4 ms·

I've already kind of made it clear here where I stand on this, but I gotta tell you, you really do sound a lot like management. Do you really think your supers

by imcrs 10mo ago

I've already kind of made it clear here where I stand on this, but I gotta tell you, you really do sound a lot like management. Do you really think your superstar programmers are well and truly doing intellectual work, the kind of work that produces business value, from the time they hit the coffee machine at 9AM to the time they grab their briefcase to go home at 5PM? If you believe this, I think you might be interested in bringing the Bobs in to discuss making our T.P.S. reporting process more efficient. They have thoughts on coversheets.

lukas099 10mo ago
I’ll attempt a steelman and say, no, employees are not doing deep work from 9–5, but I could see being in an office 9–5 setting the stage for a lot of deep work to be done. Moonlighting for another company I could especially see as detrimental to focus at work.
- p_l 10mo ago
  The nature of modern offices pretty much prevents deep work. You're not going to get deep work when you pack people like sardines into neat rows of desks, where pretty much at any time someone within one row away is going to be in a meeting - conducted of course over teleconferencing software. Or some people will talk (honestly, being in the office mostly translated to chit-chat for me).
  - jeena 10mo ago
    This is exactly my experience too.
- rustystump 10mo ago
  Deep work with an open office? Dont make me laugh. Please for the love of god bring back cubicles. The steel man is that in the office you get cross team pollination organically. Team lunches, talking about an idea with another team on how to do something better as in that moment the idea came up. This happens more often in person than remote. Does it need 5 days a week in the office? Absolutely not. 1-2 is plenty.
  - Terretta 10mo ago
    > Deep work with an open office? Dont make me laugh. Please for the love of god bring back cubicles. Or doors. 25 years ago, Microsoft Redmond had a slogan: "Every dev a door". In early 2000s, it began to be two devs per room. We all know what happened since. Open offices save facilities concrete money per seat. Productivity lost from lack of deep work is not a line item anyone knows how to track. The "every dev a door" plus "pair programming" was shown by studies from groups like Pivotal Labs as being optimal for working code, but ... and a big but ... Companies intentionally optimize for things other than working code. You get what you measure and they measure what's easy instead of measure what matters. // See https://lethain.com/measuring-engineering-organizations/ https://lethain.com/measuring-engineering-organizations/ but also https://lethain.com/good-eng-mgmt-is-a-fad/ https://lethain.com/good-eng-mgmt-is-a-fad/
legostormtroopr 10mo ago
I don't expect someone to do deep focused work from 9am to 5pm. But at the same time, I don't expect them to spend their 9-to-5 working for another company at the same time. As a founder, who respects the 9-to-5 and supports WFH, if I'm paying for 8 hours of work, I want 8 hours of output. Not 4 hours of output, and then you working 4 hours for another job. If multi-jobbing becomes a thing, then WFH becomes untenable because at least in the office you can be monitored.
- imcrs 10mo ago
  Do you pay your programmers hourly or on salary?
- agubelu 10mo ago
  How do you measure whether some output corresponds to 8 hours of work, and not 4 or 16 hours?
  - jakupovic 10mo ago
    He doesn't known what he is talking about. Bunch of wannabe founders waxing BS. If you want 8 hours of guaranteed output use a bot
- rustystump 10mo ago
  8 hours of output? I get it but poor phrasing.
- croon 10mo ago
  To be fair, you're either paying for hours or for output, because I assure you you are not paying staff accurately for their output. You can of course sack someone who outputs notoriously little, but if you get output exceeding your average "8 hours of output", you shouldn't care if someone made it in 1 hour or 16, or at least you wouldn't be able to tell. I'm using "output" as quoted in context, it's such a nebulous measure unless you're specifically buying a product.
moscoe 10mo ago
I’m sorry management hurt you. It’s not your fault.
- imcrs 10mo ago
  To be clear I'm having a lot of fun being snarky here. Like everything it's a mix. In seriousness, I do find the labor perspective sorely and quite conspicuously lacking in these discussions, both discussions about remote work and about DEI backlash.
  - a96 10mo ago
    Because they're essentially always dictations, not discussions.
safety1st 10mo ago
In Deep Work, Cal Newport posits that even the most disciplined, high performers can do work that requires really focused attention for a max of four hours per day. He's a computer science professor, not exactly "management." And these days, for a lot of knowledge workers there's a pretty strong case that anything which isn't this "deep work" can probably be automated. So yeah if I'm paying you a full time salary I want those four hours. Without necessarily rendering judgment on what a moonlighting clause should or shouldn't look like, if I'm not getting those four hours, I don't want you on my payroll.
- messe 10mo ago
  And you think you're more likely to get those four hours in an open office environment with distractions aplenty, as opposed to my effectively noise-proofed home office where I can actually focus?
  - dkga 10mo ago
    It really depends. I believe and apply a lot of Cal Newport advice, and benefit greatly from it. But I also see in my daily life how just being close to people you work with, and (crucially) being a short walk away/floor from people in other groups, creates immense value by helping unclog processes and especially by creating new ideas and products that wouldn‘t otherwise exist.
    - jakupovic 10mo ago
      Yup, short walt to my colleagues who are all spread across the world. /$
    - jeena 10mo ago
      Bullshit. When I'm in the office most of my time is spent on making sure it looks like I'm working and obsessing about if someone is standing/sitting behind me and looking at my screen or not, because I'm in a panopticum. There is no time for deep work.
    - himinlomax 10mo ago

by imcrs 10mo ago

lukas099 10mo ago

I’ll attempt a steelman and say, no, employees are not doing deep work from 9–5, but I could see being in an office 9–5 setting the stage for a lot of deep work to be done. Moonlighting for another company I could especially see as detrimental to focus at work.

