about a week. My takeaway: uncertainly can knock you for a loop in an expensive, subtle and quick way. Work to eliminate uncertainly for your team and if they're good, they will be happy and healthy.

mmastrac 7y ago
> I honestly don't know how I would do this with junior devs. Not their fault; my fault. Ditto. I'm still pondering how working with junior folks might work. In-office teams _may_ be able to absorb and level-up more junior people. Would love to spitball ideas on this with anyone else interested in that topic.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  That’s a good point. All my remote experiences have been with pretty experienced and self sufficient people. I would think that bigger remote companies like basecamp or Gitlab or Automattic have experience with onboarding junior people. Or maybe they also hire only experienced people.
  - nickbauman 7y ago
    I know a bit about basecamp's hiring from a few years back through a friend of an employee. They have a lot of trouble getting people hired. Mostly because they seem to have a unicorn list of things each hire has to come in the door with.
  - jeanduplessis 7y ago
    I’m a hiring manager at GitLab and we currently don't hire junior engineers: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/career-development/#junior-engineers https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/career-develop... That said we are trying to bring in more junior engineers via our internship program: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/internships/ https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/internships/ If our internship pilot is successful we hope that this will be a feasible way to bring in more junior engineers.