The new way of work requires a new way of managing, whether you like it or not.
Read the whole story
Read the whole story
For me, the biggest hurdle has been training.
For me, the biggest hurdle has been training. We're expanding and I typically hire Jr devs/engineers to then train into seniors. Then either myself or another senior pair develops with them, helping them over the hurdles that would otherwise cost them hours to do what would take a senior minutes to accomplish. That system is so much harder when we're not in the same room. Juniors by definition don't know when they need help - they don't know that what seems like a monumental development task can be greatly simplified with just a little assistance.
We're working through it, a lot of screensharing and a lot of checkins, but there's still significant efficiency loss.
Conversely, some of our seniors are actually more efficient remote. Which, of course, they're spending less time helping juniors.
Funny how even with no net overhead, that cost savings doesn't translate to higher salaries. IF a company stops paying the expenses to rent a huge building and nobody is getting fancy new equipment, the extra cash has to be going somewhere.Remote work can be either costly or cost-saving, depending on how you approach it and how well-equipped you are to truly support it. When done right, properly assessing the appropriateness of remote work for all your employees, and then implementing the changes necessary, saves money. It's the old idea of "right-sizing," except instead of a saccharine euphemism for "firing excess people," the term in this context means targeting and shedding capital and operational expenditures that are only necessary if you're stuffing all your people into an office.
For me, the biggest hurdle has been training. We're expanding and I typically hire Jr devs/engineers to then train into seniors. Then either myself or another senior pair develops with them, helping them over the hurdles that would otherwise cost them hours to do what would take a senior minutes to accomplish. That system is so much harder when we're not in the same room. Juniors by definition don't know when they need help - they don't know that what seems like a monumental development task can be greatly simplified with just a little assistance.
We're working through it, a lot of screensharing and a lot of checkins, but there's still significant efficiency loss.
Conversely, some of our seniors are actually more efficient remote. Which, of course, they're spending less time helping juniors.
Our team has set up regular coworking hours a couple of times a week to give people a chance to talk through problems. In addition, good ticket management makes it easier to see when a task is stalling and needs a second voice. The ability to screenshare and use remote access works really well for pairing for our all-remote team.
Sometimes people are bad at asking for help and that's true in-person as well. Maybe try pairing up each junior with a senior and scheduling a standing meeting where they check in and chat about whatever is going on, or if there's nothing, they say hi and skip. These standing meetings IMHO tend to really help remove friction because setting up specific meetings is sometimes just a little too much barrier.
Our team also finds regular retrospectives with sticky note boards a good way to bring up random topics on their mind, and those often lead to very productive brainstorms.
Not being a work-from-home person, I'd be interested to know how many such people are blowing through Comcast-or-whoever bandwidth caps because of it. Is this a major problem? I would expect so, and now that caps are back in place, the ISPs will be getting a massive windfall from either cap-overages or upgrades to business accounts.
Doesn't everyone's garage have a fume hood? Where else do you haphazardly replicate experiments from YouTube and change diapers?This job is probably not one you can do from home, unless your home is very awesome or very scary.
Meh, the property management companies will likely simply sell off some properties or request to have the properties rezoned, and repurpose the structures. Let's not cry for the commercial property owners, they'll be fine. Property is always valuable.Will be interesting to see the hit on office market over next couple years. It's starting to show some impact now but as more leases are up for renewal, expected to get hit even harder over time.
One comment about "reimbursement for utilities" (not counting internet service here) - in many case, the employee is now not commuting to work, so they're saving on gas, fares, what-have-you. I'm not sure it pencils out for everyone, but in the aggregate, it is probably about a wash.
Figure you've got maybe 100W of AC loads for your telework space - at peak rates here in SoCal, that's about 5.4c/hr, so about 50c/day, or $10/mo. Even if you have a behemoth system with multiple monitors, etc., it's not likely to be more than $50/mo. Again, referencing SoCal, at $3/gallon and 25 mi/gal, that's about the same as a 20 mile round trip commute (Or, using $.55/mile, to account for wear, tear, depreciation, a 4-5 mile round trip). Lots of people have longer commutes. Not to mention that you're typically not paid for commute time.
Two possible exceptions to the "it's a wash":
1) A/C - when I commuted, the AC didn't run during the day. Now it does. and at $0.54/kWh on peak, it's expensive.
2) Internet - what *I* might consider acceptable for personal use probably isn't what is acceptable for high performance telework (nothing less than 10 Mbps bidirectional, really - we regularly move Gbyte files around for my work). OTOH, if you live in a gaming friendly house with 500 Mbps fiber, the work demand is less than the leisure demand.
And on the subject of internet - I think that this is a big problem - There are places where decent service just isn't available. The shared upstream capacity of cable modems is brought to its knees by heavy telework on a neighborhood basis. It is possible that the cableco can reprovision (fewer downstream channels allocated, more upstream). And, typical consumer service level agreements basically let you twist in the wind with undercapacity or outages. I think a business, particularly buying in bulk, might be able to negotiate business accounts with a more "industrial" service level agreement. Certainly this was the case for me when buying phone, then ISDN, then DSL, then fiber - It cost (significantly) more, but you have a different number to call for service, and a much more responsive org behind it. But I'm fortunate to live in a fiber are with new construction, so the physical plant accommodates improved service (bigger underground conduits, pull boxes, etc.)
If your employee happens to live in an area that doesn't have "commercial potential" for the provider, it may be grossly underprovisioned at every step of the way. And, no, 5G is not going to save you here, at least not in the next 2 years in the US. They're not going roll out high capacity nanocells in "older, poorer" neighborhoods.
Not being a work-from-home person, I'd be interested to know how many such people are blowing through Comcast-or-whoever bandwidth caps because of it. Is this a major problem? I would expect so, and now that caps are back in place, the ISPs will be getting a massive windfall from either cap-overages or upgrades to business accounts.
Your commute cost was way more than $20 wasn't it and that too was not covered by the company. Not to mention time wasted commuting is more valuable than moneyNot being a work-from-home person, I'd be interested to know how many such people are blowing through Comcast-or-whoever bandwidth caps because of it. Is this a major problem? I would expect so, and now that caps are back in place, the ISPs will be getting a massive windfall from either cap-overages or upgrades to business accounts.
Oh yeah, it's been a problem for me since March. I've had to pony up an extra $20/mo for unlimited bandwidth so I don't get ridiculous overcharges.
Your commute cost was way more than $20 wasn't it and that too was not covered by the company. Not to mention time wasted commuting is more valuable than moneyNot being a work-from-home person, I'd be interested to know how many such people are blowing through Comcast-or-whoever bandwidth caps because of it. Is this a major problem? I would expect so, and now that caps are back in place, the ISPs will be getting a massive windfall from either cap-overages or upgrades to business accounts.
Oh yeah, it's been a problem for me since March. I've had to pony up an extra $20/mo for unlimited bandwidth so I don't get ridiculous overcharges.
How is that worse than a cramped open office concept ? The kid running around is the speakerphone call on the desk behind you. If the space is at premium there are foldable desk which can be hidden after the workday is over.One comment about "reimbursement for utilities" (not counting internet service here) - in many case, the employee is now not commuting to work, so they're saving on gas, fares, what-have-you. I'm not sure it pencils out for everyone, but in the aggregate, it is probably about a wash.
Figure you've got maybe 100W of AC loads for your telework space - at peak rates here in SoCal, that's about 5.4c/hr, so about 50c/day, or $10/mo. Even if you have a behemoth system with multiple monitors, etc., it's not likely to be more than $50/mo. Again, referencing SoCal, at $3/gallon and 25 mi/gal, that's about the same as a 20 mile round trip commute (Or, using $.55/mile, to account for wear, tear, depreciation, a 4-5 mile round trip). Lots of people have longer commutes. Not to mention that you're typically not paid for commute time.
Two possible exceptions to the "it's a wash":
1) A/C - when I commuted, the AC didn't run during the day. Now it does. and at $0.54/kWh on peak, it's expensive.
2) Internet - what *I* might consider acceptable for personal use probably isn't what is acceptable for high performance telework (nothing less than 10 Mbps bidirectional, really - we regularly move Gbyte files around for my work). OTOH, if you live in a gaming friendly house with 500 Mbps fiber, the work demand is less than the leisure demand.
