
Why productive people get up insanely early - SanderMak
http://www.fastcompany.com/3013856/how-to-be-a-success-at-everything/why-productive-people-get-up-insanely-early
======
r0h1n
I'm know we're all searching for the next great "hack" to make us more
productive, but frankly this article is an example of how not to go about it.

Firstly, the title seems to suggest _most_ productive people get up _insanely_
early. Yet, the only example in it of someone who does that is, well, the
author.

Then of course there's the typically prescriptive and reductive approach that
takes anecdotal or highly controlled examples and presents them as almost a
gospel.

I personally know more productive people who _don 't_ get up insanely early,
than otherwise. Maybe I should tell them to change their habits. Plus, there's
more and more research that says the "larks" and "owls" among us may be wired
differently in their brains:

\- [http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24292-first-
physical-e...](http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24292-first-physical-
evidence-of-why-youre-an-owl-or-a-lark.html)

\-
[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090623150621.ht...](http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090623150621.htm)

To cut it short, sure, getting up early is good provided you can pull it off.
But its equally possible you may end up being less productive merely trying to
screw around with your existing sleep patterns and daily schedules.

~~~
larrys
Agree with your point.

"but frankly this article is an example of"

Articles like this just end up being a forum for discussion on a particular
topic that is of interest [1].

A story or blog post is put on HN and people feast on it giving their own
personal experience or taking issue with the title's claim and how it might be
to broad, downright wrong or otherwise screwed up.

The same themes come up over and over again. I wonder why there just isn't a
weekly feature giving people the opportunity to post their own latest, um,
"research" into what they do to stay productive. Like a "Tell HN".

[1] Popularity determined by time of day posted, who is writing, where it was
written, the topic and how polarizing their thoughts are. More absolute tends
to mean more activity everything else being equal. (Have I missed anything?)

------
AndrewKemendo
This is a common theme around here lately: having time to ourselves to
work/think without incoming needs or expectations from others.

A bunch of people have solutions, from work spaces with isolation rooms, like
the nap rooms at the huffington post, to going on a cruise to do your best
development.

It all seems to me to point to one major thing, we are overburdening
ourselves. Most of this overburdening is by choice because we all _need_ to be
productive, otherwise we will not feel like we are changing the world.
Founders are reporting being depressed and having anxiety issues. As a result
we are all grasping for whatever we can to unburden ourselves while at the
same time maintaining productivity. To me these things are impossible to an
extent. Yes there are little hacks here and there and efficiencies can be
gained but on the whole you either need to be able to deal with a shitload of
stress, or figure out how to remove things from your plate.

I am guessing that there will be a mass tipping point for the
entrepreneur/startup community where a significant number of people are having
panic attacks and massive anxiety disorders because we just really all can't
be Bill Gates/Steve Jobs/Elon Musk no matter how many hours we put in on the
cruise ship at 4 AM.

Either that or everyone will start signing up for intensive training for how
to deal with high stress environments.

~~~
larrys
"Most of this overburdening is by choice because we all need to be productive,
otherwise we will not feel like we are changing the world. Founders are
reporting being depressed and having anxiety issues."

Grumpy gramps here.

Would like to point out that back in the day this was known as "keeping up
with the Jones".

And had nothing to do with changing the world.

Just keeping up with the Joneses.

The big difference is way back you weren't really aware of the things that
other people were doing other than your neighbors, some relatives, or people
who hit it big enough to make it into the press. When I was growing up you
heard about 1 billionaire, Howard Hughes. That was pretty much it. [1] Every
now and then the local big city paper would run a story on a businessman that
had done particular well.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_up_with_the_Joneses](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_up_with_the_Joneses)

[1] Forgetting inflation and magic numbers ("1 billion") the press really
didn't report on business people. And corporate execs made way less than they
do today (even accounting for inflation).

~~~
AndrewKemendo
"Would like to point out that back in the day this was known as "keeping up
with the Jones"...And had nothing to do with changing the world."

To me "Keeping up with the Joneses" always had a clear material connotation
eg: more money, bigger house, better car etc... I drew the distinction about
changing the world because I think that is the difference between generations.

I completely agree that this generation does the same peer comparisons, it's
just that our metric is influence and "disrupting" the status quo rather than
accumulation of wealth (though its often tough to divorce those things).

