[binarytox1n]

I am a manager and do have a concern for company culture. Culture is how the teams work together - socially, professionally. It's harder to maintain culture remotely. It switches from something that "just happens" with a bit of care to something that has to be actively fostered.

It's easy do dehumanize a voice on the phone. Many people don't want to even use cameras for video calls. How much empathy do you have for a voice on the phone versus a human being you interact with in person on a daily basis?

I think the benefits of remote work far outweigh the work that needs to be done to maintain culture remotely, but it is a new challenge that doesn't have a lot of good understanding around how to make it work.

[noisy_boy]

> I am a manager and do have a concern for company culture. Culture is how the teams work together - socially, professionally. It's harder to maintain culture remotely.

The main aspects of firm culture that make difference in a day to day life are minimizing company politics, avoiding blame-game, honest interaction and manager's support. In my experience, it is the manager who contributes the most towards either improving these or screwing them up. None of these things require you to be physically present in office. Rest of stuff like events, group lunches etc are nice to have but not having them won't impact you as much as a political and toxic work environment would.

> How much empathy do you have for a voice on the phone versus a human being you interact with in person on a daily basis?

Since when basic human decency became incumbent upon seeing someone in flesh in front of you? Are you saying that people can't behave professionally unless they are not physically in office? How do fully remote companies work?

> Many people don't want to even use cameras for video calls.

For the same reason people hate meetings - resolutions to that are also the same that apply to face-to-face meetings.

> I think the benefits of remote work far outweigh the work that needs to be done to maintain culture remotely, but it is a new challenge that doesn't have a lot of good understanding around how to make it work.

Agreed on that - a good starting point would be not use culture as a justification to force people to be in office.

[adwn]

> How much empathy do you have for a voice on the phone versus a human being you interact with in person on a daily basis?

Judging by the toxic office culture at some traditional (non-WFH) companies, lack of empathy has little to do with only hearing "a voice on the phone" vs interacting with "in person".

[area51org]

"Company culture" does not arise from physical presence. I've been at this for a long time, and have worked for all types of companies: mandated office presence, flexible WFH, and fully remote. All had company cultures, and the worst were the ones that forced people into an office. Being together in an office does not do anything productive. It does not create camaraderie or a culture, and the mythical hallways conversations that you hear about do not actually happen.

> it is a new challenge that doesn't have a lot of good understanding around how to make it work.

It's been going on for decades now. Time to catch up. Good WFH culture is matter of effective management. Skills required:

- good communication (knowing how to use the tools we have, like IM, video, and yes, even email)

- being responsive (this is a habit that must be cultivated in many cases)

- focus on goals and achievements instead of distractions like seeing someone in a hallway and assuming that if they seem to be working, they must be working

[lupire]

I don't want to work with sociopaths who can't be kind to a voice on the phone.

[binarytox1n]

Your exaggeration and dismissal is perfect evidence of your inability to empathize with the struggles of people you haven't met in real life.

[adwn]

> Your exaggeration and dismissal is perfect evidence of your inability to empathize with the struggles of people you haven't met in real life.

Calm down, you're overreacting. A single sentence is hardly "perfect evidence of inability to empathize" with others. Talk about "exaggeration"...

I somewhat agree with lupire: If someone only has empathy with their coworkers – who they're interacting with daily – if they can physically see them, then that's saying something.

[binarytox1n]

I would think that if anyone is overreacting it's the person who thinks people who struggle to identify with remote workers are sociopaths. I haven't made any black and white statements or used absolute terms such as "no empathy". I know people in general struggle with nuance, but come on - I'm making it easy here.

[adwn]

> I know people in general struggle with nuance, but come on - I'm making it easy here.

Your posts contain one personal attack after the other. Really: please take a step back and relax.

[unionpivo]

> I don't want to work with sociopaths who can't be kind to a voice on the phone.

Sociopaths are an outliers and rare. But most people empathize less with people they have not met in person (prof: the internet, even before social media).

Add deadlines and stress to that, and you have otherwise normal people behaving worse than they would otherwise. Source: me, working with remote teams for past 20 years.

Like the person above said, you (or someone) have to be actively on the lookout for such issues, or things can get get bad really fast (I am talking days and weeks not months).