4 ms·

I think there's an important point here too that cuts against a lot of memes: it's important to keep working hard right up until this point. A lot of people pre

by gfodor 5y ago

I think there's an important point here too that cuts against a lot of memes: it's important to keep working hard right up until this point. A lot of people presume that if they put in a solid day's work they're going to do just as well as someone who is a "work-a-holic." That's not a great mental model, if the work-a-holic is working more but not so much they are hitting these problems mentioned. There's a fairly wide margin between underwork and overwork. edit: Lo and behold my sibling is taking on one of the memes I mentioned. :) If you're working less because you feel it's doing too much in the favor of your employer, and not because you're otherwise going to start becoming less productive because of it, you're probably underworking in the sense outlined here.

gopalv 5y ago
> A lot of people presume that if they put in a solid day's work they're going to do just as well as someone who is a "work-a-holic." There are two kinds of workaholics - the ones who enjoy work and those who suffer from their work. The article hits on the first kind in the passing >> Of course, to work hard, it really helps if you enjoy your work. Working hard when you enjoy your work is easier and might look like workaholism to someone who is definitely not. If work is play, you might play longer & that gets a lot done, because mistakes you throw away don't feel like wasted time. The workaholic that people knock are the ones who work because it gives them positive feedback they lack in the rest of their lives - from an inattentive parent, disrespectful spouse or demanding children. My work environment is extremely gamified and well designed to give me great feedback to improve, excellent rewards for performance and throw in some respect of my peers. The home life is Sisyphean in comparison - cook dinner today and it doesn't lie on a progression towards cooking less tomorrow. It's easy to get sucked into that and work on a death-march, because it feels like progress on a daily basis. That "How we built Internet Explorer" tweet felt very familiar to me, because I would definitely get sucked into a mission like that.
- didibus 5y ago
  > >> Of course, to work hard, it really helps if you enjoy your work. > Working hard when you enjoy your work is easier and might look like workaholism to someone who is definitely not. If work is play, you might play longer & that gets a lot done, because mistakes you throw away don't feel like wasted time. Exactly, and it's a misnomer to call that hard work. When someone enjoys their work, the work is easy. They are not "hard workers". You falsely believe they are hard working because you personally would not enjoy doing that work and would therefore not be motivated to work as much. But that only means that the work is hard to you, it doesn't mean it's hard to them.
  - mym1990 5y ago
    I would disagree with this. Many professional athletes love their work, but that doesn't make training, recovery, and competition a walk in the park...professional athletes are the pinnacle of hard work because many of them have to utilize the 24 hours in near perfection to stay at the top. Also, often the reason that someone enjoys their work is directly because it IS difficult. And the payoff from solving hard problems can be amazing and worth it. Alternatively, people who are pigeon holed into mundane or uninteresting work in their career will find dissatisfaction, even if the tasks are incredibly easy.
    - didibus 5y ago
      I feel in general by "hard work" people imply "putting in the time and effort". And I still contend, people who do put the time and effort into something probably find it easier to do so than those who don't. Let's say that "putting in time and effort" is the key to success, aka, "hard work" is the key to success. Alright, now what if you're finding it hard to "put in the time and effort"? I would say if you find it hard to put in the time and effort, you need to either find ways to make it easier, or find something else which you find easier to put in time and effort into. I'm not sure if my point will land, but see, for me, the real trick to success is to find something that is easy for you to put in time and effort into. And I think a lot of successes are attributable to that, yes successful people did put in time and effort, but it was easier for them to do so, and that's why they are successful at it.
      - mym1990 5y ago
        I get that. I think the definition of success obviously varies a lot as well, but if we talk about the upper echelon of anything, eventually everyone is putting in the time and effort, but there are people who are still above and beyond everyone else in that upper echelon. So the question becomes, whats the difference?
        didibus 5y ago
        > So the question becomes, what's the difference? It's mostly luck most of the time, and that includes the amount of motivation you have to go beyond in that venture. This is mostly my opinion, but the evidence I've seen over the years lead me to conclude this too. How motivated you are at one thing, and how exclusively focused your motivation is, from what I've read, is mostly luck. But beyond that, there's a lot of factor purely driven by luck, your genetics, your environment, the time and place of your efforts, etc.
6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
> it's important to keep working hard right up until this point As a pretty hard worker who is very far from workaholic, I strongly disagree. Work hard. It's super important. Put the time in or else you won't progress. But you don't need to go right up to the edge. If you put in solid work reliably for years, other factors will matter so much more than whether you go right up until that point.
SquishyPanda23 5y ago
> it's important to keep working hard right up until this point I'm not sure there's any real empirical evidence for this in the absolute way you stated it. There are plenty of highly productive creative people who do 4 hours of highly focused work a day and then spend the rest of their time walking around a garden. If your goal is to produce great lasting work that seems to be a formula that works a lot. Working up to your limit is useful for other scenarios, like where you want to crank out much more routine work. If you want to get promoted in a structured environment like a big tech company, then this strategy works well. There are definitely cultures that value working long hours. You see it both in business and in academia, and I'm not aware of any evidence that it's better than the system where you empower workers to focus on as they need to and then take the time they need to recharge.

