HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Jul 27, 2020, 6:23 PM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handro View Post
Good luck replacing your sales and marketing teams with less expensive overseas labor.
I agree with this, but I thought we were talking remote work.

Sales and marketing wouldn't be in Boise or Bangalore, and will be in-office as soon as there's a vaccine. WFH, and travel restrictions, are terrible for sales teams.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Jul 27, 2020, 6:37 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
WFH, and travel restrictions, are terrible for sales teams.
So true. I know I don't feel comfortable closing unless I can track business on my nice big CRT monitor and power tie to let people know I mean business. Nothing like getting the day started by flipping the page on my Far Side calendar and setting my Walkman to classic oldies for some prospecting through the yellow pages! Can't replace that energy from home. Plus, I don't have space for all my filing cabinets in a home office, dunno how else I'd keep track of all my client files.

Maybe in the future things will change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Jul 27, 2020, 6:41 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
I’ve probably missed this earlier, but what do people make of Facebook’s plan to pay people less if they are working from home in less expensive locations? Slack has said the same. In other words, the savings that come from not needing expensive real estate in a major hub city accrue to the business, not the individual.

If you can’t move away from NYC or SF (or London or Paris or wherever) and make the same money with cheaper housing, then a lot fewer people will do it. And those high salaries have only really ever come to be because people needed them to cover high costs.

There is and will always be something lost when working remotely, and people are kidding themselves if they think otherwise.
My wife's company was remote (except for guys in field) for a few months and were just as productive when they were in the office proving there wasn't much lost. My skills are far more valued on the west coast but I don't want to move there so I welcome companies like FB recruiting more WFH employees. Houston has been a dead end for my industry and field and this sort of things opens up a lot of opportunities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Jul 27, 2020, 9:36 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
My wife's company was remote (except for guys in field) for a few months and were just as productive when they were in the office proving there wasn't much lost. My skills are far more valued on the west coast but I don't want to move there so I welcome companies like FB recruiting more WFH employees. Houston has been a dead end for my industry and field and this sort of things opens up a lot of opportunities.
WFH productivity will really only be measurable over a longer period of time. One of the things I keep hearing from people, which makes intuitive sense, is that we are benefitting from the “capital” of relationships built when we were interacting face to face. You can stay close with a colleague or client you’ve known for years over Zoom, but might not be able to form new relationships that are as solid.
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Jul 27, 2020, 9:48 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
WFH productivity will really only be measurable over a longer period of time. One of the things I keep hearing from people, which makes intuitive sense, is that we are benefitting from the “capital” of relationships built when we were interacting face to face. You can stay close with a colleague or client you’ve known for years over Zoom, but might not be able to form new relationships that are as solid.
I agree. If I had a WFH job I would have to have some regular contact with the home office. I had a job for almost 10 years out of the UK and only met up with my colleagues a handful of times over that time and I found myself out of the loop. That was years ago when remote working was relatively new and they sucked at maintaining cohesion. Fortunately, my line of work doesn't involve a lot of client interaction so remote is more feasible for me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2020, 4:05 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,768
I think it really depends on the type of work and also personality of the employee or person(s).

Some line of work, requires face to face to truly be effective and also... because of the job scope. Telemedicine has its benefits, but can't be replaced in terms of true effectiveness, unless one is faking a back injury or pretending they have ADHD for reasons, than it has positives or if one has a cut on the finger or some non-emergency issue.

With personalities, there are folks that can't stand office, and like to travel or be out. Somewhere new all the time, not the same location.

Remote working has its limitations, but also its positives. For folks in certain metros, it can also mean one can be further from the job center, radius wise, and save tremendously for family or other matters.

Another positive for the world is less cars on the roads. Easier rush hour commutes, which means less stress and minivans on the roads, which means the average lifespan for the nation improves.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2020, 11:10 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
WFH productivity will really only be measurable over a longer period of time. One of the things I keep hearing from people, which makes intuitive sense, is that we are benefitting from the “capital” of relationships built when we were interacting face to face. You can stay close with a colleague or client you’ve known for years over Zoom, but might not be able to form new relationships that are as solid.
Exactly. WFH can be very productive over a few months, because you've built the relationships pre-WFH. It's easy to shepherd existing projects remotely, since you've already established the foundation.

