Hacker News Reader

>There is also a somewhat of divide between introverts and extroverts between which they prefer, but of course - there are many in either camp leaning the other way too.

Yeah, as an introvert, seeing the constant assertion that only extroverts want to work from the office is very frustrating. It is because I am an introvert that I want to work from the office. Sure, I struggle with interacting with people in general already. But I will have that trouble whether I'm at home or in the office. But here's just a small list of the additional troubles that pile on WFH:

Having to speak out on a public chat channel, where everything I say will be recored for a legally mandated long time, seen by who knows and potentially misinterpreted because of a lack of tone (slack).

Having to interrupt someone without being able to see if they're busy (IMs).

Being self conscious of the existence of a camera and not knowing if people are or aren't looking at me (web conferences)

Not being able to get tone and body language feedback from the people I'm talking to (any text based medium)

Accidentally speaking over or interrupting someone because of latency (web and audio conferences)

Having to specifically put effort into promoting myself and my work because it's less visible now

Not having the chance side conversations with my mangers, skip managers and directors. I know a lot of people doubt these happen, but I've had enough of them, and am convinced one or two major changes in my career have been in part because of those conversations that I would not have otherwise had. This goes hand in hand with the item above.

I am 100% behind having more choice and more flexibility, but I really wish people would stop pretending that the divide on this is extrovert/introvert. I'm far enough along in my career to understand the importance of speaking up and being seen and therefore to put the effort into doing it, but make no mistake, 100% remote requires me to put more more effort into it and for my personal form of introversion, it makes things much much harder on me.

On the flip side, I'm an extravert, but I have stopped considering anything but 100% remote work. I get my energy from others, but that doesn't mean we have to share the same physical space. I used to spend 2 hours a day in a crappy commute, and for an extravert, that sucks. Now I get to spend that time around people I enjoy.

I know extroverts who love their commute. They call colleagues and get stuff done while traveling. Its working, IMO.

I'm not sure if there's any study to back this up but aren't introverts generally more sensitive to social cues? As an introvert myself, we have similar frustrations. In-person communication is just more effective in some cases.

> aren't introverts generally more sensitive to social cues?

Maybe, if you don’t open a whole neurodivergent can of worms. (Speaking for myself, autistic and ADHD, I’m more sensitive to some social cues than others, and quite a lot less for other cues; my sensitivity to specific cues is often different if subtly from most of the neurodivergent people I know.)

Afaik no. Introverts can be both very good at social cues and bad at them. Same goes for extroverts. Introversion vs extrovertion is just one of huge amount of traits we have.

Also, it ia not like there would be two distinct species. It is scale and majority of the people are in the middle between extroversion and introversion. Just slightly biased toward one side.

The distinction between "introvert" and "extrovert" is really about whether socializing is draining or recharging.

I'm extremely introverted and plenty "good at" (most forms of) socializing. It's also hard work for me. But it's hard work like going on a mountain hike is hard work: it's a fantastic experience (usually) and I am glad I do it, but I also simply can't do it 24/7/365.

I doubt that this is an extravert/ intravert divide and am pretty sure it has more to do with the current life situation.

Young, single and living nearby by yourself or in a shared flat without a dedicated room to work in? Not too sure about what to do with free time? Going to the office for socializing and structure is great.

Married, with kids and living in a house on the countryside? Strong social ties and no need to get to know your colleagues? Or traveling around/ having an otherwise fulfilling life outside work? Then, remote is awesome.

I'm rather introverted myself and very happy with hybrid. Meeting colleagues when I feel like socializing and in need of some routine, working remotely when I have other things to do and want the flexibility.

Absolutely, 100% this. Also, I really appreciate how candid the author of the article is. Why is it so hard to admit our human foibles?

Is it wrong that I value both of those things?

I like going in once or twice a week, catching up with my team, writing stuff on a whiteboard, having in person 1:1s, attending an all hands in person, getting a free snack from the kitchen, having a beer after work at the pub.

