Live data from Hacker News

"Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

programmers.stackexchange.com

101–110 of 172 posts

Re: "Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

#101
post #13

What do long hours often represent? Enterprise: Incompetent management, lazy co-workers, and spoiled users. Small Business: Tough competition and limited resources. Startup: Taking advantage of opportunites that may not pass this way again.

Question, what do the long hours that are part of investment banking fall under. I haven't worked in it but might yet so I'm curious. I know there's a lot to do in a short amount of time in terms of the mood of the stock market like a small business, but c'mon, these are smart people, surely they can streamline some of these processes.

From my conversations with I-banker friends, it sounds like the long hours in I-banking are externally imposed. When a client is facing an imminent acquisition deal, it's very important that they get all their accounting straightened out, all their valuations nailed down while the acquirer is still interested. A delay usually means the deal falls through.

So when companies come to an I-banking firm, they're usually like "I need all your best people on this, stat." And because there're millions of dollars at stake, the I-banking firm will happily comply.

So I-bankers definitely fall into the "working late because of somebody else's incompetence" camp. In this case, it's customers. There're various things that startups could do that would make I-banker's jobs a lot easier: keep good accounting records, make sure they're completely covered legally, have solid revenue streams, don't get all buddy-buddy with potential acquirers. But startups that do all this rarely need an I-banker to close the deal; they just negotiate directly with a potential acquirer, have the lawyers draw up a deal, and sign it.

Basically, the I-banking business model is trading other people's stupidity for cash. It's the same thing with management consultants, and divorce attorneys, and litigators, all also professions that can make a lot of money but have shitty quality of life.

Re: "Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

#103
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you're working overtime very often on your own business, it's either because you're incompetent, or lazy, or greedy, or failing (see 'incompetent')." Of all of the successful people I've met (measured in cash, influence, etc), I can't think of ANY who weren't pretty seriously married to their work. I guess many of those people fall into the "greedy" camp and are doing it for the money. But I think most of them do…

I think that's a myth of the startup world (a persistent, but mostly incorrect myth). I know successful people with both balanced and unbalanced lives... and the former are definitely happier. I'm not convinced that regular long hours lead to a more competitive business. Particularly when it comes to running a business (as opposed to being a contractor or freelancer, which is a completely different proposition), spen…

That's a bit of a straw man. You don't have to choose between working harder or smarter. And I never said anything about happiness.

Say we fork the universe now and one version of you works 25 hour weeks henceforth, which the other works 50 hours per week henceforth. Who retires with more money and more impact on the world? Both version of you are equally smart. The well-rested you might make SLIGHTLY smarter decisions due to happiness/lack of fatigue perhaps... But surely you wouldn't contend that the success outcomes (professional impact and wealth, for the sake of argument) wouldn't be different.

It's not a myth-- working hard correlates with success (plenty of studies out there to back it up). Working smart correlates with success too... Though one of the things that really surprised me about being in Y Combinator was that the founders WEREN'T universally brilliant/clever. They DID universally work their asses off and generally had irrational stick-with-it-ness.

Happiness is a whole different discussion, of course. Whether "top 1%" success is even worth it is another discussion.

Re: "Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

#104

How about in a cyclical project start -> project release process? I am not referring to "crunch time" where you realize everything is broken and your schedule was unrealistic; rather, many projects I have participated in have an escalating work load as you near release, because a lot of the work simply cannot be done before previous stages are completed. Unless you are a large entity that can heavily "pipeline" by ru…

Work that can't be done because of dependencies, long release cycles instead of incremental delivery, planned escalating work load... What part of that do you think is NOT broken?

It may not be the romantic ideal, but I don't see the fix. Try as you might, some work has dependency trees.

About all I can think of is over-hiring, or release cycles could be extended, but for us TTM is pretty sensitive.

Re: "Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

#106

I know a lot of people who seem to like working long hours. It allows them to think they're getting more done, but I suspect that many of the processes involved could be optimized if they thought about it a bit. For me, I work long hours but it's spread out over the course of a day (so removing breaks/bs it's probably not much more than 40 hours p/wk), and I love what I do, so I do get a lot done (and it feels less l…

Law firms are changing. They are moving away from billable hours and towards fixed price contracts. They are making better use of non-partner track lawyers to handle routine stuff, and those lawyers get sane hours and lower salaries.

You're right, some are moving away from billable hours because they have to. However, I haven't heard much about a reduction in working hours. Lots of out of work lawyers and biglaw firms are back to offering 160k+ to summer associates--business as usual but less of it to go around. Non-partner track seems same as it's ever been, except you're less likely to have a job. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer...

Re: "Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

#108
What a bunch of B.S. In fact I cannot believe it is even here in Hacker News.

"Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

This is a such a horrible generalization. Successful people always work hard/long hours to make something succeed. Imagine telling your kids that to be successful you should work just 40 hours and no more. They will be easily steamed rolled by other kids that are willing to work harder/ go the extra mile.

