8 ms·

Working from home, or remotely is not for everyone - neither is being in an office. Some folks thrive in an office environment, they value the things it provid

by _s 4y ago

Working from home, or remotely is not for everyone - neither is being in an office. Some folks thrive in an office environment, they value the things it provides - a schedule, a time, a reason to get up and out, socialising with others, being out in the world. It comes at a cost of time and a bit of freedom; you don't really get to choose the hours or where this happens, neither the folks you interact with. Others prefer working remotely, they cherish being able to set their own schedule and work, and being able to manage their level of interactions with others. Remote work does not have to be work from home either, and the freedom this gives can be quite liberating. There is also a somewhat of divide between introverts and extroverts between which they prefer, but of course - there are many in either camp leaning the other way too. You just have to find what works for you - and that means trying both, or a mix, and seeing which one suits you best. Where it gets rather frustrating for folks is when they are not given a choice - some companies; ergo leaders, can't wait to have everyone back in an office even after 2 or so years of being (mostly? somewhat?) productive during the pandemic; and this is where frictions arise. Other companies are entirely remote, and for those who thrive in an office environment, they will struggle greatly. I'd love to see managers / leaders, and even employees recognise that individuals have preferences, and being accommodating of it to get the best out of their people, rather than imposing how they find they work best. How, or what this would entail, I'd have to give more thought - but I believe there are plenty of individuals with far more experience and knowledge than me around this topic who have been successful at managing hybrid (office + remote) teams, and accomodating individuals that lean either way.

rubicon33 4y ago
I’ve found the best option to be a hybrid. 2 days remote, 3 in office.
- mathgeek 4y ago
  Important to note again that this is the best option _for you_.
- yieldcrv 4y ago
  But only if everybody else is on the same schedule
  - spaetzleesser 4y ago
    Not necessarily. It's enough if you meet people from time to time.
  - ParetoOptimal 4y ago
    So long as the remote days a given person takes off stay the same I've found my team adjusted well any place it was necessary.
  - rubicon33 4y ago
    Yes this requires everyone on the same schedule. If you can find a workplace like this, do not take it for granted. I’ve worked fully remote and fully office and it’s the hybrid (sync schedule) that is hands down the best (for me).
    - dbwjxufh7373 4y ago
  - eyelidlessness 4y ago
    I’m in UTC-7 (currently) and I have a Monday meeting with someone in UTC+3. Neither of us expressed concern about that.
Supermancho 4y ago
> Working from home, or remotely is not for everyone - neither is being in an office. Upper management has always been wfo or wfh as it suits them. The 2 groups (wfo and wfh) of mid-low tier "office workers" are far from equal in size. The majority rather be remote. Most of the wfo people realize their limited value is less visible remotely, as is their opportunities for getting opportunistically involved in processes and projects. Professionally, this a compelling reason to claim wfo is for them as it's part of their act, which doubles the insult (inefficient+predatory people in an organization, waving the WFO banner). Yes, I believe this wholeheartedly.
- 5350-uiop-1130 4y ago
  yes, much hard to justify their bullshit jobs remotely, they actually have to do some real work to try and posture. we need a general clear out of middle managements, there are too many useless people in the workforce who only serve to demotivate the people who do the real work
tpmoney 4y ago
>There is also a somewhat of divide between introverts and extroverts between which they prefer, but of course - there are many in either camp leaning the other way too. Yeah, as an introvert, seeing the constant assertion that only extroverts want to work from the office is very frustrating. It is because I am an introvert that I want to work from the office. Sure, I struggle with interacting with people in general already. But I will have that trouble whether I'm at home or in the office. But here's just a small list of the additional troubles that pile on WFH: Having to speak out on a public chat channel, where everything I say will be recored for a legally mandated long time, seen by who knows and potentially misinterpreted because of a lack of tone (slack). Having to interrupt someone without being able to see if they're busy (IMs). Being self conscious of the existence of a camera and not knowing if people are or aren't looking at me (web conferences) Not being able to get tone and body language feedback from the people I'm talking to (any text based medium) Accidentally speaking over or interrupting someone because of latency (web and audio conferences) Having to specifically put effort into promoting myself and my work because it's less visible now Not having the chance side conversations with my mangers, skip managers and directors. I know a lot of people doubt these happen, but I've had enough of them, and am convinced one or two major changes in my career have been in part because of those conversations that I would not have otherwise had. This goes hand in hand with the item above. I am 100% behind having more choice and more flexibility, but I really wish people would stop pretending that the divide on this is extrovert/introvert. I'm far enough along in my career to understand the importance of speaking up and being seen and therefore to put the effort into doing it, but make no mistake, 100% remote requires me to put more more effort into it and for my personal form of introversion, it makes things much much harder on me.
- jawns 4y ago
  On the flip side, I'm an extravert, but I have stopped considering anything but 100% remote work. I get my energy from others, but that doesn't mean we have to share the same physical space. I used to spend 2 hours a day in a crappy commute, and for an extravert, that sucks. Now I get to spend that time around people I enjoy.
  - Fnoord 4y ago
twelvechairs 4y ago
Exactly - it varies person to person and company to company. Personally I'm changing my lifestyle to have a small urban apartment in the city close to work, shops and services; and a house close to the beach around 1 hr by car / 1.5hrs by train away. I plan to move back and forth around once a week. For me this ticks a lot of boxes and I'm happy to overcome the hassles involved. I can see it becoming a more popular lifestyle. I couldn't do the 'fully remote' move to a tiny town in the middle of nowhere.
- jcims 4y ago
  I just signed a lease on an apartment to do something very similar. House out in the country, apartment in a very walkable town just outside a major metro area. The motivation was to help a family member in that town but I’m stoked at the prospect of having both. It’s definitely a bit of an indulgence but i could downsize both once my youngest is on her own.
  - philsnow 4y ago
    If you care to use an established term for it, there's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pied-%C3%A0-terre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pied-%C3%A0-terre
    - jcims 4y ago
      Oh nice!! Thank you!
bpye 4y ago
I prefer to be remote. I find having my own space is less distracting but if I need to get up and walk away from my computer for a bit because I'm stuck - that also works better. I can be more flexible with my time if I have other things that I need to do during the day. Less thinking about lunch or drinks or such - I'm home, I have my kitchen. At the same time - I also appreciate having an office that I can go to. Sometimes I just need a change of scenery, other times it's nice to just be around some other people. My team aren't local either, but there are a few folks I know in the local office on other teams - so it works out. I very much agree that what's important is finding the right balance for yourself, and it certainly takes some experimentation.
bvm 4y ago
Is it wrong that I value both of those things? I like going in once or twice a week, catching up with my team, writing stuff on a whiteboard, having in person 1:1s, attending an all hands in person, getting a free snack from the kitchen, having a beer after work at the pub. I also like making my own breakfast, lunch and dinner, not spending over 50 quid travelling to the office, booking out an afternoon to write something, the ability to set my own schedule, having my own screen and desk, going for a quick walk in garden, and kissing my daughter goodnight.
- jasonboyd 4y ago
- lmarcos 4y ago
  The problem with an hybrid approach is that it forces you to live close to the office. If I were living in Hamburg and the company I want to work for is located in Munich and requires me to go 1 day/week to the office... Well that's a nogo to begin with. So hybrid mode limits a lot your pool of potential employers.
blub 4y ago
Office work has obvious costs for the company (rent, etc), and obvious costs for the employee (commute, etc). All of these were known and agreed upon when the contract was signed. What many proponents of remote work are arguing for is unilaterally changing the contract because it’s possible to also work from home. This line of argument typically highlights the obvious benefits for the employee (no commute, flexibility, etc.), but often ignores the less obvious cost of working from home, such as lower team/company social cohesion, poorer communication, significantly more difficult onboarding for new employees and quite likely reduced productivity and socialization. Additionally the employee can expect some increased costs (electricity, food) which my or may not be offset by reductions from dropping eating out and such. While many software engineers accepted poor working conditions in exchange for money and opportunities, now they want to have their cake and eat it too - at the cost of new employees and their company. Maybe the latter is excusable depending on the company, but the former is not and needs to be discussed instead of being swept under the rug.