by gfodor 5y ago

gopalv 5y ago

> A lot of people presume that if they put in a solid day's work they're going to do just as well as someone who is a "work-a-holic." There are two kinds of workaholics - the ones who enjoy work and those who suffer from their work. The article hits on the first kind in the passing >> Of course, to work hard, it really helps if you enjoy your work. Working hard when you enjoy your work is easier and might look like workaholism to someone who is definitely not. If work is play, you might play longer & that gets a lot done, because mistakes you throw away don't feel like wasted time. The workaholic that people knock are the ones who work because it gives them positive feedback they lack in the rest of their lives - from an inattentive parent, disrespectful spouse or demanding children. My work environment is extremely gamified and well designed to give me great feedback to improve, excellent rewards for performance and throw in some respect of my peers. The home life is Sisyphean in comparison - cook dinner today and it doesn't lie on a progression towards cooking less tomorrow. It's easy to get sucked into that and work on a death-march, because it feels like progress on a daily basis. That "How we built Internet Explorer" tweet felt very familiar to me, because I would definitely get sucked into a mission like that.

didibus 5y ago
> >> Of course, to work hard, it really helps if you enjoy your work. > Working hard when you enjoy your work is easier and might look like workaholism to someone who is definitely not. If work is play, you might play longer & that gets a lot done, because mistakes you throw away don't feel like wasted time. Exactly, and it's a misnomer to call that hard work. When someone enjoys their work, the work is easy. They are not "hard workers". You falsely believe they are hard working because you personally would not enjoy doing that work and would therefore not be motivated to work as much. But that only means that the work is hard to you, it doesn't mean it's hard to them.
- mym1990 5y ago
  I would disagree with this. Many professional athletes love their work, but that doesn't make training, recovery, and competition a walk in the park...professional athletes are the pinnacle of hard work because many of them have to utilize the 24 hours in near perfection to stay at the top. Also, often the reason that someone enjoys their work is directly because it IS difficult. And the payoff from solving hard problems can be amazing and worth it. Alternatively, people who are pigeon holed into mundane or uninteresting work in their career will find dissatisfaction, even if the tasks are incredibly easy.
  - didibus 5y ago
    I feel in general by "hard work" people imply "putting in the time and effort". And I still contend, people who do put the time and effort into something probably find it easier to do so than those who don't. Let's say that "putting in time and effort" is the key to success, aka, "hard work" is the key to success. Alright, now what if you're finding it hard to "put in the time and effort"? I would say if you find it hard to put in the time and effort, you need to either find ways to make it easier, or find something else which you find easier to put in time and effort into. I'm not sure if my point will land, but see, for me, the real trick to success is to find something that is easy for you to put in time and effort into. And I think a lot of successes are attributable to that, yes successful people did put in time and effort, but it was easier for them to do so, and that's why they are successful at it.
    - mym1990 5y ago
      I get that. I think the definition of success obviously varies a lot as well, but if we talk about the upper echelon of anything, eventually everyone is putting in the time and effort, but there are people who are still above and beyond everyone else in that upper echelon. So the question becomes, whats the difference?
      - didibus 5y ago
        > So the question becomes, what's the difference? It's mostly luck most of the time, and that includes the amount of motivation you have to go beyond in that venture. This is mostly my opinion, but the evidence I've seen over the years lead me to conclude this too. How motivated you are at one thing, and how exclusively focused your motivation is, from what I've read, is mostly luck. But beyond that, there's a lot of factor purely driven by luck, your genetics, your environment, the time and place of your efforts, etc.

6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago

> it's important to keep working hard right up until this point As a pretty hard worker who is very far from workaholic, I strongly disagree. Work hard. It's super important. Put the time in or else you won't progress. But you don't need to go right up to the edge. If you put in solid work reliably for years, other factors will matter so much more than whether you go right up until that point.

SquishyPanda23 5y ago

> it's important to keep working hard right up until this point I'm not sure there's any real empirical evidence for this in the absolute way you stated it. There are plenty of highly productive creative people who do 4 hours of highly focused work a day and then spend the rest of their time walking around a garden. If your goal is to produce great lasting work that seems to be a formula that works a lot. Working up to your limit is useful for other scenarios, like where you want to crank out much more routine work. If you want to get promoted in a structured environment like a big tech company, then this strategy works well. There are definitely cultures that value working long hours. You see it both in business and in academia, and I'm not aware of any evidence that it's better than the system where you empower workers to focus on as they need to and then take the time they need to recharge.