5 ms·

It seems a consultancy has done some research, only to discover that the thing their customers want to be true is true. What a novel development! I'd always un

It seems a consultancy has done some research, only to discover that the thing their customers want to be true is true. What a novel development! I'd always understood that hybrid was the worst of both worlds. Companies still have to pay for real estate, can't recruit from neighboring cities, let alone internationally, and employees have to commute to work and live in expensive cities, just so they can work in loud offices and be micromanaged.

repeekad 2y ago
Hybrid is exclusively a stop gap to stop people for quitting, no company wants to pay for an office downtown used 2-3 out of 7 days a week, S.F. vacancy rates seem to be leveling off and not improving around 40% (officially)
tyre 2y ago
We do hybrid with people in office 3-4 days of the week (and no one on Friday.) Feels like a good balance. As a manager, it’s absolutely not to micromanage. People build bonds in person in a different way than online. I can give reasons why that helps with work, but also it’s nice to be around humans? As for commute, NYC subways are great (or at least as good as America’s got…). We have people in NJ, Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens. Everything has trade-offs, but it’s common for engineers to mention in the interview process that they’re looking for something at least partly in person.
- dmitrygr 2y ago
  > As a manager [...] it’s nice to be around humans? And there is your bias
  - tyre 2y ago
    when your ellipsis elides whole sentences and glues together phrases that weren’t tied together in text, that’s bad faith
- viraptor 2y ago
  > People build bonds in person in a different way than online I see you said "different", which I agree with. But you didn't say "better" - and I do feel that's a mix that goes both sides.
  - ratmeadow 2y ago
    From my own experience at a hybrid company, sample size 1, there's a marked difference in interaction between me and other devs when we meet in person. It's basically like I don't exist and am worth 0 to them before we've met in person. After meeting, even if only briefly, it's completely different: suddenly they respond to messages, are willing to help with questions, even willing to prioritise work if I ask. Now this could be for various reasons - company culture, me being a juniorish dev, confirmation bias. But it really seems like humans don't account value to something/someone unless they interact with it in person. Personally I am completely for remote work, although I think it's wrong to say it's strictly better for everyone in every scenario.
    - viraptor 2y ago
      Have you tried to schedule some video calls for lunch / banter / get to know each other time? They can do magic too. In my experience it's about taking the time to actually chat to each other when you both have time, not about the presence.
      - brailsafe 2y ago
        This sounds like the difference between going to a singles event to try and meet people instead of just bumping into them where you already are. One is much more likely to actually form something substantial, even though I'm hugely in-favor of focusing social time on doing this outside of work, it's important to have some level of that with coworkers I'd think.
      - ratmeadow 2y ago
        Video calls do work to some extent, true. Just having some form of rapport with someone helps. However, I think there are some downsides to calls: - The person has to agree to the call (tricky if they are already not responding and/or are more senior and/or dislike meetings) - Calls often seem to have a lesser effect than in-person - Plus other standard downsides of Zoom, etc. In comparison, taking 2 minutes to walk up to someone's desk and directly address them is almost like a magic trick. Instant "pay attention to me now", thanks to the evolved human brain. Now maybe overall not worth the tradeoff for in-office vs remote, but still I appreciate in-office's effectiveness here.
- piva00 2y ago
  > People build bonds in person in a different way than online. I can give reasons why that helps with work, but also it’s nice to be around humans? Completely agree on people building bonds in person, hard disagree that you need people in the office most of the time for it. My employer went full onboard with allowing people to choose if they want to work from home or in an office, we're very distributed (offices in many European cities, in the USA, Japan, etc.) with thousands of employees, having 1-2 events a year where we gather together has already been enough to develop bonds that we maintain remotely. I live in a city with amazing public transportation but I would not choose to commute again for work in my life, I prefer working from home and doing the odd trip to the office when I feel like it, it's enough to personally connect with people while also avoiding a lot of the pitfalls of office life.
- cassianoleal 2y ago
  > it’s common for engineers to mention in the interview process that they’re looking for something at least partly in person. How can you tell this is not because they're aware of present market or even your specific company's preference / conditions and are simply trying to increase their appealing to you and increase their chance of getting an offer? It's common interviewing advice and CV writing to market yourself according to the job you're aiming for - that includes "company culture", "company values" and whatever other crap helps bias the interviewers in your favour. > it’s nice to be around humans Yep. That's what family and friends are for. Work is mainly to make money. Until the time comes when work stops being a requirement for survival, that will always be its primary function. Making friends can be a nice side-effect sometimes, but is not a requirement.
