

Joel Spolsky: Lunch - alexlmiller
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2011/04/28.html
Joel has a new post up on Joel on Software talking about his take on lunch and why its important for companies to think about it.
======
edw519
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 should I eat it there?

5\. Sometimes I want a beer with my lunch.

6\. Sometimes I just want to close my eyes for 5 minutes.

7\. If my work mates are talking about something other than work, I'm probably
not interested. I'd rather chew razor blades than talk about traffic, weather,
casino gambling, baseball, real estate taxes, gun control, politics, or
Dancing with the Stars. I'd rather shoot myself than hear _anything_ about
their children.

8\. If I am going to talk about work, I will want to bitch about the boss.
Tough to do if he/she is there.

9\. If I am going to talk about work, I want everyone else to talk freely and
openly. This never happens. They will bitch about anyone else if they're not
there, but when we're all together, they act like everything is just peachy.
Phoneys.

10\. "Enforced association" is phoney. I'd rather just make my own friends at
work or out of work. So what if it appears to be a clique? All that means is
that we are humans acting naturally.

~~~
InfinityX0
Synopsis: You hate your job, not your lunch. Quit your job and get a job that
you love, and you'll inevitably end up loving the lunch you currently hate.

~~~
theoj
The job has nothing to do with it, it's about the co-workers. You're not doing
your job at lunch, you are interacting with your co-workers.

~~~
ktsmith
I'm interacting with my co-workers while doing my job. I don't have any desire
to also interact with most of them during my breaks, which includes lunch.
Part of my lunch is to not just take a break from my work, but to take a break
from the people I work with.

------
spolsky
To those who thought that team lunch is "mandatory," you misread the article.
It's not mandatory. You can go out instead. You can go to the gym instead. You
can hide in your office and "free your mind" instead. You can bring your
friends or family to our lunch. You can go out instead. You can take a picnic.
You can come in after lunch and work late instead of working early.

I don't even think there's social pressure to go to lunch. People do because
they enjoy it. Sorry if this wasn't clear from the article. It's not a weird
cult where I'm forcing introverts into cult-like hanging out with people that
they hate or already spend too much time with. That would be inconsistent with
our goal of making a humane, friendly, and fun workplace, which was the point
of the article.

We very rarely talk about work at lunch. I've never met anyone who visited us
for lunch and thought that it was weird. I have met some pretty anti-social
people in my time and some of them work for us and somehow they don't seem to
mind sitting at the table during lunch and listening to everyone else enjoying
the conversations.

~~~
metachris
_That’s why when new people start work at the company, they’re not allowed to
sit off by themselves in a corner._

Sounds like pretty strong social pressure to me.

~~~
mattmanser
Trouble with words on a page is that you can't convey all that other stuff.
When I read that I read it as jokey and also a camaraderie thing on the first
day.

It sounded good to me.

Other people are reading it as a dictat. It sounded bad to them.

But Joel just explained what he meant explicitly, you can't keep on
challenging him after that.

~~~
narag
Hmmm.... he said that people has _misread_ the article. Yes, later he
apologize if he hasn't made himself clear. I think that most of us that got
infuriated by the article have had different experiences: bore or jerk
coworkers, crowded offices, unhealthy food... the reasons that edw519 has
enumerated.

Joel is a very influential person. And the perspective that some boss in a
not-so-nice environment as Fog Creek understand the "policy" like we have and
"copy" it is really really scary.

------
jfruh
Joel is obviously not aware of the differences between introverts and
extroverts, which seems weird for someone who works in a field with a lot of
introverts.

