from Hacker News

Stop working so hard

by jpadilla_ on 4/3/13, 6:11 PM with 163 comments

• by webwright on 4/3/13, 6:24 PM

  Empirically, people who succeed on a grand scale work their asses off because they love (or are addicted) to their work.

  So no, you won't be as productive if you aren't addicted to your work, don't love it, and/or don't think about it all/most of the time. (aside: yes, you need to eat well and exercise and take a breather from time to time).

  That said, productivity/achievement might be a bit overrated. Will your life be better and will you be happier when you achieve your goal? Will you ever achieve it? Most of us disregard the fact that wealth is not remotely correlated with happiness and still hunt for the big payday.

  [edit: lots of folks are asking for data. FWIW, I founded and ran RescueTime, so I was hip dip in this world for a long time.

  The data actually shows that, for line workers, hours worked have diminishing returns. However, when you look at people at the top of their game (executives, etc), they work extreme hours. Correlation does not equal causation, of course. But when you look at the most successful/productive people in your circles, how many of them talk about work/life balance, have lots of hobbies, etc? Maybe they're successful DESPITE their crazy work hours, for all I know.]

• by noelwelsh on 4/3/13, 6:30 PM

  On this theme, I've found having kids has actually helped me be more productive. I don't have the opportunity to work crazy hours. I know I can't catch up in the evening so I have to make every day count. Because my hours are limited to a standard working day I never burn-out, and I'm motivated and ready to go each and every day.

  When they were really young it was rough (no sleep, etc.) but now they're a bit older it generally works out well. (Modulo illness. They are both currently coming down with something and it's going to wipe out at least two working days.)

• by crazygringo on 4/3/13, 8:38 PM

  Here's one way to think of it. Suppose you're working on a new product, and you have to decide whether to spend 30 hrs or 60 hrs / week on it, over the next two years.

  If the difference is between failure in the first case, and success in the second case, then it's either a bad product, or you're bad at planning. If you work half as much, then maybe it will have less features, but a good product should still be viable. And everyone knows predicting how your software will adhere to a schedule is impossible, so the chances are good you wouldn't even get it to work at 60 hrs/wk.

  Obviously, an order of magnitude difference in effort should produce a qualitative difference in your product. You can't replace ten good programmers' time with just one.

  But picking startup ideas that require you to be working 80 hours a week, is just bad planning -- it's waaaay too risky. When you live in a first world country, and are doing this out of choice (not survival), it's insane to sacrifice your health like that.

  If an idea is really good and really sustainable, truly a good business idea, then there are much healthier ways of finding success than working 80 hours weeks -- finding partners, networking better to get investment, etc.

  I'm not advocating anything silly like a 4-hour workweek. I'm just advocating realistic expectations, realistic risk management, and realistic work-life balance.

  You might get hit by a car two years from now. You don't want to have neglected all the wonderful things in life, like relationships and experiences with people, in exclusive pursuit of a startup over those two years. Even not getting hit by a car, there's a large chance your startup will fail. Don't throw away your life in complete pursuit of a single thing -- healthy balance is key.

• by lubujackson on 4/3/13, 10:52 PM

  After working on a few startups, my experience is that when you operate in crunch mode for a long period of time the line between "crisis" and "normal" blurs and you simply can't distinguish or effectively scale your effort to the situation. This is especially harmful for entrepreneurs when they have to deeply consider their strategic options or programmers when they are trying to refactor code.

  I can't tell you how many hours of development I've wasted simply because I didn't want to spend an extra hour thinking through the implications and instead tried to "get 'er done."

  I DON'T agree that this means you have to work less than 35 hours a week and take long walks on the beach. I've had really productive times working 100 hours a week. But when you feel burned out or stressed, when you have trouble prioritizing your efforts, when everything feels like it's "way behind" you are going to make mistakes and put effort in the wrong place. It's important to stay balanced, but "balanced" means different things to different people at different points in their career.

