9 ms·

Fire the workaholics (2008)

156 points by DanielRibeiro 15y ago

swombat 15y ago
[2008]. Comments from 3 years ago, courtesy of the awesome fast shiny new HN search box: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=131691 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=131691 PS: I was sure I commented on this, possibly on 37signals' site itself, but I can't find the comments anywhere... oh well.
- DanielRibeiro 15y ago
  Thanks! I surely hadn't notice that now we have a search box. Teaches me that It should have stroke me as a bit odd that it wasn't posted on HN already, and that rellying on HN identical URL "was posted already" mechanism is not really relliable.
  - jlind 15y ago
    I think a re-post isn't without merit though. There's plenty of people here (myself included) who might not have seen this article otherwise.
    - swombat 15y ago
      I never suggested it wasn't worth reposting - I just thought some people might like to know when it was posted, and see the previous set of comments.
      - mikeleeorg 15y ago
        Perhaps having an easy way to link up, or display, the comments from a previous post of the same link would be helpful. I myself find it really interesting to read old comments from a previous post.
  - derefr 15y ago
    It occurs to me that, since we now do have some sort of local search index built into HN itself, it should really be using that index as part of the "was posted already" mechanism.
gavanwoolery 15y ago
Fire them? Uh...no. Here are my responses to his points: 1) I work 80-100 hours a week, and enjoy it. For the past 7 years. No burnout yet. I find time to exercise and unwind. 2) If you are just throwing hours at the problem, you are not passionate about the problem. Workaholics are (most often) passionate about their work. 3) Those people who feel bad that someone else is working more than them need to get over themselves. 4) Workaholics often "put in their time" in an attempt to retire early. Not a bad judgment call, IMHO. 5) Even workaholics know how to unwind, and do. You can work 80 hours a week and still have days off (168 hours in a week, 112 waking hours).
- dasil003 15y ago
  I think it's just inflammatory link bait, in the same vein as Calacanis' OP. The bottom line is there are many ways to run a business. Personally I would not fire a great person regardless of whether they worked 20 hours or 100 hours a week, but I understand that there may be social dynamics at play that shouldn't be ignored.
  - crikli 15y ago
    Jason is an expert at leveraging hyperbole to a) get attention and b) initiate constructive dialogue. I respect him for his ability to do both. But sometimes I feel what he writes needs to have a disclaimer at the top that says, "This is what worked for me in my very unique business. It may be disastrous in yours." Basically, I view Jason as a conversation starter, not someone whose advice I'm necessarily going to follow. And having talked to him a few times at cons I've gotten the feeling that's really what he wants.
    - gnaritas 15y ago
      > But sometimes I feel what he writes needs to have a disclaimer at the top that says, "This is what worked for me in my very unique business. It may be disastrous in yours." That doesn't need to be stated, it's a given. They never say our way is the only way to do things; they're just telling you what works for them.
- 15y ago
crikli 15y ago
I effing love what I do. The result is that I frequently "work" 14+ hour days, skip social stuff to code (or sneak in my iPad to research the problem I'm stuck on), and I love talking shop. I'm this way in my own business and I was like this at the job I had before I left to start it. Honestly, with all of the slack ass clock punchers out there that can't write a lick of code, the idea of canning someone for working too hard seems pretty silly. And FWIW, I found time in the last couple years to get my pilot's certificate.
- tathagata 15y ago
  Agree 100% I often work passionately 16 or even 18 hours a day, but that's like for a couple of weeks (or maybe a month) in a year, when we are about to launch something exciting, rest of the year I usually work 5-6 hours a day, sometimes even less, an hour or a couple of hours a day, spending the rest of the time catching up on technology, making art and some music. That said, I get more work done than almost a 100 other people combined. If I were to work for a fixed number of hours a day every day of the year, I would probably be doing some boring chore of a work, and would likely 'burn out' due the boredom.
- awj 15y ago
  Both the article and you are talking in terms of extremes. Some people work 14+ hour days regularly because they are excited about the work. There is nothing wrong with this. Working 14+ hour days because you feel like you must do so to "keep up" is bad. In general working well past the point where you are productive is bad. Some people want to slack off and punch the clock, and do not give a crap about their work. This is bad. Some recognize when they've done all of the productive work they can today, and seek to use the remaining time to balance out their life. There is nothing wrong with that, either. Basically it comes down to reasons and effective self-evaluation. If you're working 14+ hours while being useful and engaged, great for you. If you're doing it as some badge of honor and hacking together crap because you're tired, you really aren't helping. Know yourself, and your limits. Use them as tools to do the best you can. The only people you should fire here are the ones who refuse to do this.
