3 ms·

Agree 100% (as an IC-turned-manager myself). 5 years ago, I exercised my privilege (as an IC with a lenient boss), to work from another state for a few months.

Agree 100% (as an IC-turned-manager myself). 5 years ago, I exercised my privilege (as an IC with a lenient boss), to work from another state for a few months. During that time, I dialed into meetings that were otherwise held in person. My experience: - Nobody remembered to ask me for my opinion, so I was constantly interrupting - Often, people just forgot to open the telcon, so I was ignored on hold - Often, people forgot to present the slides / visuals over telcon as well as the projector, so I had to interrupt them and cause 5 minute delays - Whiteboard designs? Flat out of scope - Try pitching ideas over the phone to a room full of stakeholders. They treat you like a spam caller A project I was leading for a new design was "killed" and "revived" with exactly the same team, but another (onsite) person swapped out for my role. That person is now in charge of the project, and it's a big, big deal, with attention all the way up to Washington. His career is skyrocketing because of this. Working hybrid may not be a scam in and of itself, but I suspect someone with 10+ years experience managing recognizes that all remote, or all in person, are both tenable solutions, but hybrid will cause a separate-and-not-equal workforce schism.

kkfx 5y ago
Sorry for the rude intervention but... > Nobody remembered to ask me for my opinion, so I was constantly interrupting that's not much because of you or others but the actual management organization is crap. The basic idea is have a workforce, at any level, made of stereotypical Ford-model workers, those who ancient Greek's call "useful idiots", people just able to work but mentally unable to be citizens, to be adult, autonomous. So there is the idea of creating a hierarchy of shepherds to keep the flock "as it should" and that does not work because such social model does not work. A proof? We have not invented anything really new in the last decades. We have improved anything, popularized anything, but nothing really new have seen the light. Now for the first time in human history after industrial revolution began we see a decline in quality of anything not because of scarcity or war but because of a system that can't anymore sustain itself having consumed itself from the inside. That's the classic failure of merchants societies: they are skilled in making money, but they only exists if there are some others society to commerce with, different society who develop and produce. Now that everything is commerce... > I suspect someone with 10+ years experience managing recognizes that all remote, or all in person, are both tenable solutions, but hybrid will cause a separate-and-not-equal workforce schism. I think it's already there: most talented escape, lest talented start the so called big resignation with vague autarkic attempts doomed to fail and resulting in a mass of future new poor ready to be inserted in the WEF 2030's agenda new society. Being in person offer benefits form human interaction we can't have on remote BUT have the downside of the physical location need. In a changing world people want freedom and actual cities does not offer that and have no visible chance of improvement. Remote allow living in good place with enough services at interesting costs (at least in theory, in practice for some a bad cold shower of reality for others) trading the less benefit from human interaction to a far more comfortable life. In a society designed around the panem et circense concept at the start of a scarcity era most prefer the circense in absence seen the scarcity of panem... Beside that, at another level, economy of scale have reached the tipping point of density where we are now too dense and so the scale benefit drop crushed by the density costs. A reset is needed and nobody want to be in the places to be resetted and no one know how will be the new world. So no one want brace the new trying to save resources in classic reactionary moves. Here the real schism.
fartcannon 5y ago
Most meetings can be and then are emails (sent after the meeting) so you probably didn't lose out on much.
jghn 5y ago
On an old team we had a teammate in a similar circumstance. The worst part was that the rest of us meant well and still all the things you described happened. We tried to be good about including them, and yet there were times no one remembered to turn on the hangout, or to remember to ping him when an ad hoc design discussion started up. It was eye opening to me. If in an environment when people are trying to accommodate the remote person they still got left behind, what does that imply in other circumstances
dopidopHN 5y ago
I’ve seen what you are describing happen several times pre covid. I’ve been in 100% remote team since but I would be really careful with being one of the few remote resources. It’s a recipe to grind your gears alone while the team is moving on. My only personal experience with that was being remote for a few week at a time. I always felt a disconnect settling in.

kkfx 5y ago

Sorry for the rude intervention but... > Nobody remembered to ask me for my opinion, so I was constantly interrupting that's not much because of you or others but the actual management organization is crap. The basic idea is have a workforce, at any level, made of stereotypical Ford-model workers, those who ancient Greek's call "useful idiots", people just able to work but mentally unable to be citizens, to be adult, autonomous. So there is the idea of creating a hierarchy of shepherds to keep the flock "as it should" and that does not work because such social model does not work. A proof? We have not invented anything really new in the last decades. We have improved anything, popularized anything, but nothing really new have seen the light. Now for the first time in human history after industrial revolution began we see a decline in quality of anything not because of scarcity or war but because of a system that can't anymore sustain itself having consumed itself from the inside. That's the classic failure of merchants societies: they are skilled in making money, but they only exists if there are some others society to commerce with, different society who develop and produce. Now that everything is commerce... > I suspect someone with 10+ years experience managing recognizes that all remote, or all in person, are both tenable solutions, but hybrid will cause a separate-and-not-equal workforce schism. I think it's already there: most talented escape, lest talented start the so called big resignation with vague autarkic attempts doomed to fail and resulting in a mass of future new poor ready to be inserted in the WEF 2030's agenda new society. Being in person offer benefits form human interaction we can't have on remote BUT have the downside of the physical location need. In a changing world people want freedom and actual cities does not offer that and have no visible chance of improvement. Remote allow living in good place with enough services at interesting costs (at least in theory, in practice for some a bad cold shower of reality for others) trading the less benefit from human interaction to a far more comfortable life. In a society designed around the panem et circense concept at the start of a scarcity era most prefer the circense in absence seen the scarcity of panem... Beside that, at another level, economy of scale have reached the tipping point of density where we are now too dense and so the scale benefit drop crushed by the density costs. A reset is needed and nobody want to be in the places to be resetted and no one know how will be the new world. So no one want brace the new trying to save resources in classic reactionary moves. Here the real schism.

fartcannon 5y ago

Most meetings can be and then are emails (sent after the meeting) so you probably didn't lose out on much.

jghn 5y ago

On an old team we had a teammate in a similar circumstance. The worst part was that the rest of us meant well and still all the things you described happened. We tried to be good about including them, and yet there were times no one remembered to turn on the hangout, or to remember to ping him when an ad hoc design discussion started up. It was eye opening to me. If in an environment when people are trying to accommodate the remote person they still got left behind, what does that imply in other circumstances

dopidopHN 5y ago

I’ve seen what you are describing happen several times pre covid. I’ve been in 100% remote team since but I would be really careful with being one of the few remote resources. It’s a recipe to grind your gears alone while the team is moving on. My only personal experience with that was being remote for a few week at a time. I always felt a disconnect settling in.