3 ms·

Hard to be sure of course, but from (my perception of) tone I get the impression you've read my comment as somehow opposing the concept of remote work. Wasn't

Hard to be sure of course, but from (my perception of) tone I get the impression you've read my comment as somehow opposing the concept of remote work. Wasn't where I was coming from at all. My personal opinions on the matter are skewed as I have worked remotely (home, overseas, or while on the move) for more of my career than not. But that's still personal preference and I'm not going to pretend my opinion is some objective truth. The point I was drilling into in my original comment was something specifically mentioned in the article which I found intriguing: the potentially misleading correlation between societies deemed "individualist" and the fallacious presupposition that one can only be a team player when physically collocated. It's never going to be a simple answer - some people yearn for the open plan office, some wish they had a private office (but still at work), some wish they were at home exclusively. The dangerous thing (which intrigues me just slightly more than it makes me uncomfortable) is when people start saying one way or the other is "right" (or worse, implying that one is selfish and the other selfless) I've my own take, and I could easily make arguments for the opposing view - but far more interested in the meta-conversations than the bluster.

kkfx 2y ago
An ancient Italian proverb state "there is no medal without a backside", or anything have good and bad aspects, however "collectivism vs individualism" it's IMVHO a way to misled, society are groups of individuals who share something, the point might be the ratio between cooperation and competition witch is not the same than collectivism vs individualism because happen at various different levels: two restaurants might compete to earn more customers but also cooperate for or against a law, some changes in the surroundings and so on. There is not much "collectivism vs individualism" in that. Having "the quid" who makes humans doing something even if they dislike it is a classical need of those who rule others, because there are regularly situations where is needed and totally "free" people, specially those who understand less what they are doing and why, might decide not to do something suddenly. The geographical vinculum, the regular physical proximity might help form such "quid", sentiment that push humans to act together, but in a modern world such need is just a sign of incompetent management who fail to "make a team" without certain helpers. Workers are not soldiers and daily work is not a war, any company need a certain environment and slack to compensate various situations without needing such techniques. Companies who operate without that have a bad future and if they perform well now it's just a temporary thing. A society who perform like that is a society doomed to fail quickly anyway. In the end it's not different than those who prefer the office because at home they have unpleasant situations, it's a kind of patch to retard a bit the outcome, not a solution.

kkfx 2y ago

An ancient Italian proverb state "there is no medal without a backside", or anything have good and bad aspects, however "collectivism vs individualism" it's IMVHO a way to misled, society are groups of individuals who share something, the point might be the ratio between cooperation and competition witch is not the same than collectivism vs individualism because happen at various different levels: two restaurants might compete to earn more customers but also cooperate for or against a law, some changes in the surroundings and so on. There is not much "collectivism vs individualism" in that. Having "the quid" who makes humans doing something even if they dislike it is a classical need of those who rule others, because there are regularly situations where is needed and totally "free" people, specially those who understand less what they are doing and why, might decide not to do something suddenly. The geographical vinculum, the regular physical proximity might help form such "quid", sentiment that push humans to act together, but in a modern world such need is just a sign of incompetent management who fail to "make a team" without certain helpers. Workers are not soldiers and daily work is not a war, any company need a certain environment and slack to compensate various situations without needing such techniques. Companies who operate without that have a bad future and if they perform well now it's just a temporary thing. A society who perform like that is a society doomed to fail quickly anyway. In the end it's not different than those who prefer the office because at home they have unpleasant situations, it's a kind of patch to retard a bit the outcome, not a solution.