Proximity to coworkers increases long-run development, lowers short-term output (2023)

Study design and evidence quality

• Several commenters note the paper is still “revise and resubmit” and based on a single Fortune 500 online retailer, with code review data and code-output metrics as proxies; many see this as too narrow to justify broad claims.
• Some view the paper as typical/acceptable quality for business research; others call it “low quality” and argue it needs more firms, roles, and measures beyond software development output.
• The thread criticizes the HN title as dropping important nuance from the abstract (“tradeoffs”) and worries it will be weaponized in RTO debates.

RTO vs WFH implications

• Many expect managers to cherry‑pick the headline (“proximity increases development”) to justify return‑to‑office, ignoring the documented short‑term productivity drop.
• Others argue this won’t move RTO policy at all, since most RTO decisions already seem driven by gut, leases, or power dynamics, not data.
• Multiple people emphasize proximity helps only if you’re near actual collaborators; just “being in an office” (different floor, different site) confers little benefit.

Mentorship, onboarding, and careers

• Broad agreement that in‑person proximity especially benefits juniors and new hires: faster onboarding, more informal questions, easier social integration.
• Senior/remote‑experienced workers often do fine at home, but many acknowledge remote is worse for learning, serendipitous exposure, and long‑term career capital.
• Some explicitly accept this tradeoff: they’ll sacrifice promotion speed for remote life benefits (location, childcare, housing costs).

Productivity, metrics, and work style

• Many say WFH increases their individual focus and output; others (e.g., ADHD) find offices or third places (libraries/cafés) better.
• Commenters distrust “code productivity” metrics (LOC, object code size) as measures of real value or quality.
• Hamming’s “open door vs closed door” story is heavily discussed: open/interruptible work seen as worse for short‑term output but better for finding important problems and building influence.

Corporate motives and labor dynamics

• A recurring view is that RTO is primarily about soft layoffs, control, and justifying real estate, not development.
• People describe remote‑specific failure modes (multiple jobs, interview fraud) but others counter that “duds” existed long before remote.
• Several promote hybrid or intentional-collocation models (e.g., periodic onsite weeks, “no‑meeting” deep‑work days) as the best balance.