by _s 4y ago

rubicon33 4y ago

I’ve found the best option to be a hybrid. 2 days remote, 3 in office.

mathgeek 4y ago
Important to note again that this is the best option _for you_.
yieldcrv 4y ago
But only if everybody else is on the same schedule
- spaetzleesser 4y ago
  Not necessarily. It's enough if you meet people from time to time.
- ParetoOptimal 4y ago
  So long as the remote days a given person takes off stay the same I've found my team adjusted well any place it was necessary.
- rubicon33 4y ago
  Yes this requires everyone on the same schedule. If you can find a workplace like this, do not take it for granted. I’ve worked fully remote and fully office and it’s the hybrid (sync schedule) that is hands down the best (for me).
  - dbwjxufh7373 4y ago
- eyelidlessness 4y ago
  I’m in UTC-7 (currently) and I have a Monday meeting with someone in UTC+3. Neither of us expressed concern about that.

Supermancho 4y ago

> Working from home, or remotely is not for everyone - neither is being in an office. Upper management has always been wfo or wfh as it suits them. The 2 groups (wfo and wfh) of mid-low tier "office workers" are far from equal in size. The majority rather be remote. Most of the wfo people realize their limited value is less visible remotely, as is their opportunities for getting opportunistically involved in processes and projects. Professionally, this a compelling reason to claim wfo is for them as it's part of their act, which doubles the insult (inefficient+predatory people in an organization, waving the WFO banner). Yes, I believe this wholeheartedly.