~~~
larrys
"I completely agree that this generation does the same peer comparisons, it's
just that our metric is influence and "disrupting" the status quo rather than
accumulation of wealth (though its often tough to divorce those things)."

Sure but is that the case because you all actually organically think that way
or because the peer group exhibits those tendencies and make you think that
way? Further perhaps you (I mean the group not the individual where ymmv) grew
up with more so they aren't as hungry or needing material goods?

When we were growing up with got like 2 toys per year. Birthday and holiday.
Or close to it. And we were middle class not poor. And there weren't many toys
to begin with. Parents in general were more strict and didn't spoil kids. And
you didn't go out to eat practically ever (weren't that many restaurants like
today) and tv was black and white and not much entertainment. So there weren't
as many distractions. So money was a way to have more fun. Oh and another
thing was you needed money because you were raised where your parents
controlled everything and weren't your friend or someone you would hang with.

Want to make it clear that of course there were individual exceptions to
anything that I've said above. But things were different and that difference
meant you ended up having different needs and values.

When I was a kid my dad payed for 1/2 of the money to buy me a tty that I
could use to dial up to the time share. The fact that he even agreed to do
that was a big deal. I had to work and make 1/2 the money but felt lucky that
he was willing to help me out. By comparison I just bought my daughter a
macbook air and didn't even think twice about it. Even got her the extra
memory and larger flash drive.

------
lifeisstillgood
TL;DR - I got up early to beat depression, found I had loads of time to get
work done uninterrupted.

I want to make two comments - firstly there is something very wrong with the
business world when you have to avoid the 9-5 full of interruptions to get any
work done. I know this from experience.

Secondly compare this to the Peter Higgs (of Bosun fame) saying he would never
have got an academic post today because he would not be seen as productive
enough - in other words he did not get up at 4 to do a days work before going
and doing a days interruptions.

We are getting something terribly terribly wrong with our working days.

~~~
dasil003
> _firstly there is something very wrong with the business world when you have
> to avoid the 9-5 full of interruptions to get any work done. I know this
> from experience._

If you are a low-level programmer or work for a very small startup yes, but at
scale communication and coordination overhead is necessary and significant.

As a tech lead I am keenly aware of the tension between the fact that
interruptions may shoot my technical work to hell, but if it helps 10 other
people be twice as productive that day it might well be worth it to sacrifice
my own productivity, especially if the interruption is of the "teach a man to
fish" variety.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
9 times out of 10 interruptions that I remember had nothing to do with
improving others productivity but getting around what can best be thought if
as systemic pathologies - meetings to convince people who should have no power
over the project the project was on track, discussing schedules and
projections. Rarely were the right people involved.

So be glad your interruptions have a net value. Maybe my anecdata is untypical
- It would be nice to think so.

~~~
dasil003
This is a non-sequitur. Paraphrasing the thread:

OP says "there is something wrong with the business world where you have to
avoid the interruptions of the 9-5 to get things done"

I reply "even if nothing is wrong, the needs of others can conflict with the
need for focus"

Then you reply "but most interruptions are not necessary for anybody's
productivity".

 _That has nothing to do with my point_. I'm not diagnosing the work world in
general. I'm saying even if you fix all the problems, there will still
necessarily be distractions in the 9-5 that an engineer might seek to avoid.

------
mistercow
I suspect that the causation is backwards here. Studies of highly driven
people show that they tend to have naturally higher dopamine levels than less
driven people (I'm grossly oversimplifying here, but anyway). In effect, they
are on stimulants all the time - natural ones created by their own bodies. And
that's going to create a correlation between productivity and early rising
right there.

~~~
StavrosK
How do stimulants relate to rising early? If anything, they might relate to
needing less sleep, but that still only means you get up early if you go to
sleep early.

