6 ms·

A friend and I who have known each other for decades say we manage to stay friends because we only see each other a couple of times a year. Why burden business

A friend and I who have known each other for decades say we manage to stay friends because we only see each other a couple of times a year. Why burden business relationships with forced several hours /week physical presence and face time when nobody would impose that on a customer or a vendor, and lockdowns have shown that even (especially) marriages aren't designed for people to be stuck together that long. The only other situation you spend that amount of time with someone is a cellmate in prison, and the inevitable and necessary conseqeunce is micro-power struggles over the least significant things because in spending that much time together, you literally exhaust every other way to relate. Show me someone who loves office life and being around people who are forced to be together, and I will show you someone with a perverse addiction to confict. When extroversion becomes immoderate, they become masochists who crave attention and interpersonal intensity. As a result, whenever someone tells me they are a "people person," I give them a wide berth because I remember the advice I was given as a young boy which was, "you are what you eat." I can't imagine re-adapting to something so insane as an office ever again.

throwawayboise 5y ago
I think it can be healty to maintain a strict "home is home" and "work is work" separation. Home is then a place of escape/relaxation/recharging where work does not interfere. Some people can manage that separation with a home office. Others prefer a physically separate workplace. For me, I didn't think I would like WFH. When forced over the last year, it was better than expected. Certainly not having a commute was nice, not having to "dress up" for work was nice, but both my productivity and the amount of direction on tasks/priorities fell off a cliff. Interruptions were about the same, but when they come from spouse/kids (especially spouse) they are harder to deflect.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- masterof0 5y ago
  Exactly, some people can't afford to have a office room, and just shut the doors closed until 5PM.
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  > Home is then a place of escape/relaxation/recharging where work does not interfere. Or the other way around. That's the rarely stated but arguably common case, particularly for middle-age people: office is a place of escape/relaxation/recharging where your spouse and your little children and/or your inlaws don't interfere. I love my WFH, I have it worked out with my wife and our family, and I don't want to ever have to work in an office on a regular basis - but I do understand this point. Parenting is hard. Marriage is hard - and COVID in particular threw a lot of people into uncharted territory. Despite all the romantic ideals and the condescending opinions of some people, modern marriage in western world is designed around partners spending significant time apart. Our current pandemic suddenly forced every couple to live a lifestyle most don't experience until retirement. Few were ready for this.
blastro 5y ago
Beautifully expressed post, I just wanted to let you know I appreciate your writing style and what you've written resonates deeply with my experience as well.
Salgat 5y ago
I think part of it is also that some people create a dependence on forced social interaction to address their own loneliness, instead of developing healthy friendships outside the workplace.
- iamstupidsimple 5y ago
  Easier said than done in today's world, unfortunately.
  - Salgat 5y ago
    While true, that's to blame on COVID, not WFH.
    - aksss 5y ago
      COVID makes it worse, but the erosion of participation in structured social groups (fraternal organizations, sports leagues, churches, etc.) has been on the decline for a long, long time. Less participation means less funding means less outreach means even less participation means less groups in total, means less participation, etc.; down and down it goes. Now even the paycheck-compelled participation in the office environment is eroding. For many people, making new friends as an adult gets harder with age. Part of that is that we're not compelled to join things like we were as children. Part of it is that we have the cumulative time and means to create our own favored environments - my house has some kick-ass stuff in it and air conditioning, so why would I leave it? :D I kid, but kinda not. As I've gotten older, I've made a point to get more involved in entirely voluntary organizations (collector's groups, church, etc) and it takes work. It's rewarding on the balance - good for my personal growth and good for the group assuming they would agree that I bring a modicum of value to the table - but it takes a dedication that doesn't come easy. Kind of like exercise, right? An antipattern here is expecting to replicate your quality childhood friendships quickly. Friendships, particularly intimate friendships, take a long time and many shared experiences. 80% of the job is just showing up, so nothing kills budding friendship opportunities like flaking out one too many times. Show up!
    - dublinben 5y ago
turtlebits 5y ago
I appreciate your opinion, but you use words like "impose"/"force" and bring up prison. You have the choice to choose your own employer and if you don't like the terms, the choice to leave. A lot of people were hired on the condition of going into the office and I find it all the backlash from employees after being asked to go back into the office a bit absurd.
