Brian Chesky: Ability to hire from anywhere is more valuable than in-office work
These remote-vs-office discussions where nobody discusses the actual work involved are fairly pointless. Disregarding the obvious scenarios of presence-required in order to work (i.e. manufacturing), the question applies: what is most productive for "information work"?In my personal experience, I've found collaboration conducted face-to-face far more effective than doing so in a distributed/online way. There is a high level of context in these situations: the topic of discussion, the interactions among attendees, etc.On the flip side, standard administrative operations that require nothing more than a terminal/shell? That's not collaborative, don't make those colleagues commute to a remote workstation.But those employers who "feel their employees aren't so productive" when they aren't in-house -- huge signal they don't know how to really measure productivity.What I've heard from other colleagues in management roles: the concern with remote work isn't about productivity, it's about _dedicated_ productivity coupled with zero trust. In other words, how do we (the employer) ensure our employees aren't moonlighting on our team and only giving the minimum level of effort with us?