5350-uiop-1130 4y ago
yes, much hard to justify their bullshit jobs remotely, they actually have to do some real work to try and posture. we need a general clear out of middle managements, there are too many useless people in the workforce who only serve to demotivate the people who do the real work

tpmoney 4y ago

>There is also a somewhat of divide between introverts and extroverts between which they prefer, but of course - there are many in either camp leaning the other way too. Yeah, as an introvert, seeing the constant assertion that only extroverts want to work from the office is very frustrating. It is because I am an introvert that I want to work from the office. Sure, I struggle with interacting with people in general already. But I will have that trouble whether I'm at home or in the office. But here's just a small list of the additional troubles that pile on WFH: Having to speak out on a public chat channel, where everything I say will be recored for a legally mandated long time, seen by who knows and potentially misinterpreted because of a lack of tone (slack). Having to interrupt someone without being able to see if they're busy (IMs). Being self conscious of the existence of a camera and not knowing if people are or aren't looking at me (web conferences) Not being able to get tone and body language feedback from the people I'm talking to (any text based medium) Accidentally speaking over or interrupting someone because of latency (web and audio conferences) Having to specifically put effort into promoting myself and my work because it's less visible now Not having the chance side conversations with my mangers, skip managers and directors. I know a lot of people doubt these happen, but I've had enough of them, and am convinced one or two major changes in my career have been in part because of those conversations that I would not have otherwise had. This goes hand in hand with the item above. I am 100% behind having more choice and more flexibility, but I really wish people would stop pretending that the divide on this is extrovert/introvert. I'm far enough along in my career to understand the importance of speaking up and being seen and therefore to put the effort into doing it, but make no mistake, 100% remote requires me to put more more effort into it and for my personal form of introversion, it makes things much much harder on me.

jawns 4y ago
On the flip side, I'm an extravert, but I have stopped considering anything but 100% remote work. I get my energy from others, but that doesn't mean we have to share the same physical space. I used to spend 2 hours a day in a crappy commute, and for an extravert, that sucks. Now I get to spend that time around people I enjoy.
- Fnoord 4y ago

twelvechairs 4y ago

Exactly - it varies person to person and company to company. Personally I'm changing my lifestyle to have a small urban apartment in the city close to work, shops and services; and a house close to the beach around 1 hr by car / 1.5hrs by train away. I plan to move back and forth around once a week. For me this ticks a lot of boxes and I'm happy to overcome the hassles involved. I can see it becoming a more popular lifestyle. I couldn't do the 'fully remote' move to a tiny town in the middle of nowhere.

jcims 4y ago
I just signed a lease on an apartment to do something very similar. House out in the country, apartment in a very walkable town just outside a major metro area. The motivation was to help a family member in that town but I’m stoked at the prospect of having both. It’s definitely a bit of an indulgence but i could downsize both once my youngest is on her own.
- philsnow 4y ago
  If you care to use an established term for it, there's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pied-%C3%A0-terre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pied-%C3%A0-terre
  - jcims 4y ago
    Oh nice!! Thank you!

bpye 4y ago

I prefer to be remote. I find having my own space is less distracting but if I need to get up and walk away from my computer for a bit because I'm stuck - that also works better. I can be more flexible with my time if I have other things that I need to do during the day. Less thinking about lunch or drinks or such - I'm home, I have my kitchen. At the same time - I also appreciate having an office that I can go to. Sometimes I just need a change of scenery, other times it's nice to just be around some other people. My team aren't local either, but there are a few folks I know in the local office on other teams - so it works out. I very much agree that what's important is finding the right balance for yourself, and it certainly takes some experimentation.

bvm 4y ago

Is it wrong that I value both of those things? I like going in once or twice a week, catching up with my team, writing stuff on a whiteboard, having in person 1:1s, attending an all hands in person, getting a free snack from the kitchen, having a beer after work at the pub. I also like making my own breakfast, lunch and dinner, not spending over 50 quid travelling to the office, booking out an afternoon to write something, the ability to set my own schedule, having my own screen and desk, going for a quick walk in garden, and kissing my daughter goodnight.

jasonboyd 4y ago
lmarcos 4y ago
The problem with an hybrid approach is that it forces you to live close to the office. If I were living in Hamburg and the company I want to work for is located in Munich and requires me to go 1 day/week to the office... Well that's a nogo to begin with. So hybrid mode limits a lot your pool of potential employers.

blub 4y ago

Office work has obvious costs for the company (rent, etc), and obvious costs for the employee (commute, etc). All of these were known and agreed upon when the contract was signed. What many proponents of remote work are arguing for is unilaterally changing the contract because it’s possible to also work from home. This line of argument typically highlights the obvious benefits for the employee (no commute, flexibility, etc.), but often ignores the less obvious cost of working from home, such as lower team/company social cohesion, poorer communication, significantly more difficult onboarding for new employees and quite likely reduced productivity and socialization. Additionally the employee can expect some increased costs (electricity, food) which my or may not be offset by reductions from dropping eating out and such. While many software engineers accepted poor working conditions in exchange for money and opportunities, now they want to have their cake and eat it too - at the cost of new employees and their company. Maybe the latter is excusable depending on the company, but the former is not and needs to be discussed instead of being swept under the rug.