3 ms·
If you’re going to work from home, do so for a company where WFH is first class. I’ve worked for remote-only companies and for mixed companies. The mixed ones w
by christophilus 5y ago
If you’re going to work from home, do so for a company where WFH is first class. I’ve worked for remote-only companies and for mixed companies. The mixed ones were really terrible WFH experiences. The remote-only / remote-first ones were excellent. It really makes a difference.
/anecdote
- mabbo 5y agoFunny enough, I start with Shopify tomorrow. They went remote-only last year.
- doopy1 5y agoWhat makes a good experience vs. a poor one for you?
- ipaddr 5y agoA team that has strong reading and writing abilities and a culture that promotes documentation and decentralization of work through tickets or some other form. Vs A culture that will always prefer an hour long zoom meeting to a 2 minute exchange on stack. A zoom based culture is one that hasn't fully walked away from the office.
- dvtrn 5y agoHasn’t fully walked away from the office and probably hasn’t learned that “management by meeting” is probably an indicator that management isn’t sure what they’re managing for. Probably.
- HighPlainsDrftr 5y agoI've worked remotely for about 15 years. It isn't what it is cracked up to be. But TBH, after the pandemic hit, I found written communications to be far better than they had been previously. That really leveled the playing field for me. But from my point of view, I've derived much of my communications from mailing lists, forums, listservs over the years. When people get around the water cooler and and I am just hanging around Thunderbird, I'm at a big disadvantage.
- makeitdouble 5y agoI'd second the remote-only / remote-first point. In particular, "remote-first" can effectively work, and bring diversity in the work place that is always welcome. It requires discipline and a real buy in from every layer of the company, but when it works I think it's the best.