- kelnos 5y ago
  > You have the choice to choose your own employer and if you don't like the terms, the choice to leave. That assumes two things: 1) That a company exists that will grant you your (let's presume reasonable) terms, and 2) That there are enough companies accepting those terms such that there are enough jobs available for everyone who wants those terms. My ideal job would be a part-time gig where I get the benefits of a full-time gig (health insurance, 401k, equity, etc.), but can choose my hours (essentially 100% flexibly), perhaps with some sort of weekly minimum, and get paid by the number of hours worked. It would be fully remote, and I could work from wherever I want. But there are very few companies that will agree to terms like that (maybe even no companies), even though I'd be just as (probably more) productive than their "standard" full-time employees. > A lot of people were hired on the condition of going into the office and I find it all the backlash from employees after being asked to go back into the office a bit absurd. It's not absurd, it's people who have traditionally been on the bad end of a power imbalance (employees) finally getting the flexibility they've always wanted, proving that they can be just as productive that way, and then being pissed off that employers are requiring them to go back into the office for little reason other than management's desire to control their employees' lives. And it's really funny that you find that absurd, because many of them are doing exactly what you claim they should do: leave and find a different employer that will accept their terms. Post-pandemic there are a lot more employers that will accept flexible/remote work arrangements than there were previously, and employers that are requiring employees to come back to the office are going to lose some talent.
  - dbrueck 5y ago
    That ideal job can exist, though you may have to create the company yourself (that's what I ended up doing). We were very small (5-7 people) and thought it'd be fun to try out different forms of compensation, so after some experimentation we settled on: - very healthy hourly rate - min commit of X hours per month (I think it was 80), then work as few or as many as you want beyond that (though for planning purposes we'd often ask people to give us a rough idea of their plans for the next few weeks) - various bonuses that would kick in when the group reached different milestones each month (this was a consulting company, so a lot of them revolved around billable hours) - no additional paid benefits at all That last one took the most time for people to get on board with initially, but ultimately proved to be really popular. I think it had to do with how entrenched the mindset is around the norm, but concepts like getting paid even though you're not working, or having your employer be involved with your health insurance are pretty odd if you think about it. Things like sick leave, paid time off, etc. are also things that look nice on paper but IMO tend to be a net loss for employees - they tend to be assigned inflated values by the companies and are used as leverage against employees.
londondev45 5y ago
Well said
masterof0 5y ago
I know your way of thinking is quite popular here, but I will take my chances anyway. If your friend says that seriously, then friendship is not what you guys have, at least in the traditional sense, I see my friends often, I enjoy seeing them and having conversations, playing, etc... Saying people who are fine talking to other human beings face to face, are craving attention is ridiculous, that's how we have been doing things since the beginning. Also, no one is forced to be together, you can always find a remote gig, or do freelance work or another career altogether. Lots of people love to go to an office an interact with another human beings, you don't need to be extroverted. I do respect your perspective, and I think is totally fine, but trying to associate social people with some sort of masochism is ridiculous. I know , nowadays, being a regular social human , is not as cool as being introverted , or "in the spectrum" (in the spectrum myself), instead of lashing on other people, maybe you can get yourself a more comfy setup and a gig that allows you to not talk to others, and just code your way to the moon.
- Taylor_OD 5y ago
  I think it's equally ridiculous to say that because someone's friendship is not like your, in person face to face interaction, friendship then its not real.
  - 411111111111111 5y ago
    That's why he added that caveat about traditional...
  - masterof0 5y ago
    I didn't say it wasn't real, I said, that in the traditional sense, friends like to meet? you know, be friends? But nice try.
    - lsaferite 5y ago
      > then friendship is not what you guys have That sounds a lot like you are claiming their friendship isn't real to me.
feifan 5y ago
I can't speak to your office environment, but in all the offices I've worked in, I haven't been "forced" to interact with coworkers more than I want to. Being at the office gives me the option to engage in high-bandwidth IRL communication when necessary, and to not interact/ignore other people when I'm busy with something.
ignoramous 5y ago
