I'm sure you can come up with the perfect counterpoint to my anecdote. We'll just have to wait a few more years for more robust, large scale comparisons before we really understand how much an office is worth.
I'm sure you can come up with the perfect counterpoint to my anecdote. We'll just have to wait a few more years for more robust, large scale comparisons before we really understand how much an office is worth.
I can see ways it might be worse, obviously, and I've experienced good in-office onboarding. But I've also experienced absolutely crap in-office onboarding (a month of no working development environment!) - so I question whether that experience was because of the office/remote dynamic, or because companies that do a good job onboarding because they value it, regardless.
So it's interesting to hear stories and experiences from other people's perspective, both onboard-ee and onboard-er, since I'm just one dude with my own Unique Perspective™ and limited total experience based on that viewpoint.
>which otherwise in face-to-face meetings can be skipped since we can chit-chat outside of meetings.
So in terms of time there is little difference? I find myself to spend much more time chitchatting in person - which is nice but also not the job.
Even if your interlocutor can, and even if the large scale studies run counter to your argument, that doesn't mean your experience is invalid.
Life isn't a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled study. There is no control group consisting of you and your cohort to measure against.
The scientific method is, I argue, on the whole, the wrong instrument to bear in these scenarios, at least because measuring the metrics affects the study group and publishing the resulted affects the society in which the study occurred.
I'm interested in hearing other people's experiences especially because I've been remote since 2011 so I have a clearly biased perspective.