this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
244 points (92.1% liked)
Technology
59454 readers
4670 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wouldn't everyone agree they would do something better if they had more data to inform their decisions?
At the very least most people would tick a box saying they would.
At the time if no appropriate data was available, decisions still have to be made based on whatever is available. And a return to the previous status quo isn't a crazy idea in that scenario.
Yes, most people hate the idea of commuting and trying to focus in an open plan office, but that's not what the question was about.
This is also done by a company, envoy, that helps companies understand their office data. So it's a bit of a conflict of interest.
The greenhouse recruiting study was more interesting. Attrition goes up and companies had a harder time filling the newly vacated roles compared to companies that didn't force a back to the office.
Personally I think the back the office mandates are a way to do voluntary layoffs without making the execs look bad
Agree re it sometimes being a back door redundancy without penalties to the employer, but also senior management are often lazy and assume that others will not work unless closely monitored. This goes hand in hand with being incompetent enough to believe that they can effectively monitor the employees.