5 ms·

Does 60 hours mean you're doing work the whole time, or is 1/2 of it browsing the Internet?

• mattquiros 13y ago
  I think that's what the author meant when he said "You become far less productive."
• corresation 13y ago
  I can only draw from anecdotes, but those align with your suspicion: where overtime was mandatory (where management was largely about maximizing suffering ^1, as if suffering has any value by itself), everyone simply compensated by doing less real work per work hour. It does seem like many people have a fixed quantity of productive output, and the decision is simply about how much to spread it out. This isn't true for all people. I've had weeks where I've worked 100+ hours productively because I was working on my own projects and initiatives, for my own company and enrichment, and had hit a stride. But I would never brag about that effort, because the effort itself is meaningless. Only the results of the effort mattered, and of those I am very proud. Too many brag about the effort regardless of what is often a lack of results. ^1 - http://dennisforbes.ca/index.php/2013/03/05/mediocre-managers-can-only-manage-suffering/ http://dennisforbes.ca/index.php/2013/03/05/mediocre-manager...
  • opinali 13y ago
    Well said; the problem is that worked hours is a useless metric of productivity. Even the horribly poor metric "lines of code written" is much better—at least I know that you have been producing work, not social media posts.
• aet 13y ago
  I think you've nailed it. I'd be really shocked to find someone working 9am-9pm straight, no lunch or dinner break 5 days a week. I used to do shift work (IT) 7am-7pm 3 days a week, which, to me, was burn out level. I used to feel over worked even though every weekend was a 4 day weekend. Can't imagine adding 2 more days.