8 ms·

I can't help but think that there must be some arbitrage opportunity there: massive companies hire top notch engineers and all make them waste their time in (co

I can't help but think that there must be some arbitrage opportunity there: massive companies hire top notch engineers and all make them waste their time in (commute to/from) offices. What if someone comes along and is like "I'm going to provide the exact same service, but without offices and everybody works from home". That company would have a competitive edge, because: people from the established company would have a reason to work for WFH company instead, WFH company would have significantly less expenses (more profits/budgets). Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that in the real world, for most people, coming to the office IS actually more efficient? Or does this just need more time? I'm honestly not sure, but I've sure been tempted to start a competitor to very silly old fashion "you shall come here and sit at a computer where I can see you" type companies.

muspimerol 2y ago
> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that in the real world, for most people, coming to the office IS actually more efficient? I don't think the labor market is efficient to such a degree that we can draw this conclusion. Lots of startups are doing this, but it takes time, capital and luck to achieve the success of the big corporate competitors, which have a huge amount of middle management who hate WFH.
- dijit 2y ago
  There is also the danger of being successful and then acquired by a big tech. You will then be folded into the organisation, maybe the initially hired staff will retain certain perks but they will be eroded with time, and new joiners to the project would never be afforded the same.
IshKebab 2y ago
What do you mean WFH is not a thing? Since the pandemic it's a huge thing.
- bboygravity 2y ago
  It's non-existent in Western Europe around my field (electronics & embedded programming of small products that can easily be taken home in a backpack). I mean there are tons of companies offering 1 or 2 day WFH, but what I was referring to was 100% remote. No office.
xlii 2y ago
That’s an unpopular opinion but given more than a decade of remote work experience I’d say: yes, people are less efficient in remote environment (on average). The „on average” is key however. I’d say that most of the people don’t understand the cost of remote work until it hits them and simply not all can bear that cost. It’s not like people are unwilling (occasionally you can find slackers) but it’s more often things like issues caused by functioning without micromanagement (which is the case in many companies), problem with written communication skills, communication process not efficient for remote work (e.g. water cooler knowledge share which is foundational for people breaks without water cooler) etc. Then there’s self-drive requirement that can easily be extinguished by home conflicts, non-prepped environment or depression coming from isolation and lack of physical movement. Efficient teams are more difficult to create when there is no space for people to bond over non-work (team pizza/social events) From my experience, both remote work proponents and opponents are right with their arguments but the crowd cannot be generalized. Some will suck at the desk, some will suck in remote. As for „sit where I can see you” - that’s a standard offshoring practice, nothing new. You do get to the point of „who watches the watchers” conundrum sooner or later ;)
- _cenw 2y ago
  I still miss that one team that did async work extremely well. On my current team - fully remote, but siloed knowledge due to lack of capacity - there's a high chance that things go missing in dailies.
- varispeed 2y ago
  > Then there’s self-drive requirement that can easily be extinguished It is 99% extinguished by low pay though. Low pay means person can't afford better living environment, can't afford leaving toxic partner, can't afford to go out or hobbies which leads to depression. > Efficient teams are more difficult to create when there is no space for people to bond over non-work (team pizza/social events) That has nothing to do with efficiency. If you create fake family or cult environment, then it is easier to manipulate workers to do unpaid overtime. They "go hard" until they burn out and they then are thrown away like a trash by the corporation. Efficient teams are composed of happy people, who live in healthy environment. You can't have efficient worker who is worried more about their bills than their current ticket.
dwedge 2y ago
I think that despite what LinkedIn influencers promote, a lot of people take advantage of wfh to be less focused on work. Not all, maybe not even most, but dealing with this (and not knowing who will fit into which camp) eats into the efficiency saving. Also once the majority of a team is WFH, it's very tempting for management to take this one step further and start supplementing, then replacing, with off shore workers
- ptero 2y ago
  > a lot of people take advantage of wfh to be less focused on work That has been my impression, too, but not for very good teams and often to a fairly small extent. The bigger issue with WFH is that it requires a management that can write well, do virtually all comms asynchronously and still quickly spot and address both technical and people issues. My 2c.
- pnutjam 2y ago
  Nobody is focused on work in the office, it's politics and coaster culture everywhere. WFH allows me to my work efficiently and quickly. I don't need to look busy because I'm delivering.
gruturo 2y ago
> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that in the real world, for most people, coming to the office IS actually more efficient? Or does this just need more time? I'm honestly not sure, but I've sure been tempted to start a competitor to very silly old fashion "you shall come here and sit at a computer where I can see you" type companies. Sadly yes. I was grumbling about finding a solution to a problem and a colleague overheard me and supplied a perfect solution, as he had the same issue a month before. Same colleague was grumbling about needing a specific non-OSS software and the paperwork around requesting it and I told him we have a subscription already and he can get access to it. Wouldn't have happened if not in the office. My boss tries to keep me informed of what's happening and what will come, but often enough the best stuff is learned serendipitously at the coffee machine. A couple of times I challenged what I learned and it ended up correcting our strategy and saving money.
- valzam 2y ago
  Ok but don't you have engineering wide slack/teams channels where these discussions can happen? If I think to my self 'man this is really hard to achieve for whatever company specific reason' I don't just stew on it for days by myself.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - riehwvfbk 2y ago
    If you always post complaints to these channels, and nobody else supports you - you look like a complainer. If you first find some people with the same problem at the water cooler and you say "we have this problem as a group" then you are proactive.
  - gruturo 2y ago
    I do. But it wouldn't have occurred to me to discuss this in the channel, it's noisy enough.
- hasbot 2y ago
  But how much did your grumbling disturb other people around you and reduce their efficiency?
Sgt_Apone 2y ago
> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that in the real world, for most people, coming to the office IS actually more efficient? WFH is still a thing despite some big names pulling back on it.
shepherdjerred 2y ago
I would rather take a 50% pay cut than work fully remotely
- bboygravity 2y ago
  I would rather take a 50% pay cut and work fully remotely.
mvdtnz 2y ago
> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that... That's an interesting "fact".
brynnboucher6 2y ago
[dead]

muspimerol 2y ago

> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that in the real world, for most people, coming to the office IS actually more efficient? I don't think the labor market is efficient to such a degree that we can draw this conclusion. Lots of startups are doing this, but it takes time, capital and luck to achieve the success of the big corporate competitors, which have a huge amount of middle management who hate WFH.

