3 ms·
Partially remote is the worst of both worlds. Either go all in on an office setting or a remote one. Reasons are that office people want to be around people, w
by akmarinov 5y ago
Partially remote is the worst of both worlds. Either go all in on an office setting or a remote one.
Reasons are that office people want to be around people, which would be missing half the time, leading to them leaving to a more office friendly company eventually.
At the other end, the remote workers will be treated to a business as usual environment where things happen more face to face and synchronously, leaving them out of touch with the work environment, which will inevitably lead to them leaving for a more remote friendly company.
Pick one and stick with it.
- xpil 5y agoI do not agree. I used to work on a hybrid basis for about 5 years (until Covid). It was approximately 40% from home and 60% on-site but the employer was flexible. Since Covid, I'm working 100% from home and while it has some advantages (commute time/costs, better work gear), I'm missing the hybrid model. The entire debate is futile though. Some employees / employers prefer WFH, some don't. Simple like that. To my understanding, as long as the job is done, up to standards, and within budgets, everyone should be happy no matter WFH or not.
- KaiserPro 5y agohybrid for me allows me to be a father, but also have some sort of office life. A lot of my colleagues are going this way. It allows them to have some deep focus time, but also have meeting times. Its clearly delineated too. Its not for everyone, but for parents, it can be good.