> a person lounging at home in their pajamas, drinking a chai latte while ‘dabbling’ occasionally in work
This is literally what a lot of people want though.
This is literally what a lot of people want though.
People act (on average) with a lot more good faith than most corporate entities.
If, as a manager, you are unable to infer that this is happening, then in all probability that person would be doing the same 'dabbling' if they were co-located. (Just with a higher effort of looking busier).
Old administration thought that wasn't good, because people were screwing around during the 8-5. I tried to explain that yes, that happened, but
a) that already happens in the office;
b) they're also working at night, on the weekends, and whenever the hell I need them to, and not complaining about it, or even being bothered by it
c) they're happier and MUCH more effective for the students.
No go.
That's why, despite having the choice to work from home, I am going to mainly work in the office.
At work = work mode, at home = home mode.
I will say when I used to just sometimes work from home, it was more important for me to do the usual morning routine, dress up in my usual business casual, and sit down in my office.
The last 10 years or so, when I've been increasingly working remote--and have been effectively full-time even within fairly easy commute of an office--I don't bother and will work anywhere in the house I want.
You can have a "fixed" work environment without it being a centrally managed office.
More reason why "work-from-home" is an under-efficient specifier on both sides for what people are often really asking for/what bosses really want. "Work-from-home-office" at the very least would offer a better impression to both sides, though I think the great-grandparent here's "flexible-location" is probably better still.
if a worker wants to slack off and post on HN (or watch netflix) during office hours it does not matter if they are "in the office" or at home....