Working from Home Can Make You Happier and More Productive | Hacker News Reader

Working from Home Can Make You Happier and More Productive

inc.com

114 pointsingve84 comments

As someone self-employed at home, I must say: it's easy to have a grass-is-greener-on-other-side-of-the-fence feeling. Open office plans are awful, but the options aren't only open-office or work-from-home. There's also better office designs… For that matter, there are various setups to working from home, some that work well, and some that lead to WELL DAMNIT WHY AM I WASTING TIME REPLYING TO SOME BS ON HACKER NEWS‽

>Open office plans are awful, but the options aren't only open-office or work-from-home.

In many companies, they are.

And even with "better office designs" there's also the daily commute.

Even with my 15 minute commute each way I feel like that's a huge chunk of my life wasted. Still though. I just turned down a job paying more that would have required me to work from home.

Long daily commutes in single-occupancy motor vehicles are on the short list of sources of society's greatest miseries, problems, and failures.

There are ways to make commutes meaningful, like a beautiful bike ride along the river or a couple mile walk or carpooling with friends or good podcast/audio-book/music during a drive… but even with all this, long commutes eat up so much of life. Add in the insanely massive list of ills caused by car-centric life and infrastructure…

Probably the right balance is something like working one or two days a week in an office with appropriate flexibility on how to use the space. I dunno.

Meanwhile, people should put much higher priority on living close to work, above most other considerations about where to live.

I've worked on-site in my own private office, in cubicle farms, in open office plans, and (most recently) 100% from home... I vastly prefer my current situation. Subjectively, I feel more productive, though that's almost impossible to verify objectively. Here are my "must haves" to be successful working from home:

- A private office, especially if you have others in the house

- Being "away at the office" (e.g. uninterruptible) in the eyes of your family during work hours

- Healthy social outlets

- The ability to focus by turning off slack/phone/email for chunks of time without suspicion

- Not being the only (or one of a minority of) remote worker(s)

- A self-motivating, disciplined personality

- Good communication skills, and regular upward communication (e.g. showing/telling your boss what you did)

Great list!

Honestly, I think my issues are more about being self-employed than about office vs home. If I just went to my own office away from home and worked alone, that wouldn't change everything. If I had set hours that I knew coworkers were online and we interacted in ways that focused on all of us helping one another maximize productivity, that set up would work well even at home.

> WELL DAMNIT WHY AM I WASTING TIME REPLYING TO SOME BS ON HACKER NEWS‽

This isn't only a work-from-home affliction.

I learned this when, to my shock, friends with normal day-jobs chatted with me online during their work days. Still seems weird and wrong to me.

My experience is that it's difficult to stay productive at home, since there are too many temptations luring you away from work. And when the kids come back from school, it becomes nearly impossible to do anything useful.

This funny piece by the New Yorker describes it pretty well: http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/i-work-from-home

"OK Ill make you a second lunch"

"No, you need to take the dog out - I am working"

"Ill just watch thi one segment of 'X'"

"Just a short nap to clear my mind"

There are far too many temptations to do other things at home - Each child is a 10x multiplier.

I have 2 kids, and working from home has only been positive for me - I think the key is having a dedicated office room with a door. When I'm working, I'm working. I'm upstairs in my office, my wife and kids are downstairs, so noise isn't a problem.

I don't have to commute, so I save money, get to have breakfast and lunch with my wife and kids (and help out), and after work I have time to cook us a healthy meal from scratch (I actually enjoy cooking too).

I have a fiber internet connection, so no issues on that front.

I honestly have far more distractions on the 1 day a week I go into the office (which is open plan and includes a co-worker who does little but chat all day...).

Yeah... it's different for each. :-)

Personally even when working remote, I need to go to a cafe... I like being around people but none of them can interrupt me, no TV or couch or bed or fridge or pet or yard or porch in nice weather to distract me.

But I've worked with people who have been WFHing for decades. I envy their ability to do so.

