[jbob2000]

In-office communication tends to be distracted by off-topic stuff like "Hey, nice t-shirt!" or "How was the commute in this morning?".

Remote communication will have technical issues once in a while. If not that, then it's the "telephone tag" game you end up playing. Also timezones.

I'm convinced that good communication is a symptom of other things being good. Project has clear goals and everyone knows what they're doing? Communication is good! Project is unclear, scope is too big, or just plain boring? Communication is bad.

[yojo]

Communication quality also varies based on team cohesiveness. When I'm working with people I like, I trust that they're being respectful of my time when they communicate with me, and I am less likely to push back on a request that delays my feature but is for the greater good. Employees are also better able to negotiate around features/architectural decisions when they trust each other.

I worked on a team with deep trust issues between the product manager and engineers; PM didn't believe engineers were doing their best/giving fair estimates, engineers didn't believe the PM was asking for features that would lead us to success in the market. This lack of trust meant a big fight every sprint, and a lot of productivity lost to arguments and the ensuing distraction. Sample size of one, but the PM never had lunch with engineers or otherwise engaged with them socially. I can't prove it, but I suspect things would have gone a lot smoother if we'd all been friends.

tldr: Off-topic communication can still be good communication (in moderation) because it helps develop/maintain high quality relationships between the people you work with.

[JoeAltmaier]

There are some good solutions to remote teams, as covered elsewhere. I work at Sococo; we have teams in 5 states and 2 continents, and we communicate well and continuously.