5 ms·
From my past experience 50% of the time was sort of the magic amount of time to be in the office. Seemed the best blend of focus time at home and in person tim
by pwarner 4y ago
From my past experience 50% of the time was sort of the magic amount of time to be in the office. Seemed the best blend of focus time at home and in person time in the office. Now I'm 100% remote but next job I'd look for 50 /50 mix.
- j0hnyl 4y agoPersonally I love being 100% remote and have found that I'm more productive than ever, and have more personal time than ever. I would never consider a job that required any regular time in the office unless I was desperate.
- kitsunesoba 4y agoSimilar here. So much dead time in the office, primarily after productive hours have been exhausted, can now go towards things like chores and errands so my evenings and weekends are actually mine in practice, not just in theory. I might consider coming into the office a few days a week if it's within reasonable walking distance, but that usually means living downtown which is usually a cost that exceeds the regional CoL compensation adjustments that most companies make, which means it's coming out of my pocket to be possible, and I am not going to commute unless it's East Asia style train commuting during off-peak hours, where I can actually do something while in transit.
- tmaly 4y agoI have been back in the office 3 days a week since April 2021. I would say given the lost time due to the commute, I would prefer 2 days in office vs 3 days. Being able to see people face time face gives a different dynamic you cannot replicate with video calls.
- PragmaticPulp 4y agoI'm 100% remote and do well, but I have to admit that even small amounts of in-office time were very effective at overcoming a lot of the communication issues and conflicts that show up in remote work. Having an all-remote team with people who can work well remotely is a wonderful thing. It's rare to get a department full of people who can work well remotely, though. I personally prefer companies that remove the people who can't handle remote work, but so many companies hired large numbers of unprepared people into remote jobs under unprepared managers in the past 3 years. You really have to be careful about team selection to build a fully functional remote team, but that wasn't happening during the hiring rush.
- WWLink 4y ago> I'm 100% remote and do well, but I have to admit that even small amounts of in-office time were very effective at overcoming a lot of the communication issues and conflicts that show up in remote work. My observation is that with some people, I can drive to the office, find parking, find the people I'm meeting with, we go find an open room which takes time... sit down, bring up the laptop on the tv in the room.... I tell them the same fucking thing I told them yesterday on the webex. They smile and nod and now they get it. Because I had to spend a fucking hour coming in to talk to them. And then I've wasted half my damn day so someone who couldn't pay attention to me on webex felt compelled to pay attention to me sitting in a stinky room in a filthy chair.
- adql 4y agoFor us it's more 20%, to maybe 40% when something is planning heavy
- kerpotgh 4y agoI don’t understand this perspective. Being able to see people through video in meet/zoom I don’t feel like I’m missing out on any aspect of in person meetings. Outside water cooler sessions that we do virtually as well, what else am I missing?
- danwee 4y agoMy only reason to only do 100% remote is not about collaboration or similar stuff. It's plainly: I do not live near a big city (nor want to).