> I can't imagine re-adapting to something so insane as an office ever again. It might be safe to say that one group likes being in the same physical space as their peers [0] and another doesn't, and that both these groups are judging each other for their choice (typical in-group / out-group bias). > Why burden business relationships with forced several hours/week physical presence when nobody would impose that on a customer or a vendor, and lockdowns have shown that even (especially) marriages aren't designed for people to be stuck together that long. See also: Chesterton's fence when advocating for fundamental changes in the way things work [1]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7434444 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7434444 [1] https://fs.blog/2020/03/chestertons-fence/ https://fs.blog/2020/03/chestertons-fence/
OminousWeapons 5y ago
> Show me someone who loves office life and being around people who are forced to be together, and I will show you someone with a perverse addiction to confict. I see where you are coming from, but honestly the workplace is one of the rare places someone can easily make friends after 30, precisely because someone is forcing you to be together with other people. There are obviously other ways to do this (hobbies, etc) but they typically aren't as simple and you're now setting up a second thing you need to participate in. I don't think people love being in the office; they love being with other people instead of being stuck by themselves in their home or quietly sitting by themselves in a coffee shop.
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> Show me someone who loves office life and being around people who are forced to be together, and I will show you someone with a perverse addiction to confict. In my experience, being forced to be a Slack @tag or DM away from coworkers who see you as a screen name rather than a face is far worse for conflict. Remote work doesn't mean employees get to withdraw from social interaction and isolate themselves. It just moves the interaction to a different medium. I've managed in-person, mixed, and full-remote teams. Conflict always gets more heated in the remote teams. When you're in the office with someone and talking face to face, people are more likely to treat each other like humans. When you're trying to communicate through emotionless Slack text all day, some people misinterpret harmless comments as being aggressive and struggle to treat their coworkers differently than screen names in an internet flame war.
- doubled112 5y ago
  Managed or refereed? Ahh, team dynamics... I had a manager in one of my first jobs tell me to always have a hard discussion in person, if you can, because "there are eyes". It stuck with me then, and it makes more sense all the time. You definitely miss some important indicators being on Slack all day. Many probably don't realize (yet) that there's a difference between working with people in the office then being remote and just being remote. If you've spent some time with somebody, it's easier to assume tone and intent behind something that may seem hostile in isolation.
MaxBarraclough 5y ago
This reminds me of Penn & Teller's account of making it as a team for decade after decade. They see each other socially only 3 or 4 times a year. Source: https://youtu.be/rv_Xkz9zepI?t=1259 https://youtu.be/rv_Xkz9zepI?t=1259
fossuser 5y ago
I think good marriages work with the couple in close proximity for extended periods of time. Many people are in bad relationships. Many married people spend little time together.
BirdieNZ 5y ago
> Show me someone who loves office life and being around people who are forced to be together, and I will show you someone with a perverse addiction to confict. When extroversion becomes immoderate, they become masochists who crave attention and interpersonal intensity. As a result, whenever someone tells me they are a "people person," I give them a wide berth because I remember the advice I was given as a young boy which was, "you are what you eat." I'm quite surprised that this is a large part of the top comment. I'm not an extrovert but I love office life, despite its flaws. The primary flaws of office life for me are: 1. Commute. Currently not a problem but it will be in the future for me. 2. Open plan offices are the norm and make focusing more difficult. 3. Slight more difficulty in eating home-cooked food as if you aren't organised, you end up buying lunch rather than cooking at home. I don't think I have a perverse addiction to conflict. Major advantages of working in an office include: 1. I work more productively usually. The environment helps me focus, rather than goof off. 2. It is much easier to have impromptu coffee and lunch conversations and interesting discussions, both work related and otherwise. This increases team social bonding and speeds up knowledge transfer. 3. The people I work with in the office regularly are easier to relate to and think well of than faces online.
- atoav 5y ago
  I agree, however I think this whole discourse is mostly about being able to choose whether you work from home or go to the office. E.g. for software people it would be totally feasible to come into office on Monday, have all the meetings and do remote work for the rest of the week.
philwelch 5y ago
> Why burden business relationships with forced several hours /week physical presence and face time when nobody would impose that on a customer or a vendor, and lockdowns have shown that even (especially) marriages aren't designed for people to be stuck together that long. That's one reason to go into the office: to leave your spouse alone for a few hours. It's much healthier to resent your coworkers than to resent your spouse.