~~~
mistercow
>they might relate to needing less sleep, but that still only means you get up
early if you go to sleep early.

I think you might want to check your math there.

~~~
StavrosK
I did, it checks out.

~~~
mistercow
No it doesn't. I don't want to be mean, but this is really basic addition. If
you need less sleep, you can get up earlier without going to sleep earlier.

------
Nursie
I rise late and I work late. If left to it my most productive time seems to be
6-11pm.

I've never really been that bothered by the 'distractions' of the 9-5 though.
I've always worked in collaborative, open-plan spaces and I've never really
seen the problem with them. If you need a bit of 'away time', put your
headphones on for a while.

------
zdw
Alternatively, staying up insanely late gets you the same interruption-free
time. The number interruptions you'd get between 4-8AM is probably similar
between 9PM-1AM

------
moron4hire
The only problem with the 9-to-5 schedule is its adherents' insistence that it
is the only valid lifestyle.

------
gedrap
There is one really good point in the post: expectations.

I am naturally an owl. I prefer staying up late, I love sitting in the dark at
2 or 3am. Have no problem if I have to do some extra work and stay up to 5am.

But it sucks that if I wake up at around noon, and start working at 3pm. At
5pm, when going for lunch, and the city is full of traffic jams, I think 'damn
they all are going home and I just started'. It gets harder at winter because
I live in north England so I hardly get any sun light. It's harder even more,
because I live with my gf in a studio and sometimes wake her up at some random
time by eating or typing.

So while I naturally enjoy sitting to late, I have to get up earlier because,
well, I don't live in isolation.

------
coldcode
I guess programmers are never productive then.

~~~
eitland
FWIW: I am a programmer and (sometimes) an early riser

------
wreegab
I'm up since 5h00 and I produced nothing of value yet.

------
j45
As a lifelong night owl, I discovered when I could get to bed by 9:30 or 10,
waking up at 3-4 am gave me easily the energy I'd normally have doing late
night stuff after a long day.

For me it seems to have to do with being mentally rested, not much in the way
of distractions, and making sure to make a list of a few things I could dive
into without thought to get going. I wish I could do it every day, because I
don't regret it when I do.

For anyone discounting this strategy without having tried it -- I get the
studies about night owl vs larks. Try it yourself first to see how it works.
Waking up early is the road less travelled, staying up late in a way is the
default way of operating.

------
tosseraccount
Are there any reproducible studies proving highly productive people wake up
early?

Or just anecdotes?

------
jheriko
er... what? all of the most productive people I know are terrible at
timekeeping and sleeping at a reasonable time. the 'good' ones at timekeeping
amongst them are routinely 15 minutes late, and they won't go to bed in
general until past 12.

there may be some kind of sampling bias... my experience of people who do get
in early to work hard - rather than stay late, with few exceptions (two otoh),
is that they are not especially productive people anyway...

~~~
DateK
There was a saying, which goes something like "If you want something to be
accomplished, give it to the busiest colleague."

Why is it so?

~~~
Qworg
Social proof. Your busy colleague has already been vetted as "someone who gets
things done" and therefore has been issued more work.

------
recycleme
I find that I get a similar result when I work from the home office even
during business hours. Although distractions can be nice sometimes, during
crunch time, I'd rather WFH to minimize them.

------
capkutay
I went a few months forcing myself to get up early. Though I got used to it
being up at 6 and working by 7, I couldn't ignore the blanket of grogginess I
felt all day..

------
rjzzleep
i see a lot of very good criticism here, but does noone bother the fact that
op claims "productive people get up insanely early" and then continues with
for me?

well i'm glad you found your optimal timeframe. good for you

------
dredmorbius
Productive people wake up whenever the hell they damn well please.

------
namank
Insert a few chunks of quiet time in your workday. Mission accomplished.

~~~
eitland
For many this is not an option: in crowded offices with no access control this
is the exact problem.

I guess working extremely early and/or late is what some people fall back to
after trying every other trick in the book (headset, ask people to stop
interrupting when headset on, ask for a quiet ropm etc etc)

