5 ms·

Company I work for implemented more RTO recently and when someone asked in an all hands for data showing that the first RTO decision was leading to an improveme

Company I work for implemented more RTO recently and when someone asked in an all hands for data showing that the first RTO decision was leading to an improvement in productivity or some other key metric and the CTO responded saying (paraphrasing) “this isn’t a data based decision leadership is making. It’s because we want to build a culture where people are working next to each other more frequently. We FEEL that the company benefits because of this.” People got bristly that we’re all routinely forced to prove any decision we as employees want to make with data. But was a fascinating moment of transparency, even if a lot of people hated the decision.

joshdavham 2y ago
How would you propose they quantify company culture?
- EPWN3D 2y ago
  The same way you'd measure anything else at a company: productivity. A company's purpose is to make products and money, not to build the culture the CEO wants. If there's data showing that thousands of cumulative hours of commuting leads to more productivity or innovation or whatever, then by all means let's see it. But this is just the open office fad in new clothes. With open offices, the thing which conveniently cost less money also supposedly improved innovation and collaboration. No serious research demonstrates this. With RTO, the thing which conveniently gives middle- and upper-management warm annd fuzzy feelings about their life choices also supposedly increases innovation and collaboration. Again, no serious research demonstrates this. But none of this matters. If this is what the company wants to do, then that's what it wants to do. The CEO can make decisions for whatever reason they want, and if the board are okay with it and the results, then that's the decision. I do wish more C-levels would be honest and just say, "I want to see you all here, because I'm not confident that work will get done if you're not here." At least then no one's insulting anyone's intelligence.
nine_zeros 2y ago
The C-Suite is so highly paid and lives such a comfortable life that they can't even fathom how much productivity is lost by the average individual commuting for an hour and having to bounce for kids/family/home/medical issues. They truly don't understand why people may want to leave work, be at home when they themselves have ZERO chores to deal with. And they also don't understand why people are not as passionate as themselves about the work - when they make millions every quarter but the average person just gets by. Empathy is not what C-Suite operates on because they have lost those empathy brain cells by virtue of living a life SO PRIVILEGED that even a basic middle class life with no help, appointments, kids, schools, rent, is unimaginable to them.
- indecisive_user 2y ago
  Let's not be too hyperbolic here. The average mid-level dev at Amazon is making over $250k while the average senior makes over $400k (source levels.fyi) so they're hardly "just scraping by" and can afford many of those same life comforts.
  - marcosdumay 2y ago
    It's not the first 9 deciles of management that are making this kind of decision.
  - EPWN3D 2y ago
    Have a family in the Bay Area or Seattle and watch that money disappear, especially if you're a sole income provider.
  - nine_zeros 2y ago
    > Let's not be too hyperbolic here. The average mid-level dev at Amazon is making over $250k while the average senior makes over $400k (source levels.fyi) This $400k guy still pays an enormous mortgage, still struggles to pay $2.5k for daycare, still can't call a concierge to take care of medical appointments, can't just hire Uber eats for every meal, can't just hire a service for everything, still has to commute in traffic for work, still has to take cars for servicing, still has to call handyman and play scheduling poker for fixes in the house. Compare this to Andy Jassy making $7 million in the NEXT 3 months. He's going to be able to hire services for everything, helicopter into work, get catered food, have schools, house, kids, services all taken care of. His life is literally just work in the most comfortable setting possible. It is not even comparable. Higher compensation does not compensate for shithole lives imposed by an employer who themselves are living the most lavish life possible. The $125k/quarter person will NEVER be as motivated as $7m/quarter person. It is delusional to expect the same level of work for such wide pay disparity.
jncfhnb 2y ago
For me the problem is that the culture story just feels like a lie
- sharkweek 2y ago
  Yeah I’m pretty sure it is. If I had the guts (no way) I’d ask “is this a planned forced attrition to get people to quit to avoid having to conduct layoffs?” But I’m at a point in my career where I kinda just keep my head down.
- 7bit 2y ago
  Why? That was a very honest Statement, that die especially bot hide behind some nebulous studies of productivity, but the emotion to have people in the office. What do you find dishonest about that Statement?
  - jncfhnb 2y ago
    I’m inclined to believe factors such as headcount, shareholder / rich person pressure to raise commercial real estate value, something about foot traffic in commercial real estate issues, and personal insecurities of individuals about their roles rather than cultural aspirations are relevant. Something as simple as the office manager being penalized for low utilization of the office.
- namaria 2y ago
  It's not a lie. It just means that their culture is based on micromanagement, power trips and control.
  - kermatt 2y ago
    Which makes it a lie because their stated reasons are not the actual reasons.
    - namaria 2y ago
      From what is reported I disagree. But I reckon speech can be read in different ways than how I did.
flashgordon 2y ago
I can't wait for the irony where they do build a culture where people all want to be working next to each there - not for the company but only to brainstorm and work on their own startup ideas (not necessarily tech) as a big final FU!
jader201 2y ago
I’ve been WFH 100% (aside from the occasional 1-week remote offsite) for over 10 years. I will always want to work somewhere that is at the very least supportive of distributed teams, if not remote-first. I also chime in on HN articles like this with an endorsement for remote work. And I also agree that execs are biased, and either ignore or are blatantly against any supporting evidence for remote work. Having said all that, I’m not 100% sure that we have enough data to prove remote work is a benefit or detriment to long term success. I think, without a doubt, there are a number of benefits to employees. And, if for no other reason, happy employees definitely help a company be successful. But I can’t say with 100% certainty that that’s enough to offset the benefits of being together — for the company. I’ve worked with people that I’m convinced don’t put in near 8-hour days (or even the equivalent in productivity), but it’s very hard to prove, and not enough evidence to support taking action (e.g. PIP/firing). I also personally, without a doubt, feel disconnected in ways I didn’t when I used to work at the office. I think the whole “work remotely” debate and trying to come up with evidence of how it impacts the success of a company is about like trying to determine whether eggs are good for you, or whether the occasional drink of alcohol/coffee is beneficial vs. abstaining — there will always be conflicting data, and we may not know for decades. There are just too many variables. And we probably know way less about how remote work affects success vs. how eggs/coffee/alcohol affects our health. But since I know the impacts of remote work are more beneficial to me, that’s more important to me than the impacts it has on the success of the company. And execs know that (most) employees feel the same way, and they feel the need to fight it, especially if they sense that some (many?) take advantage of WFH, but can’t do anything about it.
- hyperG 2y ago
  I will never work in an office again but I suspect that the good/hard workers, are slightly more productive with work from home and are happier if they want to work remote. The slackers though are slacking much more with WFH. At least in the office they have to pretend to be productive and that ultimately results in additional productivity. There has to be scaling laws at work here. I work for a very small company and it is quite obvious who is slacking off remote. In a large company, it is probably much easier for the slackers to hide their lack of productivity.
albertopv 2y ago
It's always been like this, for every decision.