And on the subject of internet - I think that this is a big problem - There are places where decent service just isn't available. The shared upstream capacity of cable modems is brought to its knees by heavy telework on a neighborhood basis. It is possible that the cableco can reprovision (fewer downstream channels allocated, more upstream). And, typical consumer service level agreements basically let you twist in the wind with undercapacity or outages. I think a business, particularly buying in bulk, might be able to negotiate business accounts with a more "industrial" service level agreement. Certainly this was the case for me when buying phone, then ISDN, then DSL, then fiber - It cost (significantly) more, but you have a different number to call for service, and a much more responsive org behind it. But I'm fortunate to live in a fiber are with new construction, so the physical plant accommodates improved service (bigger underground conduits, pull boxes, etc.)
If your employee happens to live in an area that doesn't have "commercial potential" for the provider, it may be grossly underprovisioned at every step of the way. And, no, 5G is not going to save you here, at least not in the next 2 years in the US. They're not going roll out high capacity nanocells in "older, poorer" neighborhoods.
In the extreme case, I'd throw in people who would literally need to move if WFH were mandatory.
I'm in DC, and there are a LOT of studio and 1-bedroom apartments as well as 2-over-2 houses (kitchen & living room on ground level, 2 small bedrooms & 1 bathroom upstairs. No basement). One person can make WFH work in those cases, maybe, if their 'office' doesn't take up too much space, but for a couple both WFH, there isn't any practical way to make it work long term. In a 2-over-2, a couple with 1 child isn't unusual at all, so you can forget setting up any home office at all.
How many companies are going to make even a small contribution towards moving? I'll go with 'none' as the closest answer. What we're seeing now is a lot of 'making it work' short term; a large scale shift to WFH long term would have a lot of implications that aren't clear yet.
I've worked entire days and only used a couple hundred MB, but no video conferencing. If I did audio only calls for meetings where something wasn't being presented I could probably get by on my 5GB of hotspot data even with software updates to my work machine, but it would be close. But, all of my work is done on machines around the world on the other end of a RDP/Putty/Citrix connection so YMMV.Not being a work-from-home person, I'd be interested to know how many such people are blowing through Comcast-or-whoever bandwidth caps because of it. Is this a major problem? I would expect so, and now that caps are back in place, the ISPs will be getting a massive windfall from either cap-overages or upgrades to business accounts.
Outside of work itself, the prospect of going remote offers complete, untethered freedom on where you can live, and this is one of the best parts of it.
I personally believe every chat should be a video chat. Picking up the phone is okay and works in a pinch, but you lose all of the non-verbal communication doing that. As a supervisor, it is very very important to couch my words in non-verbal communication. I've had to teach myself to smile at all times, because an emotionless voice can come across as mean or uncaring, which is not my intention. Plus, its easier to understand a heavily accented person when you can see them talk. Which is going to be an issue if nation wide hiring becomes a thing.
We've got two members on my team I strongly suspect are on the spectrum. They have their cameras off and speak only when asked. We work in a progressive city with a well educated well behaved workforce, for an enlightened employer. Making accommodations is recognized as the right thing to do.I personally believe every chat should be a video chat. Picking up the phone is okay and works in a pinch, but you lose all of the non-verbal communication doing that. As a supervisor, it is very very important to couch my words in non-verbal communication. I've had to teach myself to smile at all times, because an emotionless voice can come across as mean or uncaring, which is not my intention. Plus, its easier to understand a heavily accented person when you can see them talk. Which is going to be an issue if nation wide hiring becomes a thing.
I understand why you think that, but I'm on the autism spectrum and strongly prefer voice only to video. The motion is distracting and I dislike keeping eye contact.
Yeah, that's a good point—and, like you said, those types of jobs probably fit in the "location frequent" category. You need to pop by the office at least every couple of days to do office-y things.Good story, Lee. You missed a category of workers, though. My wife is in business development--aka "sales"--and is most successful at that talking face-to-face with a potential client over lunch, or a beer, or whatever.
Her day-to-day sustainment work can be done on her phone from anywhere, other than where wet signatures are required.