4 ms·

Not entirely convinced. The tradeoff is in-office you need to sit next to someone. Remote you can talk to anyone in the world. But it is the role of good WFH cu

Not entirely convinced. The tradeoff is in-office you need to sit next to someone. Remote you can talk to anyone in the world. But it is the role of good WFH culture to avoid siloing of people.

lazide 2y ago
Except you don’t actually talk (as in have a real conversation) with anyone on Teams.
- danaris 2y ago
  Maybe you don't. I've never had any trouble having real conversations on online platforms, whether for work or otherwise.
  - lazide 2y ago
    Research shows, that is about as accurate as saying a Twinkie is real food. Not completely wrong, but…
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - danaris 2y ago
      [Citation needed]? I've not heard of any research that shows that it's impossible to have meaningful conversations on these platforms. And please note the distinction between "it is impossible to have such conversations" and "some people (especially less tech-savvy people) have a harder time having such conversations" on these platforms. Teams/Slack/Discord/etc is just another communication medium. Once our society has, collectively, had more of a chance to get used to them, and once we're no longer dealing with an entire generation who were bad managers before the personal computer even existed (</hyperbole>), I wager you'll see a lot less complaining about the medium itself.
      - lazide 2y ago
        [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9771703/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9771703/] [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35648039/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35648039/] And overview [https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-brain-body-connection/202205/your-brain-and-zoom-fatigue?amp https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-brain-body-con...]
        danaris 2y ago
        OK: all three of those are specifically about "Zoom fatigue". None of them in any way address the issue at hand, which is the ability to engage in meaningful conversations over online platforms such as Teams and Slack.
        lazide 2y ago
        You’re moving the goalposts quite a bit. I said they weren’t the same as in person. The reason for zoom fatigue, as the papers call out, is because zoom or similar is fundamentally different than actual in person conversations. They are missing something important. Several things which are important, actually. Just like twinkies vs ‘real food’.
        danaris 2y ago
        Your post that I originally responded to: > Except you don’t actually talk (as in have a real conversation) with anyone on Teams. That is the specific argument that I am refuting: that your experience of not being able to "have a real conversation" on Teams, etc, is universal, rather than just being your experience, which cannot be extrapolated from without gathering significant extra data. "People get Zoom fatigue from having too many video meetings (especially in the first 2 years of regularly using video meetings after never using them before)" is not the same thing, and does not prove that these technologies are impossible to use as a replacement for in-person meetings on a wide scale.
        2y ago
_ea1k 2y ago
TBH, I've been on teams where the chat was a constant stream of activity. It works really well and involves a lot of people that might not be involved in decisions otherwise. I've also seen the room be quiet way too much on some teams. This is always bad, but hard to fix.
- starkparker 2y ago
  The worst is when the team chat rooms are quiet because each member is in several private rooms or group-chat conversations doing the actual work in there. Regardless of the reasoning, it's toxic to WFH/remote work, even in the short-term. And it's outright sabotage in the long run when it's time for someone who wasn't invited to the "correct" chats to onboard a new hire who ends up needing some context that exists only in someone else's private chat.
  - vdvsvwvwvwvwv 2y ago
    I try to move into team chats. If I have a private chat that ends up with useful info I will dump it on Confluence. Keep things searchable!
  - Yizahi 2y ago
    In my very limited experience this happens when managers (above team leads) insist on being present in chat rooms. No offense to any manager in this topic, I know that you mean no harm in 99.9% of cases and that you do want to make things better, but honestly your presence creates a chiller effect. Jokes are no go, because who knows, maybe this one will be interpreted badly. Local questions are no go, because you can't ask them during work time (he's slacking!), you can't ask anything which can even remotely be treated as improper. Can't show that you lack knowledge in things which should be obvious, can't banter about colleagues or about work in non-positive way. And the list goes on. We have a chat with 100 people which started as a meme and joke one, a lot of people were posting funny stuff there. Now the last meme picture posted there in mid october, and the second to last was in august. And the only people posting there at all, even sirius stuff, are the 3-4 teamleads very close to the management. Same shit in the chat of immigrants, we have a quite a few semi-permanent relocants on the projects, but manager is not one of them and is still present in that chat room. No one posts there, everyone talks either behind the scenes (because there are a lot of questions for people in new country) or in the independent big chats outside of the company. And again, it's not like our managers are bad, quite the contrary, they are very good professionally and personally. And we don't have layoffs. But people still won't talk in the presence of even mid level management, it's an instinct of sorts I guess :) . PS: this is only about informal optional chats. All work chats are never hidden or avoided. We divide them by program, Slack for work and Telegram for fluff.