• by kirinan on 4/3/13, 6:29 PM

  I agree, which will be much to the chagrin of the community. I spend less time working, and more time thinking. I find that I am able to get more things done in a shorter amount of time if I have fully thought through exactly what I am doing before I do it. I don't just mean the normal thought process, I mean the meta thought process (is what I am thinking truly accurate). It makes my work a lot better, and I often have to work a lot less to make something that is higher quality. I often out work the people who work twice as much as me, and my work quality is higher. Getting things done is important, getting things done right is more important. If this takes me more time, then so be it. The market doesn't go who gets done first, it goes to the person who does it best.

• by bjhoops1 on 4/3/13, 7:28 PM

  My last semester of college, our capstone course saw me at the head of a team of 5 CS students building a video game. Some of the other teams frequently pulled all-nighters trying to meet the course's ambitious deadline, but the whole semester my team and I never did need to work through the night. We ended up doing better than most teams, too. In fact, the team that "won" spent even fewer hours working than we did.

  Anecdotal, to be sure, but I found the inverse relationship between hours worked and quality of product quite interesting.

• by omnisci on 4/3/13, 8:19 PM

  My boss (Academic scientist) told us that we had to work a 70-90 hour work week to be successful in this business. I found that funny as I don't count my productivity in hours work, but in the amount of "product" I produce. "Working hard" shouldn't be a function of time, and I think more people need to appreciate that. This tends to be a little more difficult for people to do however, as it typically requires a lot of hard work up front. For example, it took me a month to figure out how I could make a 45 minute procedure turn into a 7 minute procedure while still maintaining the same quality. But I got it working and I can do 6 times the amount of work in the same amount of time.My free time can now be spent doing other things, such as working on a startup:) People just don’t do this for some reason. Put the initial investment into what your working on, make it as efficient as possible, and then reap the benefits while being productive AND having enough time to post cat videos on facebook:)

• by kbouw on 4/3/13, 7:45 PM

  At my current age (25), I don't necessarily agree with this. I do understand the philosophy behind "work smart, not hard", but when I come across these posts where someone is claiming "work less, do more", i question whether they're truly passionate about what they're doing.

  My personal opinion as a startup founder, is that there is no such thing as work/life balance. Your startup is your life and your work should contribute to it.

  That aside, the post is rather misleading. You're giving advice to others on working less hours and smarter but had you worked smarter previously, you may have a different opinion.

  I prioritize my health, take a 5 minute break every 25 minutes (pomodoro technique), and get at lest 7 hours of sleep each night, all things which you seemingly didn't do.

  For now, all I can say is that I hope my competitors are reading this and nodding their heads.

• by cheald on 4/3/13, 8:38 PM

  Work smarter, not harder.

  One of the things I quickly learned when I started working from home was that if I listened to my body, I was massively more productive when I was at my desk.

  Tired? Go nap. Restless? Go run. Stuck in a rut? Go hang out with a friend or play a video game or watch a movie or find something to get your focus off your work.

  I found that I could work more and be more productive simply by stopping working when my body(/brain) said "hey, quit". We're not built for 8-5 shifts.

• by dgbsco on 4/3/13, 7:20 PM

  The "40 Hour Work Week" is, and always has been, a total sham.

  It's a "factory production" mentality transplanted into the modern workplace - where our fruit is our creativity, not a number of units produced.

• by trxblazr on 4/4/13, 12:16 AM

  ASKING FOR HELP:

  hi HN, I'll take the opportunity of this thread to ask for some advice. My current employer (a billion $ startup, ~200 employees) is asking all of us to work Saturdays (on top of the 12-13 hours I already work daily).

  I value my weekends, a lot. It's not that I don't want to work. I love work and on weekends, I still do. I have spurs of intense creativity and code productivity, but I want to keep those weekends for myself.

  How do I tell my employer that my weekends are not for sale? What should I expect from them if I say no more?