You need to set expectations. When you are working at home, you are not daycare, dogsitter, handyman or generally at leisure. I have worked at home for eight years now, and my family generally understands this.

As someone who now manages a remote team, it can be tricky to help people adjust to working from home. Some people just have to have that physical partition because they or their family won't adapt. I recommend a co-working space for those people; that partition can be essential for keeping them productive and happy.

The other side of this coin is making sure you set that time aside for your family and personal recovery. If you had a coworker who never left the office, you should worry about ingrowth and their health. The same is true for a remote worker who seems to be always online and always working.

>There are far too many temptations to do other things at home - Each child is a 10x multiplier.

You wouldn't be doing those things for your kids if you were at remote work (because it would be physically impossible as you'd be elsewhere). So why do them when working from home? Just because you can? No, close the office door and/or set clear boundaries.

The difference -- and the great benefit -- with working from home is that for the far fewer things that DO matter, you will be there for your children.

You don't count all the distractions at work because as long as you are in the office you are supposedly "being productive".

The meetings, the chats, the endless browsing

Indeed: as kids grew from babies to a more active age, I started to see an office, even an open-plan office, as a place to get some calm and concentration. As kids hit the high-school age, the effect waned.

I don't have this problem at all, but my children are teen aged, and I set soft boundaries while working at home.

I've found the key is to have a dedicated office. Being able to enter a room and enter work mode and then also being able to close that door at the end of the day is really helpful.

I trued working from home once where my desk was in my bedroom and it was awful because I was never _at_ work while simultaneously never being away from work.

If your remote position is for the convenience of your employer (no desk available in an office somewhere) you can calculate the percentage of your home taken by the office, multiply that by your rent, and deduct that when tax season comes which can help justify a slightly higher rent.

+1 on dedicated office.

I did the tax calculation for home office and it ended up being wiped out by my total income(if I remember it scales for every $10k you take home) so it's not a freebie.

One of my handy co-workers set up an automated hook to the Google Hangouts API so that an IoT deadbolt clinks shut when he's on an active hangout: handy for preventing the random toddler intrusion, reduction in "pro" ish ness...

Random toddler intrusion can make you a social media sensation though!

>And when the kids come back from school, it becomes nearly impossible to do anything useful.

If you work in the living room, yes. If you work in a dedicated office that's off limits, no.

Indeed. Even my two-year old knows which room is my office and not a playroom.

I am relying on the fact that I was a homemaker for many years to make a work-from-home situation more tolerable, though I loved the piece you linked to and upvoted you specifically because of it.

Homemakers get no respect, but you have to organize a lot of work yourself and make sure things happen, on time, on budget, etc. It is vastly more challenging to do it well than my corporate job was and everyone oohed and aahed at me when I mentioned the name of my employer. I had co-workers who had spent years trying to qualify for a job there and just having a job there was considered to be a feather in your cap by basically anyone in town.

I'm not sure that office-mates aren't as disruptive as kids. I've worked both ways. In the office, I only far more done when everybody else was off to lunch, or by staying after 5.

Vs working from home, where every hour I bill (I'm a contractor) is a work hour, when I'm making progress on my client's problem. More efficient for everybody.

I totally agree, I've never been more productive than at home/beach/forest etc. where I wasn't constantly distracted by other people. Always wondered how people get anything done when I am at crammed offices of Google or Facebook - the noise/distraction level there is just off-putting and in stark contrast to what I would call a productive environment :-/ Microsoft used to have rooms with 4-6 people, SUN used to have single mini-offices for everyone; now that is long gone in the name of cost-optimization and "sharing ideas".

Google NYC used to have cubicle-like individual desks on most floors, with shoulder-high soft fiber walls separating them. These muffled noise pretty efficiently; headphones are a still a better option, though.

Yeah. I always had to use earplugs and that gets tiring pretty fast :-( Not to mention commute, which is such a waste of time. I solved it partially by buying Novation Circuit and making music on a subway train while on my way to/from work...

