Hacker News Reader

Comment by somethoughts | Hacker News Reader

All remote work is not created equal. I think an aspect of remote work being a more seamless/smoother transition is for the distributed team to be in the same time zone or have less than 1 hour time difference. At my current company, we have conference calls between SF-Portland without much change in work/life. We evan have virtual lunches together.

I recall having to do SF-Asia and even SF-Dallas and SF-Europe calls in my previous job and I was burnt out real quick. Just trying to plan a meeting that wasn't already a recurring scheduled meeting took about 2 days.

[EDIT] Based on the initial responses I changed it from the same time zone being a key aspect to an aspect which makes the transition seamless/smoother.

View on HN

I work across 12+ hour time differentials quite often. The real keys are independence, trust and working on projects where touching bases weekly or so makes sense - and otherwise operating over email.

(that last is the biggest key really). I'm a software developer and the teams mostly coordinate over code feedback and ticket requests anyway.

Yes I can definitely see it working super seamlessly for something like GitHub/Gitlabs and other tools that are for SW developers built by SW developers.

I feel like for stuff with UX or stuff that requires significant collaboration that can't be done via git comments, someone needs to take the hit to be up at odd hours for real-time discussion meetings via Zoom/Skype or make other such work-style adaptations.

I'm pretty much full stack - UX work is typically "post a prototype or sketch or plan, wait for feedback". I think this works better when one has strongly structured design protocols though.

I've worked through a lot of different fields getting to where I am now - for instance, warehouse inventory and paperwork handling raises the importance of accurate warehouse inventories (and they weren't low before) - but a lot of the paperwork could easily be done remotely these days. (sometimes I miss forklift driving - it was a lot less stressful than programming in many ways, although it required a much more immediate care and caution and physically higher risk) I suspect that crosses a lot of other varieties of work - paperwork could be more offloaded or moved digital, while the key actions still require people, mostly. And someone always has to maintain the infrastructure.

I'm not sure it really is a key aspect, maybe it is a risk. With such a small time difference you can continue - for the most part - as you did before. But there's always the question if what you did before was really a good idea or just "we always did it that way", e.g. many conference calls probably could (and should?) be replaced by written text, which isn't as ephemeral and can be worked on asynchronously.

That is a change at first, but not more of a change than going from a very small company, where everyone talks to everyone and maybe even sits in the same office, to a bigger one where you have to establish processes to ensure information still reaches everyone in the company (if it needs to).

Agreed! Its not a key aspect, its just an aspect which makes the transition more seamless/smoother. Made a brief update to my initial comment. For people can for sure adapt to remote work across various timezones.

> I think a key aspect of remote work being successful is for the distributed team to be in the same time zone or have less than 1 hour time difference

I think the exact time difference doesn't matter so much as everyone can be at work simultaneously at least 70/80% of the time.

It really depends on how much close real-time collaboration is actually needed in your job. For some jobs/companies that may be high, for others where the work is done more independently, that may not be an issue.

I've done a fair bit of remote contracting from Asia working with team members in the U.S. and Europe and haven't had many issues since we're mostly working independently. Actually I'm currently in Japan/Korea working with NYC - probably the most inconvenient timezone difference (9am-5pm EST -> 10pm-6am Korea), but for my current project it's not really that bad since we're mostly independent and I'm a night owl anyways (also we have developers in Europe and India where the time difference isn't as drastic).

I'm not claiming that timezone is completely irrelevant because it does make a difference, but I think the bigger factor is the individual. I've had more difficulty getting in touch with team members in the same timezone than other team members in opposite timezones. In my experience, corporate culture overvalues the importance of being immediately available (not surprising given their open embrace of open offices and reluctance to adopting remote work) and underestimates the disruption and the productivity of deep, focused, uninterrupted work (eg. see Cal Newport).

We all have our individual work preferences. Regardless of what anyone's individual preferences are, I hope we see a trend towards greater freedom of choice in enabling workers to work how they are most comfortable.

I work with colleagues in Hawaii all the time, and my office is on the east coast. There are days when it really clicks and Hawaii folks can pickup right where I left off when I go home and the company gets like a 14 hour work day. But for sure there are other days when I need something from someone that hasn't waken up yet, let alone gotten into the office. Every situation can work with patience and communication.

I don't think we've had too much trouble here. The people I work closest with are in Pacific, Central and Atlantic* timezones. I'm in Eastern.

Dealing with Asia and Europe on a regular basis could be challenging. I'm glad I don't need to do that much.

* Atlantic is the one waaaay out on the East Coast of Canada.

How would being in an office change that? The time zone differences are a real factor in any global company, regardless of whether you are sitting in an office or in your home.

SF-NY works fine

Agreed - SF-NY can work and many companies are doing it. Its more if a CEO/founder is finding sites for a second remote office from scratch all things being equal, SF-Seattle/Portland/LA or even SF-Reno/Sacramento/Santa Cruz/San Diego/Phoenix (if more cost of living arbitrage is desired) will be easier than SF/NY.

- Impromptu virtual meetings do not need an additional 1-3 hour buffer at the beginning/end of the day to avoid disrupting the majority of people's daily work patterns.

- In person visits can likely be done by driving versus flying. An if flying - a day trip can suffice.

- No timezone/jetlag from a coast-coast red eye.

SF-GRU also works really well as a cost of living arbitrage where the time difference doesn't hurt too much.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com