joshdavham 2y ago

How would you propose they quantify company culture?

EPWN3D 2y ago
The same way you'd measure anything else at a company: productivity. A company's purpose is to make products and money, not to build the culture the CEO wants. If there's data showing that thousands of cumulative hours of commuting leads to more productivity or innovation or whatever, then by all means let's see it. But this is just the open office fad in new clothes. With open offices, the thing which conveniently cost less money also supposedly improved innovation and collaboration. No serious research demonstrates this. With RTO, the thing which conveniently gives middle- and upper-management warm annd fuzzy feelings about their life choices also supposedly increases innovation and collaboration. Again, no serious research demonstrates this. But none of this matters. If this is what the company wants to do, then that's what it wants to do. The CEO can make decisions for whatever reason they want, and if the board are okay with it and the results, then that's the decision. I do wish more C-levels would be honest and just say, "I want to see you all here, because I'm not confident that work will get done if you're not here." At least then no one's insulting anyone's intelligence.

nine_zeros 2y ago

The C-Suite is so highly paid and lives such a comfortable life that they can't even fathom how much productivity is lost by the average individual commuting for an hour and having to bounce for kids/family/home/medical issues. They truly don't understand why people may want to leave work, be at home when they themselves have ZERO chores to deal with. And they also don't understand why people are not as passionate as themselves about the work - when they make millions every quarter but the average person just gets by. Empathy is not what C-Suite operates on because they have lost those empathy brain cells by virtue of living a life SO PRIVILEGED that even a basic middle class life with no help, appointments, kids, schools, rent, is unimaginable to them.

