4 ms·

Potentially controversial thought here, but I'd like to bring it up for discussion. I feel like the work ethic I see throughout the industry is extremely toxic

by dheera 6y ago

Potentially controversial thought here, but I'd like to bring it up for discussion. I feel like the work ethic I see throughout the industry is extremely toxic to society, and leads to some of this. In China for example there's a so-called "996" work schedule (9am-9pm, 6 days a week) which is basically expected of everyone in tech, unfortunately, and it seems Silicon Valley is heading that direction as well with all the off-hour meetings, weekend work, and on-call requirements. Many SV companies also demand 72 hours or more of work per week, in my adecnotal observations. What I'm often observing is: (a) such toxic work ethic is largely set by male founders who don't care about other important things than work e.g. family plans (b) others in the industry are forced to compete with those ridiculous standards, including females, those with disabilities, those already with family, those taking care of a family member, etc. (c) this results in those groups being consequently disrespected by investors because they can't match up to the workaholic male founders who don't care about anything but work. I've heard several investors talk negatively about females behind their back because "they might want to have kids". (d) this results in more workaholic male CEOs rising to the top (e) the cycle repeats Are my observations and inferences correct, or am I off? Open question here.

asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
I'm not sure if you've got the details right, but it is definitely true that if you are taking part in any elite competition, you are probably going to be competing against people who are working very hard. I don't think that this is specific to male cofounders. Even in the counterfactual world where all founders are women, some will work harder than others, and if there is a perception that the harder workers are more likely to succeed, there will be pressure on everyone else to work harder as well.
- dheera 6y ago
  > specific to male cofounders I guess what I was trying to say is, male founders have a few biological choices that female founders don't, and I'm suggesting that it should be considered unethical to set industry work-hour standards to a level that only males can achieve because males are able to de-prioritize biology. An article about one of the most widely acclaimed male founders today: "As an Apple employee in the early 1990s, he almost walked out of the delivery room when the impending birth of his first child threatened to disrupt a presentation he was scheduled to give. As president of Google China from 2005 to 2009, he had a special table installed on his bed so that he could sit directly up from sleep and immediately begin responding to emails, without having to waste time standing up or reaching for a laptop." I'm hypothesizing that behavior like this, at different scales, is quickly becoming both romanticized and expected of founders, and that is marginalizing all groups except single males. https://qz.com/work/1488217/a-former-symbol-of-silicon-valleys-crush-it-culture-now-regrets-working-so-much/ https://qz.com/work/1488217/a-former-symbol-of-silicon-valle...
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
    I personally don't believe, at least at the founder/executive level, that this is a standard that has been set. Rather, there is a degree of self-organization here. Individuals are making decisions that they believe will help them compete better. I doubt there is a practical route toward lessening this effect, short of detonating the whole concept of the startup and possibly the entire economic system. There is zero chance that you're going to convince individual founders to take steps that they believe will make them less competitive in the name of "ethics." Personally I don't find it romantic at all, and therefore I am not a startup founder. I love my 9-5.
  - lainga 6y ago
    What aspects of male biology are they de-prioritizing? The need to participate in child-rearing?
    - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
      Men can have (with more difficulty, it's true) children for much later in their lives relative to a woman of the same age.
    - dheera 6y ago
      Males can more easily wait till 40+ to have children. Males don't have periods. If work hours are kept to a healthy level, both males and females can achieve those work hours averaged over a long time because there is sufficient time for rest. If sufficient rest isn't planned into the schedule, there isn't time for periods, and that culture unfairly favors males. Males don't get pregnant, and are often looked down upon, or lose promotion and investment opportunities, for working less hours to help their pregnant or child-rearing partners. The males who set aside time for family are out-competed by males who either (a) don't value having a partner or children or (b) treat their family like crap by not being there for them. (I'm saying this from direct observations of acquaintances and friends.)
itronitron 6y ago
My personal experience has been that women are just as likely to resort to toxic work practices as men. Though a lot depends on how you define toxic.
rcpt 6y ago
I don't think I've known anyone who worked a 996 or regular 70 hour weeks. Where are you seeing this?
mattgreenrocks 6y ago
Don't play zero-sum games with people who are willing to give up more than you. Are you precluding yourself from winning? Absolutely. But what is the value of winning if you had to give up what you defined as too much?
qiqing 6y ago
A bit of cultural context on "996" even though most of my cousins in China don't work in tech, the context is useful. The mandated retirement age is 60 over there so most of my aunts and uncles who have grandkids are primary childcare providers for my cousins. Due to the one child policy from a generation ago, each baby today has 6 adult caretakers, 2 of whom work full time (sometimes "996"), 4 of whom are retired and take shifts on childcare, household tasks, or ordering delivery / grocery shopping. Some of my cousins have opted for a second child, which means 4 60-ish caretakers for 2 kiddos. It's not too bad when there's good communication and teamwork between the adults, even though several of my cousins actually have never changed a diaper and I have no idea how they'll manage when it's their turn to be a grandparent in 20-30 years time.
geodel 6y ago
The one thing I am seeing is non-toxic folks are not opening enough companies that offer great work-life balance, good pay and other perks. So people who like good things are only looking for jobs and not setting up companies and offering these to others.