But WFH would not be as productive absent that base, and won't be productive indefinitely. And hiring/onboarding is extremely difficult in most disciplines.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2020, 11:13 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handro View Post
So true. I know I don't feel comfortable closing unless I can track business on my nice big CRT monitor and power tie to let people know I mean business. Nothing like getting the day started by flipping the page on my Far Side calendar and setting my Walkman to classic oldies for some prospecting through the yellow pages! Can't replace that energy from home. Plus, I don't have space for all my filing cabinets in a home office, dunno how else I'd keep track of all my client files.

Maybe in the future things will change.
I'm sorry, but this is silly. The idea that valuing in-person relationship-building makes one stuck in the 1980's, is nonsense.

There will always be value to in-person relationship-building. It's extremely dystopian to believe that humans derive zero benefit from physical proximity to other humans.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2020, 2:22 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I'm sorry, but this is silly. The idea that valuing in-person relationship-building makes one stuck in the 1980's, is nonsense.

There will always be value to in-person relationship-building. It's extremely dystopian to believe that humans derive zero benefit from physical proximity to other humans.
You're twisting the argument. Valuing in-person relationship building has nothing to do with working from home. The idea that one has to be at an office every day to perform sales or marketing tasks very much makes someone stuck in the 1980's. Having an open door office policy, team meetings, client visits, etc. still happen for remote workers. "Work from home" is just shorthand for "not required at an office desk", it doesn't mean "remain quarantined in locked house every day."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2020, 2:54 PM
Investing In Chicago Investing In Chicago is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
WFH, and travel restrictions, are terrible for sales teams.
Agree on travel restrictions, but WFH? I lead a 60 person Sales Org at Oracle, where 100% of my team is remote. In fact, of Oracle's ~5,000 person field sales team, 100% are remote employees. Oracle doesn't want field sales in an office, even if they live in a city with an office.

My wife leads a 270 person sales team at Salesforce, with over half of the employees WFH.

WFH is the way to go with Sales*

*Entry level or lower tier sales probably will do better in an office
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2020, 7:47 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Depending on the nature of the product/sale and where the customers are, many salespeople might be on the road most days anyway. In that case it really doesn’t make sense to have an office.
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2020, 9:51 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,270
The death of the city: Teleworking not the coronavirus, is making urban living obsole

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2020, 10:11 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handro View Post
Some arguments there are bizarre. They say date app also makes to help cities obsolote. In a big metropolis, we'll find dozens of potential candidates within few meters of distance. In a rural area or in an exurb, things get much more complicated.

Nobody really knows what will happen, so all those articles lecturing us about the post-Covid are annoying or just silly.
__________________
London - São Paulo - Rio de Janeiro - Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Jul 29, 2020, 12:25 AM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,210
Politico runs a lot of dumb op-eds, I don't really bother with that site.

Not everyone works in an office, about 40% of jobs can be done from home, and that assumes absolutely everyone who can would, and things like education would be all online. I don't see that happening in totality.

And then work is only one part of life. You have wants(restaurants, activities, socialization) and needs (trips to get hair cut, to the dentist, etc) and tons of people employed in filling those needs. It just makes more economic sense for these things to be clustered, at least to a point*

I think one interesting thing to come out of online shopping is that the shipping cost becomes more transparent to the consumer. Amazon and others are bringing back the concept of the vertical, smaller footprint warehouse with fulfillment centers in big cities, and the bigger the city the more things you can get same-day delivered at low or no shipping cost. Any kind of on-demand hours/30 minute delivery service is obviously going to work better in a metropolitan area rather than a low density rural one unless someone invents a teleportation machine. How much delivery "tax" would you pay to live further away from a population center?

