I don't understand the mandate for 5 days at the office. I am fully remote and I'll admit that it would probably be better if I was at the office once or twice a week. I miss the random conversations with people and I am often a little out of touch with what's going on. On the other hand I get way more focused work done than when I was at the office. I think hybrid is the perfect compromise. One to three days at the office is more than enough for collaboration and the days at home are for deep work.
Full RTO makes no sense to me. Especially if people work in an open office talking to team members all over the globe on Zoom.
There are so many caveats and variations in jobs that it’s basically impossible to truly talk about any one job from another.
At my current job, everyone I talk to sits next to me. It’s meaningfully easier IRL than over zoom. We still work hybrid. But that wasn’t true for me in 2022, when I would’ve been much happier to be remote 24/7, because my team was global.
Not to stir the specter of laziness, but I’ve noticed our recent college hire gets nothing done when he’s remote. Then on Tuesday morning, he comes in with a TON of questions. So it’s clear we haven’t figured out how properly share knowledge in a remote setting. This is (probably) an organization/management failure, not an individual’s fault. But in the short-term, RTO would improve productivity.
Amazon is famous for churning through employees. I’m guessing a significant percent of the org has a tenure under 24mo, and many are college hires. They probably see value in oversight and training by RTO. (And I’m sure the attrition doesn’t hurt their bottom line either)
I haven't found a replacement yet, because it shut down after being bought a few months ago, but my team really enjoyed using Multi which is your run of the mill webcam/screenshare team app (like slack huddle) except it had rooms that stayed open and people could hop in and out.
We had a room for my team, and other teams, and we did a lot more "sit beside one another" type work/conversations with that.
If anyone knows another app with the rooms, and hopefully that lets multiple people screenshare at the same time please let me know.
Not to stir the specter of laziness, but I’ve noticed our recent college hire gets nothing done when he’s remote. Then on Tuesday morning, he comes in with a TON of questions.
You're making some wild conclusions off of N=1, especially N=1 of a recent college graduate. Do you even remember your first job? I would have had a ton of questions regardless of being remote or in-office.
And why even mention laziness? For a recent college grad who's learning the job, "getting nothing done" is an expectation for at least 20% of the working days, it's just for learning.
But in the short-term, RTO would improve productivity.
Why would it make a difference? A question asked remotely vs a question asked in-person should take roughly the same amount of time to answer.
So it’s clear we haven’t figured out how properly share knowledge in a remote setting.
That's really sad that after 4 years of a pandemic some people haven't figured out how to type out a question in Teams or whatever. Or maybe they were so beat down by the corporate culture that they are afraid to do so?
I am fully remote and I'll admit that it would probably be better if I was at the office once or twice a week.
Yeah, probably. The thing is, why should a remote worker care? Even if in office is somewhat more productive, how does that benefit the workers? Why should they care? Maybe the stock price goes up a bit? But my impression is it’s way more impacted by market forces or exec decisions than anything a measly IC peon does.
So, if you add “for the company” after “better”… yes. But is it better for the worker? Not really?
I am in it for the money. And usually the best way to make more money is to get promoted. And to get promoted it’s best to have visibility within the company. And the easiest way to get visibility is to be at the office and chat with the right people.
It's a cost analysis thing, I think. If I'm already working it's fine to want the company to do good so I do my best.
But even outside of remote work stuff people do this analysis. Like if I take on more work related to X people might get the impression, I own it, and then I'll get way more emails and my workload will be too large. Or if I finish feature Y in Z time then the customer might get the impression that's as long as it takes when really, I got very lucky, so they might tighten their expectations. So, sometimes, you make decisions that are "worse" for the company to save your own sanity and workload, depending on the issue and scope. It's complicated, but what's good for me is also good for the company to an extent.
Working in an office 2 days a week has a cost. The drive could add up to 4+ extra hours dedicated to work a week (that's a lot!). If the improvement to the company is only marginal based on my perception, I might say that's not worth it. Of course, in these bigger scenarios, we don't necessarily make this decision. But we make very similar micro-decisions almost every day.
The company doing well is a lovely outcome. However, at what point do they care about me doing well? Or do they just want to do the bare minimum to keep me alive and in my seat?