throwawayboise 5y ago

I think it can be healty to maintain a strict "home is home" and "work is work" separation. Home is then a place of escape/relaxation/recharging where work does not interfere. Some people can manage that separation with a home office. Others prefer a physically separate workplace. For me, I didn't think I would like WFH. When forced over the last year, it was better than expected. Certainly not having a commute was nice, not having to "dress up" for work was nice, but both my productivity and the amount of direction on tasks/priorities fell off a cliff. Interruptions were about the same, but when they come from spouse/kids (especially spouse) they are harder to deflect.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
masterof0 5y ago
Exactly, some people can't afford to have a office room, and just shut the doors closed until 5PM.
TeMPOraL 5y ago
> Home is then a place of escape/relaxation/recharging where work does not interfere. Or the other way around. That's the rarely stated but arguably common case, particularly for middle-age people: office is a place of escape/relaxation/recharging where your spouse and your little children and/or your inlaws don't interfere. I love my WFH, I have it worked out with my wife and our family, and I don't want to ever have to work in an office on a regular basis - but I do understand this point. Parenting is hard. Marriage is hard - and COVID in particular threw a lot of people into uncharted territory. Despite all the romantic ideals and the condescending opinions of some people, modern marriage in western world is designed around partners spending significant time apart. Our current pandemic suddenly forced every couple to live a lifestyle most don't experience until retirement. Few were ready for this.

blastro 5y ago

Beautifully expressed post, I just wanted to let you know I appreciate your writing style and what you've written resonates deeply with my experience as well.

Salgat 5y ago

I think part of it is also that some people create a dependence on forced social interaction to address their own loneliness, instead of developing healthy friendships outside the workplace.

iamstupidsimple 5y ago
Easier said than done in today's world, unfortunately.
- Salgat 5y ago
  While true, that's to blame on COVID, not WFH.
  - aksss 5y ago
    COVID makes it worse, but the erosion of participation in structured social groups (fraternal organizations, sports leagues, churches, etc.) has been on the decline for a long, long time. Less participation means less funding means less outreach means even less participation means less groups in total, means less participation, etc.; down and down it goes. Now even the paycheck-compelled participation in the office environment is eroding. For many people, making new friends as an adult gets harder with age. Part of that is that we're not compelled to join things like we were as children. Part of it is that we have the cumulative time and means to create our own favored environments - my house has some kick-ass stuff in it and air conditioning, so why would I leave it? :D I kid, but kinda not. As I've gotten older, I've made a point to get more involved in entirely voluntary organizations (collector's groups, church, etc) and it takes work. It's rewarding on the balance - good for my personal growth and good for the group assuming they would agree that I bring a modicum of value to the table - but it takes a dedication that doesn't come easy. Kind of like exercise, right? An antipattern here is expecting to replicate your quality childhood friendships quickly. Friendships, particularly intimate friendships, take a long time and many shared experiences. 80% of the job is just showing up, so nothing kills budding friendship opportunities like flaking out one too many times. Show up!
  - dublinben 5y ago

turtlebits 5y ago

I appreciate your opinion, but you use words like "impose"/"force" and bring up prison. You have the choice to choose your own employer and if you don't like the terms, the choice to leave. A lot of people were hired on the condition of going into the office and I find it all the backlash from employees after being asked to go back into the office a bit absurd.