Self-driving cars will have the same effect. The current model of owning a car hides the real cost per mile aside from gas but a robot taxi would do the opposite and people would be sensitive to longer trips if they saw a higher dollar amount. Also I think the only reason we don't toll every inch of roadway is because of the complexity of putting up tollbooths and signage, but if a car's location can be tracked at all times and can be geofenced denying it access to a road without payment of a toll, then it becomes possible to toll everything. This of course then drips into getting things delivered too, no not only is the shipping cost noticed by the consumer who also notices the unavailability of 30 minute grocery delivery in some places, but the cost of the infrastructure that got it to you is also now factored in.

For a website full of urbanists who are so anal about how the suburbs are inefficient because they use more of everything - roads, pipes, wires, fire department response times, etc, I'm surprised how many embrace the idea of a rural super sprawl.

*Of course on the other hand, a city doesn't need to be very, very dense or very massive to the point of being uncomfortable and hyper-expensive. I think in the future, giant skyscrapers will become less common due to much less demand, and old 1970s boxy office towers in third-tier downtowns like Dayton, Ohio or Albuquerque would probably get demolished in mass at some point leaving skylines unrecognizable or nonexistent in smaller places. In developed countries there will be far fewer neighborhoods boasting population densities over 15-20k people per square mile, BUT I don't think cities would be abandoned, instead housing units would get larger and households get smaller in a gradual process that's already occurred in a lot of gentrified neighborhoods and in Europe. Lower quality apartments would get torn down to build townhouses with small yards, etc, though some very small apartment units could be useful to guarantee a home to all incl. the poor and mentally ill or handicapped, etc. Maybe that's what would save some buildings.

Last edited by llamaorama; Jul 29, 2020 at 12:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Jul 29, 2020, 1:02 AM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 18,327
My company decided to move my department into a rotating WFH shift (3 weeks home and 1 week office). I do clinical and regulatory checks for a pharmacy benefits manager, it's a job made for WFH.

Austin will be very interesting..... The Hill Country part was already sprawling and overcrowded.....
__________________
"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

"Such then is the human condition , that to wish greatness for one's country is to wish harm to one's neighbor" Voltaire
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2020, 1:32 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
August 15, 2020
Suburbs can woo city people by being more city-like
The burbs of the '70s won't cut it anymore.

NOAH SMITH
Bloomberg Opinion

America’s urban landscape is on the cusp of change. As big cities struggle, suburbs and smaller cities have a chance to win over fleeing workers, boosting their tax bases. But in order to be attractive places to live, they’ll have to look a bit more city-like.

Many big U.S. cities were already struggling before the pandemic struck. Powerful local homeowners known as NIMBYs blocked new development and transit, making urban cores less affordable and less convenient, and slowing the urban influx that began around 1990. Now Covid-19 is hitting big cities the hardest:

Urban Drought

Meanwhile, the pandemic may convince companies that remote work is an acceptable and productive way to manage large portions of their workforces. Crime is also increasing in large cities, while the rise of dating apps and other social technologies is making suburban life more fun. All this means the centers of New York City, San Francisco, and other so-called superstar cities may lose population in the decade to come.


Where will the people go? Declining cities in the Rust Belt will offer cheap rents, but often at the cost of urban blight. Most city dwellers don’t enjoy life in rural areas or small towns. So they’ll probably move to the same sorts of places they moved last time people fled city centers en masse: to the suburbs.

But “the suburbs” won’t mean exactly what it meant in the 1970s. Then, the term conjured visions of malls, single-family houses separated by broad lawns, and homogeneous White populations. In order to attract today’s urbanites, suburbs will have to offer something a bit different.

Most important, they’ll have to become denser. Without new housing construction, attractive suburbs will suffer the same fate as superstar cities — rising rents and displacement. Newcomers will be accused of gentrification and pitted against long-term residents in a bitter zero-sum game.

In earlier eras, it was possible for suburbs to grow through sprawl, but this process has now probably reached its limit in most locations. Building further out would make it too unpleasant to drive to workplaces, retail, entertainment, or other destinations.

