3 ms·

> It seems like a lot of RTO proponents can't comprehend, or maybe don't care, that there are people who don't need to be surrounded by other people all the tim

> It seems like a lot of RTO proponents can't comprehend, or maybe don't care, that there are people who don't need to be surrounded by other people all the time, and who work better, and are happier if they are alone. This is a variation on the classic mismatch between introverts and extroverts, social expectations, and behaviors. It's just concentrated in the RTO vs remote debate. > Let people who want to work in an office work in an office, and let people who want to work from home work from home. This, 100%, if you can control for bias. The issue with the true optionality is that remote workers may get passed up for promotion or other opportunities because they're less physically present—even if they're the best fit for the opportunity. That's what makes it difficult to straddle both worlds. I guess one solution would be to have managers, paradoxically, never in the office more than 1-2 days a week to force more explicit interaction via remote conferencing, but that's a weird forcing function.

s1gsegv 2y ago
Maybe the answer to the bias is to have entire teams as either fully in office or fully remote. At a certain level of management abstraction the physical presence wouldn’t be much of a bias anymore, I almost never see my VPs anyway. And for the people in-office trying to communicate with another team, this is not much different than the problem you have anyway with multiple offices even if everyone was in office. Then you can internally move to the team aligned with your working style. People do this now by switching to a company most aligned with their working style, but obviously this has major drawbacks and we probably don’t need to be that coarse.
ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
> This is a variation on the classic mismatch between introverts and extroverts The issue isn't the "mismatch", because everyone is different. The issue arises when people who match 1 pattern force others who don't to follow the pattern anyways, particularly when the reasoning is selfish (I like it [because of X], so we're doing it, even if you don't like it). > The issue with the true optionality is that remote workers may get passed up for promotion or other opportunities because they're less physically present. A few points to touch upon here: - While that is indeed sometimes true, it's a problem of that specific company's culture, not of remote work (my current company promotes equally, for example). - It is indeed extra work to be "noticed" when you're remote, as it requires more than just sitting there and having a face that people can see. For me, this has meant developing myself in terms of delivering results and letting folks know how they're good for the company. IMHO these are pretty universally useful skills in business. - Not everyone is forever looking for another promotion, so that's another argument for letting them choose. > I guess one solution would be to have managers, paradoxically, never in the office more than 1-2 days a week to force more explicit interaction via remote conferencing, but that's a weird forcing function We hold our meetings with a video option, even when a couple people are in the office, and it doesn't feel weird. We are also effective at "huddling" around a screen shared digitally, to quickly swarm a problem. I have alternatively heard of companies incentivizing optionally hybrid workers to come in 2-3 specific days per week by providing perks like free meals on those days.
listenallyall 2y ago
You might be the best fit for the opportunity of "spouse" to some amazing, beautiful, intelligent other person out there, but if you refuse to ever show up in person, inevitably, you're going to miss out in favor of someone who will.

s1gsegv 2y ago

Maybe the answer to the bias is to have entire teams as either fully in office or fully remote. At a certain level of management abstraction the physical presence wouldn’t be much of a bias anymore, I almost never see my VPs anyway. And for the people in-office trying to communicate with another team, this is not much different than the problem you have anyway with multiple offices even if everyone was in office. Then you can internally move to the team aligned with your working style. People do this now by switching to a company most aligned with their working style, but obviously this has major drawbacks and we probably don’t need to be that coarse.

ImPostingOnHN 2y ago

> This is a variation on the classic mismatch between introverts and extroverts The issue isn't the "mismatch", because everyone is different. The issue arises when people who match 1 pattern force others who don't to follow the pattern anyways, particularly when the reasoning is selfish (I like it [because of X], so we're doing it, even if you don't like it). > The issue with the true optionality is that remote workers may get passed up for promotion or other opportunities because they're less physically present. A few points to touch upon here: - While that is indeed sometimes true, it's a problem of that specific company's culture, not of remote work (my current company promotes equally, for example). - It is indeed extra work to be "noticed" when you're remote, as it requires more than just sitting there and having a face that people can see. For me, this has meant developing myself in terms of delivering results and letting folks know how they're good for the company. IMHO these are pretty universally useful skills in business. - Not everyone is forever looking for another promotion, so that's another argument for letting them choose. > I guess one solution would be to have managers, paradoxically, never in the office more than 1-2 days a week to force more explicit interaction via remote conferencing, but that's a weird forcing function We hold our meetings with a video option, even when a couple people are in the office, and it doesn't feel weird. We are also effective at "huddling" around a screen shared digitally, to quickly swarm a problem. I have alternatively heard of companies incentivizing optionally hybrid workers to come in 2-3 specific days per week by providing perks like free meals on those days.

listenallyall 2y ago

You might be the best fit for the opportunity of "spouse" to some amazing, beautiful, intelligent other person out there, but if you refuse to ever show up in person, inevitably, you're going to miss out in favor of someone who will.