Fully Remote Might Not be the Best Option

As we navigate this stage of the world-wide Coronavirus pandemic, more and more companies are looking to return to normal. That includes trying to define the new normal for the workplace and the workforce. To be clear, when I use “company” or “companies” within this article, I’m?referring specifically to tech, IT, and engineering focused companies. That's my background. That doesn't make me an expert, and I don’t have any of my own metrics or hard data to lean on. I just have my own empirical evidence to suggest there is no “one size fits all” answer - not even within the same company.

I’ll start by making what I suspect will be a controversial statement for many:

You might be asking yourself why I’m not supporting my fellow engineers and their desire to work from home. Or you may be thinking that sounds like a typical baby boomer opinion but hear me out. My statement intentionally includes several all-inclusive qualifiers - e.g., “blanket permission,” “their entire staff,” and “fully remote.” My point is that although fully remote and hybrid work opportunities are likely to remain at significantly higher levels than pre-COVID, I believe the idea that all tech companies can perform at the same or higher levels with a fully remote workforce is probably unrealistic.

Over the last two and a half years, I have seen teams work (or attempt to work) multiple ways with varying levels of success - all at the same company. I have seen fully remote teams be very successful. I would suggest that these teams were successful largely because they were successful teams before the pandemic. I also saw teams that were less successful as fully remote. Some eventually moved to a hybrid model. In one case, it was largely due to the fact that several team members were responsible for test and integration on target hardware - large scale hardware that couldn’t be taken home. In another it was primarily because the team was new and had a hard time gelling and becoming a team while working fully remote. Other teams basically never left the office. In the defense contracting world, accessibility to hardware and classified information and systems simply prevented work from being done remotely. That's a topic for a future article.

I agree there are potential advantages to working from home. However, I believe those advantages are more pronounced and sustainable in some cases than others.

Many of the advantages and disadvantages of working from home have been discussed elsewhere with supporting, and sometimes contradictory, data. My empirical observations suggest the following (far from comprehensive or scientific) list as a starting point:

• Working from home as an empty nester provides better focus time.
• Working from the Living Room of a one-bedroom apartment with a retired spouse at home, not so much.
• Working from home with a family?that has young kids at home makes it easier to take care of personal appointments and help out your spouse.
• Being able to focus on a project with young kids at home and no dedicated office space is not so easy.
• Zoom and other similar technologies have changed our expectations regarding the need for face-to-face meetings - from small team teams to large customer and program meetings.
• I suspect the Millennial and Gen Z folks will disagree, but I've seen evidence that it is harder to integrate new team members into the team and build the same team culture and relationships over Zoom and conference calls compared to face-to-face interaction.
• Working from home cuts down on commute time and gives us more time with family.
• Working from home blurs the line between work and family and gives us more time “at work” without feeling like we’re cheating your family (but we are).

Bottom line - I think companies and employees should both look at their situations and objectively evaluate the pros and cons of 100% onsite, hybrid, and 100% remote options before adopting one option or a combination. We should not reject any of these simply because we don’t like the idea of it. As hybrid work becomes a more acceptable alternative for all of us, employers and employees should embrace it and carefully consider what tasks can be completed more efficiently at the office and when work can be completed efficiently from home.

I know some employers are eager to move some or all of their staff to fully remote and downsize their physical office footprint. However, they should still be concerned about the employee's well-being and productivity. Employers should consider providing stand-up desks, ergonomic chairs, quality internet and VPN connections, and other resources that keep their remote employees productive.

I’m certainly not a CEO, just an engineer trying to get the job done, but I disagree with Yelp CEO, Jeremy Stoppelman who asserts that the hybrid model is the worst possible option. My experience is that office collaboration is valuable, and that working from home can have advantages. Perhaps there are situations and companies where a fully remote workforce can be effective, but I stand by my statement that there is no “one size fits all” answer.

I have other experiences with remote teams and remote individuals prior to COVID-19, and I’ll share some of those experiences and lessons learned in future articles. For now, I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below. I’d also encourage you to share this post on your own feed. The more discussion, the better.

*I should probably come up with a more legal sounding disclaimer, but for now, I’ll go with this. The views and opinions expressed in this newsletter are solely my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of LinkedIn, my current or former employers, my alma mater, my church, or my family.