I'm not down on his idea of eating lunch together - it's probably fun and
productive. But if someone spots me eating lunch by myself while reading (a
book, a magazine, on my phone, on my computer), it's not because I "don't like
people," or, sadder, that I pretend not to like people because I've been
rejected socially. It's because I find dealing with people all day somewhat
wearying and I enjoy having time to myself doing things that I like, such as
catching up on reading I can't do during work hours.

~~~
alexlmiller
Yes, Joel is COMPLETELY unaware of the differences between introverts and
extroverts. Except for the fact that he is an introvert and runs two companies
filled with a substantial percentage of introverts.

The reason that lunch here works so well is because the people we hire are fun
and enjoyable people (even the introverts) so you don't have to pretend to
like the other people at the lunch table, you actually do.

~~~
randallsquared
I don't eat by myself nearly every day because I dislike my co-workers -- I
actually _do_ like my co-workers, and my job would be a nightmare if I didn't.
That doesn't mean that, come lunchtime, I won't nearly always take the
opportunity to be by myself (conceptually, even though I'm still surrounded by
people).

On your assertion that Joel is an introvert:

 _[...] but you'll also see a distressing number of loners eating by
themselves._

Distressing? Really? I don't think an introvert would say that, and his later
assertion that

 _Being in any clique, even if it's just the nerds, is vastly preferable than
eating alone._

, and the "obligated to pretend" language, seems to indicate that he's an
extrovert. I'm not sure if he's claimed to be an introvert, but if so, it's a
pretty weird juxtaposition.

------
justin
Interesting that there is so much anti-company lunch sentiment on HN. At
Justin.tv we serve lunch (and dinner!) every week day. Originally, when we
were much smaller, it started as a time saving measure (it was a lot quicker
to get back to work than if everyone went out). Now, I see it as much more
about giving everyone a chance to hang out and eat, and as a cost benefit to
employees. If you don't want to eat at the big lunch tables, you don't have
to. If you want to go somewhere else, you're welcome to. People do meet
friends for lunch elsewhere, or bring them to the office for lunch.

At lunch, people rarely seem to talk about work (or at least, in a specific
"x,y,z tasks need to be done" kind of way), and generally talk more about
topics I can only really describe as technology and liberal arts. We don't
really talk sports or reality tv, as pretty much no one in the office watches.

After lunch usually a few people play Street Fighter 4 for 20-30 minutes or so
in our common area which adjoins the lunch room.

~~~
nsfmc
i think part of what's going on here is that everyone is taking the position
of disliking a mandate to eat with your coworkers, which is arguably a
troubling thing.

When i interned at pentagram's ny office, one of the nice things was lunch,
which was served tue-thu. It was totally optional and you could eat with
members from your team or others, whatever. It sounds similar to what you're
describing and i thought it worked really well, i liked it, and it always
bummed me out a little when it wasn't there on those bookend days. sometimes
i'd be busy during lunch and there might be something waiting in the kitchen
or i'd go out to eat with a friend.

I don't think it really works if you force this sorta thing, but if the food
is compelling (i really liked the cheese, personally) and everyone's on good
terms, i think the staff lunch works really well. the exception here is if
there's a toxic team member or individual, which i think really sours the
experience and which many people may be also reacting to.

When i worked as a line cook, staff lunches were also equally gratifying, but
for entirely different reasons.

------
cletus
This is something that varies depending on scale.

I work for Google in one of the larger offices (New York). Here we have
several cafeterias. You go at anytime (in the meal times), take what you want,
eat it there or eat it at your desk.

You can eat with team mates, by yourself, with friends from other teams, with
random strangers or whatever.

I _love_ this for several reasons:

1\. There is obviously the cost aspect (not having to pay for lunch) but for
me this is probably the least important part;

2\. It saves so much time. Other places I've worked, going out to lunch means
30-60 minutes for a lunch break. Here you can eat and be back at your desk, if
you want to, within a few minutes. Waiting for elevators, waiting in line, etc
are all such incredible time wasters;

3\. When choosing where to go and what to get for lunch, you're basically
asking me to make decisions I don't care about. This I hate. Here I simply
choose what cafeteria to go (typically the closest one) and take from the
selection. I don't have to decide about where to go, what to get. I simply
taken what's (generously) offered.

(3) for me is probably the most important. This one applies to software and
hardware too and is (IMHO) one of the key reasons for Apple's success: Apple
is unafraid and unapologetic about making most decisions for you. These
decisions are right for most people most of the time.

Joel had an old blog post on this (probably the famous "Controlling Your
Environment Makes You Happy" one that everyone should read) that said
something like this: every option you give someone forces them to make a
decision. I would go on to add that every decision has a cognitive cost, which
simply annoys the decider if they're deciding on something they don't really
care about.

Now, on a smaller scale I can see work lunches being a problem. If you need to
be there at a set time, have limited opportunity for mingling or your team is
so small that if you don't want to get stuck with someone (eg you don't like
them or you simply don't want to talk about work).

So I see edw519's point. On a sufficiently large scale however, provided meals
are fantastic.

