3 ms·
I think the reason people get angry about it is that it feels like an asymmetric ask. It feels a bit like saying "everyone needs to come I to the office because
by Dusseldorf 2mo ago
I think the reason people get angry about it is that it feels like an asymmetric ask. It feels a bit like saying "everyone needs to come I to the office because I like there to be people in the office, regardless of whether that's what they want." (not saying that's what you're saying here, just trying to shine some light on how it may be perceived)
- dec0dedab0de 2mo agoOh I get it, I was an early adopter and advocate for working from home. Hell, it was my job to write code to help tens of thousands of people work from home when the pandemic started. I gladly did it, assuming they would all enjoy it as much as I did at the time. But I was only 6 years into it at that point, it was barely a walk in the park.
- zmmmmm 2mo agoOn top of that, it seems the WFO crowd simply can't help exploiting it to their advantage once they are there. They get less work done, but they hoard higher level decisions about what work should be done. They will say "oh we had this corridor conversation and decided X and Y", and then they will even present the fact that happened as compelling evidence that everyone should work in the office. Whereas I see it as evidence of dysfunction - you want to make a decision you get all the stakeholders in the room and you ensure it's transcribed / recorded. Basically an online meeting is the ideal form of it.
- unethical_ban 2mo agoTo us, those hall conversations are normal parts of humanity that cut through organizational bullshit and build personal trust.