- cipherpunk 15y ago
  Some of us "slack ass clock punchers" have lives outside of work. I have friends and family and hobbies that do not involve sitting in front of a computer screen for every waking moment of the day. Working to live, vs. living to work.
biot 15y ago
Jason Calacanis' follow-up response to this adds more nuance to his previous statements: > Truth be told, I’ve never asked anyone to work harder > than I do, and I work seven days a week. It's good to know that he doesn't ask anyone to work eight days a week.
- shareme 15y ago
  My bias: sometimes JC ask me mobile technology questions. But than again spending 7 days a week on a problem and business model known not to work is not exactly working smart..ie Mahalo..
  - lukeschlather 15y ago
    I think to a certain extent that shows the problems with the 7-day-a-week mentality for anyone who is working on product direction, marketing, etc. If I've got someone working on keeping my servers up, or doing deep parallel algorithms work to solve a specific problem my company has, I want the person who has the tunnel vision required to focus for 14 hours. But if I've got someone deciding which specific problems are most worthy of concern, I want someone who is going home at night and on the weekends and living life. Working on one thing for most of your waking hours makes it really difficult to understand how that thing is useful outside of your domain.
chrisjsmith 15y ago
I tend to work as little as possible. Playing is important. Family is important. Living is important. Might be dead tomorrow and would be thoroughly miffed if I'd worked through my life. I believe life is the reward and must be lived, not some religious fantasy.
- yhlasx 15y ago
  This reminds me of Steve Jobs's speech at Stanford.
  - chrisjsmith 15y ago
    He has first hand experience of nearly being dead so it's pertinent.
- jodrellblank 15y ago
  You should be thoroughly miffed that you are writing off all the time you spend working as "not my life".
  - notJim 15y ago
    I can't speak for chrisjsmith, but I have a similar attitude to his. In my case, I regard my work as just one part of my life. Even if you work 8 hours a day, that's already half of your waking time[1] on just one activity. I love my work, and value the time I spend doing it, but it already dominates everything else, so I don't especially desire to increase the amount of it I do. [1]: In actuality, few people probably sleep 8 hours/night, and I didn't account for weekends, but I think my point is still roughly accurate.
  - chrisjsmith 15y ago
    It isn't really my life if I'm a participant in a system which supports others who either a) actively do not work and exist only to be supported -or- b) exploit others only for personal gain. It would be my life if I actively improved the human condition and directly provided for my family. I'd be happy with (and I will eventually have!) a few hectares of acres of land to be honest as I could do the above with that. Then I can get back to solving problems rather than filling timesheets which is after all the best way of helping people.
Bo102010 15y ago
I don't agree with the article. If my employees were showing signs of workaholism and I didn't send them home, then their burnout, lack of creativity, and drag on morale would be my fault, at least in part.
- gscott 15y ago
  At least send them home when they start smelling bad after a 3 day stint. I wish I was in my early twenties again I could use that time far better then what I did.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
joe24pack 15y ago
Firing someone who's always obsessed with work and willing to always spend hours upon hours to get things done might be a good idea for the reasons stated. Better idea would be to send that person on a mandatory vacation during the doldrums between projects. Make them turn in the company laptop and company cell phone for the two weeks they're on vacation. If they protest, tell them that during vacation it's their job to rest, relax & recharge to be ready for the next project. By the time they're back they'll be ready to take on those challenges.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
jack7890 15y ago
How many hours per week do you think the average startup employee (not founder) works?
zaccus 15y ago
Why do people pride themselves on the number of hours they work? It's like being proud of how long you can go without food, or how long you can hold your hand over a flame. What exactly does it prove? Would Calcanis be happier with his employees if they gave themselves 30 lashes every morning before work? Working long does not equal working hard.
- gnosis 15y ago
  https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Protestant_wo...
j_baker 15y ago
People who always work late makes the people who don’t feel inadequate for merely working reasonable hours. That’ll lead to guilt, misery, and poor morale. Worse, it’ll lead to ass-in-seat mentality where people will “stay late” out of obligation, but not really be productive. I don't have this problem (assuming a reasonable management team). In fact, I can usually outdo the workaholics in less time. They always forget that not working is oftentimes the most productive thing you can do. I can't count the number of times I've spun my wheels on a problem for hours, went home and rested, and came back to realize just how stupidly easy the problem is.
