
Ask HN: Alternatives to work/life balance? - Kinnard
I think work&#x2F;life balance is a faulty concept and doesn&#x27;t characterize what many of us, especially in tech and startups want or need. We love our work and aren&#x27;t trying to balance our work again our lives and don&#x27;t buy into that dichotomy anyway.<p>Has anyone come up with or found any really effective alternative mental models?<p>EDIT: an indicative quote from <i>The Fifth Discipline</i>:
&quot;There is also another, in some ways deeper, movement toward learning organizations, part of the evolution of industrial society. Material affluence for the majority has gradually shifted people’s orientation toward work— from what Daniel Yankelovich called an “instrumental” view of work, where work was a means to an end, to a more “sacred” view, where people seek the “intrinsic” benefits of work. “Our grandfathers worked six days a week to earn what most of us now earn by Tuesday afternoon,” says Bill O’Brien, former CEO of Hanover Insurance. “The ferment in management will continue until we build organizations that are more consistent with man’s higher aspirations beyond food, shelter and belonging. Moreover, many who share these values are now in leadership positions. I find a growing number of organizational leaders who, while still a minority, feel they are part of a profound evolution in the nature of work as a social institution. “Why can’t we do good works at work?”&quot;
======
itamarst
Of _course_ management will try to sell you your job as "higher aspiration" or
a "sacred" goal (drink the startup kool-aid!). Means you'll work harder and
longer and bargain less. They will also happily fire you, lay you off or cut
your wages when times are bad. And then your lower aspirations (food, shelter)
will suffer too.

Which is not to say you shouldn't _enjoy_ your job, or aim to do fulfilling
meaningful work. But doing one thing to exclusion of all others is not
healthy. It's not productive, either - work/life balance will make you _more_
productive: [https://codewithoutrules.com/2016/11/10/work-life-balance-
so...](https://codewithoutrules.com/2016/11/10/work-life-balance-software-
engineer/)

~~~
Kinnard
I think you're thinking with the framework of contemporary corporations and
'employment' structures. I think many of us need to look outside of that box.

I've found there are organizations that are actually working toward higher
aspirations, I don't think this is always or even often a bait-and-switch
tactic which is what your 'kool-aid' comment implies.

Where's the implication that 'work' is only one thing? My work is almost
certainly TOO varied.

~~~
itamarst
If you can start an organization with a fundamentally different power
structure (and _maybe_ cooperatives could fit the bill) that seems maybe
possible. If you're working for a normal company, you're just deluding
yourself. I quite like the people I work for... but it's still in part an
economic relationship, they have investors, and we might run out of money. So
there are circumstances where I will need to find a new job. So my current job
better not be my religion however much I like its goals or my coworkers.

Just because the organization works towards something meaningful doesn't mean
it should consume your life. You still become distorted as a human if you
don't have time just for playing, and friends, and family. It's called
workaholism, and it's not a good thing.

~~~
itamarst
Oh, and you'd need a fundamentally different economic system where people
don't need to work to get basics like shelter or food or social status. All
for that, but until we get there you're describing a goal which only the
independently wealthy can afford to think about.

~~~
Kinnard
> until we get there you're describing a goal which only the independently
> wealthy can afford to think about.

That sounds true.

------
RUG3Y
It sounds like you're young and you know everything. The geezers harping on
about "work-life-balance" and protesting all-nighters and weekend sessions
don't have a clue.

Just because you're fresh and excited right now doesn't mean that you're not
susceptible to burnout. It can and will creep up on you much faster than you
think. If you don't believe me, you can try it! I realize this sounds a little
mean. It's my opinion, and I sincerely hope it's wrong and I wish you the
best.

~~~
Kinnard
I feel like you're referencing a work/rest balance, I'm not opposed to that.
I'm religious about taking one day off a week. But work/rest alternation seems
very different from work/life balance to me.

------
HelloNurse
Work/death balance. How much and in which ways do you want to die of overwork
and burn yourself out?

------
shoo
This book may be a relevant read: "Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry into
the Value of Work"

~~~
thatwebdude
That's the second time this has come up in the last few days on HN. That must
mean something.

