Research does not say that people produce more when working 40 hours per week

Post by WalterBright » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 7:22 PM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #59

the_cat_kittles wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i've never thought about how these two things relate to each other: asymptotic productivity of work, and winner take almost all nature of capitalism. seems like a very succinct way of explaining why people work so damned much. i'm actually kind of embarrassed i've never connected the two. it seems to make the argument against it more clear too- if marginal hours worked grow less productive, and marginal improvement t…

One of the greatest examples for this is the Astronaut program requirements [1]: 1. A bachelor's degree in engineering, biological science, physical science, computer science or mathematics. 2. At least three years of related professional experience obtained after degree completion OR at least 1,000 hours pilot-in-command time on jet aircraft. 3. The ability to pass the NASA long-duration astronaut physical. Distant…

Post by WalterBright » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 7:27 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #64

the_cat_kittles wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i've never thought about how these two things relate to each other: asymptotic productivity of work, and winner take almost all nature of capitalism. seems like a very succinct way of explaining why people work so damned much. i'm actually kind of embarrassed i've never connected the two. it seems to make the argument against it more clear too- if marginal hours worked grow less productive, and marginal improvement t…

Great insight! You can see this not only at the macro level (Google winning all of search by being marginally better than competitors), but at the micro level (top employee out of a team of 10 gets the bonus/promotion while everyone else gets nothing), and probably everywhere in between. What I wonder is: Is this really an intrinsic quality of capitalism? What causes this "winner take most" reward system emerging in…

Post by watwut » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 7:27 PM UTC

veidr wrote: post #9

TL;DR: you can get more done if you work 60 hours instead of 40 hours in a week, but the work done in that extra 20 hours might be a small fraction of what gets done in 20 hours during a 40 hour week. This is self-evidently true for many jobs. E.g., if you pick apples for 40 hours, then even if you only pick one apple per hour after that, you will still pick more apples working 50 hours than 40. We software developer…

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 7:34 PM UTC

itsdrewmiller wrote: post #60

adekok wrote: post #18

Which says to me that the game development culture of "work 80 hours per week for months on end" is largely about incompetent management, and/or deliberate abuse. It's not about getting things done.

I think you may have misunderstood the article - if anything this is an argument for death marches.

Post by luispedrocoelho » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 7:41 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #95

veidr wrote: post #9

TL;DR: you can get more done if you work 60 hours instead of 40 hours in a week, but the work done in that extra 20 hours might be a small fraction of what gets done in 20 hours during a 40 hour week. This is self-evidently true for many jobs. E.g., if you pick apples for 40 hours, then even if you only pick one apple per hour after that, you will still pick more apples working 50 hours than 40. We software developer…

That is just his guess tho. He does not have study to confirm it nor appears to know what actually was done in studies he criticises nor their conclusions. Studies found that crunch slows down only after few weeks of crunch and 40-50 hours a week had same product long term. He article implies different results.