• by kilroy123 on 4/4/13, 4:15 AM

  Just started a new job where the work week is 34 hours. (1 hour on friday is for happy hour) So 9-5, with no overtime.

  I know this sounds crazy, but I feel like I have a lot more energy left after the day is over.

  I also notice no one really wasting anytime during the day, since there's one less hour to get work done. No hour of chatting, surfing HN, etc.

• by ruswick on 4/4/13, 4:34 AM

  He seems to present a polarized interpretation of work. Either one can race towards burnout by working 100 weeks or they can enjoy 6-hour days, frequent vacations, etc. Both of these are untenable for most people. The majority of people work fairly diligently and their jobs take up the preponderance of their time, but aren't necessarily working hours that are unhealthy. People who work 40-70 hours per week generally fall within this category.

  He also doesn't confront the fact that many if not most time commitments are immutable. Most people have certain tasks and obligations need to be done periodically and take a relatively static amount of time. This time expenditure is stable and unlikely to change or disappear anytime soon.

  For instance, I know that, between school, various scholastic obligations, and the occasional bit of freelance or personal work, I put in roughly 65-75 hours per week. Obviously, this takes up the majority of my time, but is not all consuming; and I don't believe that it is having any substancial adverse effects on my health. Moreover, these hours are unavoidable, and I couldn't circumvent them even if I wanted to.

  In its essence, this post is advocating for the right things insofar as it is encouraging work-life balance and discouraging subjecting oneself to dangerous working hours, but takes a fairly myopic view of work and makes suggestions that aren't really tenable in many situations.

• by PAULHANNA84 on 4/4/13, 3:17 AM

  Too much argument over this. Yes, for the majority of individuals over working is going to physically, mentally and emotionally drain them as they're generally trying to balance a separate life. The individual who wrote this article stated that he has a wife. Perhaps spending less time with his wife had some repercussions associated to it. Perhaps he likes his business but isn't completely in love with it. You can't really speak for everyone, that's for sure. It all depends on your purpose, your motive. What's your driving force? Why are you conducting business to begin with? I myself am a business owner and have been working non-stop for the last 10 years (from 18-28). When I'm not working, I'm still mentally engaged. I don't unplug or clock out. To me, it reminds me of when I was a child addicted to gaming. I would blissfully spend 12 hours playing my Sega or Super Nintendo in pursuit to beat whatever game was at hand. When I was at school I was thinking of ways to beat the level that I might have been stuck on for a few days. This is called passion, it's rare but it does exist so although I appreciate the article, I must ask to not advise everyone this same idea.

• by alphakappa on 4/3/13, 8:07 PM

  This advice requires some serious caveats, so be very cautious about following this. I would go so far as to say that this some really bad advice. Here's why:

  Once you reach a certain station in life, it's possible to sit back and think about being more effective while not working long hours. In fact, it's probably a great idea since it's easy to get addicted to working 7 days a week with very little sleep and that can wreak havoc on your health, relationships and happiness.

  However, barring luck, people don't generally get to that station in life without working those long hours. If you want to be really good at something, it generally requires extreme dedication (yes, I know some people are just naturally talented, but I'm not talking about them). Unless you are one of those lucky ones, you _should_ be working really hard to master whatever it is that you need to master. Ignore people who are already successful trying to tell you to take it easy.

  Also, unlike what Kyle says, people are not always working those crazy schedules to out hustle their competition. Often it's just passion and addiction to their own work and the desire to create something good (competition be damned)

• by noahrsg on 4/3/13, 7:02 PM

  I think in the future companies will realize they can retain exceptional talent by implementing a four day work week. As more and more hackers get older and have kids they will be drawn to companies that support an actual work/life balance, as opposed to the status quo of "its startup life of course you work 60 hour weeks."

• by athiercelin on 4/4/13, 6:01 AM

  Just like this post tries to claim "The Hustle™ is bullshit" so is this post.

  It's not work hard vs work smart. It's both.