The way forward, then, is for suburbs to build more dense housing. Fortunately, this is a lot easier to do in capacious, sprawling suburbs than in the middle of Manhattan. It would be easy to change single-family zoning rules to allow pockets of denser housing throughout suburbs. These wouldn’t be towering skyscrapers, but duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, row-houses, in-law units, and small apartment complexes.


Most suburbs can accommodate a large increase in density without feeling like a city. Oregon is showing how this can be done, legalizing small multi-family housing units throughout the entire state. Portland is going further, allowing various forms of dense infill housing and eliminating mandatory on-site parking requirements in order to free up more space for homes.

Such measures will keep suburbs not only cheap but also diverse as they become more populous. The trend toward more multiracial suburbs actually began decades ago. The lily-white ‘burbs of the 70s are becoming rarer due to immigration and to Americans of all races choosing more integrated neighborhoods. Denser and more-affordable housing will let suburbs maintain this trend while also enjoying another burst of growth.
Suburbs will also have to become more fun and vibrant. Dating apps and social networks make it easier for people to meet, but they still need somewhere to go besides their own houses. Downtown areas with restaurants, bars, dance clubs, parks, and shop-lined streets all provide more attractive destinations than the old suburban attractions of malls and strip-malls.

In their book “Our Towns: A 100,000-Mile Journey into the Heart of America,” writers James and Deborah Fallows note one of the key hallmarks of successful, thriving places is a vibrant downtown. In fact, suburbs should probably offer more than one such area — maybe one filled with bars and nightlife, a couple of quieter shopping villages for older residents, and so on.


Finally, suburbs should offer some transit options. Cars will probably continue to be the main mode of transportation, especially as electric or even self-driving vehicles become more common. But a good bus and light rail network will help keep the roads from getting clogged, while a commuter rail stop will let suburban residents venture into a nearby larger city without jamming up the highways.

In other words, suburbs need to become just a bit more urban. In doing this, they’ll transform metropolitan areas from hub-and-spoke arrangements into true modern polycentric cities. This will realize the old and long-frustrated dream of the New Urbanist movement. But it’s not just a plan for pleasant blends of urban and suburban life — it’s a way smaller outlying towns can exercise smart growth and enjoy their day in the sun.


https://www.chicagobusiness.com/opin...eing-more-city
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2020, 7:17 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,885
I just don't see suburbs really booming at the expense of cities because of recent events.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2020, 9:23 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
I just don't see suburbs really booming at the expense of cities because of recent events.
I don’t see some sort of major earth-shattering change either. However, I do see them becoming more compelling than before, and becoming more competitive.

In other words, prior to COVID central cities had all of the momentum with suburbs languishing. I think recent changes rebalance that scenario by just a tiny amount.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2020, 1:03 AM
Matthew's Avatar
Matthew Matthew is offline
Fourth and Main
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Johns Creek, GA (Atlanta)
Posts: 3,133
As kids return to school and suburban schools often have more conservative (no masks, in-person learning, no one-way changes in the halls, back to sports, hide any issues from parents and the media, etc.) school boards that want to return to pre-COVID-19 right now, could we see teachers and families want to leave the suburbs for more careful urban/city schools? Could city schools gain some of the best teachers and sports coaches through being more careful with everyone's health or at least being perceived as the better choice for the health of kids and teachers? Here in the suburbs of Atlanta, I've seen teachers quitting or protesting over COVID-19 concerns and parents (kids too!) are speaking-up over masks, distancing, the need for online classes, etc.,. It "could" present a rare opportunity for schools in our nation's cities to gain some of the best teachers from the suburbs and improve the quality of education and maybe their sports teams, too? Quality of education is often seen as a weakness of city living for young families. I'm sure the best city schools in the highest income neighborhoods would see most of these gains. Could this position cities to retain more young families?
__________________
My Diagram
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2020, 1:46 AM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 68,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
I just don't see suburbs really booming at the expense of cities because of recent events.
I think it is pretty clear this will hurt cities. Which areas, if any, will benefit? I have no idea.
__________________
The Last Word.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:27 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.