p_l 10mo ago
The nature of modern offices pretty much prevents deep work. You're not going to get deep work when you pack people like sardines into neat rows of desks, where pretty much at any time someone within one row away is going to be in a meeting - conducted of course over teleconferencing software. Or some people will talk (honestly, being in the office mostly translated to chit-chat for me).
- jeena 10mo ago
  This is exactly my experience too.
rustystump 10mo ago
Deep work with an open office? Dont make me laugh. Please for the love of god bring back cubicles. The steel man is that in the office you get cross team pollination organically. Team lunches, talking about an idea with another team on how to do something better as in that moment the idea came up. This happens more often in person than remote. Does it need 5 days a week in the office? Absolutely not. 1-2 is plenty.
- Terretta 10mo ago
  > Deep work with an open office? Dont make me laugh. Please for the love of god bring back cubicles. Or doors. 25 years ago, Microsoft Redmond had a slogan: "Every dev a door". In early 2000s, it began to be two devs per room. We all know what happened since. Open offices save facilities concrete money per seat. Productivity lost from lack of deep work is not a line item anyone knows how to track. The "every dev a door" plus "pair programming" was shown by studies from groups like Pivotal Labs as being optimal for working code, but ... and a big but ... Companies intentionally optimize for things other than working code. You get what you measure and they measure what's easy instead of measure what matters. // See https://lethain.com/measuring-engineering-organizations/ https://lethain.com/measuring-engineering-organizations/ but also https://lethain.com/good-eng-mgmt-is-a-fad/ https://lethain.com/good-eng-mgmt-is-a-fad/

legostormtroopr 10mo ago

I don't expect someone to do deep focused work from 9am to 5pm. But at the same time, I don't expect them to spend their 9-to-5 working for another company at the same time. As a founder, who respects the 9-to-5 and supports WFH, if I'm paying for 8 hours of work, I want 8 hours of output. Not 4 hours of output, and then you working 4 hours for another job. If multi-jobbing becomes a thing, then WFH becomes untenable because at least in the office you can be monitored.

imcrs 10mo ago
Do you pay your programmers hourly or on salary?
agubelu 10mo ago
How do you measure whether some output corresponds to 8 hours of work, and not 4 or 16 hours?
- jakupovic 10mo ago
  He doesn't known what he is talking about. Bunch of wannabe founders waxing BS. If you want 8 hours of guaranteed output use a bot
rustystump 10mo ago
8 hours of output? I get it but poor phrasing.
croon 10mo ago
To be fair, you're either paying for hours or for output, because I assure you you are not paying staff accurately for their output. You can of course sack someone who outputs notoriously little, but if you get output exceeding your average "8 hours of output", you shouldn't care if someone made it in 1 hour or 16, or at least you wouldn't be able to tell. I'm using "output" as quoted in context, it's such a nebulous measure unless you're specifically buying a product.

moscoe 10mo ago

I’m sorry management hurt you. It’s not your fault.

imcrs 10mo ago
To be clear I'm having a lot of fun being snarky here. Like everything it's a mix. In seriousness, I do find the labor perspective sorely and quite conspicuously lacking in these discussions, both discussions about remote work and about DEI backlash.
- a96 10mo ago
  Because they're essentially always dictations, not discussions.

safety1st 10mo ago

In Deep Work, Cal Newport posits that even the most disciplined, high performers can do work that requires really focused attention for a max of four hours per day. He's a computer science professor, not exactly "management." And these days, for a lot of knowledge workers there's a pretty strong case that anything which isn't this "deep work" can probably be automated. So yeah if I'm paying you a full time salary I want those four hours. Without necessarily rendering judgment on what a moonlighting clause should or shouldn't look like, if I'm not getting those four hours, I don't want you on my payroll.

messe 10mo ago
And you think you're more likely to get those four hours in an open office environment with distractions aplenty, as opposed to my effectively noise-proofed home office where I can actually focus?
- dkga 10mo ago
  It really depends. I believe and apply a lot of Cal Newport advice, and benefit greatly from it. But I also see in my daily life how just being close to people you work with, and (crucially) being a short walk away/floor from people in other groups, creates immense value by helping unclog processes and especially by creating new ideas and products that wouldn‘t otherwise exist.
  - jakupovic 10mo ago
    Yup, short walt to my colleagues who are all spread across the world. /$
  - jeena 10mo ago
    Bullshit. When I'm in the office most of my time is spent on making sure it looks like I'm working and obsessing about if someone is standing/sitting behind me and looking at my screen or not, because I'm in a panopticum. There is no time for deep work.
  - himinlomax 10mo ago