- mattgreenrocks 15y ago
  Yes! Most problems don't require you to grind away for hours on end. If I don't get anywhere within 45 minutes or so, I'll just walk away. The unconscious mind is a wonderful tool, but it needs breathing room to do its work, it seems.
protomyth 15y ago
Do remember that sometimes the "workaholic" is actually doing the jobs of other people or double checking that they got their stuff done because the "workaholic" is blamed for the failure of the system. It happens a lot and some organizations are not really good at finding where it all went south. It also happens more in bad economies (no other jobs) or highly political places (friends before truth).
m0wfo 15y ago
I bought the book ("Getting Real") when it came out and it brought home a lot of truisms of starting up in the 21st century. But 'Firing all the workaholics' isn't as simple as that: I've worked in places where people with no lives (and more importantly no equity in the company) spent most of their waking lives in the office because it was there- they obviously didn't have a whole lot going on in their lives, maybe needed some kind of social acceptance or maybe a combination of the two. I've also worked in places with a fantastic buzz [where I've had no equity in the company]' where I slept on the floor to get a job done. I've also worked for a startup doing 100+ hour weeks end to end just to get ourselves started (not naming any company names). The latter two I enjoyed and did of my own volition; the first I didn't. If DHH is talking about losers who are several orders of magnitude less productive than my counterparts then fair enough; but sleeping on the floor is the manifestation of obsession. If you wanna stop that, go ahead you Danish wanker.
mikeleeorg 15y ago
I think the operative words in that article are, "requiring passion." And to that, I would add, "work smarter, not harder." When I was in my early twenties, I lived in NYC and London. My motto was the typical, "word hard, play hard." I worked 12+ hour days fairly regularly. The work was interesting, the people were cool, and I was learning a lot. I remember leaving work one morning as people were coming in; their day was starting as my day was ending. On the weekends (and sometimes weekdays), my friends and I would go bar-hopping, catch a movie, attend a festival, etc. While in London, we'd also take weekend excursions to another city or country. I also remember sky diving & bungee jumping trips. Now that I'm in my thirties, I don't work as many hours, though my work output hasn't decreased. Instead, I like to think that I work smarter now, not harder. I still really enjoy my work - and oftentimes don't even feel like I'm "working." But if I spend too much time on something, instead of slogging through it, I'll stop and look for a more efficient solution. I've learned that time is too valuable for brute force. On the surface, it may not seem like I'm working as much. I work anywhere from 8-12 hours a day now, but in aggregate, I get much more done. And none of those hours really feels like work. I attribute this to having passion for what I do, and learning how to work smart.
- dustingetz 15y ago
  You sound a lot like me now. I'm a typical "work hard play hard" twenty-something, and if it was possible for me to be working smarter, I don't see it. I probably spend my first 40 hours solving/understanding the problem, and the next 30 hours refactoring the code to look like my mental model of the solution. I'd love to slow down but it's just doesn't seem possible to ship a high quality product given our schedule. Some of the senior folks work saner hours, but it's not at all obvious if their output is higher quality than mine, or even equal quality (this isn't a slight--i'm getting twice as much zone time as them!). If they're 'working smarter' than me, I can't see how, other than having already paid the learning curve for a large class of problems. Can you give concrete examples of how you work smarter now, compared to your twenties?
  - mikeleeorg 15y ago
    Sure. On an individual contributor level: Right out of college, I tended to prefer building things on my own, rather than using existing patterns or frameworks. I did this partly because I wanted to learn the "fundamentals", and partly because I was arrogant (or stupid, some probably said). One day, a senior developer gave me a book on design patterns. I was floored. I started applying them and found the quality (and maintainability, reusability, etc) of my code increase tremendously. Over time, others have given me more tips on improving my efficiency. From something as simple as learning keyboard shortcuts and customizing an IDE's UI, to unit testing and handy shell scripts, I found myself saving a lot of time. Of course, you may be doing all of these things already, in which case, you may already have a pretty optimized work technique already. On a managerial level: I'm a believer that if you put the right team together, 1+1=3. So my value has shifted from being an individual software developer to someone who can put together teams of developers insanely smarter than I am, then remove all the roadblocks out of their way so they can build great things. I still write some code, but while my value as a developer has dropped