  - tyre 2y ago
    > How can you tell this is not because they're aware of present market or even your specific company's preference / conditions and are simply trying to increase their appealing to you and increase their chance of getting an offer? Hybrid is a requirement so it’s more about expectation setting, and most people who say that bring it up themselves when asked what they’re looking for. Maybe they’re all lying, but it’s a pretty low priority thing to lie about and after interviewing hundreds of people, you do get pretty good at parsing out how genuine someone is. Not perfect! But pretty good. > Yep. That's what family and friends are for. Work is mainly to make money. Until the time comes when work stops being a requirement for survival, that will always be its primary function. Agree to disagree. If I’m going to spend a third of my life doing a thing, I’m damn sure going to screen for people I respect and want to spend time with. Work means a lot more than the money to me; impact and people are higher up there.
    - cassianoleal 2y ago
      Thanks for your reply. > Hybrid is a requirement If they know it's a requirement to work for you, and they're interviewing with you, they either want it or don't want it but have accepted it as a requirement. The former case is the one you say is the majority of your interviewees. I'm not saying you're wrong, but consider the latter case. A person is looking for a job because they require money to make a living. They know your requirements. They will want to be as appealing to you as they can live with. Since they've already accepted the constraint of hybrid working, they may as well tell you that's exactly what they want. > most people who say that bring it up themselves when asked what they’re looking for And that's exactly what I mean by the above. > Maybe they’re all lying, but it’s a pretty low priority thing to lie about Which makes it a very easy lie as well. It's harder to lie about the things that have more weight as they tend to be harder to live with. > after interviewing hundreds of people, you do get pretty good at parsing out how genuine someone is. Not perfect! But pretty good. This is exactly what bias does to you. You start believing you're good at detecting things. Maybe you actually are, I don't know. I couldn't know. Even if I thought you were that good, it may just be my own biases telling me that. > If I’m going to spend a third of my life doing a thing, I’m damn sure going to screen for people I respect I agree. It's very difficult to try to build something with people for whom you have no respect. > and want to spend time with. Also fair. There's no need for friendship still. In any case, this is a strawman. I was responding to: > > it’s nice to be around humans I think it's nice to be around humans for whom I have more than just respect. That's where friends and family come into play. At work, even though there will always be a preference to be around people who are nice, it's not a hard requirement. > Work means a lot more than the money to me; impact and people are higher up there. This is easy to say from a position of privilege. People interviewing for a job are much of the time at risk of ceasing to exist in society if they don't get hired. That puts them in a position where they will make as much as they can live with in order to get the job. It's great that you and I can be selective about the jobs and people we work with, but in reality even in tech most people are in the workforce for survival and subsistence first and foremost. Hell, even though I am at this moment in a relatively comfortable position, in very little time I could go from privileged to desperate and you can bet I would lie (and likely be very good at it) in an interview if it would be the difference between keeping my house and feeding my offspring, and any other altenative.
iancmceachern 2y ago
You have it wrong. First, think about from which viewpoint your above comment comes from. Each sentence above could be amended to add "... , from the companies standpoint". From the employees standpoint it's better on each account. If you understand that companies, and their performance, is just an aggregate of thr employees and their performance. Empower the employees, that's the only company culture worth pursuing. Your points: - "Companies still have to pay for real estate" - they need this anyway. If you do it properly you don't have extra space, you have twice as many hybrid people working out of the same space you had half as many full time on site folks. This is the choice of management in how they efficiently use their space. Even explicitly remote first companies I know of have offices and meet regularly in person. This is a red herring. - "cant recruit from neighboring cities" - Being hybrid actually helps with this, no? I personally know lots of people who work further from the office than they would if they didn't have a hybrid schedule. - your last point is exactly why people want hybrid or remote positions. I don't see an argument for your point there, only one against it. -
consteval 2y ago
Hybrid still reducing driving hours significantly. I think that lone means it's not the worst of both worlds. I certainly don't see how it's worse than purely in-office work.

repeekad 2y ago

Hybrid is exclusively a stop gap to stop people for quitting, no company wants to pay for an office downtown used 2-3 out of 7 days a week, S.F. vacancy rates seem to be leveling off and not improving around 40% (officially)

tyre 2y ago

We do hybrid with people in office 3-4 days of the week (and no one on Friday.) Feels like a good balance. As a manager, it’s absolutely not to micromanage. People build bonds in person in a different way than online. I can give reasons why that helps with work, but also it’s nice to be around humans? As for commute, NYC subways are great (or at least as good as America’s got…). We have people in NJ, Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens. Everything has trade-offs, but it’s common for engineers to mention in the interview process that they’re looking for something at least partly in person.

dmitrygr 2y ago
> As a manager [...] it’s nice to be around humans? And there is your bias
- tyre 2y ago
  when your ellipsis elides whole sentences and glues together phrases that weren’t tied together in text, that’s bad faith
viraptor 2y ago
> People build bonds in person in a different way than online I see you said "different", which I agree with. But you didn't say "better" - and I do feel that's a mix that goes both sides.
- ratmeadow 2y ago
  From my own experience at a hybrid company, sample size 1, there's a marked difference in interaction between me and other devs when we meet in person. It's basically like I don't exist and am worth 0 to them before we've met in person. After meeting, even if only briefly, it's completely different: suddenly they respond to messages, are willing to help with questions, even willing to prioritise work if I ask. Now this could be for various reasons - company culture, me being a juniorish dev, confirmation bias. But it really seems like humans don't account value to something/someone unless they interact with it in person. Personally I am completely for remote work, although I think it's wrong to say it's strictly better for everyone in every scenario.
  - viraptor 2y ago
    Have you tried to schedule some video calls for lunch / banter / get to know each other time? They can do magic too. In my experience it's about taking the time to actually chat to each other when you both have time, not about the presence.
    - brailsafe 2y ago
      This sounds like the difference between going to a singles event to try and meet people instead of just bumping into them where you already are. One is much more likely to actually form something substantial, even though I'm hugely in-favor of focusing social time on doing this outside of work, it's important to have some level of that with coworkers I'd think.
    - ratmeadow 2y ago
      Video calls do work to some extent, true. Just having some form of rapport with someone helps. However, I think there are some downsides to calls: - The person has to agree to the call (tricky if they are already not responding and/or are more senior and/or dislike meetings) - Calls often seem to have a lesser effect than in-person - Plus other standard downsides of Zoom, etc. In comparison, taking 2 minutes to walk up to someone's desk and directly address them is almost like a magic trick. Instant "pay attention to me now", thanks to the evolved human brain. Now maybe overall not worth the tradeoff for in-office vs remote, but still I appreciate in-office's effectiveness here.
piva00 2y ago
> People build bonds in person in a different way than online. I can give reasons why that helps with work, but also it’s nice to be around humans? Completely agree on people building bonds in person, hard disagree that you need people in the office most of the time for it. My employer went full onboard with allowing people to choose if they want to work from home or in an office, we're very distributed (offices in many European cities, in the USA, Japan, etc.) with thousands of employees, having 1-2 events a year where we gather together has already been enough to develop bonds that we maintain remotely. I live in a city with amazing public transportation but I would not choose to commute again for work in my life, I prefer working from home and doing the odd trip to the office when I feel like it, it's enough to personally connect with people while also avoiding a lot of the pitfalls of office life.
cassianoleal 2y ago
> it’s common for engineers to mention in the interview process that they’re looking for something at least partly in person. How can you tell this is not because they're aware of present market or even your specific company's preference / conditions and are simply trying to increase their appealing to you and increase their chance of getting an offer? It's common interviewing advice and CV writing to market yourself according to the job you're aiming for - that includes "company culture", "company values" and whatever other crap helps bias the interviewers in your favour. > it’s nice to be around humans Yep. That's what family and friends are for. Work is mainly to make money. Until the time comes when work stops being a requirement for survival, that will always be its primary function. Making friends can be a nice side-effect sometimes, but is not a requirement.
- tyre 2y ago