kelnos 5y ago
> You have the choice to choose your own employer and if you don't like the terms, the choice to leave. That assumes two things: 1) That a company exists that will grant you your (let's presume reasonable) terms, and 2) That there are enough companies accepting those terms such that there are enough jobs available for everyone who wants those terms. My ideal job would be a part-time gig where I get the benefits of a full-time gig (health insurance, 401k, equity, etc.), but can choose my hours (essentially 100% flexibly), perhaps with some sort of weekly minimum, and get paid by the number of hours worked. It would be fully remote, and I could work from wherever I want. But there are very few companies that will agree to terms like that (maybe even no companies), even though I'd be just as (probably more) productive than their "standard" full-time employees. > A lot of people were hired on the condition of going into the office and I find it all the backlash from employees after being asked to go back into the office a bit absurd. It's not absurd, it's people who have traditionally been on the bad end of a power imbalance (employees) finally getting the flexibility they've always wanted, proving that they can be just as productive that way, and then being pissed off that employers are requiring them to go back into the office for little reason other than management's desire to control their employees' lives. And it's really funny that you find that absurd, because many of them are doing exactly what you claim they should do: leave and find a different employer that will accept their terms. Post-pandemic there are a lot more employers that will accept flexible/remote work arrangements than there were previously, and employers that are requiring employees to come back to the office are going to lose some talent.
- dbrueck 5y ago
  That ideal job can exist, though you may have to create the company yourself (that's what I ended up doing). We were very small (5-7 people) and thought it'd be fun to try out different forms of compensation, so after some experimentation we settled on: - very healthy hourly rate - min commit of X hours per month (I think it was 80), then work as few or as many as you want beyond that (though for planning purposes we'd often ask people to give us a rough idea of their plans for the next few weeks) - various bonuses that would kick in when the group reached different milestones each month (this was a consulting company, so a lot of them revolved around billable hours) - no additional paid benefits at all That last one took the most time for people to get on board with initially, but ultimately proved to be really popular. I think it had to do with how entrenched the mindset is around the norm, but concepts like getting paid even though you're not working, or having your employer be involved with your health insurance are pretty odd if you think about it. Things like sick leave, paid time off, etc. are also things that look nice on paper but IMO tend to be a net loss for employees - they tend to be assigned inflated values by the companies and are used as leverage against employees.

londondev45 5y ago

Well said

masterof0 5y ago

I know your way of thinking is quite popular here, but I will take my chances anyway. If your friend says that seriously, then friendship is not what you guys have, at least in the traditional sense, I see my friends often, I enjoy seeing them and having conversations, playing, etc... Saying people who are fine talking to other human beings face to face, are craving attention is ridiculous, that's how we have been doing things since the beginning. Also, no one is forced to be together, you can always find a remote gig, or do freelance work or another career altogether. Lots of people love to go to an office an interact with another human beings, you don't need to be extroverted. I do respect your perspective, and I think is totally fine, but trying to associate social people with some sort of masochism is ridiculous. I know , nowadays, being a regular social human , is not as cool as being introverted , or "in the spectrum" (in the spectrum myself), instead of lashing on other people, maybe you can get yourself a more comfy setup and a gig that allows you to not talk to others, and just code your way to the moon.

Taylor_OD 5y ago
I think it's equally ridiculous to say that because someone's friendship is not like your, in person face to face interaction, friendship then its not real.
- 411111111111111 5y ago
  That's why he added that caveat about traditional...
- masterof0 5y ago
  I didn't say it wasn't real, I said, that in the traditional sense, friends like to meet? you know, be friends? But nice try.
  - lsaferite 5y ago
    > then friendship is not what you guys have That sounds a lot like you are claiming their friendship isn't real to me.

feifan 5y ago

I can't speak to your office environment, but in all the offices I've worked in, I haven't been "forced" to interact with coworkers more than I want to. Being at the office gives me the option to engage in high-bandwidth IRL communication when necessary, and to not interact/ignore other people when I'm busy with something.

ignoramous 5y ago

> I can't imagine re-adapting to something so insane as an office ever again. It might be safe to say that one group likes being in the same physical space as their peers [0] and another doesn't, and that both these groups are judging each other for their choice (typical in-group / out-group bias). > Why burden business relationships with forced several hours/week physical presence when nobody would impose that on a customer or a vendor, and lockdowns have shown that even (especially) marriages aren't designed for people to be stuck together that long. See also: Chesterton's fence when advocating for fundamental changes in the way things work [1]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7434444 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7434444 [1] https://fs.blog/2020/03/chestertons-fence/ https://fs.blog/2020/03/chestertons-fence/

