Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

blogs.hbr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 52 posts

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#11

Post by ggambetta »

dethtron5000 wrote: post #3

I would be curious if Googlers on this list feel that Google does a good job putting these insights into practice.

Yes. The work-life balance at Google is awesome. More precisely, you have everything you need to find the right balance for yourself, including support at all levels.

A personal anecdote I like to tell. After our weekly 1:1, my previous manager strongly suggested I should go get a nap in the room we have specifically for that (http://goo.gl/nhNOIe). You can be as cynical as you want, ultimately it's for the company benefit, and so on... but in how many other companies does this happen?

And this and the onsite gym and the awesome food are just a trick to make me work 20 hours a day, right? Well, not quite. I work completely normal business hours and then I go home to my wife, my friends and my hobbies. I never work on weekends and thoroughly enjoy my 25 days of holidays.

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#12

Post by insuffi »

QuantumChaos wrote: post #9
dethtron5000 wrote: post #3

I would be curious if Googlers on this list feel that Google does a good job putting these insights into practice.

I didn't really get the point of the article, so I'm just going to comment on work-life balance at Google in general. Basically, you are freed from any unnecessary constraints in choosing your own work life balance. You are judged by the work you do, regardless of how long it took you to do that work, or which hours of the day you did that work. The company goes to reasonable lengths to allow remote working, but they…

Except for B) having nothing to do with free market. 1)The problem with a long-hours work culture is that long hours don't translate to productivity, and it's rather hard to quantify productivity in a programming setting. It's an emotional/managerial phenomenon.2)It's not avoiding competition either. If the optimal work hours for a programmer are 4-6 hours, then 10 hours surely will lower his/her productivity and just project "more work". As a result, we get a badly competitive micro climate based on "projections" of more work.

I suggest you look at how Finland approaches non-competitive study in elementary and high schools, which propelled them to the top of the world in terms of quality.

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#13

Post by cclogg »

miloshadzic wrote: post #7

Heh. I took a photo of that same girl(I think) on the cover photo when I was in India: http://www.flickr.com/photos/miloshadzic/7102823323/

Nice, that was shot on film right? Love the look. Also, seems like a bit of a light leak... a tip: I once glued some black foam-paper on the door-hinge to my old film camera, because the original one from the 70's had worn off haha.

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#14

Post by PeterWhittaker »

Bulkington wrote: post #4

Is it possible for anyone who thinks for a living to truly 'segment'? The best I can hope is really intense distraction: mountain biking, sailing, even golf. It's amazing how little I consider anything else while playing golf--but I couldn't get away in the middle of the afternoon unless I had the flexibility to get good work done from 4-7AM. Intuitively, I'd bet job satisfaction is right up there with mate selection…

Sample size of one, but yes, it is: Years ago I took my work stresses to bed, each and every night. Eventually I realized these stresses were feeding me to a vicious circle: Stressed in bed, sleep poorly, fail to refresh, get less done - and do stupider things, get more stressed.

Eventually I just flipped the switched and stopped it. I wish I could recall the moment (or period?) more clearly so that I could describe what I did well enough to make you believe you can do it too, but it was a long time ago, and I stopped worrying about it pretty soon thereafter.

Will those stressors be there in the morning? Is there anything you can do about them in bed? Stop worrying.

(And stop convincing yourself there is something you can do about them in bed, because you know very well that you need a fresh mind and a fresh perspective to do your best work. And you know very well you are not going to get those things worrying with your head on the pillow.)

Rituals can help, such as commutes: Leave the office stressed, put things out of your mind as you go home. Be mindful of the sky, the clouds, the people around you. Make up stories about them.

On the way in to the office, plan how you will evaluate the stressors.

And use the "will ignoring this get me fired" rule for everything. That really helps with focus.

(I still think for a living - but now I'm quarter-owner of a consulting firm - stressors now are ever so much greater, but my stress is generally less, because I segment and defer.)

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#15

Post by cbhl »

dethtron5000 wrote: post #3

I would be curious if Googlers on this list feel that Google does a good job putting these insights into practice.

I think it would be disingenuous to consider two years worth of studies "insights"; I think the truly interesting stuff will likely come out of clustering machine-learning algorithms applied to the data ten, maybe twenty years down the line (when some Googlers' children have grown up and we can see the effect or lack thereof on them as well as on the Googlers themselves).

I get the impression that Google errs on the side of "provide more information"; for example, food in the micro-kitchens has been labelled with traffic-light colours for many years now. Many of the interns I met at my last internship there went out of their way to eat more of the food that was labelled "red" because "that clearly means it tastes better". Whether that made the life of the interns in question "better" or depends entirely on the metric you choose to measure with.

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#16

Post by QuantumChaos »

insuffi wrote: post #12
QuantumChaos wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't really get the point of the article, so I'm just going to comment on work-life balance at Google in general. Basically, you are freed from any unnecessary constraints in choosing your own work life balance. You are judged by the work you do, regardless of how long it took you to do that work, or which hours of the day you did that work. The company goes to reasonable lengths to allow remote working, but they…

Except for B) having nothing to do with free market. 1)The problem with a long-hours work culture is that long hours don't translate to productivity, and it's rather hard to quantify productivity in a programming setting. It's an emotional/managerial phenomenon.2)It's not avoiding competition either. If the optimal work hours for a programmer are 4-6 hours, then 10 hours surely will lower his/her productivity and jus…

I'm not describing encouraging people to work long hours for the sake of it, but rather people working longer hours in order to get more done. It seems like you don't believe it is possible for a company to reward people based on their actual results, ("it's rather hard to quantify productivity in a programming setting") but that is what Google does. No one really notices how much time you spend in the office.

