Joel Spolsky: Lunch • Hacker News Board

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#31

Post by pnathan » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:02 PM UTC

wccrawford wrote: post #9

At my last job, I ate my lunch 2-3 hours earlier than everyone else, thanks to dietary issues and the fact that I started work 3 hours earlier than they did. That meant I always ate alone. But everyone else tended to bunch together. (The boss actually vetoed that, requiring that at least 1 person remain in the tech room. (Which was me, obviously.) After the team grew, it became '3' for the requirement.) They would al…

Neither do I.

While we all need our times off, a team needs to mesh well enough to be able to eat with each other at least a few times a week. If that can't happen, there's something profoundly wrong with the team.

If "Joe" doesn't ever want to eat with the team, I would prefer not to work with "Joe", given the choice. I'd like to work with humans, not with "Joe who doesn't want to talk about anything but work".

Well, that's how I feel. Others may differ.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#32

Post by tomstuart » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:02 PM UTC

puls wrote: post #21

I think Joel's article glosses over a point that most of the con arguments here don't notice: in order for this to work, you have to set up a group of coworkers who mesh spectacularly well. Fog Creek has pretty obviously done that; it's one of their top priorities. I've worked at companies where lunch is communal and companies where it isn't, and it seems to me that the difference has less to do with personality type…

This is unfair. Extroverts are energised by social interaction, but introverts are drained by it, so they're going to find mandatory group lunches tiring and unpleasant in the long term regardless of the cohesion of the group.

So perhaps that's what "cohesion" really means in this context: hire a bunch of extroverts. Bully for Joel.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#33

Post by civilian » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:02 PM UTC

edw519 wrote: post #18

I have always hated this and probably always will. I have rarely eaten lunch with my work mates. Just a few reasons why: 1. I don't want to talk about work at lunch. 2. I want to get out of the office and get some fresh air. 3. I often want to get away from the very people that Joel suggests spending time with on my break. 4. I'm a "food outlier". I hate pizza, deli, and fast food. I won't eat it away from work. Why…

Regarding item 1: I had this problem at my last job, especially since I was technical support, so people would often use lunch time as a forum for questioning me. I would answer the first question, and then politely say that I didn't feel like talking about work during lunch. If other people around me were talking about work, I'd make an effort to start another topic with the people who weren't actively engaged in the work-convo.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#34

Post by nikki9696 » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:03 PM UTC

Why does Joel hate introverts?

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#35

Post by droz » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:06 PM UTC

What a crock of shit.

This strikes me way too much of the, "I see people doing something I don't do, so there must be something wrong with them." mentality.

I like leaving the office. Go outside for a good long, quiet walk along the creek to think about non-work stuff. Or going home and enjoying some left overs.

When I come back to the office, I'm fully refreshed and ready to jump right back into things.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#36

Post by barkingcat » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:07 PM UTC

I don't mind lunching together with a bunch of people if there is no pressure to join in with the "conversation" or the "group activity" at the table.

Sometimes I want to read the Bible at lunch. I don't mind if we talk shop about which chapters we're reading, which Biblical story best fits our challenges at work, or maybe even discuss differing viewpoints from differing faiths, etc, but a lot of times reading the Bible requires some personal concentration and contemplation.

In that case, I wouldn't mind eating at a big table - just don't expect me to join in talking about the latest movies, or which MacBook Pro is better to buy, or which web server we should use.

For me, I can handle reading in solitude while also being in the middle of a group. If the group of coworkers can understand and accept that idea, then I'm all for eating together.

However, if my religion makes other people at the table uncomfortable, I'd rather sit and lunch on my own.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#37

Post by GrandMasterBirt » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:08 PM UTC

I am right now unable to have lunch with co-workers. I've always done the group lunch and would always make every possible effort to get as many people involved as possible.

The problem is that at some point, I simply run out of people :( I am not that much of a social person who comes up to random people and socializes with them very well, so its really hard for me now, I'm not getting my daily dose of talking to people, its maddening.

Talking about work or not is irrelevant. What is important is that the conversation is completely friendly, enjoyable by all, not stressful, and does not in any way require immediate action. Also it means that at any point we can go off on a completely different direction talking one moment about building software and the next about how cats decide that your keyboard is a backscratcher.

To be honest, the lack of socializing is demoralizing and depressing :(

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#38

Post by sspencer » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:08 PM UTC

edw519 wrote: post #18

I have always hated this and probably always will. I have rarely eaten lunch with my work mates. Just a few reasons why: 1. I don't want to talk about work at lunch. 2. I want to get out of the office and get some fresh air. 3. I often want to get away from the very people that Joel suggests spending time with on my break. 4. I'm a "food outlier". I hate pizza, deli, and fast food. I won't eat it away from work. Why…

Number 9 seems to directly contradict number 8. By your own rationale, you should speak freely about/to your boss.

Alternatively you might try finding a job where you don't hate your boss.

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#39

Post by nollidge » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:08 PM UTC

JCB_K wrote: post #20

I remember my first day working at IKEA as a summer job. I was young, I didn't know anyone, I didn't know the culture. So I got my lunch, found an empty spot to sit, and was about to sit down. But I didn't sit down properly before someone came over from a busy table, asking me if I wanted to join them. From then on I realized that the culture was that everybody always eats together there. That way I got to know loads…

IKEA's U.S. factory workers might disagree: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ikea-union-20110410,0,...

Re: Joel Spolsky: Lunch

#40

Post by sspencer » Thu, Apr 28, 2011, 7:14 PM UTC

devspade wrote: post #11

JabavuAdams wrote: post #4

While there are some positives, to enforce this seems quite inhumane. People often need a bit of space in order to work together better. Also, in a group > 2 there's huge potential for conversational drift. So, if two people want to talk about a certain topic, it becomes too easy to derail. Embrace the quiet.

We do this at my company and it's awesome. The idea is it's not at all mandatory. Do whatever you want for lunch. But everyday, at noon, there will be a free lunch served at this location. Most people will participate in that 4 out of 5 days. If they have a deadline, want to meet a friend for lunch, need to run some errands or whatever it's fine. Most often the conversation is about everything but business. It makes…

This is exactly what it's like where I work. It's fun to grab lunch when you want/need it at the same time as others, but it's ultra-low-pressure and in no way mandatory. Best of all possible worlds, in my opinion, and a huge perk for anyone working at a company <20 people.