Biggest upsides (+) along with flipsides (-) of working at home in my experience:

------------

+: Get to define your own hours for the most part

-: Convince your partner and friends these hours are real and you're not just making them up as an excuse to ignore them

------------

+: Can work in your pajamas

-: End up looking like a bum when someone swings by

------------

+: Get to spend more time with the kids

-: Young kids (mine are 1.5 and 3yrs) have absolutely no respect for what you're doing (my boys seem to have some sort of sixth sense to tell when I'm debugging & they'll have none of it)

------------

+: Team discussions and communication tend to have more thought and planning put into them

-: Some simple questions/coordination become games of phone tag and far-more drawn out then necessary

------------

+: No commute

-: Home doesn't feel as relaxing when you've been working in it all day

------------

For me, ideally there would be a happy balance. Maybe one and a half office days a week and the rest from home. I do mostly enjoy working from home.

This is a more balanced view of work from home. I'd add that loneliness is a big minus from my experience.

This is a big problem when you're by yourself. I tried some indie game dev, and although I loved the code and what I was doing it meant that I was sitting at home by myself 24/7 with no human interaction.

I'm just not social/agreeable enough to easily make friends or talk to strangers in random locations. At least at work, even though the work is often boring and I'm mostly working the whole day I still get to have some random interactions on a daily basis.

All the "working from home" negatives are soft issues -- things that can change with the right mindset/effort on your part (dressing properly, respect from spouses/kids, coordination, etc).

The "work at office" negatives on the other hand are hard limits or require change of ways of doing business for the whole company -- commuting, meetings, fixed hours.

I largely agree. The way you put it makes me think of the trade-offs when choosing between configuration or convention.

As an engineer it is massively more productive. The work I'm doing is so complex my brain would freeze in a loud open office. When you're trying to solve a very hard problem at least fore silence is golden, no music no headphones no random conversation just pure work and problem solving for me it's engineering heaven to be able to control my space for noise and distraction.

Same here. I don't want to listen to music or other people talking. I also hate earplugs.

In my cubicle it's often so loud I would be better off working in sports bar during super bowl:)

Just give me a small office. It's even ok having a team with two or three people.

20 years ago, the computer at my office was much better than my home computer at home. The Internet there was way much better than my crappy 56k dial-up modem. I had a nice landline phone with many buttons and I could call the world for free--at the office.

Now, I have the best computer with 2x 5K displays and a all-in-one super fast printer which is always working--at home. I've never had such a setup at any office. And video call based meetings with screen sharing are more productive than real meetings.

Why an office?

I made friends at the office, dated here and there, met my later co-founders. However, I have made only a handful friendships at the office. So is it of value? IDK. An office is a mixed bag.

What's most interesting to me is that the work-from-home employees were reportedly not just more productive and happier, but also physically healthier. Although there could certainly be some uncontrolled variable like crappy fluorescent lighting, poor HVAC, or pathogens in the building, it makes me suspect that there might be a chronic stress component to working in a space owned (in a psychosocial sense, not a legal one) by someone else. Perhaps there would be some way to change office structure or culture to get the benefits in the office building environment and not just at home. In one of Jamie Zawinsky's old "gruntles" (not linked per the infamous referer abuse), he mentions putting camo netting over his cube and that it made people ask to come in. In vague terms, that's the sort of effect I'm thinking of.

the work-from-home employees were reportedly not just more productive and happier, but also physically healthier

One of the key advantages I've found working from home is that when I want to take a break, I'm inclined to get out of the house & walk around the neighbourhood. I'd often choose to work from a park instead, getting sunlight & fresh air. When I was doing that earlier this year, I was getting up to 16,000 steps a day, and that level of walking significantly improved my health.

I've read that unless you have a room dedicated for work, working from home will not be a productive solution.

It really makes sense.

You can't have people coming and going.

When my girlfriend was out working, I was productive at working my personal projects, but when she came home, made herself a meal, started some chores or cleaning up, or even stood there next to me, I just could not work.

So the reality is just that you move your office to your home, so you will actually need a larger place to live.

But I guess it's still cheaper and more ecologic to do things that way, so actually you would get a raise.

What I would like, is a simple software that blocks a list of website of my choice so I can stay productive. As long as it is self imposed, it would feel okay.

It depends on the person, but as a generalization, that's simply not true. I was more productive before getting a house with a separate office when I just had my bedroom to sleep/work in. I'm still way more productive than in any office situation, but the point is that you don't need a separate office at home to be productive.

Working from home for years now, I've found that I get more deep and meaningful , uninterrupted work done. I've also found that I have a harder time working a 'full' 8 hour day because it's more obvious at home that there's more to life than just working.

Offices are designed to keep you there and focused on the work as much as possible. At home I have my pets, wife (when she's not at work too), things I like, in a location I chose to live. People call these distractions but they're your life at least as much as your job is. At some point, working at home, I'm going to stop and pet my cats, go for a walk with my wife, sip coffee and read a book, visit a friend, whatever. When I have kids, I will get to be there and see them grow up.

When you're able to get a good amount of great work done because you have that uninterrupted time, it makes the idea of working 8 hours 'just because' seem stupid and opposing your productivity and your happiness. I get more and better work done these days. I make more money, for both myself and my clients, working from home, and I much more rarely need sick/mental health days because I'm basically happy and healthy all the time as a result of working from home.

The things I miss, like socializing with a team, I can get other places. I still talk to other devs during the day, just on the phone, over video chat, or something like slack. I go to meetups dedicated to the things I'm interested in, chalk full of smart and interesting people. I have friends to socialize with, many of whom are from those meetups, so I get to talk about tech even more if I want to.

Basically, the downsides for the employee/worker are heavily, heavily outweighed by the benefits in my opinion. I also think that's the case for companies as well, but only have my own small experience as a very small employer to back that up so maybe someone else could comment there.

I've found this to be my experience as well. Although, I've witnessed a few cases of co-workers taking advantage of the freedom. I suspect the software engineering field is less prone to employees taking excess advantage of their employers, mostly because the field selects against people that don't actually like the work, more so than in other fields. Spending an entire work day on a bug that later turns out to be trivial and then being asked why you didn't finish the specs in time is only worth it to the people that love it too much to give up. Obviously, this happens less and less the more experienced you become, but those first few years developing your craft are incredibly rough.

As a remote worker for a not-small company one downside I've noticed is that I have basically no idea which way the wind is blowing corporate-politics-wise. Most of the time it doesn't matter, but once in a while it does matter and one is caught by surprise. When I worked in the office that was way easier to gauge.

Another is that you don't have any chance to rub shoulders with the higher-ups, so to the extent you are on their radar at all it's usually because you either delivered something awesome very recently, or they see your name next to a figure they'd like to spend on something else. This can negatively impact career development.

Also, depending on where your remote work is done, you can end up with an advancement problem: much career development in tech is done by changing companies, and most significant salary increases are backed by the prospect that you might leave for more money. If you work remotely, or work locally from home and insist on keeping it that way, then your options for changing jobs are much more limited.

In terms of the company I think they lose out in two specific areas:

1) Brainstorming, which I think is better done in person. 2) Mentoring, which ditto.

However I agree that WFH, with the right people, is a win-win situation for the employee and the employer.

When thinking about WFH as a "software person" I often come back to the case of the writer.

In the ideal case, i.e. if we factor out the employers, what we do is not so different from what novelists do. Of course it's not the same, but the physical aspects of the work are remarkably similar when you think about it.

And where does the novelist usually work? In a home office if they can.

So while I am sometimes frustrated with my (very privileged) position as a remote worker for a software company, I try to remind myself that in the ideal version of the work I do, I already have the ideal workspace.

(And yes, in the ideal version the Programmer codes for four good hours a day, just as the Novelist writes for about that long before going out into the world for inspiration and Life.)

In the ideal case, i.e. if we factor out the employers, what we do is not so different from what novelists do.