OminousWeapons 5y ago

> Show me someone who loves office life and being around people who are forced to be together, and I will show you someone with a perverse addiction to confict. I see where you are coming from, but honestly the workplace is one of the rare places someone can easily make friends after 30, precisely because someone is forcing you to be together with other people. There are obviously other ways to do this (hobbies, etc) but they typically aren't as simple and you're now setting up a second thing you need to participate in. I don't think people love being in the office; they love being with other people instead of being stuck by themselves in their home or quietly sitting by themselves in a coffee shop.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

> Show me someone who loves office life and being around people who are forced to be together, and I will show you someone with a perverse addiction to confict. In my experience, being forced to be a Slack @tag or DM away from coworkers who see you as a screen name rather than a face is far worse for conflict. Remote work doesn't mean employees get to withdraw from social interaction and isolate themselves. It just moves the interaction to a different medium. I've managed in-person, mixed, and full-remote teams. Conflict always gets more heated in the remote teams. When you're in the office with someone and talking face to face, people are more likely to treat each other like humans. When you're trying to communicate through emotionless Slack text all day, some people misinterpret harmless comments as being aggressive and struggle to treat their coworkers differently than screen names in an internet flame war.

doubled112 5y ago
Managed or refereed? Ahh, team dynamics... I had a manager in one of my first jobs tell me to always have a hard discussion in person, if you can, because "there are eyes". It stuck with me then, and it makes more sense all the time. You definitely miss some important indicators being on Slack all day. Many probably don't realize (yet) that there's a difference between working with people in the office then being remote and just being remote. If you've spent some time with somebody, it's easier to assume tone and intent behind something that may seem hostile in isolation.

MaxBarraclough 5y ago

This reminds me of Penn & Teller's account of making it as a team for decade after decade. They see each other socially only 3 or 4 times a year. Source: https://youtu.be/rv_Xkz9zepI?t=1259 https://youtu.be/rv_Xkz9zepI?t=1259

fossuser 5y ago

I think good marriages work with the couple in close proximity for extended periods of time. Many people are in bad relationships. Many married people spend little time together.

BirdieNZ 5y ago

> Show me someone who loves office life and being around people who are forced to be together, and I will show you someone with a perverse addiction to confict. When extroversion becomes immoderate, they become masochists who crave attention and interpersonal intensity. As a result, whenever someone tells me they are a "people person," I give them a wide berth because I remember the advice I was given as a young boy which was, "you are what you eat." I'm quite surprised that this is a large part of the top comment. I'm not an extrovert but I love office life, despite its flaws. The primary flaws of office life for me are: 1. Commute. Currently not a problem but it will be in the future for me. 2. Open plan offices are the norm and make focusing more difficult. 3. Slight more difficulty in eating home-cooked food as if you aren't organised, you end up buying lunch rather than cooking at home. I don't think I have a perverse addiction to conflict. Major advantages of working in an office include: 1. I work more productively usually. The environment helps me focus, rather than goof off. 2. It is much easier to have impromptu coffee and lunch conversations and interesting discussions, both work related and otherwise. This increases team social bonding and speeds up knowledge transfer. 3. The people I work with in the office regularly are easier to relate to and think well of than faces online.

atoav 5y ago
I agree, however I think this whole discourse is mostly about being able to choose whether you work from home or go to the office. E.g. for software people it would be totally feasible to come into office on Monday, have all the meetings and do remote work for the rest of the week.

philwelch 5y ago

> Why burden business relationships with forced several hours /week physical presence and face time when nobody would impose that on a customer or a vendor, and lockdowns have shown that even (especially) marriages aren't designed for people to be stuck together that long. That's one reason to go into the office: to leave your spouse alone for a few hours. It's much healthier to resent your coworkers than to resent your spouse.