So I would accept your points (1) and (2) to the extent that they apply in a particular setting. But these arguments don't apply to Google. If a person at Google chose to work longer hours, and ended up being less productive, that would really only harm themselves.

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#17

Post by rayiner »

Bulkington wrote: post #4

Is it possible for anyone who thinks for a living to truly 'segment'? The best I can hope is really intense distraction: mountain biking, sailing, even golf. It's amazing how little I consider anything else while playing golf--but I couldn't get away in the middle of the afternoon unless I had the flexibility to get good work done from 4-7AM. Intuitively, I'd bet job satisfaction is right up there with mate selection…

I think about work in the shower, before bed, etc. But watching "Frozen" with my daughter, I totally forget about work. Or when my wife unceremoniously hands me the baby with a "I already changed a poop diaper today, your turn."

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#18

Post by insuffi »

QuantumChaos wrote: post #16
insuffi wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for B) having nothing to do with free market. 1)The problem with a long-hours work culture is that long hours don't translate to productivity, and it's rather hard to quantify productivity in a programming setting. It's an emotional/managerial phenomenon.2)It's not avoiding competition either. If the optimal work hours for a programmer are 4-6 hours, then 10 hours surely will lower his/her productivity and jus…

I'm not describing encouraging people to work long hours for the sake of it, but rather people working longer hours in order to get more done. It seems like you don't believe it is possible for a company to reward people based on their actual results, ("it's rather hard to quantify productivity in a programming setting") but that is what Google does. No one really notices how much time you spend in the office. So I w…

1) No such thing as long hours for the sake of it. It's always to get more "done". And like I mentioned in my parent post, there's no such thing after a certain number of hours. 2)I don't believe it's possible for a company to do that, or at least not to the extent that you're saying. 3)Based on some of the interviews people have had here with Google, it seems that Google could use some more "reward based on performance" in their culture.(or a lot)

p.s. Keep in mind that my competition point still stands. Longer and longer hours are of no good. It's a slippery slope. And yes, I think such competition is poisonous and detrimental, even if some more work gets done. Working more hours just pulls everyone down,* in regards to your free market comment. It's price competition.

*even if it's not projection, but actual performance. Soon enough, everyone is working more and more to catch up to you, and everyone's miserable. That's not sustainable practice.

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#19

Post by mrjj »

Blah-blah-blah HR stuff, blah-blah-blah, leaders, goals, performance, roles.

The true science approach should aware that massive surveys can measure everything but the thing you want.

People don't "trust" that survey anonymous and trying to reflect what they expected to say in survey. Human can't seriously tell something to the stone, communication doesn't work this way. If there is a really stone of anonymous survey, human have to give him imaginary human trait, expectations and ability to evaluate him. "What are you want from me, dear stone?" So, confidentional procedure doesn't mean that people anser like it is confidentional.

Interviewer presenation - that the sociological surveys is actually measure, and there is only the ghostly shape of personal realtion behind this.

The second thing is the question interpretation: "I don’t like to have to think about work while I am at home." Can mean: 1. I don't like any serious thoughts at home. 2. I thinking all time about work ant don't like this. 3. I just don't like and not thinking. 4. I'm deep in self-estrangement and prefer not to thing about work at all.

Event "think" can be perceived in many ways: specific persons, tasks, it domain at all.

How massive survey is doesn't matter until we have raw data in hands. Some manipulation with R or whatever and there is a some groups and strict classification, some more and there is completely different classification, one question data can change everything or be just excluded to make picture "clear".

The point is that any changes in methodology of survey researches usually demonstrate applied catastrophe theory when any shift can significally change the results. Don't trust any conclusions without detailed step-by-step description of methodology.

In general, measure the pressure, scan brains, make tests aimed to somatic responces, use anal probes, but dont't ask the questions if you really want to understand something about people.

Re: Google’s Scientific Approach to Work-Life Balance

#20

Post by ryanobjc »

PeterWhittaker wrote: post #14
Bulkington wrote: post #4

Is it possible for anyone who thinks for a living to truly 'segment'? The best I can hope is really intense distraction: mountain biking, sailing, even golf. It's amazing how little I consider anything else while playing golf--but I couldn't get away in the middle of the afternoon unless I had the flexibility to get good work done from 4-7AM. Intuitively, I'd bet job satisfaction is right up there with mate selection…

Sample size of one, but yes, it is: Years ago I took my work stresses to bed, each and every night. Eventually I realized these stresses were feeding me to a vicious circle: Stressed in bed, sleep poorly, fail to refresh, get less done - and do stupider things, get more stressed. Eventually I just flipped the switched and stopped it. I wish I could recall the moment (or period?) more clearly so that I could describe…

One thing we know from studies is that when we effectively delegate work to someone else we trust, we no longer worry about it. The other thing we know from studies is that inside our brain we consider the 'future self' as another person - fMRI studies have shown that 'future self' is the same parts of the brain as we use to think about OTHER people.

The result is if we trust the future self, we can effectively delegate to someone else - ourselves!

I think when you figured out 'the switch' this is what you are doing.

One exercise is to say to yourself "This is a problem for Future ". This is surprisingly effective! Of course this only works if you trust your future self's ability to remember... an organization system really helps here. It doesnt matter WHAT system, just that you know it will work.

Post reply on HN