Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't buy that she worked 130 hours a week. Perhaps one week ever. But I'm still not sure if I buy that. Anything short of documentary proof wouldn't lead me to believe it.

We do have data that people overestimated how much they work. I'm sure she worked long hours. I'm sure she was in the office a lot to. But 130 hours?

And 130 hours of actual good work? We also have data on how the quality of work drops off as quantity begins to add up.



I think it comes down to how you define work. If it is "clocked in on a time card sitting at a desk" 130 hours a week is not realistic long term (it is 18.5 hours per day 7 days a week) -- I agree.

If you define work as "your mind focusing on solving problems or thinking about the big decisions that need to be made" it is absolutely possible to do that for an extended period of time.

I regularly sleep 4-6 hours per night and wake up without an alarm clock (there is a bunch of information about this out there now, example article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16964783 ). When I'm awake my mind is constantly thinking about the projects I'm involved in and how I can contribute to the team driving a better outcome.

I don't put in 130 hours every week but I'm putting in over 80 -- not because I have to but because I enjoy it. I'm typically only at my desk or in meetings at a corporate office 30-40 hours a week. Part of the "freedom" it talks about is letting people work from where they're most productive in a manner they choose -- not forcing them into a "one size fits all" approach -- measure productivity by outcomes not by methods.

I have a "work productivity device" (laptop, tablet, or smartphone) open consuming information or producing output related to my role easily 80 hours a week (12-15 hours a day M-F and 5-20 hours on the weekends).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: