3 ms·
Similar circumstances (but longer time wfh) and similar observation. The in-person place is full of these absurd chains of tracking down the person who knows th
by vundercind 2y ago
Similar circumstances (but longer time wfh) and similar observation. The in-person place is full of these absurd chains of tracking down the person who knows the thing, terrible processes for communication and defining what work needs to be done, et c, in ways that would never survive in a remote company because you can’t work that way when you’re remote.
It’s a huge drag on their efficiency, in person or remote, and hurts hiring because they struggle to provide even a handful of of remote days per year in a market where every office worker I know (aside from here) is at least hybrid-leaning-remote (and most office workers I know aren’t in tech, nor is this a tech company). They have no idea that it’s bad, though.
- RandomLensman 2y agoAre these huge differences in efficiency visible in financial numbers?
- nottorp 2y agoHow do you propose to establish that, clone the people at one company, run both clones for a couple years and find out which made more money?
- RandomLensman 2y agoWe kind of have natural experiments: switching to WFH and then switching back (at least for some some), so there should be groups of companies that could be compared.
- vundercind 2y agoFor companies like this one, WFH probably would look bad. It’d both be harder to work that way because they’re already dysfunctional, and it’d make the existing dysfunction more visible (and so probably be blamed for things that would have been going wrong even with everyone in the office).