  For me, if I sleep less than 8 hours I'm brain dead => 0 productivity. I am more productive at night than during the day. I need to change regularly the project I work on, so I am always working on several things at once. For instance, I am less productive 50hrs a week on the same project than 100hrs a week on several one. And the list goes on and on..

  It's up to each and everyone to see where you start loosing productivity and what makes you a better worker.

  As a CEO, this ability of self improvement is something I am always looking for in my employees. (but it's rare) The last thing I am looking forward to do, is checking the clock. When you pay someone the big bucks, it's not to be changing diapers.

  The only thing that is for sure is that in term of productivity, there is no black and white truth or rule.

• by phryk on 4/4/13, 8:37 AM

  I can second that. I've been working 30 hour weeks since last year and am more balanced and relaxed since then. Working less also helped me downsize my depression and (as of lately) procrastinatory tendencies. It also gives me more energy to work on my own projects and interests.

• by wellboy on 4/3/13, 8:27 PM

  If you know exactly what do to, be it writing a pitch the whole day or writing a new feature for a week, you can not shower for the whole week and only eat junk food.

  The essence of the post for me however, is that you shouldn't just sit in front of the screen figuring out what to do next. If you arrive at that point, take a brake, hit the gym, reorder your brain. The best ideas come when you do something completely unrelated to your startup and you should do something like this at least 1-2/week.

  There's no use in accelerating when you're going in the wrong direction and 5h spent on a great new idea that you just had, is much better than 100h that still won't work. :)

• by jgreen10 on 4/3/13, 7:26 PM

  There are such things as "big days". If you have a degree to finish, a conference paper, a demo, a seasonal feature, a lucrative work project, etc. Those are the times when I might neglect my body for 1-2 weeks, sometimes up to 4. Sure, you do have to return back to a normal, stable life after that and maybe have a little break.

  In all aspects of life, success is about performing at your peak at just the right time.

• by mrmiller on 4/3/13, 9:03 PM

  While I agree with the author's general sentiment here, he doesn't offer any evidence for his claim (besides anecdotal). Many successful people do put work first, plain and simple.

  I choose to spend time not working because I value things other than wealth/power/work (as most people do). But if you want to make a lot of money, working 100 hours a week is a pretty obvious way to do that, IMO.

• by kylestewart on 4/3/13, 7:30 PM

  This has been one of the hardest lessons I've had to learned. Really, I'm still trying to get it right.

• by thrush on 4/4/13, 4:24 AM

  Can someone please explain to me how this applies to students? I have read a lot of articles talking about enjoying life more and working more efficiently (the 4-Hour Work Week is perhaps the most convincing literature I've read on this topic), and although I actually wholeheartedly AGREE with this mindset, I can't see how I can start applying these ideas until I'm out of school.

  Are students forever bound to their over-demanding schedules? Or is there some way for us to embrace the philosophies of freedom and joy prior to joining the real world?

  -Senior Undergrad Studying CS

• by miles_matthias on 4/3/13, 8:28 PM

  So how do you do this if you get paid by the hour? Obviously you can raise your rate and decide how much you need to work for your sanity and for how much you want to earn, but is there anything else?

• by jfinnson on 4/4/13, 7:06 PM

  I think the issue of productivity extremely depends on the person.

  For me: I like to work 4 14hr days with a 2 hour gym break in the middle. Not 4 days in a row either.

  This works for me because the gym really breaks up my work day and I am most efficient when I get "in the zone". Also, when I am in the zone, I hate being interrupted or leaving work. It takes 2-3 hours for me to get into the zone some times though.

  I am 24 years old, the lead engineer at my company, amateur personal trainer, and power lifter.

• by _xhok on 4/5/13, 6:31 AM

  This article isn't very convincing. (I'm not saying he's wrong.) His point is that working less makes you happier and more productive, but he doesn't really talk about how or why or give any cases illustrating such. All he really ends up arguing is that overworking is bad, which is nothing new.

