Quick thought on the remote work study, which got some ppl riled up.
The 20th century office is a bundle of REAL WORK—desk work, meeting spaces—and SORTA WORK—lunch, chats, serendipitous convos.
The biggest advantage of offices isn't REAL WORK. It's the SORTA WORK stuff.
The 20th century office is a bundle of REAL WORK—desk work, meeting spaces—and SORTA WORK—lunch, chats, serendipitous convos.
The biggest advantage of offices isn't REAL WORK. It's the SORTA WORK stuff.
https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/1436682491956498436
What I think we only barely understand—because it's really really hard to study—is how much does in-person "Sorta Work" matter for creativity and productivity? Is idle chatter a critical carrier wave for psychological safety? Or is easily replaceable by Slack, Twitter, etc?
My bet for now is that
1. The Harvard Business Review Mafia has almost certainly overplayed the benefits of serendipity
2. The pro-WFH group probably underrates how psychologically discombobulating it can be for extroverts to interface w/ peers via only screens for too long
1. The Harvard Business Review Mafia has almost certainly overplayed the benefits of serendipity
2. The pro-WFH group probably underrates how psychologically discombobulating it can be for extroverts to interface w/ peers via only screens for too long
seeing a lot of potshots at extroverts on here rn, which is fine, but let's be clear that saturday afternoon threads on twitter are practically the Met Gala of Introversion
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