I very much agree with this as an ideal case.

The voices saying "software should always be written by a team" are very loud at the moment, though.

(A reasonable number of novels are collaborations, but the authors generally come together "organically" rather than being thrown together by the publishers. Closer to starting a contacting shop with a couple of friends than the standard software team setup).

I admit that my novelist analogy breaks down a little when you're building, say, Facebook.

But how many people who wished to be writers ended up working in advertising, or government, or someplace else where they do write a lot, in collaboration with others and subject to requirements handed to them by their bosses?

I think most of us write software the way a copywriter writes copy at McCann[0]. It's great to make Creative Director, but...

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCann_Erickson

Interesting analogy and one I'll give some thought to.

I can't really see copywriters doing the kinds of "team rituals" (daily standups, etc.) that are de rigueur in parts of the software world -- but maybe I'm wrong about this.

As someone who switched to remote work over two years ago I have an observation: the most exhausting part of the day is the commute.

I used to commute by bus - 70-80 minutes one-way trip. After I bought a car, which shaved a good 20 minutes off of that time, I noticed my productivity went up. A friend of mine even went as far as to move to a place close to the office and that changed the quality of his life(and naturally productivity) considerably.

To me the hardest part about working remotely is managing distractions and monitoring your health - I found that without a daily march to the office it's much easier not to notice that you have e.g. a fever and are too weak to work.

I disagree with this blanket statement the article is making. I think flexibility is key here, being able to work from home or being able to go into the office to connect with co-workers. In this article's study, it seems that the employees still had to go into the office one day a week.

I agree. In my first full-time remote job I quickly realized how much I missed the personal interaction that comes with being in an office setting. Sure, needless meetings get tiring quickly but in my current role I now have the flexibility to balance in-office time with working from home so I have a little more control over the amount of "dead time" I have to suffer through.

I've worked from home for the last 10 years. Before that I had regular jobs but also ran hobby Open Source projects from home too.

Reflecting on this time I don't think I would have done it differently. I'm certain that I'm more productive and happier at home. But as you gain family responsabilities, i.e. wife/husband+kids things become considerably more challenging and unavoidably productivity decreases. Today with two kids and wife, I know I am still way more productive than I would be on an office, but also less productive than I was 10 years old. The reason I think I am still way more productive working from home has been discussed over an over: much less interruptions. Also, something that is not discussed that often is that ( if you are a professional - some others would say dumb ) you end up working way more hours at home.

That holds true as long as we are talking about engineering work. However, I don't think it is true when we move above the management scale. When you move into more managing roles, even if they are technical management (architect, lead, CTO, ... ) things become very challenging at home if your company is not fully distributed. Many things that were natural when you were an engineer start to feel awkward like having all team members on physical site and a manager on a different contintent, having all managers on a place but you on a totally different part of the world, etc. etc. It is very easy get out of the loop and keeping up with everything becomes stressful.

I think working from home in general is great but it needs to be part of the company's DNA.

No, it does not - especially if you have multiple kids, ADHD and or you need to interact closely with people face-to-face.

The comment that "makes you happier and massively more productive" reads to me is if that line was written by someone still in their 20s.

We used to have an informal "Work at Home Wednesday". It's helpful if the team can agree on a specific day or two. Then you still get in-person in-office communication the other 3-4 days a week.

Higher-up managers tend to worry if they don't see people at their keyboards, in my experience. (More visible with open-office floor plans.) So if it's just 1 or 2 days, they tolerate it better.

For me personally (I have worked 80% of my professional life of 25 years from home) it is all about time management. Doing traditional office hours would and does basically squash my productivity. I see that with many people around me: they work but not in a way I would describe as productive. The work gets done eventually but there was way too much interference. That is required for a team to work sometimes, but if you need to produce, quiet and your own comfort zone is probably preferable. Depends on what you do ofcourse. Mixing job roles in one open office (sales, product dev, pm and software dev) is one of the more efficient ways to get very little done in the alotted time. That is why I think, if someone has the discipline and the right job for it, working from home is efficient.

