What “work” looks like

Over time, I could overcome this „weird“ feeling of not sitting at my desk while working. It went quite a bit like the author describes:

- Load up on context and information.

- Start outlining the problem.

- When stuck, try for a while. If no progress is to be made, go for a walk, do laundry, buy groceries. Stuff _away_ from the computer.

- When potential solution inevitably form in my mind, write them down wherever I am.

I often find that when I arrive at potential solutions this way, I’m usually a lot more motivated as opposed to banging my head against the wall. It’s not only more productive, it’s better for your mental and physical health, it keeps you engaged and satisfied with your work. Many times I simply cannot wait to return to the desk to try the ideas out.

It’s also important to know when to stop. Occasionally there are days where I can get nothing creative done. I have learned the hard way that when I force myself through, more often than not I mess something up so terribly that I need at least half a productive day following up, rectifying what I broke. It may feel like cheating yourself at first but sometimes it’s better to just stop for the day entirely.

However, while employed, have you tried to go out for an extended walk or do something else away from your computer, outside of the building you are required to work in? Deciding to do so without permission can get you a citation and asking for permission leads to blank stares from your co-workers and managers. For many, that’s apparently akin to asking for paid time off whenever you feel like it. The conclusion here can only be that many employers are more interested in owning your time than results, whether they realize this or not. Which brings us to a larger point about work culture and insistence on presence at all times but that’s a huge, separate discussion.

One only has to look at places that value such measures to see they DO work.

Israeli airports for example or Singapore's drug policies. Both of which employ draconians measures to ensure effectiveness but they do boast success rates.

I'll say policies lose effectiveness when the populace don't value it or when the neighborhood has powerful bad actors that oppose it, like trying to reinforce gun laws in Canada.

I don’t think with todays developer salaries, there’s any space left for that good old “work is slavery” message you’re sending. The HN crowd is huge so I’m sure there are exceptions, but most people reading your comment can switch jobs whenever they want. Not without stress, but without real risk.

I live in a consensus culture (Sweden) and have a slightly more cynical take on this: I think the main reason Business loves collaboration is that it legitimizes a system where the Business (and Business people) capture most of the value from innovation.

People vary greatly in their capacity for creative innovative thinking. Those that don’t have that capacity benefit from making innovation a “team sport” where they can play a leading role without exposing their ineptitude.

One data point that has convinced me of this hypothesis is how emotional people het around the counter examples. Talk about some fantastic mathematician (e.g. Galois) or “lone genius” scientist and many people go ballistic. Why would this be so sensitive if it wasn’t perceived as a threat to the ego?