4 ms·

My fully remote company has done a handful of hack trips where we live and work together in a fun destination city for a week. They have all been optional so fa

by aftbit 4y ago

My fully remote company has done a handful of hack trips where we live and work together in a fun destination city for a week. They have all been optional so far. Everyone who has chosen to attend has reported feeling more connected to their team, more willing to ask questions (less fear of looking dumb), and generally happier in their role in the company. We intend to continue doing these once or twice yearly, assuming we have the financials to make it happen.

calvinmorrison 4y ago
Zoom has created a lack of communication not more. It's like arguing over the phone, but now with 10x the people. In person you can simply communicate much better.
- matwood 4y ago
  Any meeting in person or otherwise with 10s of people is normally a waste of time if any collaboration is expected. Not sure why we would think any different with Zoom.
  - ethbr0 4y ago
    I think it's hard to argue that interrupting or finding a space to talk isn't easier in person, with the benefit of body language, than over Zoom et al.
    - lovich 4y ago
      Does zoom not have a hands up mechanic like google meets? Haven’t used it in over a year and can’t remember the UI
      - ethbr0 4y ago
        It does, but it's awkward in practice and falls into the same UX trap -- any advanced feature requires training & consensus on its use, and nobody has time or inclination to train on meeting software.
bombcar 4y ago
There are obvious bias sample issues with the survey group, but as long as the company provides the costs for travel, etc, and it moves around to try to distribute the travel hassle, it can work well enough. Industry conferences can also provide a useful target (meet before the conference, go to the conference, etc).
whiplash451 4y ago
Sounds super parent friendly.
- midasuni 4y ago
  It’s far easier for me to arrange a week away from home every few months than go to an office every day - if I were to do an 9-5 that would mean not being able to take kids to school or pick them up, ever.
  - whiplash451 4y ago
    I still don't see why your company should steal two or three weeks of your family time away. You can see it as a perk, but I see this as a theft.
    - ghaff 4y ago
      And someone else might see 10-20 hours commuting and 40+ hours in an office every week as "theft." Take the job you want and can get which has expectations you can live with. There were a lot of jobs at least in pre-pandemic times which required quite a bit of travel or even near 100% during the week (consultants).
  - sumy23 4y ago
    It might be easier to arrange, but I don't want to leave my kids for weeks at a time. Young children change every day. I've been away from my daughter for a few days and have already missed out of some of her development.
- jedberg 4y ago
  What some great companies have done is addressed this with their offsites, either by making the offsite family friendly and paying people to bring their entire family (destination vacation on us!) or paying for childcare while the working parent is at the offsite.
  - JulesRosser 4y ago
mattw2121 4y ago
As a candidate for a remote role, who hates to travel, this is off putting to me and I would not accept a role at your company. While it is "optional", I know how office politics work and, when you choose not to do the "optional" things, someone is thinking you aren't a team player. I don't mind full remote -- if it's full remote. I also don't mind going in the local office (for the reasons you mentioned people like your company trip -- I feel more connected and communication walls are broken down).
- ghaff 4y ago
  I would probably never assume I would never have to (or at least be pressured to) travel at a remote company. Maybe there are examples. But being that person who refuses to ever travel would be, as you say, disadvantageous over time. Heck, for a lot of roles, some amount of routine travel is pretty much expected at most companies, especially as you become more senior.
- aftbit 4y ago
  I can confidently state that nobody who chose not to attend the last one was punished or ostracized in any overt way. But nobody can help the fact that if some people meet up and feel more connected, then those who choose not to meet up will feel (relatively speaking) less connected. This is one of those situations where there's no obvious perfect answer. If we didn't do regular meetups, then we'd lose out on the benefits for those who like them. If we do, we lose out on the talent that fears them.
ghaff 4y ago
Trying to get together physically now and then is really a big benefit. People on this thread are belittling them by calling them "team building" but it really is a good setting to get to know people informally, exchange information in a way that isn't half paying attention on a video call, etc. You can make them optional I guess but the outliers who don't want to go will often end up dropping off of others' radar screens over time. Personally if periodic offsites (or for that matter attending certain other types of events to, say, give a presentation) really aren't your thing, you should probably find a company that better matches your preferences.