> Well, the Open-Plan Office Nazis have it all wrong

I stopped reading here. "All" wrong? "Nazis"?

Different people have different needs and experiences. Some people are social and need other people's interaction to function. Some people need more guidance on their work. Other people will be happy if they were alone in the world.

Open plan offices have advantages and disadvantages, to know them helps to create better places to work, or if an open plan office is right for your type of business.

For me, open plan is all wrong. Perhaps for the author as well.

I mean, I work in an open office, about 120 people on the floor, and it's really great. I honestly don't mind it and I love that I can just peek above my monitors and see if someone is at their desk or not. I suppose I'm lucky that my floor is nearly 100% programmers and I don't sit near anyone who is loud or unpleasant. I imagine there are people who would love to switch to a different type of office but I don't think I would given the option.

Regarding nazis, this just happened at a Forbes 100 company. Brand new office promised tailored to the workers needs. There was only one crystal clear wish, please not make it open plan. The management stated they will respect the workers decision 100% with just a little adjustment. It will be open plan.

In my experience open plan fetishism is clearly management driven.

Abstractly, you're choosing to only hire from a limited radius, taking these really expensive knowledge workers and shipping them all into a big room where common sense and study after study shows they can't concentrate. It's kinda bizarre. Forgetting a wider cheaper talent pool and increased concentration - even the math around commuting alone should be enough:

    E = size of engineering team
    C = round trip commute (45 *2 ~= 90 minutes)
    P = Productivity increase per day
    H = Avg hours worked per day per engineer

    (E*C)/(H*60) = P 
    For a 20 person engineering team:
    (90 minutes * 20 engineers)/(8*60) = .1875 or 3.75 more engineers or almost another working day per week.

I like the absurdity of the self driving analogy - We're inventing this fantastic new technology so we can better shuttle people around instead of bits which we're already pretty good at. My theory is that the people making these decisions are usually extrovert MBA-types who like the 'energy' of open offices and or most tend to generally model successful companies who have, so far, yet to make a big move here but the dominoes seem like they have to fall at some point.

I've been working remotely for three years. It was mostly a positive experience, but I've decided to move back to an on location job due to a few negatives that were making me unhappy;

* My routine decayed over time and work and rest became too intertwined. I felt too stressed while relaxing and too lazy while working. * As an extrovert, long days at home in front of the computer are isolating. * Collaboration with coworkers was so difficult that projects often took much longer than needed, delayed by "phone tag" and simple misunderstandings that usually took 24 hours to correct, vs 30 seconds in an office.

Of course, working remotely does have advantages and there were some times I was very happy to be doing so. I'm surprised it hasn't become more common for companies to offer remote work allowances. Say three months of working remotely a year, and working from the office the rest of the time. They could specify "all hands on deck" weeks, for the busy times of year, and otherwise employees could schedule remote time like they schedule vacation time, they'd just get a lor more of it.

If you're more productive at home that's great but I most definitely am not.

I'm single. I look forward to the social aspects of work. Maybe if I had a family that would be different but I doubt it.

At work I can compile our 100k file program on the corp distributed build system. It's at least 100x faster than building at home. Sure if you're doing web stuff maybe your laptop is ok or maybe you're doing backend and ssh is all you need get into the system. I was working on a giant desktop app. It took 1 to 4hrs to build at home.

At work I have a 30inch monitor, a 24inch monitor, and a workstation class PC with 12 cores, 64gig of ram, 256gig SSD, 3TB of storage. At home I have an gamer PC with 16gig of ram. The work machine is much faster.

Also when I worked on AAA games working at home was basically impossible because there are terabytes of data modified by the artists daily and I need access to that data to do my job. There are also dev kits that have to stay at the office because of NDAs etc. I'm sure other programmers have similar requirements.

So remote into your work system. Isn't that the solution to all the things listed above?

Really, how do I remote into my Xbox One dev kit? How do I debug GPU blue screen drive bugs remotely?

