Reply to Meta notes problems with WFH productivity in firings memo

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "Meta notes problems with WFH productivity in firings memo"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]How much more productive?

Satisfaction with work-life balance is directly correlated with people staying longer at companies, developing greater institutional knowledge and deepening their expertise in their area. It's short-sighted to argue to change a policy that might result in 2% more productivity but 10-15% more attrition. Sure, Meta is looking to shed headcount now because of executive-level mistakes in investment and vision (sorry, but Mega's financial issues have zero to do with engineer productivity due to WFH -- zero). But in the future economic winds will shift and they will be back in the market for talent and, in the tech industry, rigid in-office requirements will be a major liability for attracting the best talent at all levels.

Anecdotally, most people I know want to be in the office at least a couple days a week (unless they totally hate their employer, which is in itself a massive red flag). But they want to feel trusted by their employer to decided when in-office makes sense according to their work flow. I work in a slightly different field but my work is similar to a programmer -- there are definitely collaborative elements to my work, especially when initiating a project and when getting it ready for the client. But in between there are long stretches when I just have to sit at my computer and focus. I do that a million times better at home, with minimal distractions and with the ability maximize my work day without needing to commute. I can start my workday at 7 or 7:30, take shorter breaks for food or coffee since I'm just grabbing something from my kitchen, even my bathroom breaks are more efficient. When I'm mid-project, home is absolutely the most productive option and my employer often gets 10+ hour work days out of me because I'm "in the zone" with minimal distraction. It's basically impossible for me to get that in the office.

So a policy that required 3 days in office each week, with limited leeway for me to determine when that makes sense for my work, is a total no-go for me. I am a 20 yr veteran in my field, my work is in demand, and I know how I work best. I'm not some 23 yr old recent hire who just hates wearing clothes or getting off my couch.

Zuckerberg needs to remember what it is to be a high performer and look for ways to attract them. This ain't it.[/quote]

I agree. But letting go of control is VERY hard. For parents, for managers, for governments... for everyone who has to supervise anyone. Even if intellectually, they know what you just explained.[/quote]

I used to manage a fully remote team (pre-Covid) and I found that the key was setting very clear expectations for check ins and deadlines, making sure there were consequences for failing to meet them (like you lose projects, get demoted, or lose your job) and then otherwise being very supportive of peopel setting up their work as made sense to them. I'd have peopel join the team and start out telling me every detail of their schedule (because they were used to working in office or for micromanagers who didn't trust them) and I'd be like "it is a waste of both of our time for you to explain to me that you are working from a coffee shop from 2-4 in the afternoon because it is closer to where you will need to pick up your kids after that." People were unused to be treated like adults who could manage themselves. I viewed my job as facilitating theirs, and had regular check ins where they could let me know what resources they needed or I could discuss any issues with accountability on their end. It worked great.

I think most people struggle with this because they don't know how to (1) provide clear expectations -- they don't want to put in the effort to think about what is really expected of people and then communicate it clearly, and (2) hold peopel accountable. I fired peopel in that job. I didn't like doing it, but I did have people who would just did not get their job done and would hide from me instead of responding to check in calls or emails. And I'd been clear about expectations so even though those firings sucked, no one was confused about why they happened, and people had gotten ample warning.

Most companies are instead way too vague about expectations but then also never actually fire anyone for cause due to liability issues, and as a result they just rely on trying to watch people all the time or using metrics like "time spent at desk within view of my office" which is a crap metric for work performance.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics