4 ms·

> The reality is that some people can just do more per day than others. Is that really the reality? As far as I can tell, the reality is quite the opposite --

> The reality is that some people can just do more per day than others. Is that really the reality? As far as I can tell, the reality is quite the opposite -- that sustainable levels of work across all knowledge work industries drop off a cliff past 8 hours a day, and for deep work 4 hours a day. Working on a side project after work possible for short sprints at a time, but somewhat impossible if you have an engaging day job where you are making good forward progress on your career. On the other hand, if your day job is well paid but rather dull (quite common in tech), working on a side project is a nice way to retain creative and intellectual fulfillment, agency, and ownership in some capacity in one's life -- it can be an artistic outlet and worthwhile in itself. Beyond that, it can be nice transition to a startup. But I think this idea that some people "can just do more per day" makes the fallacy of thinking progress happens a day at a time. When it comes to side projects or new companies in incubation, that's not always the case. Explaining it away with an argument that is biologically untenable seems questionable to me.

jokethrowaway 6y ago
It's the reality, I witnessed it and experienced it when coding my own business. Sure, you may not do your finest work, but you can get a lot done. If you're happy trading off your health for a shot at success, it's something that's on the table. It gets harder when you start having a family or if you have other obligations. You make a great point that just doing tasks is not necessarily going to make or break a company, there are tons of other factors.
- yowlingcat 6y ago
  > You make a great point that just doing tasks is not necessarily going to make or break a company, there are tons of other factors. Exactly. Doing tasks is literally table stakes -- it's the equivalent of showing up. For any company that banks on its differentiation, making big moves that cement the company require more thought, more depth, more risk. These kinds of simplistic platitudes amount to hierarchical animisms; they have little to do with the very specific things that make up a real high performance organizational culture.
ramraj07 6y ago
I've personally seen it again and again with numerous people that they really can keep up a level of productivity most people only dream of for more than just 8 hours a day, consistently for most of their lives. As much as you want to believe that all humans are equal, we really are not. Either you don't want to see that reality, or you've deliberately or accidentally never ventured out enough to encounter them. In general in software Engineering (I can say with some confidence since I made the transition between) people get the idea that they're actually very smart when they are just _okay_. The easy six figure salaries which IMO are often the most undeserved (compared to other careers except entertainment) is probably to blame.
- Bud 6y ago
  Pretty easy to talk down at "entertainment" if you've never actually been an artist or tried to make money at it.
  - ramraj07 6y ago
    For sure, many or most entertainment people work hard, but I just preempted retorts pointing out youtube millionaires or influencers.
- yowlingcat 6y ago
  > consistently for most of their lives This sounds like the kind of overly simplified individualistic narrative I used to believe when I was 14. My heroes to me then looked so indestructible. I wanted more than anything to be like them -- a captain of the industry, prolific and indestructible. The problem with this narrative is that it didn't hold up to real world scrutiny as I entered the workforce and interacted with high-performers and became one of them. > people get the idea that they're actually very smart when they are just _okay_ I think that this is a very intellectually lazy idea. I've found that the people who most believe this idea are those who are objectively "just _okay_" themselves because they don't understand/have ever experienced how effective organizations and people deploy and harness role evolution. You remember that old chestnut about how some people with 10 years of experience just have "1 year of experience, 10 times?" The two often go hand in hand in my experience. After all, the most effective way to be lazy about your own professional growth is to believe that it's impossible to improve. And for that to be believable for yourself...you have to make sure other people believe it's the case for them, too. The problem with this kind of fiction is that eventually the fourth wall cracks as people see parts of their network leave for greener pastures where this growth is promised and then actually followed through on. I know because I've sold candidates on this exact thing during interviews. All I'll say is that it's not a particularly hard sell to say "people that think of the world in such individualistic terms are condemning themselves to mediocrity -- we're building something way better than that, come join us." Think about why that is. Our ability to execute talent arbitrage was based on our competitors having the same mental model as yours. It was an arbitrage that worked very well.

jokethrowaway 6y ago

It's the reality, I witnessed it and experienced it when coding my own business. Sure, you may not do your finest work, but you can get a lot done. If you're happy trading off your health for a shot at success, it's something that's on the table. It gets harder when you start having a family or if you have other obligations. You make a great point that just doing tasks is not necessarily going to make or break a company, there are tons of other factors.

yowlingcat 6y ago
> You make a great point that just doing tasks is not necessarily going to make or break a company, there are tons of other factors. Exactly. Doing tasks is literally table stakes -- it's the equivalent of showing up. For any company that banks on its differentiation, making big moves that cement the company require more thought, more depth, more risk. These kinds of simplistic platitudes amount to hierarchical animisms; they have little to do with the very specific things that make up a real high performance organizational culture.

ramraj07 6y ago

I've personally seen it again and again with numerous people that they really can keep up a level of productivity most people only dream of for more than just 8 hours a day, consistently for most of their lives. As much as you want to believe that all humans are equal, we really are not. Either you don't want to see that reality, or you've deliberately or accidentally never ventured out enough to encounter them. In general in software Engineering (I can say with some confidence since I made the transition between) people get the idea that they're actually very smart when they are just _okay_. The easy six figure salaries which IMO are often the most undeserved (compared to other careers except entertainment) is probably to blame.

Bud 6y ago
Pretty easy to talk down at "entertainment" if you've never actually been an artist or tried to make money at it.
- ramraj07 6y ago
  For sure, many or most entertainment people work hard, but I just preempted retorts pointing out youtube millionaires or influencers.
yowlingcat 6y ago
> consistently for most of their lives This sounds like the kind of overly simplified individualistic narrative I used to believe when I was 14. My heroes to me then looked so indestructible. I wanted more than anything to be like them -- a captain of the industry, prolific and indestructible. The problem with this narrative is that it didn't hold up to real world scrutiny as I entered the workforce and interacted with high-performers and became one of them. > people get the idea that they're actually very smart when they are just _okay_ I think that this is a very intellectually lazy idea. I've found that the people who most believe this idea are those who are objectively "just _okay_" themselves because they don't understand/have ever experienced how effective organizations and people deploy and harness role evolution. You remember that old chestnut about how some people with 10 years of experience just have "1 year of experience, 10 times?" The two often go hand in hand in my experience. After all, the most effective way to be lazy about your own professional growth is to believe that it's impossible to improve. And for that to be believable for yourself...you have to make sure other people believe it's the case for them, too. The problem with this kind of fiction is that eventually the fourth wall cracks as people see parts of their network leave for greener pastures where this growth is promised and then actually followed through on. I know because I've sold candidates on this exact thing during interviews. All I'll say is that it's not a particularly hard sell to say "people that think of the world in such individualistic terms are condemning themselves to mediocrity -- we're building something way better than that, come join us." Think about why that is. Our ability to execute talent arbitrage was based on our competitors having the same mental model as yours. It was an arbitrage that worked very well.