There are two camps that want something mutually exclusive (work from home vs work in office). Additionally, in order to get what they want, they need the other group to comply.* The struggle is spilling over into the comment threads.
* If everyone works in the office, and the work from home people are still remote, they get passed over for promotions and basically have a good chance of tanking their career. If everyone works from home, the work in office people lose a lot of human interaction that they need on a human level.
Can we stop this arrogance on both sides of this argument. Some people prefer working from home, some people prefer working in an office. The only viable solution is for there to be options for both groups (not necessarily at the same company).
Then let the people who want to work in the office work in the office. Let the people who don't work from home. That will even reduce the number of people you're trying to fit into a building, making offices possible once more, so the people who do need to be in the office get a better working environment as well.
I don't think we should force people to come into offices, but I am a strong advocate for having offices. I cannot work at home. I need a minimum number of people around, preferably people with whom I am doing some work, to get anything done. If I'm at home by myself, even for a day, I sit in a depressed pit and do no work. I understand that many, many people do not feel this way, but the idea that people would want to work from home is utterly bananas to me.
I think from a utilitarian perspective, getting the minority who want to not work from home to find a cowork space or alternative solution is better than mandating working from the office. Won’t fit everyone, but neither does forcing everyone into the office.
I feel like it's the natural thing that happens, open offices are being pushed so a lot of people will push back. I think the thing that people don't realize is that there is not a single fit solution for how an office should be, unless that solution is flexibility. Some type of middle ground where you have your own work space but also spaces for collaboration. Also forcing all people to telework or not telework isn't the answer, but like myself I want that option. If I have to drag myself to work five days a week my productivity can take a hit. However I'm excited when I get to work from home because I just have to toss on some clothes and go into my office. Not all people like to work from home, but I would rather ditch the distractions that are inevitable in any work place.
Nobody wants to force you to work from home. I think if you work better from the office you should work from the office, and if I work better from home I should work from home.
The execs advocating for work from office aren’t proposing this though: they are instead insisting everyone work from the office, regardless of preference. That’s what chafes people.
I don't understand why there can't be compromise on this? If you want to go to the office, go. If you want to work from home, then work from home.
Why is it that remote workers never insist on everyone working from home, but RTO people want every single person to RTO? Just leave it up to the individual worker.
I agree with a lot of this. It's about finding the nuance and letting people work in the way that's most effective for their context. There's no reason people shouldn't be able to work from home if they need to. But I think what gets lost in this conversation is that a lot of people aren't making altruistic decisions about how to do work best - they just want to do what they want. Some people who like working from home would benefit from being challenged to return to the office and some people in the office would probably do better working from home.
I really doubt a large majority of people want to work in the office. Most people do not. Nearly all of my friends (computer geeks) enjoy working from home, it's more of the marketing/sales/manager types that want to get back in the office even though if you corner them they will say they really aren't any less productive at home and can still communicate with whomever they want. Maybe they should go back in and leave the rest of us happy at home.
It gets complicated when you consider that a lot of people that prefer to work from an office prefer it _because_ other people are in the office. They like the interactions and collaboration. If half the team (or more) decide they want to work from home, then that benefit is lost. In that case, it can't be a win-win scenario.
People should desire a hybrid solution. Working from home is great but there's so many benefits to going to a workplace and sharing resources instead of every worker needing to recreate their own home office. Somethings just don't make sense.
I think this is too reductive. There've been enough people in this thread who mention that they prefer working from an office. It's not just managerial oppression.
Let them work at home. With the ones who cannot work at home or remain at the office anyway, you'll have a lot more space per person to implement offices.
So let them? What's the deal, why can't we have a society where people who want to work from home, do so while those who want to work remotely do so as well? I do know that I am deciding for myself (100% remote).
>"There's a few reasons to prefer working in the office. The single biggest one is the hard delimiting of the work day; when I'm not in the office, I'm not working, ..."
I completely understand your point of view and I think working from home is not for everyone. But many people do have the ability to delineate without that geographical reinforcement. I think the title of the post should be: "Employer Let Your Employees Work From Home If They Prefer" since its not a zero sum proposal.
>"The biggest secondary one is influence on the business. Simply being present when decisions are being made, whether they're technical or business, means you have a chance to speak up and help set direction"
This issues also exists though when a company has two offices that everyone is required to work from, one in London and one in SF for example. Relying on chat and informal lunch meetings is equally problematic for work form home as it is for employees of different offices. It seems like solving the communication issue for one solves it for both and companies seem to have no issues with having multiple offices.
I completely agree with you about email, I feel like we are losing the will to compose proper arguments and counter points or parse them in the context of email.
Win - Win situation. Unfortunately it seems too hard to understand for the majority of managers.. (most likely because they represent the later)
reply