by dheera 6y ago

asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago

I'm not sure if you've got the details right, but it is definitely true that if you are taking part in any elite competition, you are probably going to be competing against people who are working very hard. I don't think that this is specific to male cofounders. Even in the counterfactual world where all founders are women, some will work harder than others, and if there is a perception that the harder workers are more likely to succeed, there will be pressure on everyone else to work harder as well.

dheera 6y ago
> specific to male cofounders I guess what I was trying to say is, male founders have a few biological choices that female founders don't, and I'm suggesting that it should be considered unethical to set industry work-hour standards to a level that only males can achieve because males are able to de-prioritize biology. An article about one of the most widely acclaimed male founders today: "As an Apple employee in the early 1990s, he almost walked out of the delivery room when the impending birth of his first child threatened to disrupt a presentation he was scheduled to give. As president of Google China from 2005 to 2009, he had a special table installed on his bed so that he could sit directly up from sleep and immediately begin responding to emails, without having to waste time standing up or reaching for a laptop." I'm hypothesizing that behavior like this, at different scales, is quickly becoming both romanticized and expected of founders, and that is marginalizing all groups except single males. https://qz.com/work/1488217/a-former-symbol-of-silicon-valleys-crush-it-culture-now-regrets-working-so-much/ https://qz.com/work/1488217/a-former-symbol-of-silicon-valle...
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
  I personally don't believe, at least at the founder/executive level, that this is a standard that has been set. Rather, there is a degree of self-organization here. Individuals are making decisions that they believe will help them compete better. I doubt there is a practical route toward lessening this effect, short of detonating the whole concept of the startup and possibly the entire economic system. There is zero chance that you're going to convince individual founders to take steps that they believe will make them less competitive in the name of "ethics." Personally I don't find it romantic at all, and therefore I am not a startup founder. I love my 9-5.
- lainga 6y ago
  What aspects of male biology are they de-prioritizing? The need to participate in child-rearing?
  - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
    Men can have (with more difficulty, it's true) children for much later in their lives relative to a woman of the same age.
  - dheera 6y ago
    Males can more easily wait till 40+ to have children. Males don't have periods. If work hours are kept to a healthy level, both males and females can achieve those work hours averaged over a long time because there is sufficient time for rest. If sufficient rest isn't planned into the schedule, there isn't time for periods, and that culture unfairly favors males. Males don't get pregnant, and are often looked down upon, or lose promotion and investment opportunities, for working less hours to help their pregnant or child-rearing partners. The males who set aside time for family are out-competed by males who either (a) don't value having a partner or children or (b) treat their family like crap by not being there for them. (I'm saying this from direct observations of acquaintances and friends.)

itronitron 6y ago

My personal experience has been that women are just as likely to resort to toxic work practices as men. Though a lot depends on how you define toxic.

rcpt 6y ago

I don't think I've known anyone who worked a 996 or regular 70 hour weeks. Where are you seeing this?

mattgreenrocks 6y ago

Don't play zero-sum games with people who are willing to give up more than you. Are you precluding yourself from winning? Absolutely. But what is the value of winning if you had to give up what you defined as too much?

qiqing 6y ago

A bit of cultural context on "996" even though most of my cousins in China don't work in tech, the context is useful. The mandated retirement age is 60 over there so most of my aunts and uncles who have grandkids are primary childcare providers for my cousins. Due to the one child policy from a generation ago, each baby today has 6 adult caretakers, 2 of whom work full time (sometimes "996"), 4 of whom are retired and take shifts on childcare, household tasks, or ordering delivery / grocery shopping. Some of my cousins have opted for a second child, which means 4 60-ish caretakers for 2 kiddos. It's not too bad when there's good communication and teamwork between the adults, even though several of my cousins actually have never changed a diaper and I have no idea how they'll manage when it's their turn to be a grandparent in 20-30 years time.

geodel 6y ago

The one thing I am seeing is non-toxic folks are not opening enough companies that offer great work-life balance, good pay and other perks. So people who like good things are only looking for jobs and not setting up companies and offering these to others.