Because the development work is such a focused activity, because it can be done remotely, because commuting and occupying offices is vastly wasteful, I believe any new company can reap strong benefits from a work from home company model in the current state of the market.
While this require some knowledge of how these organizations can work fluently, developers made clear they are a majority to refuse doing what they could have been doing with the exact same efficiency being home.
However, making progress towards remote could be detrimental to workers having poor work from home conditions (busy home, lack of dedicated space, loneliness…) and to the company communication and planning efficiency.
-Thankfully, while there is some benefits to in-person meeting and informal discussions, with clever planning, you can get most benefits of both worlds; with regular interval in-person meeting days, and offering to co-pay for coworking areas whenever needed, a manager can drive and empower their employees to ensure they will deliver their best in all circumstances.
+Thankfully, with clever planning, you can get most benefits of both worlds; with regular interval in-person meeting days, and offering to co-pay for coworking areas whenever needed, a manager can drive and empower their employees to ensure they will deliver their best in all circumstances.
]]>When it comes to organizing the same team of developers, the 3 work styles (in-office, hybrid and fully remote) are challenging to coherently organize without proper organization.
Very obviously, workers who prefer the office will be disapointed and eventually stop coming if the office is perpetually empty of some teammates. This usually leads some companies towards hybrid work, in order to satisfy a larger panel.
Unfortunately the compromise can be unsatisfying for both ends of the spectrum; poor coordination of in-office hours can result in too empty or too crowded offices, which can be painful office experiences. Hybrid work does not allow for distant hires. Additionally, some employees prefer having a set daily routine rather than commuting to work sporadingly, for example in order to avoid transporting their equipment or forgetting part it somewhere during commute, and might have problems around coordinating with others.
An ideal in-office organization must offer comfortable position to work for all employees. Without too much surprise, this includes:
In office organization will face a lot of recruitment problems however, both because they are area limited, and because developers who are willing to engage durably in them are few.
Remote organization is highly desirable for both employees and employers, because it allows broader area employment, it removes necessity of large offices, it removes necessity to commute, and cut down distractions; without any possible doubt, in terms of efficiency remote is king.
However, full remote is not suited to all, and transitionning to it is difficult for employers who would prefer keeping key employees who might have unfriendly home environment.
Finally, while efficient, it may be ill suited for the purpose of bonding between employees, for a set proportion of them who prefer in-person interaction by a higher margin.
To counterbalance this, an efficient remote organization should ideally have in-person events. These events should include as little actual development as possible, and be more of a planned occasion to meet, plan in team, and have informal discussion.
In a hybrid organization, you face additional challenges: the workplace will be variably occupied, and both formal and informal meeting may need some level of effort to include remote workers. -This can be wasteful and unsatisfying for previously mentionned reasons. However, things can be made easier by cherry-picking ideas of both in office and remote organization.
Efficient organizations should include either a calendar to book the office, or an office large enough for everyone to come at the same time.
They should also include working devices to make remote meetings such as meeting rooms with included quality audio i/o devices.
All existing companies having a given model will have difficulties switching to a different one, although it isn’t impossible to. Usually, adapting to the market will mean including more remote. Existing companies might have to progressively transition to new model, adapting their processes, sometimes infrastructure, allowing more and more remote, until they ultimately get rid of their office. Some employees might oppose resistance. Some difficult choices can have to be made ! However, this can result in a more efficient organization, with access to a much larger pool of employees.
Because the development work is such a focused activity, because it can be done remotely, because commuting and occupying offices is vastly wasteful, I believe any new company can reap strong benefits from a work from home company model in the current state of the market.
While this require some knowledge of how these organizations can work fluently, developers made clear they are a majority to refuse doing what they could have been doing with the exact same efficiency being home.
However, making progress towards remote could be detrimental to workers having poor work from home conditions (busy home, lack of dedicated space, loneliness…) and to the company communication and planning efficiency.
Thankfully, while there is some benefits to in-person meeting and informal discussions, with clever planning, you can get most benefits of both worlds; with regular interval in-person meeting days, and offering to co-pay for coworking areas whenever needed, a manager can drive and empower their employees to ensure they will deliver their best in all circumstances.
Efficient organizations should include either a calendar to book the office, or an office large enough for everyone to come at the same time.
They should also include working devices to make remote meetings such as meeting rooms with included quality audio i/o devices.
All existing companies having a given model will have difficulties switching to a different one, although it isn’t impossible to. Usually, adapting to the market will mean including more remote. Existing companies might have to progressively transition to new model, adapting their processes, sometimes infrastructure, allowing more and more remote, until they ultimately get rid of their office. Some employees might oppose resistance. Some difficult choices can have to be made ! However, this can result in a more efficient organization, with access to a much larger pool of employees.
Because the development work is such a focused activity, because it can be done remotely, because commuting and occupying offices is vastly wasteful, I believe any new company can reap strong benefits from a work from home company model in the current state of the market.
While this require some knowledge of how these organizations can work fluently, developers made clear they are a majority to refuse doing what they could have been doing with the exact same efficiency being home.
However, making progress towards remote could be detrimental to workers having poor work from home conditions (busy home, lack of dedicated space, loneliness…) and to the company communication and planning efficiency.
Thankfully, with clever planning, you can get most benefits of both worlds; with regular interval in-person meeting days, and offering to co-pay for coworking areas whenever needed, a manager can drive and empower their employees to ensure they will deliver their best in all circumstances.