[RaghavEvoX]

I am totally excited & appreciate the decision taken by TCS . As an industry leader, they are setting the example and I am sure most of the IT companies will follow suit .

I work in a highly reputed global organization in the Chennai IT Hub. And over the last 2 years , I go to office like twice in a week and my presence in the office is really not going to affect my work. With around 13 years experience with different IT majors, I can safely say this is going to be a win-win situation for both the companies & employees (atleast for people who dont need physical presence in office).

Now staying in the city , I pay nearly 20% of my salary on rent & a huge sum for school fee & other urban expenses. Add to this, 10K for petrol every month & a 1.5 hour commute everyday. I think many will have the same situation like me. I would prefer to stay somewhere in the outskirts of the city or in some Tier-2 cities and once in a while come to office. I would save huge sum of money & time and can even better concentrate on family and my work with the extra time available.

With this I can get additional advantages like clean drinking water (People in Chennai will understand the water conditions of the city), less polluted air and a life which is more peaceful and real.

[m8002?]

I think WFH is going great currently for most people is because you worked with your team together in office before this. So you know how to interact with each of them online well in advance. If you are now put into a new team, your productivity will take a dive.

I am yet to come across a team setup from scratch where everyone is WFH and they have excellent communication and coordination. Why dont startups just have everyone working from home to save on infra costs?

[aniketi]

WFH is good sometimes or in crisis situation like current one, but not all the time. It's so boring to work from home alone with no buddies around, no jokes, no laughs, no gossips, no Sutta breaks, no parties, no trips with office buddies & what not. Personally i will be unhappy, nothing beats office fun with cool buddies. Also we have to do lot of work at home which we are not used to


I can also see impact on below things -

1 Lots of manager, supervisor type positions may disappear as all are working from home.
2 HR, admin roles will reduce drastically.
3 Restaurants, Hotels which are around IT parks will run out of business.
4 Small Tapri business around IT parks will close, sad.
5 Real estate business may get hampered in cities like Pune, Hyderabad.

[smartindboy]

Originally Posted by aniketi

WFH is good sometimes or in crisis situation like current one, but not all the time. It's so boring to work from home alone with no buddies around, no jokes, no laughs, no gossips, no Sutta breaks, no parties, no trips with office buddies & what not. Personally i will be unhappy, nothing beats office fun with cool buddies. Also we have to do lot of work at home which we are not used to


I can also see impact on below things -

1 Lots of manager, supervisor type positions may disappear as all are working from home.
2 HR, admin roles will reduce drastically.
3 Restaurants, Hotels which are around IT parks will run out of business.
4 Small Tapri business around IT parks will close, sad.
5 Real estate business may get hampered in cities like Pune, Hyderabad.

On the other hand, the need for managers/supervisors has greatly increased.
In the current situation, my whole organization would have gone to a standstill, if not for the efforts of the managers to make sure their team is enabled to work with minimal loss of billability and given enough confidence and assurance to clients and other stakeholders.

[msdivy]

Originally Posted by aniketi

WFH is good sometimes or in crisis situation like current one, but not all the time.

Right now all malls, travel & such distractions are closed. Hence better productivity. Unless the employee is highly interested in work, the number of hours put might reduce after lockdown is lifted.

On social interactions front, the workplace is the primary location where people most of their friends. WFH will alter this.

Originally Posted by smartindboy

On the other hand, the need for managers/supervisors has greatly increased.

Yes, managers/leads have to ensure the project is completed on schedule, by co-ordinating with everyone concerned to complete their assigned task. This will be a challenge for managers for those employees who are new to the domain.

[The Observer]

WFH was a feasible option that many organisations were conveniently ignoring due to inertia. In my organisation since 2014 or 2015 itself WFH was rolled out and seating capacity was restricted to 70% of team size. Now thanks to COVID this % of people WFH can be upped significantly.

There are many positive aspects for such organisations and its employees.

1. Reduce rental, maintenance and transport expenses significantly.

2. Reduction in traffic and consequently pollution, if many companies come forward to embrace this WFH option.

3. Increased productivity.

4. Reduced expenses for the employee themselves.

5. A better lifestyle for all in terms of possibility to eat home cooked meals. Time for exercise and family time.

6. Reduced energy consumption by large organisations w.r.t Air conditioning, lifts etc.

Yes this will disrupt PG operators and support vendors but they will adapt as in any case the restaurant model is in for a huge overhaul.

Employee engagement, performance management will see a big shift and I hope it will be in the right direction.

Ironically post COVID one may need permission to come to office in person while in the past this permission was needed to WFH.