------
creepydata
So you're saying you want to make your work your life? How about "my work is
my life," or "I'm married to my job?"

~~~
Kinnard
I don't buy the dichotomy between work and life, and maybe those ideas should
be thrown out altogether. The whole notion of 'work' is flawed.

~~~
creepydata
No it isn't, "work" is what I do because I have to and "life" is everything
else.

I have no idea what sort of response you're looking for.

~~~
Kinnard
That's how you feel. Not everyone else does.

There's a pretty compelling quote from the first chapter of __The Fifth
Discipline __:

"There is also another, in some ways deeper, movement toward learning
organizations, part of the evolution of industrial society. Material affluence
for the majority has gradually shifted people’s orientation toward work— from
what Daniel Yankelovich called an “instrumental” view of work, where work was
a means to an end, to a more “sacred” view, where people seek the “intrinsic”
benefits of work. “Our grandfathers worked six days a week to earn what most
of us now earn by Tuesday afternoon,” says Bill O’Brien, former CEO of Hanover
Insurance. “The ferment in management will continue until we build
organizations that are more consistent with man’s higher aspirations beyond
food, shelter and belonging. Moreover, many who share these values are now in
leadership positions. I find a growing number of organizational leaders who,
while still a minority, feel they are part of a profound evolution in the
nature of work as a social institution. “Why can’t we do good works at work?”"

Senge, Peter M. (2010-03-25). The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The
Learning Organization (pp. 4-5). The Doubleday Religious Publishing Group.
Kindle Edition.

~~~
jlangemeier
This doesn't really answer the main question that is being asked of you by a
variety of people: What, in general terms, are you looking to define or
accomplish when you're talking about an "Alternative to work/life balance?"
Are you talking about altruism through the office, or is it more about time-
spent between the work and the rest of life? What goal, are you looking to
accomplish with this, or any, alternative?

The general premise of work-life balance is finding a level of deference
between the thing that makes you money and the things you get to do with that
money when not attempting the goal of making the money. This interest in a
different motivating factor, "good works at work," while noble is NOT an
alternative to work-life balance, but a supplement. Investment in your "higher
calling" may be with your church group, volunteering, donations, etc; and some
offices do community outreach as parts of their team processes, but I'm not
seeing it as a direct alternative to work-life balance.

If YOU are wanting to motivate YOUR work through a higher purpose or need,
then by all means go ahead. You're given the station to do so through the
income that you are afforded through your work. But I'm very much NOT
motivated to donate my time to some corporate goal of altruism, because a
corporation doesn't do anything for free.

~~~
Kinnard
I don't define work as 'the thing that makes you money' or life as 'the things
you get to do with that money when not attempting the goal of making the
money'. Many people continue to work after they've made enough money to
satisfy their needs and be comfortable hundreds of times over. (E.g. Elon
Musk)

But it's not limited to those people: many people do lots of work that doesn't
earn any money and lots of people earn money without doing any work.

Lots of people start another company after a successful exit, and I'd bet
their motivation is not 'the goal of making money'.

I reject those definitions. This is the sort of thinking I believe no longer
works. Or at least doesn't work for me. I'm inquiring about alternatives to
this.

~~~
BlackLink16
If you want to work for the sake of what you are doing and not the material
gain, then it's your calling or passion.

~~~
Kinnard
Why not work that covers Maslow's entire stack by default? Material,
psychological, and spiritual gain. No decoupling as a rule?

~~~
lordCarbonFiber
Because 99.9999...% of the population doesn't have that as an option. The
cheeky expression "they wouldn't call it work if loads of people wanted to do
it" comes to mind. As a general rule, if someone (a group, etc) is willing to
pay you to do something it's not something that's going to provide
"psychological" or "spiritual" gains.