~~~
smackfu
Do you go home earlier because of the time saved?

~~~
random42
Depends upon the person, I suppose. The time saved is used either is being
more productive at work, or having more time for personal life.

Either way, 30-60 minutes are not wasted, _every day_ from your life.

~~~
smackfu
I kind of think the same way about commuting to work at all. Working from home
I save those 60 minutes every day of my life.

------
DavidMcLaughlin
Cause/effect.

I'm sure anyone who has ever worked in a team where things weren't going so
well has tried the whole "let's go to lunch together!" thing but it's never a
solution.

Good teams tend to eat lunch together = true. Good teams are good because they
eat lunch together = false.

A good team evolves from a consistent and careful approach to hiring and
organisation and when a manager groups people together based on common
principals, approaches and motivating factors. Or they form themselves when
people who realise they see eye to eye decide to team up and build stuff.

If people who don't agree on the basics or just plain don't get along get
together and try to be productive, there will always be that loss of focus and
resentment when compromises have to made. Getting together for one hour a day
to make small talk doesn't change that.

~~~
rubergly
A bad team isn't going to be made good because of lunch. But I think the point
of the article is that it can make a good team (full of very skilled people
who are unenthused about their work experience) into a great time (full of
very skilled people who enjoy spending time with each other much more). And
sure, a group that constantly bickers isn't going to instantly transform
because of spending time together, but it could build enough of a community to
bring together groups that get along fine but aren't that friendly.

~~~
roc
Or you could turn functional professional relationships sour when people
inevitably discuss the non-work hot-button topics.

All it takes is one off-color joke.

And good luck with your 'one big happy lunch' when there's a rift.

------
msg
From "You and Your Research" by Dick Hamming:

 _Now Alan Chynoweth mentioned that I used to eat at the physics table. I had
been eating with the mathematicians and I found out that I already knew a fair
amount of mathematics; in fact, I wasn't learning much. The physics table was,
as he said, an exciting place, but I think he exaggerated on how much I
contributed. It was very interesting to listen to Shockley, Brattain, Bardeen,
J. B. Johnson, Ken McKay and other people, and I was learning a lot. But
unfortunately a Nobel Prize came, and a promotion came, and what was left was
the dregs. Nobody wanted what was left. Well, there was no use eating with
them!

Over on the other side of the dining hall was a chemistry table. I had worked
with one of the fellows, Dave McCall; furthermore he was courting our
secretary at the time. I went over and said, "Do you mind if I join you?" They
can't say no, so I started eating with them for a while. And I started asking,
"What are the important problems of your field?" And after a week or so, "What
important problems are you working on?" And after some more time I came in one
day and said, "If what you are doing is not important, and if you don't think
it is going to lead to something important, why are you at Bell Labs working
on it?" I wasn't welcomed after that; I had to find somebody else to eat with!
That was in the spring.