by aftbit 4y ago

calvinmorrison 4y ago

Zoom has created a lack of communication not more. It's like arguing over the phone, but now with 10x the people. In person you can simply communicate much better.

matwood 4y ago
Any meeting in person or otherwise with 10s of people is normally a waste of time if any collaboration is expected. Not sure why we would think any different with Zoom.
- ethbr0 4y ago
  I think it's hard to argue that interrupting or finding a space to talk isn't easier in person, with the benefit of body language, than over Zoom et al.
  - lovich 4y ago
    Does zoom not have a hands up mechanic like google meets? Haven’t used it in over a year and can’t remember the UI
    - ethbr0 4y ago
      It does, but it's awkward in practice and falls into the same UX trap -- any advanced feature requires training & consensus on its use, and nobody has time or inclination to train on meeting software.

bombcar 4y ago

There are obvious bias sample issues with the survey group, but as long as the company provides the costs for travel, etc, and it moves around to try to distribute the travel hassle, it can work well enough. Industry conferences can also provide a useful target (meet before the conference, go to the conference, etc).

whiplash451 4y ago

Sounds super parent friendly.

midasuni 4y ago
It’s far easier for me to arrange a week away from home every few months than go to an office every day - if I were to do an 9-5 that would mean not being able to take kids to school or pick them up, ever.
- whiplash451 4y ago
  I still don't see why your company should steal two or three weeks of your family time away. You can see it as a perk, but I see this as a theft.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    And someone else might see 10-20 hours commuting and 40+ hours in an office every week as "theft." Take the job you want and can get which has expectations you can live with. There were a lot of jobs at least in pre-pandemic times which required quite a bit of travel or even near 100% during the week (consultants).
- sumy23 4y ago
  It might be easier to arrange, but I don't want to leave my kids for weeks at a time. Young children change every day. I've been away from my daughter for a few days and have already missed out of some of her development.
jedberg 4y ago
What some great companies have done is addressed this with their offsites, either by making the offsite family friendly and paying people to bring their entire family (destination vacation on us!) or paying for childcare while the working parent is at the offsite.
- JulesRosser 4y ago

mattw2121 4y ago

As a candidate for a remote role, who hates to travel, this is off putting to me and I would not accept a role at your company. While it is "optional", I know how office politics work and, when you choose not to do the "optional" things, someone is thinking you aren't a team player. I don't mind full remote -- if it's full remote. I also don't mind going in the local office (for the reasons you mentioned people like your company trip -- I feel more connected and communication walls are broken down).

ghaff 4y ago
I would probably never assume I would never have to (or at least be pressured to) travel at a remote company. Maybe there are examples. But being that person who refuses to ever travel would be, as you say, disadvantageous over time. Heck, for a lot of roles, some amount of routine travel is pretty much expected at most companies, especially as you become more senior.
aftbit 4y ago
I can confidently state that nobody who chose not to attend the last one was punished or ostracized in any overt way. But nobody can help the fact that if some people meet up and feel more connected, then those who choose not to meet up will feel (relatively speaking) less connected. This is one of those situations where there's no obvious perfect answer. If we didn't do regular meetups, then we'd lose out on the benefits for those who like them. If we do, we lose out on the talent that fears them.

ghaff 4y ago

Trying to get together physically now and then is really a big benefit. People on this thread are belittling them by calling them "team building" but it really is a good setting to get to know people informally, exchange information in a way that isn't half paying attention on a video call, etc. You can make them optional I guess but the outliers who don't want to go will often end up dropping off of others' radar screens over time. Personally if periodic offsites (or for that matter attending certain other types of events to, say, give a presentation) really aren't your thing, you should probably find a company that better matches your preferences.