tremendously, my value in managing a team of developers means our overall output is greater than the sum of our parts. In other words, I increased my "value" by becoming a manager. Of course, that kind of a role change is not for everyone, but that's what I did. Another example is one of prioritization. Sometimes it's only realistically possible to do X units of work a day (let's say 10 units), and sometimes a person is asked to do Y units of work a day (let's say 30). That means 20 units aren't going to get done; it's just not possible. Trying to squeeze in more would result in a lack of quality (due to lack of sleep, exhaustion, etc). So what can one do? Do the most important 10 units first. It sounds pretty obvious, but in the heat of the moment, I sometimes found myself wanting to do the 10 easiest units first, not the 10 most important. Proper prioritization made a big increase in the quality of my output as well.
jasonmcalacanis 15y ago
I think this was a productive discussion three years ago. I didn't write my side of it as linkbait, and I don't think the DHH did either. the truth is we are both right.... you can do a lifestyle business or you can go all in. my style is all in and as fast as possible. other folks like slow and steady. sometimes life deals you cards that dictate your approach (i.e. yo have a kids, your dad gets cancer and the Panda update cuts half your traffic... all in the same year). it's true that some folks work 100 hours a week and get less done than folks who work 40. it's true that there are folks who work 100 hours and get 2x as much done as someone who works 50. the fact is, you have to do what is right for you and your goals. me? i love to build shit... and i do it hard and fast with a lot of mistakes and passion. the video: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2219-jason-calacanis-vs-david-heinemeier-hansson-on-this-week-in-startups http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2219-jason-calacanis-vs-david...
theBobMcCormick 15y ago
Excellent advice. Nobody ever wished on their deathbed that they'd spent more time at the office working.
- Zakharov 15y ago
  Lots of people regret not accomplishing anything. Sometimes accomplishing things requires work. Creating a successful startup is an example. Earning enough in a regular job to be able to fund your own startup is another.
- saalweachter 15y ago
  There has to be some research MD somewhere who was coincidentally working on curing the very disease that killed him.
pgroves 15y ago
"Your Highness, the people have no bread" Marie Antoinette: "Let them eat cake" "Mr Millionare, small businesses are struggling to make ends meet despite 80hr work weeks." DHH: "Let them relax by flying their private planes"
benaltieri 15y ago
Working hard on something you are passionate about is a lot like running in a race. The minute you ease back on the throttle, you better hope that your competition doesn't pounce. You better have a big enough lead on your competition to allow yourself to relax. That relaxation time needs to be earned. Too much relaxation breeds complacency. And if you are not in an environment in which you are competing with someone, you really aren't working toward a worth while goal, but just spinning your wheels. You are either living off the spoils of some prior success or inheritance. Work like you are about to be attacked by a pack of rabid dogs or seek out such an environment. Don't get it? Go watch a horse race. Every split second counts. That winning rush of adrenaline is like no other. Should everyone seek out such an environment? No, not everybody all the time. But to never have done so is cowardly. Nobody is successful by working 100% smarter than everyone else 100% of the time. Those that say they do are liars. To do so is like saying they never had a failure, and everything came easy for them. Achieving success is a complete bitch. Those that have the energy and stamina to succeed in the end are the ones who earn the right to slack off. Execution is everything.
fauigerzigerk 15y ago
I'm so tired of all the speculative psycho crap. Why don't we just make a judgement based on someone's output and admit that the rest is always going to be a totally subjective matter of personal sympathy?
ballard 15y ago
0) Controversy makes for good headlines. 1) Indifference and over obsession are both blindness. 2) Effectiveness is mostly perception because reality is too costly to measure. 3) Take a mini sabbatical every now and then: http://➹.ws/sabbatical http://➹.ws/sabbatical
hootmon 15y ago
Sorry to burst yer bubbles, but this has all been discounted years ago, mainly by the United States Air Force. They did extensive studies on the optimum work hours/recreation hours and found that strict 9-5, 5 days on, 2 days off, was far more productive and safe than any other configuration. They won't let you put in more than 40 hrs a week in those multi-billion dollar war planes. Working more than 40 hours a week is counter productive. It increases the likely-hood of bad judgement, cloudy thinking etc will creep into the work. So the Robber-Baron Korp evil HR types who think they are being cool forcing people to work 40+ hours, are actually just hurting their bottom line.
- mitko 15y ago
  That sounds like a pretty interesting research I'd like to read more about - can you please provide some citations/ links.
unicornporn 15y ago
Or you could just tell them to work less.

