Telecommuting/ WFH and Remote Work

if I’m a C.E.O.why shouldn’t my response just be, look, this hybrid approach isn’t working? We had something great before in 2019. Let’s just make everyone come back into the office. Why isn’t that the right response here?

Well, I think some places have tried that, and I think that they’ve had a fair amount of attrition, especially amongst people for whom that flexibility has become nonnegotiable. A lot of the data that Charlie and I rely on, and that we frequently cite, comes from Slack’s Future Forum, and what they found is that mothers and fathers, in particular, not just want a flexible work schedule, but demand one. And if they can’t have it, if they’re threatened with it going away, they’re already looking for jobs if they haven’t left already.

And so I think that if you hire a company that’s like, we only want a certain type of person, we don’t want any parents or any people with caretaking responsibilities, and we also don’t care about these feelings of inclusion within our workplace, because, again, we’re thinking about this data that shows that people of color in the workplace feel more inclusion, feel more comfortable, in hybrid and remote scenarios, you’re essentially setting yourself up to put yourself on a trajectory going backwards in time as a company instead of forwards.I think that there is this overwhelming feeling amongst white male executives that the office was a neutral space, and I think that leaders who are smart are coming to understand that just because it was a space that felt comfortable and productive for me did not mean that it felt that way to others.

The Stanford economist Nick Bloom, who I think has done some of the best work generally on remote work, him and some co-authors just released what I really think of as the gold standard study on hybrid versus in-person work. They did this huge randomized control trial of something like 1,600 workers in a tech company.
So these were computer engineers, folks in marketing, finance, et cetera. Some were in the office five days a week. Others had a hybrid schedule working from home two days a week, and the results were really striking. Among the hybrid employees, quit rates were 35 percent lower, which is really important when you consider just how much attrition costs a company in terms of rehiring and retraining. People’s self-reported happiness and work/life balance went way up, and productivity actually improved slightly. There was one measure they did where they looked at literally the most objective measure I think you can. Lines of code written went up around 7 percent. And what really struck me about that was, to the conversation we’ve been having, a lot of hybrid arrangements are kind of a mess right now, and yet hybrid work is still outperforming full time office work on all of these measures, which I think is just really telling.

2 Likes

It’s not just the new or weak team members…it’s the coasters who decide that they’re going to do the minimum it takes to get by. Some are smart and potentially very talented employees but they’ve made a conscious decision that work is a quid pro quo, rather than a communal mission, and they are out to get as much as they can in return for the minimum amount of effort.

During WFH this mentality has become more widespread, and at the same time it’s harder to monitor employees to make sure that this attitude has not set in. It’s as much about the culture of the organization as it is about the mechanics of monitoring productivity, and it’s much harder to build that culture when you only see each other in person a couple times a year.

1 Like

no way - people are not WFH and keeping their kids at home with no childcare - I can’t get anything done work wise when kid is home and most companies state as such.

3 Likes

If you have bay area people making under $100k, then you’re probably not going to get the best. Why even have those roles in the bay area? You’d probably get better talent with better retention in a lower cost area.

Nobody makes under $100k base in 2022. As my friend likes to put it, $200k is the new $100k :smiling_face_with_tear:.

We’re talking roles with $125–175k base salary…+ bonus, benefits, options, etc.

.

I am jobless.

1 Like

Interesting.

We’ll find out how this plays out.

Then they should step up or get replaced. We’ve hired 100% remote for 2+ years. None of us live near an office, so we can’t unwind it either. We view it as a way to attract and retain talent. That said, it’s perform or get the boot though.

1 Like

That should be the plan. The current tight labor market makes it easier said than done. I guess an upside of WFH is that in principle you have more flexibility to attract talent. But you to have a good way to measure productivity and be merciless at weeding out the coasters (few established businesses meet this criteria imo).

No doubt it will warm @DH0’s heart.

No more of this WFH malarkey at Goldman.

1 Like

We recently hired someone from Goldman who relocated to Texas for family reasons. Go figure. This will only accelerate the talent exodus.

1 Like

And a slew of recent research indicates that remote work—at least part-time—isn’t going anywhere. More than three-quarters of business leaders polled in real estate firm JLL’s recent future of work survey said offering remote or hybrid work is critical to their talent attraction and retention. “Our research confirms beyond doubt that the hybrid model is now a permanent feature of the working landscape,” JLL stated.

Same article says this. I’m in job market and it’s super hot at least on the tech side.

1 Like
1 Like
1 Like

Agree.

Btw, that reply came across as an answer to me but it was actually to @Jil . Just making sure it’s clear. :wink:

1 Like

Yeah, I know many of my friends save $2500 (two kids) day care expenses, and paying of their mortgages by staying WFH.

In some cases, both parents are WFH and kids at home. They are able to manage and balance it. It is ultimately what they want to sacrifice and what they want to save.

3 Likes

Understand.

1 Like