3 ms·
We absolutely should not be measuring WFH productivity right now. There are way too many variables to consider at this point. Because it's new for a lot of peop
by jscheel 6y ago
We absolutely should not be measuring WFH productivity right now. There are way too many variables to consider at this point. Because it's new for a lot of people, and because of the lockdowns, there seem to be a lot of issues with overwork. I absolutely love WFH, and I've been doing for quite a long time, but I feel pretty confident that we are going to see a bunch of companies claim to go fully WFH, and they backpedal in a year or two. Hopefully not, but if the expectations are wrong, these companies are settings themselves up for failure from the start.
- cableshaft 6y agoJust anecdata, but I've been doing full WFH for my company for the past 2.5 years. If anything my productivity has gone down because of the stress of the pandemic, not up because of more hours (which I worked more hours WFH before the pandemic also).
- Exmoor 6y agoI think you can make really strong arguments for productivity both being higher than normal times (due to overwork, less options for non-work activities, etc.) and lower than normal (due to additional childcare responsibilities, overall stress level, etc.). I think both make a good case for the OP's point that the current situation is not indicative of what we'll be able to sustain long-term, both good and bad. Personally, I think the biggest thing my team discovered was how much of our work was actually able to be done remotely. We were all averaging roughly one day a week work from home, but I expect to be more like 2-3 long-term.