Comments
I don't understand the mandate for 5 days at the office. I am fully remote and I'll admit that it would probably be better if I was at the office once or twice a week. I miss the random conversations with people and I am often a little out of touch with what's going on. On the other hand I get way more focused work done than when I was at the office. I think hybrid is the perfect compromise. One to three days at the office is more than enough for collaboration and the days at home are for deep work.
Full RTO makes no sense to me. Especially if people work in an open office talking to team members all over the globe on Zoom.
There are so many caveats and variations in jobs that it’s basically impossible to truly talk about any one job from another.
At my current job, everyone I talk to sits next to me. It’s meaningfully easier IRL than over zoom. We still work hybrid. But that wasn’t true for me in 2022, when I would’ve been much happier to be remote 24/7, because my team was global.
Not to stir the specter of laziness, but I’ve noticed our recent college hire gets nothing done when he’s remote. Then on Tuesday morning, he comes in with a TON of questions. So it’s clear we haven’t figured out how properly share knowledge in a remote setting. This is (probably) an organization/management failure, not an individual’s fault. But in the short-term, RTO would improve productivity.
Amazon is famous for churning through employees. I’m guessing a significant percent of the org has a tenure under 24mo, and many are college hires. They probably see value in oversight and training by RTO. (And I’m sure the attrition doesn’t hurt their bottom line either)
I haven't found a replacement yet, because it shut down after being bought a few months ago, but my team really enjoyed using Multi which is your run of the mill webcam/screenshare team app (like slack huddle) except it had rooms that stayed open and people could hop in and out.
We had a room for my team, and other teams, and we did a lot more "sit beside one another" type work/conversations with that.
If anyone knows another app with the rooms, and hopefully that lets multiple people screenshare at the same time please let me know.
I've sort of enjoyed gather town for that sort of thing
You're making some wild conclusions off of N=1, especially N=1 of a recent college graduate. Do you even remember your first job? I would have had a ton of questions regardless of being remote or in-office.
And why even mention laziness? For a recent college grad who's learning the job, "getting nothing done" is an expectation for at least 20% of the working days, it's just for learning.
Why would it make a difference? A question asked remotely vs a question asked in-person should take roughly the same amount of time to answer.
That's really sad that after 4 years of a pandemic some people haven't figured out how to type out a question in Teams or whatever. Or maybe they were so beat down by the corporate culture that they are afraid to do so?
For me, the sweet spot would average to 1.5 days a week in the office.
But right now, I have a mandatory 3 days in the office a week.
Yeah, probably. The thing is, why should a remote worker care? Even if in office is somewhat more productive, how does that benefit the workers? Why should they care? Maybe the stock price goes up a bit? But my impression is it’s way more impacted by market forces or exec decisions than anything a measly IC peon does.
So, if you add “for the company” after “better”… yes. But is it better for the worker? Not really?
I am in it for the money. And usually the best way to make more money is to get promoted. And to get promoted it’s best to have visibility within the company. And the easiest way to get visibility is to be at the office and chat with the right people.
So expand this out a it for me - at what point do you care about doing your job well? Or do you just want to do the bare minimum to keep your job?
It's a cost analysis thing, I think. If I'm already working it's fine to want the company to do good so I do my best.
But even outside of remote work stuff people do this analysis. Like if I take on more work related to X people might get the impression, I own it, and then I'll get way more emails and my workload will be too large. Or if I finish feature Y in Z time then the customer might get the impression that's as long as it takes when really, I got very lucky, so they might tighten their expectations. So, sometimes, you make decisions that are "worse" for the company to save your own sanity and workload, depending on the issue and scope. It's complicated, but what's good for me is also good for the company to an extent.
Working in an office 2 days a week has a cost. The drive could add up to 4+ extra hours dedicated to work a week (that's a lot!). If the improvement to the company is only marginal based on my perception, I might say that's not worth it. Of course, in these bigger scenarios, we don't necessarily make this decision. But we make very similar micro-decisions almost every day.
The company doing well is a lovely outcome. However, at what point do they care about me doing well? Or do they just want to do the bare minimum to keep me alive and in my seat?