indecisive_user 2y ago
Let's not be too hyperbolic here. The average mid-level dev at Amazon is making over $250k while the average senior makes over $400k (source levels.fyi) so they're hardly "just scraping by" and can afford many of those same life comforts.
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  It's not the first 9 deciles of management that are making this kind of decision.
- EPWN3D 2y ago
  Have a family in the Bay Area or Seattle and watch that money disappear, especially if you're a sole income provider.
- nine_zeros 2y ago
  > Let's not be too hyperbolic here. The average mid-level dev at Amazon is making over $250k while the average senior makes over $400k (source levels.fyi) This $400k guy still pays an enormous mortgage, still struggles to pay $2.5k for daycare, still can't call a concierge to take care of medical appointments, can't just hire Uber eats for every meal, can't just hire a service for everything, still has to commute in traffic for work, still has to take cars for servicing, still has to call handyman and play scheduling poker for fixes in the house. Compare this to Andy Jassy making $7 million in the NEXT 3 months. He's going to be able to hire services for everything, helicopter into work, get catered food, have schools, house, kids, services all taken care of. His life is literally just work in the most comfortable setting possible. It is not even comparable. Higher compensation does not compensate for shithole lives imposed by an employer who themselves are living the most lavish life possible. The $125k/quarter person will NEVER be as motivated as $7m/quarter person. It is delusional to expect the same level of work for such wide pay disparity.

jncfhnb 2y ago

For me the problem is that the culture story just feels like a lie

sharkweek 2y ago
Yeah I’m pretty sure it is. If I had the guts (no way) I’d ask “is this a planned forced attrition to get people to quit to avoid having to conduct layoffs?” But I’m at a point in my career where I kinda just keep my head down.
7bit 2y ago
Why? That was a very honest Statement, that die especially bot hide behind some nebulous studies of productivity, but the emotion to have people in the office. What do you find dishonest about that Statement?
- jncfhnb 2y ago
  I’m inclined to believe factors such as headcount, shareholder / rich person pressure to raise commercial real estate value, something about foot traffic in commercial real estate issues, and personal insecurities of individuals about their roles rather than cultural aspirations are relevant. Something as simple as the office manager being penalized for low utilization of the office.
namaria 2y ago
It's not a lie. It just means that their culture is based on micromanagement, power trips and control.
- kermatt 2y ago
  Which makes it a lie because their stated reasons are not the actual reasons.
  - namaria 2y ago
    From what is reported I disagree. But I reckon speech can be read in different ways than how I did.

flashgordon 2y ago

I can't wait for the irony where they do build a culture where people all want to be working next to each there - not for the company but only to brainstorm and work on their own startup ideas (not necessarily tech) as a big final FU!

jader201 2y ago

I’ve been WFH 100% (aside from the occasional 1-week remote offsite) for over 10 years. I will always want to work somewhere that is at the very least supportive of distributed teams, if not remote-first. I also chime in on HN articles like this with an endorsement for remote work. And I also agree that execs are biased, and either ignore or are blatantly against any supporting evidence for remote work. Having said all that, I’m not 100% sure that we have enough data to prove remote work is a benefit or detriment to long term success. I think, without a doubt, there are a number of benefits to employees. And, if for no other reason, happy employees definitely help a company be successful. But I can’t say with 100% certainty that that’s enough to offset the benefits of being together — for the company. I’ve worked with people that I’m convinced don’t put in near 8-hour days (or even the equivalent in productivity), but it’s very hard to prove, and not enough evidence to support taking action (e.g. PIP/firing). I also personally, without a doubt, feel disconnected in ways I didn’t when I used to work at the office. I think the whole “work remotely” debate and trying to come up with evidence of how it impacts the success of a company is about like trying to determine whether eggs are good for you, or whether the occasional drink of alcohol/coffee is beneficial vs. abstaining — there will always be conflicting data, and we may not know for decades. There are just too many variables. And we probably know way less about how remote work affects success vs. how eggs/coffee/alcohol affects our health. But since I know the impacts of remote work are more beneficial to me, that’s more important to me than the impacts it has on the success of the company. And execs know that (most) employees feel the same way, and they feel the need to fight it, especially if they sense that some (many?) take advantage of WFH, but can’t do anything about it.

hyperG 2y ago
I will never work in an office again but I suspect that the good/hard workers, are slightly more productive with work from home and are happier if they want to work remote. The slackers though are slacking much more with WFH. At least in the office they have to pretend to be productive and that ultimately results in additional productivity. There has to be scaling laws at work here. I work for a very small company and it is quite obvious who is slacking off remote. In a large company, it is probably much easier for the slackers to hide their lack of productivity.

albertopv 2y ago

It's always been like this, for every decision.