3 ms·

Not everybody is Feynman ofcourse. You have to accept the risk that giving freedom for creativity won't end up with anything useful.

• jmfldn 6y ago
  True. I think most people can benefit from a bit of this at least. Ie. Speaking of software engineering, at work our 10% time is for us to do as we please. A lot of good things come from that. Maybe 50% time would be too much for most though. Google's 20% is probably the maximum I'd opt for if I were a CEO.
  • mmcnl 6y ago
    For me setting 10% aside as "do as you please" feels like a restriction on creativity as well. It's hard to "plan" creativity. I think culture and trust is much more important than setting a number.
    • jmfldn 6y ago
      I agree about culture and trust, both crucial in this regard. I think something like 10% time can play a part too, it at least gives people the feeling they can do what they want for a fixed period of time.
  • cryptonector 6y ago
    These percentages are purely aspirational. Managing software developers' time down to the single digit percentages is impossible. In reality if you're doing something in your 20% (or whatever) that turns out to be valuable, and in particular you make your management see that it's valuable, your 20% will become 80%, and if not, then your 20% will be whatever you manage to make it.
• mikro2nd 6y ago
  But you'll still end up having fun. So a win, whatever the "outcome". (If such a thing matters then you're probably not at play.)