Not the social aspects, which was the very first (and probably most important) thing listed.

Having worked remotely for 2 years it all depends. Its not perfect, it depends of the company, there are terrible places to work at remotely.

Usually if everyone works remotely if better, but if you are the only one its not so good.

It's way better than open plan office.

I think the ideal would be 3 days remote, 2 tops at office with everyone on the same day at office so you can integrate or make pair programming sessions.

In other news, the sky is blue, and vegetables are good for your health.

These kind of generalizations are entirely humorous. Whether remote or on-site works better for someone is entirely situational, and mostly depends on the personality/disposition of the person. For many many people, remote just doesn't work for them for many reasons, and on-site is where they may thrive. Ridiculousness.

It's an interesting experimental outcome, but I wonder to what extent the results are impacted by the type of work being done. From the TEDx talk, the company, C-Trip, was actually based in Shanghai. It's a travel agency.

It's not mentioned, but if the employees' salary has a variable component and the more they sell the more they earn, then eliminating their commute and giving them an extra 1-2 hours per day to sell travel services, and thereby earn more money, will certainly increase their productivity. I would be interested in knowing if that is the case for these workers.

What if the workers were instead, say, an AP/AR department at a fortune 500 company? Would they see the same increase in productivity? The same decrease in turnover and absenteeism? I am not arguing that they wouldn't, only that I'd expect different types of work to have different degrees of improvement.

I have the option to work from home, but I almost exclusively work in the office now. Even though the open concept can sometimes be distracting, I am much more productive and happier at the office. On the occasion when I do work from home, I end up working longer hours, feel like I accomplished less, and am more tired.

I work from home and I am bored out of my mind. I don't enjoy it and it's a terrible love-hate relationship. I crave and need human contact, and that distracts me from my work. Additionally being at home means everything is a distraction.

For those of you software engineers who-- like me-- work from home in a non-tech hub, how do you network/socialize/meetup with other tech people?

Happier, sure, but massively more productive? I think you need really good management for this to hold. In my last company WFH basically meant a day off.

Come on Hacker News, less click-baity next time. This was a Buzzfeed like article in terms of generalization and Nazi references.

Not having to travel to work is great. Having very tolerant boss (me) is awful. Having boss that's not me is even worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Places_in_The_Hitchhiker%27s_G...

I also see ecological reasons to justify working from home. Less people on the road= less traffic, less pollution.

"few pundits seemed to object when Yahoo, IBM, and Aetna rolled back their work-from-home policies."

News reported that - insinuating that work from home doesn't work for those companies. however it is a known fact that it was a round about way to lay off some people without actually doing it directly.

The title should say "..more productive - For Me"

is it me or do these magazines, inc, fastcompany all consist of crappy filler material that is typically associated with a clickbait title?

Yeah, what is this? "The results will astound you.". Sounds like a parody. I thought Inc Magazine was serious.

Comfortable

Not drinking too much

Regular exercise at the gym

working from home is definitely not productive for me.

Numerous studies show this not to be the case. It's bad for your mental health and it's bad for your work.

Obviously this doesn't count for everyone, a single mum forced to do a 2 hour commute might be worse off having to go to work. Same for some personalities.

The article seems to be hiding the source? Is it in the TED talk? But from memory the Singapore company employees did non-teamwork work, fairly menial labour.

And it's a really old study, that was talked about years ago.

Numerous studies show this not to be the case. It's bad for your mental health and it's bad for your work.

Care to cite some?

(Although I'd argue that averages shouldn't matter here, it ought to be about what works for the individual -- and the constant "team, team, team" refrain in contemporary management speak seems like a somewhat-deliberate attempt to distract from that).

> Numerous studies show this not to be the case. It's bad for your mental health and it's bad for your work.

I've been working from home for 8 years. It is good for my mental health and it is very good for my work. Working in the office was the opposite.

So much depends on how studies are conducted, who runs them, and who pays for them. Perhaps, too, people like me were too busy working to participate in the studies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com