  For what it's worth, though, I agree with what he's trying to imply. If the amount of time you work is increasing by n and your work quality is decreasing by n^2, you're screwed.

• by kwikx on 4/4/13, 10:19 AM

  I tried shifting from measuring how long I work to measuring results. And it was more traumatic. I would be agonizing everyday that I was taking so long to come up with anything concrete. It was especially true for doing anything creative, where its not really correlated to time spent.

  What I would really like to know is how to shut off the entrepreneur guilt. There's always something to do at any time, and you're perennially guilty.

• by hello_newman on 4/3/13, 9:36 PM

  I think this is all true, but you could also make a viable argument for working more. I personally love the satisfaction you get after working those long days. It's like a high you get after an intense run. It helps that I personally love the work I am doing, so working 16 hour days feels like 5 hours. I am only 21, maybe it catches up with you the older you get, but for now 16 hour days are fine by me.

• by pagejim on 4/4/13, 5:28 AM

  If you have time to write long blogs and exhaustive comments, then I am not sure you are really working hard enough on the thing you love the most.

  And that is why most people here on HN (me included) might not ever get know what it is like to be in the "zone".

  Hence this whole debate of working hard or not working hard or productivity is all really BS.

• by Elizer0x0309 on 4/4/13, 4:00 AM

  Wow! The audacity on two things: 1. Stop trying to cap my passion by throwing a number of hours I can spend doing it. 2. You built a "Task" app. I'll consider any opinion from you when you're actually contributing to the advancement of our species rather than tagging along old created technologies.

• by orangethirty on 4/3/13, 6:56 PM

  No, no, no. What you should do is work smarter. Instead of blindingly working hard, just work hard on the things that provide results. I work 12 hours a day (at the least), but only on the things that get results. I learned to just let go and re-focus quickly.

• by bugsbunny4341 on 4/3/13, 10:58 PM

  Don't wear yourself out trying to get rich. Be wise enough to know when to quit. (Proverbs 23:4)

• by kris121 on 4/3/13, 6:42 PM

  kyle if you read this then please answer me. I am going against your voice. It's not make me thing that you are right.

  For you You are "Former Founder". I am sure you have a lot of penny and future safe in your pocket.

  What about people who new newcomer and newbie. Is this applied to us. I am weak in English and programming both. Are this applicable to everyone who just got started. I means this strategy help them to do.

  You make me confused.I hope someone can tell me the difference & reason about mine and their thoughts.

• by sylvainww on 4/3/13, 6:38 PM

  It's not easy finding that right balance, if there is one. Some people (like me at times) also like to work by doing sprints (2/3 crazy weeks) then resting (3/4 days vacation).

• by tyang on 4/7/13, 7:07 AM

  This makes sense for most of us.

  But if you want to be the next Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates or Elon Musk, do you work smart but not that hard or do you work smart and work hard like they did?

• by hallomac2013 on 4/4/13, 6:56 AM

  And how exactly are you going to output more quality without more working? Can someone please explain this to me?

• by markdown on 4/4/13, 2:45 AM

  Says man who has essentially 'made it'.

• by stevebot on 4/3/13, 11:29 PM

  I wish I could do this, but it sounds to good to be true. I think I need to follow the postscript...

• by latifnanji27 on 4/3/13, 6:37 PM

  Elon Musk is a great example of this post.

• by scottbartell on 4/4/13, 5:58 AM

  This article is the perfect length.

• by andyl on 4/3/13, 6:48 PM

  I really hope my competitors adopt the "Stop working so hard" mentality.

• by goggles99 on 4/4/13, 10:31 AM

  I think someone else tried this before. It is not working out very well though. Who was it.. Oh yeah - it was France...

• by Buzaga on 4/3/13, 10:21 PM

  Won't read because the arrows are mapped to changing articles.

• by TheSOB88 on 4/3/13, 6:22 PM

  Conversely, start working( harder ).