3 ms·

because 9 out of 10 times I'd ping someone saying "Hey X, got a minute we want to discuss Y and Z" then I'd get a response 40 minutes later of "sorry I was focu

because 9 out of 10 times I'd ping someone saying "Hey X, got a minute we want to discuss Y and Z" then I'd get a response 40 minutes later of "sorry I was focusing on W. What's up? How can I help?". Then I look around and 2 of the 4 people are not at their desks anymore and it's all just a shitshow. If I need the 6 of us to be on anything I need to send a meeting invite for a specific time to eliminate that type of bullshit. Then deal with all the bullshit that entails

fzeroracer 3y ago
So let me break something down for you real quick. Higher up you say the following: > You do far more pointless meeting and verbal communication when everyone is working remotely anyway. In this situation, you ping someone and are upset that they're focusing on work. You are angry that you didn't interrupt someone in the middle of deep focus to do what someone else might consider a pointless meeting. The last statement proves my point. You don't actually seem to consider the employees time or work to be important, but rather that you need the six of them NOW, no matter what they're doing. You're exactly the problem you describe. What you describe as avoiding red tape to me sounds controlling and nightmarish. Even in an office environment if people want to do quick talks, white board stuff etc I vastly prefer setting up quick meetings or something ahead of time so that I don't constantly get interrupted by some jackasses fighting for my attention when I got a problem to solve.
- eddythompson80 3y ago
  It's a lot easier to look around, see that 1 out of 6 has headphones on, think "they must be busy", let's wait for them to put their headphones down or the next major office interruption or to pull people first thing in the morning next day when we're all are getting in vs everything you've mentioned.
  - fzeroracer 3y ago
    You can do the same thing in a remote environment. Schedule a meeting in the morning of the next day as people are logging onto work. Or schedule stuff for after lunch before people get back into focus mode. All of this stuff can be done with proper scheduling rather than just grabbing people as they go and assuming that it's not interrupting their work.
    - eddythompson80 3y ago
      of course. The whole point of OP and that I was responding to is that an organization needs to make a decision. Are you a 100% remote organization or are you a predominately in-office with occasional WFH type allowance. WFH isn't a new thing. Long before the pandemic we had plenty of people who would WFH every Friday or when they had a contractor or a delivery they needed to be home for. Or when they had one part of the project they wanted extra focus on. An organization should have the balls to say "fuck it, we're 100% remote work" then let employees figure out how that would work for everyone and hoe to organize their meetings and work schedule for everyone. Or they should equally have the same amount of balls to say "we're 100% work from office with the occasional exceptions like we did before and you should figure it out". I've been wanting a commitment to one of the approaches from management for a long time. I'd also like some form of commitment from other companies when I'm applying for jobs. I have no interest in working in a "hybrid" team. You're either 100% remote or you're not. Just tell me which you are and let me pick.
    - strokirk 3y ago
      How on earth do you know when a remote worker takes lunch?
  - Volundr 3y ago
    If you're going to wait for me to take my headphones off in an open office, your going to wait till I'm heading out. Your better off sending a meeting invite, I'll make sure I'm available. What's funny is your solution "or to pull people first thing in the morning next day when we're all are getting in" should be a meeting invite rather than a morning ambush.
    - eddythompson80 3y ago
      > If you're going to wait for me to take my headphones off in an open office, your going to wait till I'm heading out. That’s fine. I’ll catch you next morning or when you’re grabbing a soda or water or …

fzeroracer 3y ago

So let me break something down for you real quick. Higher up you say the following: > You do far more pointless meeting and verbal communication when everyone is working remotely anyway. In this situation, you ping someone and are upset that they're focusing on work. You are angry that you didn't interrupt someone in the middle of deep focus to do what someone else might consider a pointless meeting. The last statement proves my point. You don't actually seem to consider the employees time or work to be important, but rather that you need the six of them NOW, no matter what they're doing. You're exactly the problem you describe. What you describe as avoiding red tape to me sounds controlling and nightmarish. Even in an office environment if people want to do quick talks, white board stuff etc I vastly prefer setting up quick meetings or something ahead of time so that I don't constantly get interrupted by some jackasses fighting for my attention when I got a problem to solve.

eddythompson80 3y ago
It's a lot easier to look around, see that 1 out of 6 has headphones on, think "they must be busy", let's wait for them to put their headphones down or the next major office interruption or to pull people first thing in the morning next day when we're all are getting in vs everything you've mentioned.
- fzeroracer 3y ago
  You can do the same thing in a remote environment. Schedule a meeting in the morning of the next day as people are logging onto work. Or schedule stuff for after lunch before people get back into focus mode. All of this stuff can be done with proper scheduling rather than just grabbing people as they go and assuming that it's not interrupting their work.
  - eddythompson80 3y ago
    of course. The whole point of OP and that I was responding to is that an organization needs to make a decision. Are you a 100% remote organization or are you a predominately in-office with occasional WFH type allowance. WFH isn't a new thing. Long before the pandemic we had plenty of people who would WFH every Friday or when they had a contractor or a delivery they needed to be home for. Or when they had one part of the project they wanted extra focus on. An organization should have the balls to say "fuck it, we're 100% remote work" then let employees figure out how that would work for everyone and hoe to organize their meetings and work schedule for everyone. Or they should equally have the same amount of balls to say "we're 100% work from office with the occasional exceptions like we did before and you should figure it out". I've been wanting a commitment to one of the approaches from management for a long time. I'd also like some form of commitment from other companies when I'm applying for jobs. I have no interest in working in a "hybrid" team. You're either 100% remote or you're not. Just tell me which you are and let me pick.
  - strokirk 3y ago
    How on earth do you know when a remote worker takes lunch?
- Volundr 3y ago
  If you're going to wait for me to take my headphones off in an open office, your going to wait till I'm heading out. Your better off sending a meeting invite, I'll make sure I'm available. What's funny is your solution "or to pull people first thing in the morning next day when we're all are getting in" should be a meeting invite rather than a morning ambush.
  - eddythompson80 3y ago
    > If you're going to wait for me to take my headphones off in an open office, your going to wait till I'm heading out. That’s fine. I’ll catch you next morning or when you’re grabbing a soda or water or …