156 points by DanielRibeiro 15y ago

[2008]. Comments from 3 years ago, courtesy of the awesome fast shiny new HN search box: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=131691 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=131691 PS: I was sure I commented on this, possibly on 37signals' site itself, but I can't find the comments anywhere... oh well.

DanielRibeiro 15y ago
Thanks! I surely hadn't notice that now we have a search box. Teaches me that It should have stroke me as a bit odd that it wasn't posted on HN already, and that rellying on HN identical URL "was posted already" mechanism is not really relliable.
- jlind 15y ago
  I think a re-post isn't without merit though. There's plenty of people here (myself included) who might not have seen this article otherwise.
  - swombat 15y ago
    I never suggested it wasn't worth reposting - I just thought some people might like to know when it was posted, and see the previous set of comments.
    - mikeleeorg 15y ago
      Perhaps having an easy way to link up, or display, the comments from a previous post of the same link would be helpful. I myself find it really interesting to read old comments from a previous post.
- derefr 15y ago
  It occurs to me that, since we now do have some sort of local search index built into HN itself, it should really be using that index as part of the "was posted already" mechanism.

gavanwoolery 15y ago

Fire them? Uh...no. Here are my responses to his points: 1) I work 80-100 hours a week, and enjoy it. For the past 7 years. No burnout yet. I find time to exercise and unwind. 2) If you are just throwing hours at the problem, you are not passionate about the problem. Workaholics are (most often) passionate about their work. 3) Those people who feel bad that someone else is working more than them need to get over themselves. 4) Workaholics often "put in their time" in an attempt to retire early. Not a bad judgment call, IMHO. 5) Even workaholics know how to unwind, and do. You can work 80 hours a week and still have days off (168 hours in a week, 112 waking hours).

dasil003 15y ago
I think it's just inflammatory link bait, in the same vein as Calacanis' OP. The bottom line is there are many ways to run a business. Personally I would not fire a great person regardless of whether they worked 20 hours or 100 hours a week, but I understand that there may be social dynamics at play that shouldn't be ignored.
- crikli 15y ago
  Jason is an expert at leveraging hyperbole to a) get attention and b) initiate constructive dialogue. I respect him for his ability to do both. But sometimes I feel what he writes needs to have a disclaimer at the top that says, "This is what worked for me in my very unique business. It may be disastrous in yours." Basically, I view Jason as a conversation starter, not someone whose advice I'm necessarily going to follow. And having talked to him a few times at cons I've gotten the feeling that's really what he wants.
  - gnaritas 15y ago
    > But sometimes I feel what he writes needs to have a disclaimer at the top that says, "This is what worked for me in my very unique business. It may be disastrous in yours." That doesn't need to be stated, it's a given. They never say our way is the only way to do things; they're just telling you what works for them.
15y ago

crikli 15y ago

I effing love what I do. The result is that I frequently "work" 14+ hour days, skip social stuff to code (or sneak in my iPad to research the problem I'm stuck on), and I love talking shop. I'm this way in my own business and I was like this at the job I had before I left to start it. Honestly, with all of the slack ass clock punchers out there that can't write a lick of code, the idea of canning someone for working too hard seems pretty silly. And FWIW, I found time in the last couple years to get my pilot's certificate.

tathagata 15y ago
Agree 100% I often work passionately 16 or even 18 hours a day, but that's like for a couple of weeks (or maybe a month) in a year, when we are about to launch something exciting, rest of the year I usually work 5-6 hours a day, sometimes even less, an hour or a couple of hours a day, spending the rest of the time catching up on technology, making art and some music. That said, I get more work done than almost a 100 other people combined. If I were to work for a fixed number of hours a day every day of the year, I would probably be doing some boring chore of a work, and would likely 'burn out' due the boredom.
awj 15y ago
Both the article and you are talking in terms of extremes. Some people work 14+ hour days regularly because they are excited about the work. There is nothing wrong with this. Working 14+ hour days because you feel like you must do so to "keep up" is bad. In general working well past the point where you are productive is bad. Some people want to slack off and punch the clock, and do not give a crap about their work. This is bad. Some recognize when they've done all of the productive work they can today, and seek to use the remaining time to balance out their life. There is nothing wrong with that, either. Basically it comes down to reasons and effective self-evaluation. If you're working 14+ hours while being useful and engaged, great for you. If you're doing it as some badge of honor and hacking together crap because you're tired, you really aren't helping. Know yourself, and your limits. Use them as tools to do the best you can. The only people you should fire here are the ones who refuse to do this.
cipherpunk 15y ago
Some of us "slack ass clock punchers" have lives outside of work. I have friends and family and hobbies that do not involve sitting in front of a computer screen for every waking moment of the day. Working to live, vs. living to work.