  > How can you tell this is not because they're aware of present market or even your specific company's preference / conditions and are simply trying to increase their appealing to you and increase their chance of getting an offer? Hybrid is a requirement so it’s more about expectation setting, and most people who say that bring it up themselves when asked what they’re looking for. Maybe they’re all lying, but it’s a pretty low priority thing to lie about and after interviewing hundreds of people, you do get pretty good at parsing out how genuine someone is. Not perfect! But pretty good. > Yep. That's what family and friends are for. Work is mainly to make money. Until the time comes when work stops being a requirement for survival, that will always be its primary function. Agree to disagree. If I’m going to spend a third of my life doing a thing, I’m damn sure going to screen for people I respect and want to spend time with. Work means a lot more than the money to me; impact and people are higher up there.
  - cassianoleal 2y ago
    Thanks for your reply. > Hybrid is a requirement If they know it's a requirement to work for you, and they're interviewing with you, they either want it or don't want it but have accepted it as a requirement. The former case is the one you say is the majority of your interviewees. I'm not saying you're wrong, but consider the latter case. A person is looking for a job because they require money to make a living. They know your requirements. They will want to be as appealing to you as they can live with. Since they've already accepted the constraint of hybrid working, they may as well tell you that's exactly what they want. > most people who say that bring it up themselves when asked what they’re looking for And that's exactly what I mean by the above. > Maybe they’re all lying, but it’s a pretty low priority thing to lie about Which makes it a very easy lie as well. It's harder to lie about the things that have more weight as they tend to be harder to live with. > after interviewing hundreds of people, you do get pretty good at parsing out how genuine someone is. Not perfect! But pretty good. This is exactly what bias does to you. You start believing you're good at detecting things. Maybe you actually are, I don't know. I couldn't know. Even if I thought you were that good, it may just be my own biases telling me that. > If I’m going to spend a third of my life doing a thing, I’m damn sure going to screen for people I respect I agree. It's very difficult to try to build something with people for whom you have no respect. > and want to spend time with. Also fair. There's no need for friendship still. In any case, this is a strawman. I was responding to: > > it’s nice to be around humans I think it's nice to be around humans for whom I have more than just respect. That's where friends and family come into play. At work, even though there will always be a preference to be around people who are nice, it's not a hard requirement. > Work means a lot more than the money to me; impact and people are higher up there. This is easy to say from a position of privilege. People interviewing for a job are much of the time at risk of ceasing to exist in society if they don't get hired. That puts them in a position where they will make as much as they can live with in order to get the job. It's great that you and I can be selective about the jobs and people we work with, but in reality even in tech most people are in the workforce for survival and subsistence first and foremost. Hell, even though I am at this moment in a relatively comfortable position, in very little time I could go from privileged to desperate and you can bet I would lie (and likely be very good at it) in an interview if it would be the difference between keeping my house and feeding my offspring, and any other altenative.

iancmceachern 2y ago

You have it wrong. First, think about from which viewpoint your above comment comes from. Each sentence above could be amended to add "... , from the companies standpoint". From the employees standpoint it's better on each account. If you understand that companies, and their performance, is just an aggregate of thr employees and their performance. Empower the employees, that's the only company culture worth pursuing. Your points: - "Companies still have to pay for real estate" - they need this anyway. If you do it properly you don't have extra space, you have twice as many hybrid people working out of the same space you had half as many full time on site folks. This is the choice of management in how they efficiently use their space. Even explicitly remote first companies I know of have offices and meet regularly in person. This is a red herring. - "cant recruit from neighboring cities" - Being hybrid actually helps with this, no? I personally know lots of people who work further from the office than they would if they didn't have a hybrid schedule. - your last point is exactly why people want hybrid or remote positions. I don't see an argument for your point there, only one against it. -

consteval 2y ago

Hybrid still reducing driving hours significantly. I think that lone means it's not the worst of both worlds. I certainly don't see how it's worse than purely in-office work.