Not entirely convinced. The tradeoff is in-office you need to sit next to someone. Remote you can talk to anyone in the world. But it is the role of good WFH culture to avoid siloing of people.

lazide 2y ago

Except you don’t actually talk (as in have a real conversation) with anyone on Teams.

danaris 2y ago
Maybe you don't. I've never had any trouble having real conversations on online platforms, whether for work or otherwise.
- lazide 2y ago
  Research shows, that is about as accurate as saying a Twinkie is real food. Not completely wrong, but…
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - danaris 2y ago
    [Citation needed]? I've not heard of any research that shows that it's impossible to have meaningful conversations on these platforms. And please note the distinction between "it is impossible to have such conversations" and "some people (especially less tech-savvy people) have a harder time having such conversations" on these platforms. Teams/Slack/Discord/etc is just another communication medium. Once our society has, collectively, had more of a chance to get used to them, and once we're no longer dealing with an entire generation who were bad managers before the personal computer even existed (</hyperbole>), I wager you'll see a lot less complaining about the medium itself.
    - lazide 2y ago
      [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9771703/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9771703/] [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35648039/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35648039/] And overview [https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-brain-body-connection/202205/your-brain-and-zoom-fatigue?amp https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-brain-body-con...]
      - danaris 2y ago
        OK: all three of those are specifically about "Zoom fatigue". None of them in any way address the issue at hand, which is the ability to engage in meaningful conversations over online platforms such as Teams and Slack.
        lazide 2y ago
        You’re moving the goalposts quite a bit. I said they weren’t the same as in person. The reason for zoom fatigue, as the papers call out, is because zoom or similar is fundamentally different than actual in person conversations. They are missing something important. Several things which are important, actually. Just like twinkies vs ‘real food’.
        danaris 2y ago
        Your post that I originally responded to: > Except you don’t actually talk (as in have a real conversation) with anyone on Teams. That is the specific argument that I am refuting: that your experience of not being able to "have a real conversation" on Teams, etc, is universal, rather than just being your experience, which cannot be extrapolated from without gathering significant extra data. "People get Zoom fatigue from having too many video meetings (especially in the first 2 years of regularly using video meetings after never using them before)" is not the same thing, and does not prove that these technologies are impossible to use as a replacement for in-person meetings on a wide scale.
        2y ago

_ea1k 2y ago

TBH, I've been on teams where the chat was a constant stream of activity. It works really well and involves a lot of people that might not be involved in decisions otherwise. I've also seen the room be quiet way too much on some teams. This is always bad, but hard to fix.

starkparker 2y ago
The worst is when the team chat rooms are quiet because each member is in several private rooms or group-chat conversations doing the actual work in there. Regardless of the reasoning, it's toxic to WFH/remote work, even in the short-term. And it's outright sabotage in the long run when it's time for someone who wasn't invited to the "correct" chats to onboard a new hire who ends up needing some context that exists only in someone else's private chat.
- vdvsvwvwvwvwv 2y ago
  I try to move into team chats. If I have a private chat that ends up with useful info I will dump it on Confluence. Keep things searchable!
- Yizahi 2y ago
  In my very limited experience this happens when managers (above team leads) insist on being present in chat rooms. No offense to any manager in this topic, I know that you mean no harm in 99.9% of cases and that you do want to make things better, but honestly your presence creates a chiller effect. Jokes are no go, because who knows, maybe this one will be interpreted badly. Local questions are no go, because you can't ask them during work time (he's slacking!), you can't ask anything which can even remotely be treated as improper. Can't show that you lack knowledge in things which should be obvious, can't banter about colleagues or about work in non-positive way. And the list goes on. We have a chat with 100 people which started as a meme and joke one, a lot of people were posting funny stuff there. Now the last meme picture posted there in mid october, and the second to last was in august. And the only people posting there at all, even sirius stuff, are the 3-4 teamleads very close to the management. Same shit in the chat of immigrants, we have a quite a few semi-permanent relocants on the projects, but manager is not one of them and is still present in that chat room. No one posts there, everyone talks either behind the scenes (because there are a lot of questions for people in new country) or in the independent big chats outside of the company. And again, it's not like our managers are bad, quite the contrary, they are very good professionally and personally. And we don't have layoffs. But people still won't talk in the presence of even mid level management, it's an instinct of sorts I guess :) . PS: this is only about informal optional chats. All work chats are never hidden or avoided. We divide them by program, Slack for work and Telegram for fluff.