biot 15y ago

Jason Calacanis' follow-up response to this adds more nuance to his previous statements: > Truth be told, I’ve never asked anyone to work harder > than I do, and I work seven days a week. It's good to know that he doesn't ask anyone to work eight days a week.

shareme 15y ago
My bias: sometimes JC ask me mobile technology questions. But than again spending 7 days a week on a problem and business model known not to work is not exactly working smart..ie Mahalo..
- lukeschlather 15y ago
  I think to a certain extent that shows the problems with the 7-day-a-week mentality for anyone who is working on product direction, marketing, etc. If I've got someone working on keeping my servers up, or doing deep parallel algorithms work to solve a specific problem my company has, I want the person who has the tunnel vision required to focus for 14 hours. But if I've got someone deciding which specific problems are most worthy of concern, I want someone who is going home at night and on the weekends and living life. Working on one thing for most of your waking hours makes it really difficult to understand how that thing is useful outside of your domain.

chrisjsmith 15y ago

I tend to work as little as possible. Playing is important. Family is important. Living is important. Might be dead tomorrow and would be thoroughly miffed if I'd worked through my life. I believe life is the reward and must be lived, not some religious fantasy.

yhlasx 15y ago
This reminds me of Steve Jobs's speech at Stanford.
- chrisjsmith 15y ago
  He has first hand experience of nearly being dead so it's pertinent.
jodrellblank 15y ago
You should be thoroughly miffed that you are writing off all the time you spend working as "not my life".
- notJim 15y ago
  I can't speak for chrisjsmith, but I have a similar attitude to his. In my case, I regard my work as just one part of my life. Even if you work 8 hours a day, that's already half of your waking time[1] on just one activity. I love my work, and value the time I spend doing it, but it already dominates everything else, so I don't especially desire to increase the amount of it I do. [1]: In actuality, few people probably sleep 8 hours/night, and I didn't account for weekends, but I think my point is still roughly accurate.
- chrisjsmith 15y ago
  It isn't really my life if I'm a participant in a system which supports others who either a) actively do not work and exist only to be supported -or- b) exploit others only for personal gain. It would be my life if I actively improved the human condition and directly provided for my family. I'd be happy with (and I will eventually have!) a few hectares of acres of land to be honest as I could do the above with that. Then I can get back to solving problems rather than filling timesheets which is after all the best way of helping people.

Bo102010 15y ago

I don't agree with the article. If my employees were showing signs of workaholism and I didn't send them home, then their burnout, lack of creativity, and drag on morale would be my fault, at least in part.

gscott 15y ago
At least send them home when they start smelling bad after a 3 day stint. I wish I was in my early twenties again I could use that time far better then what I did.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

joe24pack 15y ago

Firing someone who's always obsessed with work and willing to always spend hours upon hours to get things done might be a good idea for the reasons stated. Better idea would be to send that person on a mandatory vacation during the doldrums between projects. Make them turn in the company laptop and company cell phone for the two weeks they're on vacation. If they protest, tell them that during vacation it's their job to rest, relax & recharge to be ready for the next project. By the time they're back they'll be ready to take on those challenges.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

jack7890 15y ago

How many hours per week do you think the average startup employee (not founder) works?

zaccus 15y ago

Why do people pride themselves on the number of hours they work? It's like being proud of how long you can go without food, or how long you can hold your hand over a flame. What exactly does it prove? Would Calcanis be happier with his employees if they gave themselves 30 lashes every morning before work? Working long does not equal working hard.

gnosis 15y ago
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Protestant_wo...

j_baker 15y ago

People who always work late makes the people who don’t feel inadequate for merely working reasonable hours. That’ll lead to guilt, misery, and poor morale. Worse, it’ll lead to ass-in-seat mentality where people will “stay late” out of obligation, but not really be productive. I don't have this problem (assuming a reasonable management team). In fact, I can usually outdo the workaholics in less time. They always forget that not working is oftentimes the most productive thing you can do. I can't count the number of times I've spun my wheels on a problem for hours, went home and rested, and came back to realize just how stupidly easy the problem is.