Here is a relevant piece from: http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html

>>Now for the matter of drive. You observe that most great scientists have tremendous drive. I worked for ten years with John Tukey at Bell Labs. He had tremendous drive. One day about three or four years after I joined, I discovered that John Tukey was slightly younger than I was. John was a genius and I clearly was not. Well I went storming into Bode's office and said, ``How can anybody my age know as much as John Tukey does?'' He leaned back in his chair, put his hands behind his head, grinned slightly, and said, ``You would be surprised Hamming, how much you would know if you worked as hard as he did that many years.'' I simply slunk out of the office!>>What Bode was saying was this: ``Knowledge and productivity are like compound interest.'' Given two people of approximately the same ability and one person who works ten percent more than the other, the latter will more than twice outproduce the former. The more you know, the more you learn; the more you learn, the more you can do; the more you can do, the more the opportunity - it is very much like compound interest. I don't want to give you a rate, but it is a very high rate. Given two people with exactly the same ability, the one person who manages day in and day out to get in one more hour of thinking will be tremendously more productive over a lifetime. I took Bode's remark to heart; I spent a good deal more of my time for some years trying to work a bit harder and I found, in fact, I could get more work done. I don't like to say it in front of my wife, but I did sort of neglect her sometimes; I needed to study. You have to neglect things if you intend to get what you want done. There's no question about this.Yes, sometimes it may mean that working long hours there is something wrong and the title should reflect that rather than just generalizing.

I remember there was a study done at one point that the best piano players had worked longer hours per week practicing as opposed to the so so piano player.

You want to work 40 hours and be happy? Good! But I doubt you will be able to achieve greatness like that. Achieving success requires sacrifices.

Edison is another example of a guy that would work really long hours. Look at everything that he accomplished. You want to be mediocre, work 40 hours. You want to be great like Edison, work your ass off. Don't listen to the little people that tell you not to work your ass off. That is the road to mediocrity.

Now, if you are saying that you want to have time for family and be another cog in the machine, 40 hours are great for you.

edit - OK, after further reflection I think that what the title means is that IF you are just a cog in the machine of a large corporation AND you are working long hours then something is terribly wrong. If that was the original intent then I completely agree. Is OK to do it once in a while but if it is normal then something is terribly wrong.

Now, for academics, athletics, other competitive fields and even startups at least in their earlier faces you still have to work long hours or the other guys will steam roll you. Eventually though you do hit a point of diminishing returns so you have to watch for that.

Re: "Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

#109
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's a myth of the startup world (a persistent, but mostly incorrect myth). I know successful people with both balanced and unbalanced lives... and the former are definitely happier. I'm not convinced that regular long hours lead to a more competitive business. Particularly when it comes to running a business (as opposed to being a contractor or freelancer, which is a completely different proposition), spen…

That's a bit of a straw man. You don't have to choose between working harder or smarter. And I never said anything about happiness. Say we fork the universe now and one version of you works 25 hour weeks henceforth, which the other works 50 hours per week henceforth. Who retires with more money and more impact on the world? Both version of you are equally smart. The well-rested you might make SLIGHTLY smarter decisio…

I have no doubt that determination and enthusiasm are positively correlated with both success and with working long hours. However, as a rational skeptic, I've yet to see evidence that working long hours has a causal relationship to success.

However, there is evidence to suggest an inverse relationship may exist. Furthermore, hazing is effective in building solidarity, and people are generally more likely to retroactively justify hardship, which makes me think there may be a psychological bias towards overvaluing poor work/life balance.

In my particular line of work, Daniel Cook put it better than I ever could: http://www.lostgarden.com/2008/09/rules-of-productivity-pres...

Re: "Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process."

#110

What a bunch of B.S. In fact I cannot believe it is even here in Hacker News. "Any time you have worked long hours, it is a sign of a broken process." This is a such a horrible generalization. Successful people always work hard/long hours to make something succeed. Imagine telling your kids that to be successful you should work just 40 hours and no more. They will be easily steamed rolled by other kids that are willi…

So you take a few edge cases and make them the example for the main stream?

I doubt you should ever use Edison or Einstein to ever refer to the average person. Let alone put yourself in the same camp, you'll probably do yourself mental harm via exhaustion. Fine if you have abnormal drive and intelligence go for it.

But chances are you are an average person and need to obey the rules of what makes average people happy. Or you won't be happy. Maybe you'll throw yourself at your work in the hope of finding happiness.. something I'll admit to doing myself.. chasing dreams of a better life.

Theres plenty of research that states the exact opposite of what you are saying, enough that France even had laws banning working over 35 hours (and its 48 hours for the rest of Europe). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_time#Western_Europe

What works for some people doesn't work for others. I remember listening to my friend talk about working in Japan during the late 80's early 90's and described the people he worked with as having an ingrained apathy towards the long work day, and most just mucked around all day. Took 2 hours to even start work, the work force was extremely unproductive for the hours they where doing. I'm sure theres different stories in different industries but thats a story I take as 100% as the person isn't known for being a liar or exaggerator.

Just because you can make people work long hours doesn't mean things get better, it often means things get worse. And thats the moral of his story about Japan.

The stories of how industrious and loyal they are... just stories... they are just people like everyone else. And as a majority they'd rather be at home with there families and friends than at work making someone else rich.

Post reply on HN