3 ms·

To me this entire argument smacks of emacs or vim, Windows vs Mac, ... just another holy war on something that doesn't have one right answer. I think the best

To me this entire argument smacks of emacs or vim, Windows vs Mac, ... just another holy war on something that doesn't have one right answer. I think the best approach would be for companies to stop forcing people to pick. Some days I come in to my office & need to shut the door and grind through a problem. Some days I'd rather go sit in a bullpen to talk through some sticky issues. So rather than forcing people into (or out of) boxes, give everyone their own space but have plenty of places for people to have informal meetings and collaboration. The problem, as always, is cost.

troygoode 13y ago
You're right that we shouldn't force people to pick, but I disagree with your conclusion. If you need to shut your door and grind through the problem, why come into the office at all? I like how GitHub has structured it: come to the office to collaborate, stay at home to have your "private office experience."
- owenmarshall 13y ago
  See, I'm comfortable with that as a choice as well. Some days I'd be perfectly content working on my couch, but there are other days where I'd probably end up doing nothing but playing FIFA! Not only that but I can move from "grind away" time to "oh crap I need to collaborate" time very quickly, and I find it personally easier to collaborate in person. Again though, just a choice. And choice at work is a funny thing -- I've been asked if I want a Macbook or an HP laptop, if I need any software licenses for tools, if I want to get my reference books in ebook format or as actual books, but no one has ever asked me if I want an office or a cube or a desk in the middle of a room.
- scott_s 13y ago
  I like the routine of going somewhere everyday to work. It gets me in the mindset, "Okay, now it's time to work." I also like keeping as much separation as possible from "home" and "work." When I'm at home on my couch, I want that to be a place to relax.
RogerL 13y ago
just another holy war on something that doesn't have one right answer This article is in reaction to a scientific study, one of many, showing that in fact there is a right answer.
wpietri 13y ago
I think the problem with letting people choose individually is that a lot of software work is essentially collaborative. One team I'm working with right now is entirely distributed. And they're building a video call tool, so they like remote-presence tech just fine. But they still work one week physically together every month, even though that means a bunch of 10-13 hour flights. Despite the pain, they see the direct collaboration as necessary to making rapid progress. If you let individuals be remote or unavailable as they please individually, it becomes very difficult to collaborate. Another team I work with has made Tuesday the optional work-from-home day just to minimize the scheduling chaos and communication impairment that comes from people being out of the office. I'm hoping that remote-presence tech will solve this problem eventually, but for now, there's just no substitute for having everybody in the same room.
- darkarmani 13y ago
  > I think the problem with letting people choose individually is that a lot of software work is essentially collaborative. > One team I'm working with right now is entirely distributed. And they're building a video call tool, so they like remote-presence tech just fine. But they still work one week physically together every month, even though that means a bunch of 10-13 hour flights. Despite the pain, they see the direct collaboration as necessary to making rapid progress. In the broader discussion, I feel like your example invalidates your argument. Yes, software work is collaborative, but these people are greatly successful collaborating in person less than 1/4 of their time. This is way less collaboration than they would have working in the same office with private offices.
  - wpietri 13y ago
    They actually do a fair bit more collaboration than just the monthly get-togethers. They meet at least daily via video, and they do a lot of virtual pair programming, too. But the point of my example is that they are going to extraordinary lengths to get physical presence, which is a sign of how vital it is. To make that happen, they can't just let individuals choose to be present or not; they have to all agree.

troygoode 13y ago

You're right that we shouldn't force people to pick, but I disagree with your conclusion. If you need to shut your door and grind through the problem, why come into the office at all? I like how GitHub has structured it: come to the office to collaborate, stay at home to have your "private office experience."

owenmarshall 13y ago
See, I'm comfortable with that as a choice as well. Some days I'd be perfectly content working on my couch, but there are other days where I'd probably end up doing nothing but playing FIFA! Not only that but I can move from "grind away" time to "oh crap I need to collaborate" time very quickly, and I find it personally easier to collaborate in person. Again though, just a choice. And choice at work is a funny thing -- I've been asked if I want a Macbook or an HP laptop, if I need any software licenses for tools, if I want to get my reference books in ebook format or as actual books, but no one has ever asked me if I want an office or a cube or a desk in the middle of a room.
scott_s 13y ago
I like the routine of going somewhere everyday to work. It gets me in the mindset, "Okay, now it's time to work." I also like keeping as much separation as possible from "home" and "work." When I'm at home on my couch, I want that to be a place to relax.

RogerL 13y ago

just another holy war on something that doesn't have one right answer This article is in reaction to a scientific study, one of many, showing that in fact there is a right answer.

wpietri 13y ago

I think the problem with letting people choose individually is that a lot of software work is essentially collaborative. One team I'm working with right now is entirely distributed. And they're building a video call tool, so they like remote-presence tech just fine. But they still work one week physically together every month, even though that means a bunch of 10-13 hour flights. Despite the pain, they see the direct collaboration as necessary to making rapid progress. If you let individuals be remote or unavailable as they please individually, it becomes very difficult to collaborate. Another team I work with has made Tuesday the optional work-from-home day just to minimize the scheduling chaos and communication impairment that comes from people being out of the office. I'm hoping that remote-presence tech will solve this problem eventually, but for now, there's just no substitute for having everybody in the same room.

darkarmani 13y ago
> I think the problem with letting people choose individually is that a lot of software work is essentially collaborative. > One team I'm working with right now is entirely distributed. And they're building a video call tool, so they like remote-presence tech just fine. But they still work one week physically together every month, even though that means a bunch of 10-13 hour flights. Despite the pain, they see the direct collaboration as necessary to making rapid progress. In the broader discussion, I feel like your example invalidates your argument. Yes, software work is collaborative, but these people are greatly successful collaborating in person less than 1/4 of their time. This is way less collaboration than they would have working in the same office with private offices.
- wpietri 13y ago
  They actually do a fair bit more collaboration than just the monthly get-togethers. They meet at least daily via video, and they do a lot of virtual pair programming, too. But the point of my example is that they are going to extraordinary lengths to get physical presence, which is a sign of how vital it is. To make that happen, they can't just let individuals choose to be present or not; they have to all agree.