In the fall, Dave McCall stopped me in the hall and said, "Hamming, that
remark of yours got underneath my skin. I thought about it all summer, i.e.
what were the important problems in my field. I haven't changed my research,"
he says, "but I think it was well worthwhile." And I said, "Thank you Dave,"
and went on. I noticed a couple of months later he was made the head of the
department. I noticed the other day he was a Member of the National Academy of
Engineering. I noticed he has succeeded. I have never heard the names of any
of the other fellows at that table mentioned in science and scientific
circles. They were unable to ask themselves, "What are the important problems
in my field?"_

~~~
alphakappa
And that's Hamming of the Hamming Window and Hamming Code fame.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hamming>

------
bmccormack
One of the first things I noticed when I started working at Fog Creek is that
most everyone in the office is always working and it stays pretty quiet. We
rarely have meetings and individuals are able to remain focused on getting
things done.

The office is generally quiet except for lunch. Lunch gets pretty loud when
Fog Creek and Stack Exchange gather around two long tables to eat great food.
Sometimes we talk about work, but most of the time it's off-topic.
Occasionally people eat at their desks, but most of the time everyone is
together for lunch.

The people I work with are incredible and I'm excited to join them for lunch
every single day. Perhaps I get an extra boost at lunchtime because I'm an
extrovert, but I think even the introverts enjoy this time together with great
people.

I see a lot of comments here about how awful it is that introverts are forced
to sit with others at lunch. I suppose that's possible, but I don't get the
slightest impression from anyone that they'd rather be eating alone. Since
most developers are shielded from distractions most of the day and are heads-
down in code, lunch allows them to connect socially with other people at the
company.

Maybe you'd have to experience lunch with great coworkers day-in and day-out
to understand Joel's perspective. I couldn't agree more with what he wrote.

------
wccrawford
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 all have lunch together, going somewhere they decided on, or playing
pool upstairs in the breakroom.

It was obviously something that was strengthening them as a team, and despite
my anti-social tendencies, I really wanted to join them.

I don't doubt for a minute that Joel is on the money with this issue.

~~~
pnathan
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.

------
JCB_K
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 of people, many of whom I
otherwise never would've talked to because they'd work in an entirely
different department. This is just 1 example of the awesome culture at IKEA.

~~~
nollidge
IKEA's U.S. factory workers might disagree:
[http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ikea-
union-20110410,0,...](http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ikea-
union-20110410,0,5341610.story)

~~~
nollidge
Downvotes? Seriously? It's a simple statement of fact.

------
mrcharles
At my last job, I had a really fantastic lunch group -- intelligent,
inquisitive, and always wanting to talk shop. It was fantastic, I feel that I
learned and grew more as part of the lunch group than with respect to a lot of
other things I did at work.

At my current job, I'm sad, because generally I don't have anyone to do that
with, as most people are only interested in empty socializing.

Frankly I'm so uninterested in my current job, I'd rather eat while working
and go home that much earlier. Which is sad, but there you have it.

------
blhack
Lunch is also a really important part of my job. I run the IT department for a
fairly small company (~200 employees).

Going to lunch with people affords me the opportunity to hear them complain
about their job. Sometimes, although they might not realize, their complaints
are things that I can fix for them. They're my best source of ideas for
projects.

"GUH! I keep asking $so_and_so for new $office_supply, but I guess we're out
of it, WTF!?"

 _Hmm...maybe we need an inventory tracking system for the office supplies?_

"$so_and_so is gone today, and she is the only one with the $excel_spreadsheet
on her computer. It sucks because I can't get ahold of her and I need
$excel_spreadsheet!"

 _Well how can we solve this? Why aren't they using the file server for this
stuff?_

And so on.

~~~
rodh257
While the ideas for projects is a good one, do you ever get sick of hearing
peoples complaints in social situations? Nothing is more annoying than when
you are having a few Friday beers and all people want to do is tell you how
crap their computer is expecting you to promise them a new one by Monday.

~~~
ora600
Oh, that was my favorite thing about working at HP. The conversations!