mattgreenrocks 15y ago
Yes! Most problems don't require you to grind away for hours on end. If I don't get anywhere within 45 minutes or so, I'll just walk away. The unconscious mind is a wonderful tool, but it needs breathing room to do its work, it seems.

protomyth 15y ago

Do remember that sometimes the "workaholic" is actually doing the jobs of other people or double checking that they got their stuff done because the "workaholic" is blamed for the failure of the system. It happens a lot and some organizations are not really good at finding where it all went south. It also happens more in bad economies (no other jobs) or highly political places (friends before truth).

m0wfo 15y ago

I bought the book ("Getting Real") when it came out and it brought home a lot of truisms of starting up in the 21st century. But 'Firing all the workaholics' isn't as simple as that: I've worked in places where people with no lives (and more importantly no equity in the company) spent most of their waking lives in the office because it was there- they obviously didn't have a whole lot going on in their lives, maybe needed some kind of social acceptance or maybe a combination of the two. I've also worked in places with a fantastic buzz [where I've had no equity in the company]' where I slept on the floor to get a job done. I've also worked for a startup doing 100+ hour weeks end to end just to get ourselves started (not naming any company names). The latter two I enjoyed and did of my own volition; the first I didn't. If DHH is talking about losers who are several orders of magnitude less productive than my counterparts then fair enough; but sleeping on the floor is the manifestation of obsession. If you wanna stop that, go ahead you Danish wanker.

mikeleeorg 15y ago

I think the operative words in that article are, "requiring passion." And to that, I would add, "work smarter, not harder." When I was in my early twenties, I lived in NYC and London. My motto was the typical, "word hard, play hard." I worked 12+ hour days fairly regularly. The work was interesting, the people were cool, and I was learning a lot. I remember leaving work one morning as people were coming in; their day was starting as my day was ending. On the weekends (and sometimes weekdays), my friends and I would go bar-hopping, catch a movie, attend a festival, etc. While in London, we'd also take weekend excursions to another city or country. I also remember sky diving & bungee jumping trips. Now that I'm in my thirties, I don't work as many hours, though my work output hasn't decreased. Instead, I like to think that I work smarter now, not harder. I still really enjoy my work - and oftentimes don't even feel like I'm "working." But if I spend too much time on something, instead of slogging through it, I'll stop and look for a more efficient solution. I've learned that time is too valuable for brute force. On the surface, it may not seem like I'm working as much. I work anywhere from 8-12 hours a day now, but in aggregate, I get much more done. And none of those hours really feels like work. I attribute this to having passion for what I do, and learning how to work smart.

dustingetz 15y ago
You sound a lot like me now. I'm a typical "work hard play hard" twenty-something, and if it was possible for me to be working smarter, I don't see it. I probably spend my first 40 hours solving/understanding the problem, and the next 30 hours refactoring the code to look like my mental model of the solution. I'd love to slow down but it's just doesn't seem possible to ship a high quality product given our schedule. Some of the senior folks work saner hours, but it's not at all obvious if their output is higher quality than mine, or even equal quality (this isn't a slight--i'm getting twice as much zone time as them!). If they're 'working smarter' than me, I can't see how, other than having already paid the learning curve for a large class of problems. Can you give concrete examples of how you work smarter now, compared to your twenties?
- mikeleeorg 15y ago
  Sure. On an individual contributor level: Right out of college, I tended to prefer building things on my own, rather than using existing patterns or frameworks. I did this partly because I wanted to learn the "fundamentals", and partly because I was arrogant (or stupid, some probably said). One day, a senior developer gave me a book on design patterns. I was floored. I started applying them and found the quality (and maintainability, reusability, etc) of my code increase tremendously. Over time, others have given me more tips on improving my efficiency. From something as simple as learning keyboard shortcuts and customizing an IDE's UI, to unit testing and handy shell scripts, I found myself saving a lot of time. Of course, you may be doing all of these things already, in which case, you may already have a pretty optimized work technique already. On a managerial level: I'm a believer that if you put the right team together, 1+1=3. So my value has shifted from being an individual software developer to someone who can put together teams of developers insanely smarter than I am, then remove all the roadblocks out of their way so they can build great things. I still write some code, but while my value as a developer has dropped tremendously, my value in managing a team of developers means our overall output is greater than the sum of our parts. In other words, I increased my "value" by becoming a manager. Of course, that kind of a role change is not for everyone, but that's what I did. Another example is one of prioritization. Sometimes it's only realistically possible to do X units of work a day (let's say 10 units), and sometimes a person is asked to do Y units of work a day (let's say 30). That means 20 units aren't going to get done; it's just not possible. Trying to squeeze in more would result in a lack of quality (due to lack of sleep, exhaustion, etc). So what can one do? Do the most important 10 units first. It sounds pretty obvious, but in the heat of the moment, I sometimes found myself wanting to do the 10 easiest units first, not the 10 most important. Proper prioritization made a big increase in the quality of my output as well.