I also like making my own breakfast, lunch and dinner, not spending over 50 quid travelling to the office, booking out an afternoon to write something, the ability to set my own schedule, having my own screen and desk, going for a quick walk in garden, and kissing my daughter goodnight.

The problem with an hybrid approach is that it forces you to live close to the office. If I were living in Hamburg and the company I want to work for is located in Munich and requires me to go 1 day/week to the office... Well that's a nogo to begin with.

So hybrid mode limits a lot your pool of potential employers.

Exactly - it varies person to person and company to company.

Personally I'm changing my lifestyle to have a small urban apartment in the city close to work, shops and services; and a house close to the beach around 1 hr by car / 1.5hrs by train away. I plan to move back and forth around once a week.

For me this ticks a lot of boxes and I'm happy to overcome the hassles involved. I can see it becoming a more popular lifestyle. I couldn't do the 'fully remote' move to a tiny town in the middle of nowhere.

I just signed a lease on an apartment to do something very similar. House out in the country, apartment in a very walkable town just outside a major metro area. The motivation was to help a family member in that town but I’m stoked at the prospect of having both.

It’s definitely a bit of an indulgence but i could downsize both once my youngest is on her own.

If you care to use an established term for it, there's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pied-%C3%A0-terre

Oh nice!! Thank you!

Office work has obvious costs for the company (rent, etc), and obvious costs for the employee (commute, etc). All of these were known and agreed upon when the contract was signed.

What many proponents of remote work are arguing for is unilaterally changing the contract because it’s possible to also work from home. This line of argument typically highlights the obvious benefits for the employee (no commute, flexibility, etc.), but often ignores the less obvious cost of working from home, such as lower team/company social cohesion, poorer communication, significantly more difficult onboarding for new employees and quite likely reduced productivity and socialization. Additionally the employee can expect some increased costs (electricity, food) which my or may not be offset by reductions from dropping eating out and such.

While many software engineers accepted poor working conditions in exchange for money and opportunities, now they want to have their cake and eat it too - at the cost of new employees and their company. Maybe the latter is excusable depending on the company, but the former is not and needs to be discussed instead of being swept under the rug.

I prefer to be remote. I find having my own space is less distracting but if I need to get up and walk away from my computer for a bit because I'm stuck - that also works better. I can be more flexible with my time if I have other things that I need to do during the day. Less thinking about lunch or drinks or such - I'm home, I have my kitchen.

At the same time - I also appreciate having an office that I can go to. Sometimes I just need a change of scenery, other times it's nice to just be around some other people. My team aren't local either, but there are a few folks I know in the local office on other teams - so it works out.

I very much agree that what's important is finding the right balance for yourself, and it certainly takes some experimentation.

I’ve found the best option to be a hybrid. 2 days remote, 3 in office.

But only if everybody else is on the same schedule

Not necessarily. It's enough if you meet people from time to time.

So long as the remote days a given person takes off stay the same I've found my team adjusted well any place it was necessary.

Yes this requires everyone on the same schedule. If you can find a workplace like this, do not take it for granted. I’ve worked fully remote and fully office and it’s the hybrid (sync schedule) that is hands down the best (for me).

I’m in UTC-7 (currently) and I have a Monday meeting with someone in UTC+3. Neither of us expressed concern about that.

Important to note again that this is the best option _for you_.

> Working from home, or remotely is not for everyone - neither is being in an office.

Upper management has always been wfo or wfh as it suits them.

The 2 groups (wfo and wfh) of mid-low tier "office workers" are far from equal in size.

The majority rather be remote. Most of the wfo people realize their limited value is less visible remotely, as is their opportunities for getting opportunistically involved in processes and projects. Professionally, this a compelling reason to claim wfo is for them as it's part of their act, which doubles the insult (inefficient+predatory people in an organization, waving the WFO banner).

Yes, I believe this wholeheartedly.

yes, much hard to justify their bullshit jobs remotely, they actually have to do some real work to try and posture.

we need a general clear out of middle managements, there are too many useless people in the workforce who only serve to demotivate the people who do the real work