[BLACNWYTE]

I work for a PSU where WFH is not really possible. Earlier I used to think that it would be great if I got to work from home. But now when I think of it I guess I'm better off going to office every day. (I work in essential services). I'm a bit lazy by nature and WFH can bring out the worst in me I guess. My thoughts now are, what will be the effect of WFH, if implemented by all companies possible? And how is it going to affect our economy?

I'm sure there are lot of positives for our IT folk, like getting to spend more time with families, move to a more peaceful neighborhood away from the rush of the city, may be even move to hometowns and be with parents, more money saved, less stress etc. But there are also negatives like slipping into depression, lack of social interaction which otherwise would have been possible if one went to an office, overlapping of family time and office time etc. It's a slippery slope.

Also I'm thinking about the jobs lost in the unorganized sector. In a country like ours, the unorganized job sector is huge. During my time in Bangalore I have seen a symbiotic life of IT sector with the unorganized sector. The PGs, small shop-tea stall vendors, cab aggregates, laundry services, tiffin services, the housekeeping contractors, repairmen, guards etc might lose their sources of income. This could push is down that abyss of poverty that we are desperately climbing up now.

The coming years will be very challenging if this happens and govts will have to rethink and reform their policies to accommodate for the job losses and create new employment avenues.

[TheCatalyst]

I have worked for TCS for 10+ years, mostly in 2000's era, and I know pretty well how IT companies work in India. The more I read this news, the more I see the theme of 'cost efficiency (cost cutting?)' coming out of it. I have mixed feelings about long term working from home and here's why -

- First, lets not generalize the IT sector in India. Its huge, from small time Product Development company to Enterprise grade organization comprising of QA teams, Production Support, Maintenance, Audits, Security, Networking etc. SME IT companies can definitely make use of WFH, but large teams often require co-location. I doubt the government bureaucrats who send out circulars related to IT industries even understand an iota of it.

- The type of work performed matters. If the work can be assigned to a single individual and that person can continue to work in isolation, then great. But most decision making, design considerations as well as issue resolution are much faster when you can just sit next to the team.

- Companies like TCS have mostly production support and testing / maintenance projects with pure development projects actually constituting less than 20% of the entire book. The time to market as well as issue resolution certainly takes longer when WFH.

- On one hand companies stand to save on office space, electricity, security,transport, cafeteria but on the other hand those costs will be borne by employees working from home. Increased personal electric bills, increased food bills etc. I am sure there wont any increase in salary. Maybe a reimbursement for the internet plan at home, but that's all one would get.

- In companies like TCS, which are certified at CMM level 5 (model for maturity) there are lot of things which look great on paper. However I personally know how the figures (metrics as they are called) are sugar coated and arrived at in those models. Mind you, there is nothing illegal here, just another way of interpreting and presenting a statistic. The ground reality is very different. However badges like 'CMM certified' play a key role when securing large security-sensitive projects.

- Another factor is, WFH in corporate gets more and more difficult as you go higher up. Going higher up usually means more people management and collaboration. Though video conferencing does provide the capability, it comes no where close to the real thing.

- Bonding and networking with colleagues (senior) in a large organization is a critical skill and is needed for promotions and perceptions. Well with WFH, unless you setup a meeting with an agenda, it becomes very difficult to 'run into someone' in a lift or lobby and have a casual (but strategic) conversation.

- In the current lock-down scenario, most large IT companies are just keeping the critical functions afloat with this WFH thing. The delivery velocity has taken a severe beating with business analysts, developers and QA teams growing slowly drifting apart. In our company (which is an Investment Bank), many senior approvals are needed to put a simple change in production for the fear of breaking anything in this lock-down. This is what we usually call change freeze or chills.

- I don't want to reiterate the inadequate WFH infra which has been discussed at length in previous posts, but its not just a question of buying a good laptop and internet connection. A proper dual / triple screen workstation is needed for most multi-tasking tools and a physical headset phone and an ergonomic desk/chair. The chair is especially important as already many of my colleagues have started complaining about lower back pain when WFH. (Fun fact: The chairs which we are used in the office are quite expensive and cost between Rs. 30-50K each. Even after spending 12 hours straight, there is absolutely no back issues somehow). And this whole setup needs a study room, which is a challenge in a match box sized Mumbai flats.

- Those advocating that more women will join the workforce, I am not so sure about that either. Maybe in the entry level jobs which pay just 'adequately'. With women WFH, they will also be expected to take care of the kids (which they might be already doing) which is a big challenge. Me and my wife are struggling to manage kids in this lockdown and both WFH.

Although we are improving, there is still a long way to go before we improve on the WFH possibility and it needs the government to step up their game as well (24x7 electricity, mobile call drop issue, peak internet usage bandwidth / latency, VOIP services, tax implications etc)

I think what this will lead to is a split between WFH and office i.e. people will get 2 days WFH and 3 days in office. That will foster more work life balance and will be sustainable in the longer term.

[fhdowntheline]

Originally Posted by Dry Ice

Well a lot of smaller companies were already doing it. It only hits the news if its Infy/TCS.


Finally the Govt.

God knows what they will come up with. WFH cess? Commercial rates for electricity if you WFH? New regulations limiting WFH % ? Only time will tell.

Why would that be the case? Companies are charged commercial rates in offices and consume considerably larger amounts of power with redundancy backups. Some of these needs will go away.

[fhdowntheline]

"Are we trying to measure a jet airliner's design and development with our piston-engine experience ?"
Let us understand that when a large company talks about a game changing move, there will be fallouts, which we have discussed quite a bit here, but also a major work culture change. The biggest threat to a service organization is its lack of ability to serve, period. What is coming up is simply a long term solution to this. As to making this sustainable, there are all kinds of human and tech solutions available or will be available. The traditional roles in the IT service org chart will change. Most importantly, the businesses will be forced to re-look at how they outsource their work. So as the vision evolves,the methods will too. Let us observe how things go along.

[srishiva]

I dont think govt can mandate WFH. It can only suggest. But there are advantages to companies and employees. They will do it only if they find that it doesnt hamper their working. I was in Wipro when it changed to 5 day week. Premji had mentioned they will revert back to 6 days if it doesnt work out !

Productivity etc are not difficult things and can be managed. For my work, we still need lots of hardware and lab related work but it need not be everyday. Companies thinking in that direction is really good. Looks like lot people want to be the 25%

[tiger_stripes]

Besides reduced office running costs, companies can now tap a wider talent pool as location is no longer a constraint to hiring.
Flip side for employees is downward pressure on salaries. Companies no longer have to pay high salaries to offset the high cost of living in metro cities, if they can attract talent from lower cost cities. Similar to how the outsourcing model developed in the first place.
So people looking for the best of both worlds may be in for a rude shock. Employee costs are a significant portion of expenses for most IT companies.

On a separate note, to know how companies have managed WFH, here is an article from Gitlab, the 'largest all-remote company' https://about.gitlab.com/company/cul...-remote/guide/

[Dry Ice]

Originally Posted by fhdowntheline

Why would that be the case? Companies are charged commercial rates in offices and consume considerably larger amounts of power with redundancy backups. Some of these needs will go away.

Like I said, "god knows", and only time will tell. It's just a worse case guess.

[sridharj77]

As an IT guy who used to WFH 1-2 times a week, this is not a great/sustainable move.

All this while, WFH was treated as a perk/privilege and even now managers tend to view it suspiciously. All of a sudden, how did they come to this decision? Some notes:

1. Clients have realized that the same work can be done remote - you don't need onsite roles with high billing rates

2. Work visas are getting difficult, so this move will address #1 above

3. People will be asked to work more evening and night shifts (in the same time zones as clients), reducing collaboration challenges

4. Surveillance and micromanagement will increase. Already, we are seeing managers in many companies ask their teams to fill up timesheets daily instead of weekly. Also, installation of employee monitoring software is going up dramatically

5. Commercial rental prices were going up astronomically. Facilities far away from the city were not preferred by employees, obviously and hence companies were forced to rent offices in the IT hubs. Now, those costs can be saved (Cost per head includes all of these bills), but need not be passed on to employees

6. Subsidized canteens, expensive conference room facilities, gyms, sports facilities, pickup and drop for late night shifts, team outings/dinners, Client visits, inter-city travel - all these are huge costs that are saved as well


After 2 years, I predict that companies will stop these WFH citing productivity or "A colocated team is a high-performing team" or some such nonsense and get everyone back into offices. IBM, Sun Microsystems, Oracle, HP have gone through these cycles before!

About productivity: with lockdown, people don't have an option to step out and hence productivity is temporarily high. Once this ends, people will have to run errands, pick up kids from school/tuition/art classes etc. Then we will see increased noise from management and disciplinary actions.

[srishiva]

Originally Posted by sridharj77

About productivity: with lockdown, people don't have an option to step out and hence productivity is temporarily high. Once this ends, people will have to run errands, pick up kids from school/tuition/art classes etc. Then we will see increased noise from management and disciplinary actions.

I have seen this few times in this thread. If we accept productivity is high, then shouldn't that be sustainable ? Provided we are not working for more than 8 or 9 hours for this productivity, if the employee is not able to work at desired productivity, they would lose their jobs. When companies mandate that 75% work from home, there will be checks and balances. Maybe better planning is required and its not present today even for people working in office

Picking kids from school/tuition/art classes while supporting productivity should lead to employee satisfaction. In fact we force people to work from home if some help is required at home. We are all humans and they would put little more work in the evening or so.