4 ms·

And I'll add my own anecdote: the top performers on the 100+ software engineer org I work in are either fully remote or mostly remote. Losing our fully remote p

And I'll add my own anecdote: the top performers on the 100+ software engineer org I work in are either fully remote or mostly remote. Losing our fully remote people would be catastrophic to the team. Collaboration with them is extremely easy, even from different time zones. On the days I go to my office, all I observe is people wearing headphones to be able to focus. Team lunches are nice, but we never talk about work. As I've already developed personal connections with my coworkers, I could go months without seeing them in person (as a matter of fact, that's what happens with my coworkers who live across the country). The famous "whiteboarding sessions where ideas are born" can be easily done remotely, or in one off events in the office if people who believe in office work insist. I found shared docs and basic digital whiteboards allowing me to draw rectangles, arrows and labels as efficient than physical chalk/marker boards. Why? Because the hard work is on the ideas and conversations, not the drawing. Also anecdotally, in 10+ years of office work, I've never observed a single "watercooler conversation" leading to a particularly interesting idea. I generally hear sports, weather chat and complaints about the food by the watercooler. Oh, have you seen that? I'll counter that with the dozens of non-watercooler conversations that led to interesting ideas.

rybosworld 4y ago
I always laugh when I hear the importance of "watercooler conversation" in birthing new ideas.
macNchz 4y ago
> On the days I go to my office, all I observe is people wearing headphones to be able to focus. It's funny to hear all this hand wringing about the loss of spontaneous collaboration in offices, because in 10 years of working in tech offices in NYC, this was by far the dominant pattern: dozens of people sitting in a big open room wearing noise canceling headphones, talking to each other on Slack.
slotrans 4y ago
> Also anecdotally, in 10+ years of office work, I've never observed a single "watercooler conversation" leading to a particularly interesting idea. I have. Happens all the time. > The famous "whiteboarding sessions where ideas are born" can be easily done remotely Really? How? All the tools are garbage and none have the tactility of a marker.
twelve40 4y ago
> Losing our fully remote people would be catastrophic to the team you just made the case for losing the non-remote team and outsourcing everything to a cheaper time zone or even a cheaper country, because why not? after all, remote is so efficient. So why waste money on extremely expensive western labor? > As I've already developed personal connections with my coworkers there could be people that, you know, haven't yet done that, like juniors or newhires
- ojkelly 4y ago
  You're confusing the means of communication and collaboration (remote vs office), with the fungibility of engineers. They are distinct things, and knowledge workers aren't the most fungible things. A good team is a good team, regardless of how they communicate and collaborate. Replace one person in that team, and you have a different team. Replacing a team just because they're remote is phenomenally destructive, just like the layoffs are. > because why not? after all, remote is so efficient That's not the point of remote. It is a preferred way of working for a significant portion of the industry.
  - twelve40 4y ago
    So... why can't a "good team" be assembled somewhere else that's 10x cheaper? Just like what happened to manufacturing, the Chinese and other nations actually turned out to have good - enough - teams to take a good chunk of the US market. So if I'm building my fully remote team, what advantage does a stateside worker have over Latam, or India, or some other location that has managers on the ground, tons (and growing) of Computer Science graduates, increasing knowledge of English, and in Latam's case, same timezones? Isn't that the culmination of remote?
    - ojkelly 4y ago
      It absolutely can be! Good talent is global (eg. I'm Australian). But you suggested getting rid of the existing team in favour of a remote team in another country, because remote is more efficient. You lose more than you'll gain in the cost savings. I'm fully on board with remote teams across the globe, especially when it means engineers can be on call while the sun is up. Do it becuase it gives you access to talent, not because it's cheaper or remote is "efficient".

rybosworld 4y ago

I always laugh when I hear the importance of "watercooler conversation" in birthing new ideas.

macNchz 4y ago

> On the days I go to my office, all I observe is people wearing headphones to be able to focus. It's funny to hear all this hand wringing about the loss of spontaneous collaboration in offices, because in 10 years of working in tech offices in NYC, this was by far the dominant pattern: dozens of people sitting in a big open room wearing noise canceling headphones, talking to each other on Slack.

slotrans 4y ago

> Also anecdotally, in 10+ years of office work, I've never observed a single "watercooler conversation" leading to a particularly interesting idea. I have. Happens all the time. > The famous "whiteboarding sessions where ideas are born" can be easily done remotely Really? How? All the tools are garbage and none have the tactility of a marker.

twelve40 4y ago

> Losing our fully remote people would be catastrophic to the team you just made the case for losing the non-remote team and outsourcing everything to a cheaper time zone or even a cheaper country, because why not? after all, remote is so efficient. So why waste money on extremely expensive western labor? > As I've already developed personal connections with my coworkers there could be people that, you know, haven't yet done that, like juniors or newhires

ojkelly 4y ago
You're confusing the means of communication and collaboration (remote vs office), with the fungibility of engineers. They are distinct things, and knowledge workers aren't the most fungible things. A good team is a good team, regardless of how they communicate and collaborate. Replace one person in that team, and you have a different team. Replacing a team just because they're remote is phenomenally destructive, just like the layoffs are. > because why not? after all, remote is so efficient That's not the point of remote. It is a preferred way of working for a significant portion of the industry.
- twelve40 4y ago
  So... why can't a "good team" be assembled somewhere else that's 10x cheaper? Just like what happened to manufacturing, the Chinese and other nations actually turned out to have good - enough - teams to take a good chunk of the US market. So if I'm building my fully remote team, what advantage does a stateside worker have over Latam, or India, or some other location that has managers on the ground, tons (and growing) of Computer Science graduates, increasing knowledge of English, and in Latam's case, same timezones? Isn't that the culmination of remote?
  - ojkelly 4y ago
    It absolutely can be! Good talent is global (eg. I'm Australian). But you suggested getting rid of the existing team in favour of a remote team in another country, because remote is more efficient. You lose more than you'll gain in the cost savings. I'm fully on board with remote teams across the globe, especially when it means engineers can be on call while the sun is up. Do it becuase it gives you access to talent, not because it's cheaper or remote is "efficient".