4 ms·
Working more than 40 hours a week doesn't mean you are more productive. See "Bring back the 40-hour work week" http://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/bring_back_the_4
by henrik_w 13y ago
Working more than 40 hours a week doesn't mean you are more productive. See "Bring back the 40-hour work week" http://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/bring_back_the_40_hour_work_week/ http://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/bring_back_the_40_hour_work_...
- kamaal 13y agoUnfortunately there are tons of examples which say otherwise. Nearly every start up is an example of this. Working a lot, gets a lot of work done. Ofcourse you need rest and recovery time to time. But on an average a guy who does 16 hours/day will inevitable achieve more than somebody who does 8 hours/day. Don't look too surprised if that happens.
- henrik_w 13y agoAre they successful because they work 16 hours/day, or despite working 16 hours/day?
- Jgrubb 13y agoMaybe they work 16 hours a day because they are successful.
- yarrel 13y agoWorking pst 8 hours a day adds bugs that you then have to work more hours to fix. This feels like a lot of work because it is. But it's not "achieving more".
- shaggyfrog 13y ago> Nearly every start up is an example of this. And what is the percentage of startups that "fail"? Working really hard on a bad idea doesn't make it get any better. Garbage in, garbage out. I suspect that the number of hours worked per week isn't a strong indicator of either success or failure.
- dman 13y agoWould be interesting to interview nobel laureates and see what fraction of them are working 40 hours a week.