4 ms·

Maybe as an average, but high performers can sustain more than 40h/week and that's who he is targeting.

by memish 4y ago

cmh89 4y ago
Why would high performers want to work for him at Twitter though? Twitter and the toxic person who owns it isn't really going to be appealing for high performers.
pixelfarmer 4y ago
I have yet to meet a single person who can actually do that much sustained work for long periods of time without consequences. I remember talking to some guy who supposedly worked 80-90h/week and started dissecting what he truly did. Ended up with ~30h of actual work. That is good, but it was also showing him how much inflated ego and bullshit he was carrying around. Let me add here that I have a lot of personal experience when it comes to long (actual) working hours and consequences from that. The moment you have to crosscheck all the things, run tests and whatnot, you are confronted in a more immediate way with all the mistakes. Most of these so called high performers fall apart when subjected to such a strict regime, because they are normal humans like everyone else. There are outliers, and these people have deficiencies in other areas because their brains work a bit different, so this doesn't come for free, either. Edit: Here, a nice link for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_fatigue_on_safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_fatigue_on_safety For example, where I live there is a group of stupid idiots called "doctors" (and I suppose this is not much different elsewhere on this planet), who think they can deal with long working hours. Imagine you end up in hospital with a doctor who had a long shift or is maybe on the 2nd shift already, because "it is no problem!" (problems can be fixed with pills). I have a little red book about high altitude sickness here, and doctors are high up in the list of professions to die from that. Pills cannot fix everything.

Maybe as an average, but high performers can sustain more than 40h/week and that's who he is targeting.

by memish 4y ago

Maybe as an average, but high performers can sustain more than 40h/week and that's who he is targeting.

Why would high performers want to work for him at Twitter though? Twitter and the toxic person who owns it isn't really going to be appealing for high performers.

pixelfarmer 4y ago

I have yet to meet a single person who can actually do that much sustained work for long periods of time without consequences. I remember talking to some guy who supposedly worked 80-90h/week and started dissecting what he truly did. Ended up with ~30h of actual work. That is good, but it was also showing him how much inflated ego and bullshit he was carrying around. Let me add here that I have a lot of personal experience when it comes to long (actual) working hours and consequences from that. The moment you have to crosscheck all the things, run tests and whatnot, you are confronted in a more immediate way with all the mistakes. Most of these so called high performers fall apart when subjected to such a strict regime, because they are normal humans like everyone else. There are outliers, and these people have deficiencies in other areas because their brains work a bit different, so this doesn't come for free, either. Edit: Here, a nice link for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_fatigue_on_safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_fatigue_on_safety For example, where I live there is a group of stupid idiots called "doctors" (and I suppose this is not much different elsewhere on this planet), who think they can deal with long working hours. Imagine you end up in hospital with a doctor who had a long shift or is maybe on the 2nd shift already, because "it is no problem!" (problems can be fixed with pills). I have a little red book about high altitude sickness here, and doctors are high up in the list of professions to die from that. Pills cannot fix everything.