3 ms·

BLS did a great job here https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-13/remote-work-productivity.htm https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-13/remote-work-productiv...

hn_throwaway_99 1y ago
Everything in that report basically confirms what I was saying. Most importantly, it looks primarily at the data from 2019-2022. Most execs (and many have said this publicly) are not that concerned about the short-term impacts on productivity. Indeed, many have argued that a good reason things were able to transition relatively smoothly during the pandemic is all the personal and professional networks and workflows already existed. But that study can obviously not measure the longer term impacts on overall competitiveness. And again, since I'm talking about longer term impacts, no study that only took place from 2019-2022 could measure these effects. But I think it's important to acknowledge that, rather than just leaning on the "See! Studies prove remote work doesn't hurt productivity!" argument, which is an invalid interpretation IMO.
- intended 1y ago
  Not the previous poster - but the study which confirms that remote work is not bad, was one done at Stanford. The devil in the details was that Hybrid resulted in productivity gains - not remote.
  - hn_throwaway_99 1y ago
    Do you have a link to that, I'd be interested to see their methodology. That confirms my experience. Even before the pandemic, I would often work from home one or two days a week when I needed to be in "heads down" mode and just knock shit out. It was more efficient for me because there were fewer distractions and it was easier for me to get in the zone. But then I still had plenty of time for in-person collaboration with my colleagues.
    - intended 1y ago
      Ugh. I feel bad sharing this, because I am a proponent of Remote. https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2024/06/hybrid-work-is-a-win-win-win-for-companies-workers https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2024/06/hybrid-work-is-a-w... this should have a link. Also a correction - it showed increased retention rates, but no change in productivity.
- ghaff 1y ago
  From personal observation, we were at a point in the technology cycle--networks/Zoom et al./etc.--where people were able to work remotely in many cases. Indeed, some organizations I'm involved with now hold at least some meetings remotely rather than spending half a day or more trudging somewhere for a meeting that takes half a day or more. On the other hand, I felt very disconnected at work latterly with a larger group and mostly kept up tighter connections with people I already knew.
- esseph 1y ago
  What about all of us that were already working remotely for a decade or more before COVID? Didn't seem to be a problem then.
- no_wizard 1y ago
  >But that study can obviously not measure the longer term impacts on overall competitiveness. And again, since I'm talking about longer term impacts, no study that only took place from 2019-2022 could measure these effects. But I think it's important to acknowledge that, rather than just leaning on the "See! Studies prove remote work doesn't hurt productivity!" argument, which is an invalid interpretation IMO. It didn't though, and if companies and managers are supposedly results driven, data driven orgs (many claim to be, some times very loudly), why would they go against the actual data? Famously, Amazon's CEO couldn't even show something - anything - that supported their RTO position. If you start to see issues downstream in a few years, you need to ask questions as to why, but assuming - which is what RTO does - that going back to the office is right because its been the historical norm - without actually truly studying the effects of remote work - is the problem here. This is simply the executive class flexing what power they have for purposes other than the goal they claim its for

hn_throwaway_99 1y ago

Everything in that report basically confirms what I was saying. Most importantly, it looks primarily at the data from 2019-2022. Most execs (and many have said this publicly) are not that concerned about the short-term impacts on productivity. Indeed, many have argued that a good reason things were able to transition relatively smoothly during the pandemic is all the personal and professional networks and workflows already existed. But that study can obviously not measure the longer term impacts on overall competitiveness. And again, since I'm talking about longer term impacts, no study that only took place from 2019-2022 could measure these effects. But I think it's important to acknowledge that, rather than just leaning on the "See! Studies prove remote work doesn't hurt productivity!" argument, which is an invalid interpretation IMO.

intended 1y ago
Not the previous poster - but the study which confirms that remote work is not bad, was one done at Stanford. The devil in the details was that Hybrid resulted in productivity gains - not remote.
- hn_throwaway_99 1y ago
  Do you have a link to that, I'd be interested to see their methodology. That confirms my experience. Even before the pandemic, I would often work from home one or two days a week when I needed to be in "heads down" mode and just knock shit out. It was more efficient for me because there were fewer distractions and it was easier for me to get in the zone. But then I still had plenty of time for in-person collaboration with my colleagues.
  - intended 1y ago
    Ugh. I feel bad sharing this, because I am a proponent of Remote. https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2024/06/hybrid-work-is-a-win-win-win-for-companies-workers https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2024/06/hybrid-work-is-a-w... this should have a link. Also a correction - it showed increased retention rates, but no change in productivity.
ghaff 1y ago
From personal observation, we were at a point in the technology cycle--networks/Zoom et al./etc.--where people were able to work remotely in many cases. Indeed, some organizations I'm involved with now hold at least some meetings remotely rather than spending half a day or more trudging somewhere for a meeting that takes half a day or more. On the other hand, I felt very disconnected at work latterly with a larger group and mostly kept up tighter connections with people I already knew.
esseph 1y ago
What about all of us that were already working remotely for a decade or more before COVID? Didn't seem to be a problem then.
no_wizard 1y ago
>But that study can obviously not measure the longer term impacts on overall competitiveness. And again, since I'm talking about longer term impacts, no study that only took place from 2019-2022 could measure these effects. But I think it's important to acknowledge that, rather than just leaning on the "See! Studies prove remote work doesn't hurt productivity!" argument, which is an invalid interpretation IMO. It didn't though, and if companies and managers are supposedly results driven, data driven orgs (many claim to be, some times very loudly), why would they go against the actual data? Famously, Amazon's CEO couldn't even show something - anything - that supported their RTO position. If you start to see issues downstream in a few years, you need to ask questions as to why, but assuming - which is what RTO does - that going back to the office is right because its been the historical norm - without actually truly studying the effects of remote work - is the problem here. This is simply the executive class flexing what power they have for purposes other than the goal they claim its for