How I decided to allow remote work forever at Atlassian

Deciding to embrace remote was easy for co-CEO Scott Farquhar. The rest was a little more complicated.

Atlassian Co-Founder & Co-CEO Scott Farquhar Keynote Speech at the Morgan Stanley Australia Summit

"Moving fast and communicating fast with false certainty ends up not being the right thing."

Photo: Brent Lewin/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Click banner image for more How I decided series

Scott Farquhar is the co-CEO of Atlassian. Before the pandemic, only around 5% of Atlassian employees were remote workers. Today, most are, with 42% of the Australian software giant’s employees living more than two hours from an office.

The overall decision was easy enough; the hard part was working out the details. Farquhar walks through how he and co-CEO Mike Cannon-Brookes made this decision during that fateful spring and summer of 2020.

Farquhar’s story, as told to Protocol, has been edited for clarity and brevity.

We predicted the worst. Very early on, Mike and I chatted about it and came to the same conclusion: This pandemic is not going back in six weeks. I think we originally said we think this is going to go for two years.

If we’re not going to go back for two years, what are the implications of that? We looked around and said, we’ve always tapped into a global talent base because we’re a global company. If we don’t have to go back to offices, we can tap into an even bigger global talent base.

We think we should plan to never go back into the office. I think our leadership team was a bit shocked when Mike and I announced this. We’re usually pretty collaborative. But on this particular one, we were pretty convicted, both on our assumption about two years, and also about the implications that came out of that.

We talked to folks at Twitter about their choice to close offices. Twitter was the first company to come out and say, “We’re closing our offices.” Around that same time, there was a Slack channel of peers, CEOs, in other countries, who I would normally catch up with when I was in San Francisco. What I found is that we had way more clarity around what we were doing than other companies. I think there was an angst internally about, like, why aren’t we making our decision as fast as they have? We still made the decision to do it, but there were a lot of details. Can our employees move states? Do they need permission? If people move to other locations, do we guarantee that their salary will be the same, or could it change in the future? We went and talked to people at Twitter, like, “How did you solve all these questions so fast, and what were your solutions to them?” They were like, “Oh, we haven’t solved any of those questions.”

It turned out that moving fast and communicating fast with false certainty ends up not being the right thing. It’s that hard trade-off. There were two big rounds of communications. We came out with certainty with the things that we want — the principles — and then we have the open questions, which we will answer, and I think we’d answer them within, like, six weeks.


Upstart has a new plan to sell Wall Street on its loans

The AI-powered lender will hold some loans on its balance sheet as it seeks partners for long-term capital.

Despite the current struggles, Upstart views the marketplace model as the best way to write to keep its loan business growing.

Photo: Upstart

After a revenue drop its CEO called “unacceptable,” the leadership at fintech lender Upstart is making a bet on the strength of its ability to underwrite loans with AI.

The San Mateo company is planning to leave some loans on its balance sheet that investors do not want to buy, as concerns about the economy shift Wall Street away from backing riskier consumer debt. Rather than pull back on its lending in response, the company said it will hold some loans as it seeks longer-term capital partners.

Keep Reading Show less
Ryan Deffenbaugh
Ryan Deffenbaugh is a reporter at Protocol focused on fintech. Before joining Protocol, he reported on New York's technology industry for Crain's New York Business. He is based in New York and can be reached at
Sponsored Content

How cybercrime is going small time

Blockbuster hacks are no longer the norm – causing problems for companies trying to track down small-scale crime

Cybercrime is often thought of on a relatively large scale. Massive breaches lead to painful financial losses, bankrupting companies and causing untold embarrassment, splashed across the front pages of news websites worldwide. That’s unsurprising: cyber events typically cost businesses around $200,000, according to cybersecurity firm the Cyentia Institute. One in 10 of those victims suffer losses of more than $20 million, with some reaching $100 million or more.

That’s big money – but there’s plenty of loot out there for cybercriminals willing to aim lower. In 2021, the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) received 847,376 complaints – reports by cybercrime victims – totaling losses of $6.9 billion. Averaged out, each victim lost $8,143.

Keep Reading Show less
Chris Stokel-Walker

Chris Stokel-Walker is a freelance technology and culture journalist and author of "YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars." His work has been published in The New York Times, The Guardian and Wired.


Does your boss sound a little funny? It might be an audio deepfake

Voice deepfake attacks against enterprises, often aimed at tricking corporate employees into transferring money to the attackers, are on the rise. And at least in some cases, they’re succeeding.

Audio deepfakes are a new spin on the impersonation tactics that have long been used in social engineering and phishing attacks, but most people aren’t trained to disbelieve their ears.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

As a cyberattack investigator, Nick Giacopuzzi’s work now includes responding to growing attacks against businesses that involve deepfaked voices — and has ultimately left him convinced that in today's world, "we need to question everything."

In particular, Giacopuzzi has investigated multiple incidents where an attacker deployed fabricated audio, created with the help of AI, that purported to be an executive or a manager at a company. You can guess how it went: The fake boss asked an employee to urgently transfer funds. And in some cases, it’s worked, he said.

Keep Reading Show less
Kyle Alspach

Kyle Alspach ( @KyleAlspach) is a senior reporter at Protocol, focused on cybersecurity. He has covered the tech industry since 2010 for outlets including VentureBeat, CRN and the Boston Globe. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and can be reached at


Binance’s co-founder could remake its crypto deal-making

Yi He is overseeing a $7.5 billion portfolio, with more investments to come, making her one of the most powerful investors in the industry.

Binance co-founder Yi He will oversee $7.5 billion in assets.

Photo: Binance

Binance co-founder Yi He isn’t as well known as the crypto giant’s colorful and controversial CEO, Changpeng “CZ” Zhao.

That could soon change. The 35-year-old executive is taking on a new, higher-profile role at the world’s largest crypto exchange as head of Binance Labs, the company’s venture capital arm. With $7.5 billion in assets to oversee, that instantly makes her one of the most powerful VC investors in crypto.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.


Trump ordered social media visa screening. Biden's defending it.

The Knight First Amendment Institute just lost a battle to force the Biden administration to provide a report on the collection of social media handles from millions of visa applicants every year.

Visa applicants have to give up any of their social media handles from the past five years.

Photo: belterz/Getty Images

Would you feel comfortable if a U.S. immigration official reviewed all that you post on Facebook, Reddit, Snapchat, Twitter or even YouTube? Would it change what you decide to post or whom you talk to online? Perhaps you’ve said something critical of the U.S. government. Perhaps you’ve jokingly threatened to whack someone.

If you’ve applied for a U.S. visa, there’s a chance your online missives have been subjected to this kind of scrutiny, all in the name of keeping America safe. But three years after the Trump administration ordered enhanced vetting of visa applications, the Biden White House has not only continued the program, but is defending it — despite refusing to say if it’s had any impact.

Keep Reading Show less
Anna Kramer

Anna Kramer is a reporter at Protocol (Twitter: @ anna_c_kramer, email:, where she writes about labor and workplace issues. Prior to joining the team, she covered tech and small business for the San Francisco Chronicle and privacy for Bloomberg Law. She is a recent graduate of Brown University, where she studied International Relations and Arabic and wrote her senior thesis about surveillance tools and technological development in the Middle East.

Latest Stories