dijit 2y ago
There is also the danger of being successful and then acquired by a big tech. You will then be folded into the organisation, maybe the initially hired staff will retain certain perks but they will be eroded with time, and new joiners to the project would never be afforded the same.

IshKebab 2y ago

What do you mean WFH is not a thing? Since the pandemic it's a huge thing.

bboygravity 2y ago
It's non-existent in Western Europe around my field (electronics & embedded programming of small products that can easily be taken home in a backpack). I mean there are tons of companies offering 1 or 2 day WFH, but what I was referring to was 100% remote. No office.

xlii 2y ago

That’s an unpopular opinion but given more than a decade of remote work experience I’d say: yes, people are less efficient in remote environment (on average). The „on average” is key however. I’d say that most of the people don’t understand the cost of remote work until it hits them and simply not all can bear that cost. It’s not like people are unwilling (occasionally you can find slackers) but it’s more often things like issues caused by functioning without micromanagement (which is the case in many companies), problem with written communication skills, communication process not efficient for remote work (e.g. water cooler knowledge share which is foundational for people breaks without water cooler) etc. Then there’s self-drive requirement that can easily be extinguished by home conflicts, non-prepped environment or depression coming from isolation and lack of physical movement. Efficient teams are more difficult to create when there is no space for people to bond over non-work (team pizza/social events) From my experience, both remote work proponents and opponents are right with their arguments but the crowd cannot be generalized. Some will suck at the desk, some will suck in remote. As for „sit where I can see you” - that’s a standard offshoring practice, nothing new. You do get to the point of „who watches the watchers” conundrum sooner or later ;)

_cenw 2y ago
I still miss that one team that did async work extremely well. On my current team - fully remote, but siloed knowledge due to lack of capacity - there's a high chance that things go missing in dailies.
varispeed 2y ago
> Then there’s self-drive requirement that can easily be extinguished It is 99% extinguished by low pay though. Low pay means person can't afford better living environment, can't afford leaving toxic partner, can't afford to go out or hobbies which leads to depression. > Efficient teams are more difficult to create when there is no space for people to bond over non-work (team pizza/social events) That has nothing to do with efficiency. If you create fake family or cult environment, then it is easier to manipulate workers to do unpaid overtime. They "go hard" until they burn out and they then are thrown away like a trash by the corporation. Efficient teams are composed of happy people, who live in healthy environment. You can't have efficient worker who is worried more about their bills than their current ticket.

dwedge 2y ago

I think that despite what LinkedIn influencers promote, a lot of people take advantage of wfh to be less focused on work. Not all, maybe not even most, but dealing with this (and not knowing who will fit into which camp) eats into the efficiency saving. Also once the majority of a team is WFH, it's very tempting for management to take this one step further and start supplementing, then replacing, with off shore workers

ptero 2y ago
> a lot of people take advantage of wfh to be less focused on work That has been my impression, too, but not for very good teams and often to a fairly small extent. The bigger issue with WFH is that it requires a management that can write well, do virtually all comms asynchronously and still quickly spot and address both technical and people issues. My 2c.
pnutjam 2y ago
Nobody is focused on work in the office, it's politics and coaster culture everywhere. WFH allows me to my work efficiently and quickly. I don't need to look busy because I'm delivering.

gruturo 2y ago

> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that in the real world, for most people, coming to the office IS actually more efficient? Or does this just need more time? I'm honestly not sure, but I've sure been tempted to start a competitor to very silly old fashion "you shall come here and sit at a computer where I can see you" type companies. Sadly yes. I was grumbling about finding a solution to a problem and a colleague overheard me and supplied a perfect solution, as he had the same issue a month before. Same colleague was grumbling about needing a specific non-OSS software and the paperwork around requesting it and I told him we have a subscription already and he can get access to it. Wouldn't have happened if not in the office. My boss tries to keep me informed of what's happening and what will come, but often enough the best stuff is learned serendipitously at the coffee machine. A couple of times I challenged what I learned and it ended up correcting our strategy and saving money.

valzam 2y ago
Ok but don't you have engineering wide slack/teams channels where these discussions can happen? If I think to my self 'man this is really hard to achieve for whatever company specific reason' I don't just stew on it for days by myself.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- riehwvfbk 2y ago
  If you always post complaints to these channels, and nobody else supports you - you look like a complainer. If you first find some people with the same problem at the water cooler and you say "we have this problem as a group" then you are proactive.
- gruturo 2y ago
  I do. But it wouldn't have occurred to me to discuss this in the channel, it's noisy enough.
hasbot 2y ago
But how much did your grumbling disturb other people around you and reduce their efficiency?

Sgt_Apone 2y ago

> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that in the real world, for most people, coming to the office IS actually more efficient? WFH is still a thing despite some big names pulling back on it.

shepherdjerred 2y ago

I would rather take a 50% pay cut than work fully remotely

bboygravity 2y ago
I would rather take a 50% pay cut and work fully remotely.

mvdtnz 2y ago

> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that... That's an interesting "fact".

brynnboucher6 2y ago

[dead]