------
alltakendamned
Here's a relevant article that might be a good read for you:

[https://www.brainpickings.org/2015/09/11/theodor-adorno-
work...](https://www.brainpickings.org/2015/09/11/theodor-adorno-work-
pleasure-gadgeteering/)

~~~
Kinnard
Thanks for sharing!

Beautiful paragraph: "In a magnificent essay titled “Work and Pleasure,”
Adorno dissects one of the most perilous such modern myths — the tyranny of
work/life balance. Just a few years after his compatriot Josef Pieper — an
obscure German philosopher of extraordinary prescience — argued for reclaiming
the dignity of leisure amid a culture of workaholism, Adorno examines the
psychosocial origin of the toxic work/life divide that fractures our inner
wholeness."

------
mbrock
Indoors vs outdoors; focusing vs relaxing; earning vs spending; customers vs
family; profit vs nonprofit; etc.

------
gls2ro
I don't know how to actually answer your question.

First I can recommend an essay of _Bertrand Russell: In Praise of Idleness_.
Not because what he says is true because it is more a reflection or a
philosophical enquiry than a demonstration of something so it cannot be true
of false in itself. But because it might provide some questions to ask about
the source of ideas behind the concept of how we do work.

Second: related to a new mental model. I think in order to have a new mental
model there should be a problem (a crisis) with the existing one.

What is the existing model?

A possible speculation (in IT) based on common mainstream ideas:

\- There is/was a general move from seeing jobs/work as means to live to
"making a dent in the universe" or "changing the world"

\- There is/was a supporting atmosphere of believing that work can happen
anytime and anyplace - we have access to what we need to work from everywhere
and every time we want to

\- There is/was a general idea that everybody should love what they are doing
and should want to do that all the time

\- There is/was a large support for work from home, which (at least
symbolistically) means that work and home are not antagonistic concepts

\- There is/was (maybe not majority) support and focus on spreading concepts
of: one should hang together with one's peers afterwork, one should go to
hackathons in weekends, one should read more about technology during personal
time, one should come early to the office or one should leave late ...

\- Now the outsiders are seen as being the ones who are saying that after work
they are not doing programming but something unrelated to IT

Based on the mainstream ideas above then one possible logical conclusion could
be that: (in general) we are not moving toward a work/life balance but to work
being the main activity of the day and life being a complement.

What I agree with is that we don't yet have a name or a good understanding of
the current model works - what what it is (which is not work/life balance).
And it might be that we don't have such understanding because we are in a
transition period.

Historically I think we passed through multiple periods for the vast majority
of people:

1\. When there is not life after work (and no concept of happiness, well-being
...) - from the dawn of humankind until manufacturing era

2\. A period when the focus was on the life after work. When people were
working to have money to spend after work. In this case it did not matter what
kind of work was. It matter how much time one spent there and how much money
could bring it. I think it lasted up until 70s - 80s.

3\. A period of high purpose - let's called it "enlightenment" \- when people
wanted to "make a dent in the universe", "want to change the world" and
basically everybody was talking about passion, ideas, ....

4\. Now - a period of unrest or anxiety about the future

In the end I think there is one subject we are not talking about and I think
it might define how we explore the topic you are providing and that subject is
a question to ask ourselves: What is a GOOD life? Where GOOD is a personal
concept including morals/ethics, happiness/well-being, tranquility, being
content with life, but in the same time a concept defined or imposed by
society.

edit: formatting

~~~
taway_1212
> When there is not life after work (and no concept of happiness, well-being
> ...) - from the dawn of humankind until manufacturing era

Actually, people in primitive (pre-XX century) agriculture (at least in my
country - Poland) had lots of free time - for example, during winter there
just wasn't that much to do. I think they slept a lot and also crafted stuff
(ex. clothes). Of course, in the busy season (ex. during harvest) they worked
longer than 40 hours a week, but I think in general they might have had more
free time than the modern worker. And certainly, they had more agency. Of
course, I am only referring to people who were lucky enough to have enough
land to sustain themselves (a big issue in overpopulated Europe before
chemical fertilizers were developed).