jasonmcalacanis 15y ago

I think this was a productive discussion three years ago. I didn't write my side of it as linkbait, and I don't think the DHH did either. the truth is we are both right.... you can do a lifestyle business or you can go all in. my style is all in and as fast as possible. other folks like slow and steady. sometimes life deals you cards that dictate your approach (i.e. yo have a kids, your dad gets cancer and the Panda update cuts half your traffic... all in the same year). it's true that some folks work 100 hours a week and get less done than folks who work 40. it's true that there are folks who work 100 hours and get 2x as much done as someone who works 50. the fact is, you have to do what is right for you and your goals. me? i love to build shit... and i do it hard and fast with a lot of mistakes and passion. the video: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2219-jason-calacanis-vs-david-heinemeier-hansson-on-this-week-in-startups http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2219-jason-calacanis-vs-david...

theBobMcCormick 15y ago

Excellent advice. Nobody ever wished on their deathbed that they'd spent more time at the office working.

Zakharov 15y ago
Lots of people regret not accomplishing anything. Sometimes accomplishing things requires work. Creating a successful startup is an example. Earning enough in a regular job to be able to fund your own startup is another.
saalweachter 15y ago
There has to be some research MD somewhere who was coincidentally working on curing the very disease that killed him.

pgroves 15y ago

"Your Highness, the people have no bread" Marie Antoinette: "Let them eat cake" "Mr Millionare, small businesses are struggling to make ends meet despite 80hr work weeks." DHH: "Let them relax by flying their private planes"

benaltieri 15y ago

Working hard on something you are passionate about is a lot like running in a race. The minute you ease back on the throttle, you better hope that your competition doesn't pounce. You better have a big enough lead on your competition to allow yourself to relax. That relaxation time needs to be earned. Too much relaxation breeds complacency. And if you are not in an environment in which you are competing with someone, you really aren't working toward a worth while goal, but just spinning your wheels. You are either living off the spoils of some prior success or inheritance. Work like you are about to be attacked by a pack of rabid dogs or seek out such an environment. Don't get it? Go watch a horse race. Every split second counts. That winning rush of adrenaline is like no other. Should everyone seek out such an environment? No, not everybody all the time. But to never have done so is cowardly. Nobody is successful by working 100% smarter than everyone else 100% of the time. Those that say they do are liars. To do so is like saying they never had a failure, and everything came easy for them. Achieving success is a complete bitch. Those that have the energy and stamina to succeed in the end are the ones who earn the right to slack off. Execution is everything.

fauigerzigerk 15y ago

I'm so tired of all the speculative psycho crap. Why don't we just make a judgement based on someone's output and admit that the rest is always going to be a totally subjective matter of personal sympathy?

ballard 15y ago

0) Controversy makes for good headlines. 1) Indifference and over obsession are both blindness. 2) Effectiveness is mostly perception because reality is too costly to measure. 3) Take a mini sabbatical every now and then: http://➹.ws/sabbatical http://➹.ws/sabbatical

hootmon 15y ago

Sorry to burst yer bubbles, but this has all been discounted years ago, mainly by the United States Air Force. They did extensive studies on the optimum work hours/recreation hours and found that strict 9-5, 5 days on, 2 days off, was far more productive and safe than any other configuration. They won't let you put in more than 40 hrs a week in those multi-billion dollar war planes. Working more than 40 hours a week is counter productive. It increases the likely-hood of bad judgement, cloudy thinking etc will creep into the work. So the Robber-Baron Korp evil HR types who think they are being cool forcing people to work 40+ hours, are actually just hurting their bottom line.

mitko 15y ago
That sounds like a pretty interesting research I'd like to read more about - can you please provide some citations/ links.

unicornporn 15y ago

Or you could just tell them to work less.