Fully remote work is associated with 10-20% lower productivity - according to some of the biggest advocates for remote work.
Paint me not at all surprised.
🙄🙄 I think you missed your calling wielding a whip in the bowels of a galley.
I'm wondering do you know where the paper get that figure from.
Even so, according to the article the conclusion is not "Do away with WFH" but instead, "Learn to Manage It".
Ohhh noooo!!
*goes back to happily WFH*
Summary of that paper would be better titled WFH has higher productivity except where managers don't keep proper metrics and don't know how to communicate properly. Where such dysfunction exists we'll just guess the stats to make it look like we know what we are doing.
Not sure how you get that from it to be honest. But I don't think you would be willing to take any study that doesn't suit your agenda at face value. The paper is referencing points people made on this thread over the past 18 months and I think most people now that they have come out of their covid hibernation can see the reality of wfh. A hybrid set up is a nice perk but that's about it.
"Take things at face value"
That's a euphemism for not having metrics or data and relying on "referencing points" sound bites. Chinese whispers. That article is full of that.
They actually use one data point where WFH was MORE productive as less productive due suggesting they took longer. They also had ludicrously low figure of time saved commuting per week. It was less than I take in a day. And I've a short commute.
If it takes more time then productivity is lower, you know that right?
I think since returning back to the office many places have return to playing office politics. It's that culture that causes problems with communication, mentoring etc.
If you need to be sitting beside people to communicate you've bigger issues than WFH.
You realise people WFH often aren't working traditional hours right. It's do they get the work done. The article is inadvertently conceding they do (even get more done) but then change the narrative to be about start and end times.
I'll bet in the office asking people to stay late or come in at the weekend, no one's having a conversation about productivity, sticking to 9-5 or how your being paid less working extra for free.
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make but are we clear on the definition of productivity now as a metric?
Because all communication works better virtually....
I work in local government and we have an optional WFH policy but very few are availing of it as far as I can see. People aren’t travelling long distances to work for the most part so commuting times aren’t a big factor.
I much prefer the office but I often have substantial pieces of work like reports and funding applications to do and I have taken to doing these at home because you have far fewer distractions and can just power through the work and get it done. I realise this is just my own anecdotal take on the productivity thing and not really relevant in the bigger scheme of things.
I can see how WFH would be hugely attractive in other sectors and for people with long commute times in to cities etc and it’s great that many employers can offer it now IMO
Because reverting to strawman speaks volumes ...
It's clear your happy with fudging the figures to distort the narrative.
I'm only doing 14k ish by train (usually) and it's still best part of an hour door to door (or to the desk) That's 10 hours in a week. Not a trivial amount of time. Often its longer.
But totally agree it suits some people and some work tasks better than others.
At least for those of us without families not having to commute is the big factor. I went as far as having a desk and computer dedicated for work but on the whole the lack of work-life seperation with fully remote working has (no pun intended) not really worked out for me.
It's clear you are conflating output with productivity,
It's not my report I haven't fudged anything.
OK let's break into smaller chunks, do you think face to face communication is more or less effective than virtual? All other things being equal
The report has.
This thread is communication. Would this thread by more or less effective face to face.
A year of communication, 1.4K comments 82.2K viewers (Listeners) and I don't know maybe 30 commentators from all their locations, (incl the 1.4k) meeting face to face.
"...All other things being equal.."
That train has left the station, if you competitors are doing it you can either do the same or accept you won't be employees first choice.
You have proven the point, everyone would have said everything they had to say in an hour or two. But way to obfuscate.
You attempted and failed to narrow the terms of reference to a question that had only one answer. Then you just simply ignored what was said. At least Bumble tried to make a meaningful contribution, even if I disagree with Bumble, and the link dumping, there is something to discuss. No idea what point you are trying to make.
Going back to the actual topic I simply asked where (and how) did the report get those figures. The lack of reply says it all.
From that report...
Hybrid working, in turn, appears to have small positive impacts on productivity, coming from two sources. First, hybrid workers save about two or three hours each week from less commuting, and some of that time goes into more hours in their current job. Second, hybrid workers appear to be more productive on their home days because of fewer distractions and quieter home working conditions.
In the longer run we predict the amount of working from home will continue to grow, primarily due to technological improvements and changing norms. In 10 to 20 years we could see 30% to 40% of working days being done from home, continuing the long run trend of growing levels of working from home, which has roughly doubled every 15 years going back to the 1960s. The pandemic led to an additional one-off five-fold jump, but also jumpstarted a surge in research and development into new hardware and software products to support working from home. Thus, we expect the rate of technological change in remote work friendly innovations to fuel a new phase of work from home adoption in the coming decades.
Its not all pro remote working, and thats ok. But its certainly not as was presented.
I'm not sure why you are holding me responsible for the report, I didn't even link it. But I do agree that hybrid working is better than fully remote, as I said it's a perk rather than any great benefit to a business but I value a few days wfh to spend more time with my family rather than commuting. I wouldn't cod myself into thinking that it's better from a work perspective though.
I'm glad we agree in person communication works better.
'I'm glad we agree in person communication works better.' you seem fixated on this aspect, how do you get any work done if you want all meetings face to face...
Going well for Musk.
Sacked half the staff including a lot of the people he needed to keep the lights on. Cancel remote working. Grovels to try get staff back. Staff go elsewhere Compounds one bad decision after another. Twitter now worth half of what he paid for it, ($20bn less in 6 months) Now accuses Meta of hiring former Twitter employees
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2022/09/20/1123560338/bad-boss-lose-remote-work-wars
What point are you trying to make, when I was 5 days a week in the office all meetings were face to face, somehow I managed. Do you disagree with me?
Yes, yes I do, You managed. Our office is split over two offices on the opposite side of the country. So day to day is mainly through teams, we collaborate with other companies, who could be based anywhere in Ireland or the UK again all over teams. You might not have managed.
Do you disagree with me?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