"Where do you work?"

"HP"

"Oh, I have a problem with my printer/laptop"

"Actually, I work on superdome specific optimizations for the HPUX compiler."

"So why does printer ink cost so much?"

....

------
impendia
It seems there's an obvious middle ground which doesn't seem to have been
mentioned by Joel or anyone else.

Being compelled to have lunch with colleagues _every day_ sucks. Sometimes you
are feeling cranky, want some fresh air, need to run errands, or have a hot
date.

Not having the opportunity to lunch with colleagues also sucks. It provides a
great opportunity for employees to get to know each other, make friends, and
informally discuss company business.

Seems the onus is on the company to make lunch pleasant, and perhaps to steer
newcomers into the middle of the crowd. After that, create the kind of
environment where no one feels compelled to do anything, but employees want to
eat with each other at least a lot of the time.

~~~
r00fus
One compromise is like one of my previous teams did: One day of the week is
team lunch day (and a longer lunch at that).

This isn't so quotidien, but still has a bonding effect, diffusing group
tensions while satisfying the need for self-time.

I think daily mandatory would be weird, but I'd be up for 1-2 days a week
where the team meets over food.

~~~
frossie
_One day of the week is team lunch day (and a longer lunch at that)_

There is nothing better than a 2-hour team lunch in a park, on nice sunny day.
You don't need to do it every day, or even every week, but it has many of the
advantages without robbing people of their personal time (which is what lunch
break is meant to be).

------
droz
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.

------
wolter
I hate it when people assume that everyone else thinks the same way they do.

Just because you get lonely eating alone doesn't mean everybody does.

"Being in any clique, even if it’s just the nerds, is vastly preferable than
eating alone."

This is just bullshit. I don't want to be part of a clique. Or a group. Or
anything of the sort. My lunch time is a time to get AWAY from people and
recharge. Take that away from me and I get stressed out and my productivity
suffers massively.

"For loners and geeks, finding people to eat with in the cafeteria at school
can be a huge source of stress."

For a lot of us, feeling pressured into "socializing" because some bigwig
decided that it's good for us is a huge source of stress. Just leave us be!
Please! It's my time, so let me do my thing. Alone.

------
tomstuart
I need a break at lunchtime. For me that means sitting quietly, spending some
time away from the effort of conversation, catching up on reading or taking
the opportunity to think about ideas that have been on the back burner.

There goes my career at Fog Creek!

~~~
levesque
I see it differently. I sit alone all day, working on my projects by myself.
Come dinner time, it is a welcome change to get to chat a little with my
coworkers.

Ultimately, I'd say it depends _a lot_ on who your coworkers are. If you enjoy
your coworkers, you will enjoy lunchtime with them and it won't be a chore. On
the other hand, if they annoy you the second they open their mouth...

------
mburney
I'd rather not be compelled to eat with co-workers at lunch. Lunch should be a
time to do whatever you want. For things like meeting people/friends outside
of work, having some quiet time to read a book, or going to the gym.

Some days I don't even feel like eating at lunch, and prefer to have a late
lunch in the afternoon.

And why the compulsion to sit with people that I already interact with the
entire day? Nothing wrong with being social with your co-workers, but it ought
to be natural. This isn't kindergarten.

------
JabavuAdams
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.

~~~
devspade
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 us closer as a team and some of our best ideas come out over lunch
when we're not trying to brainstorm or think about business issues.

~~~
JabavuAdams
Yes, I think this is great.

It's the idea of making it mandatory that I consider domineering.

Great for a cult ... not so good for herding cats.

------
dwc
At my first real programming job we (developers) went out to lunch together
every day. We went out to restaurants, not fast food. Lunch often took 1.5
hours and sometimes 2 hours. Our boss came with us. We were a small company,
so there were only four of five of us, usually.

Sometimes we talked about work, and sometimes not. When we did, we often
discussed higher level stuff rather than quotidian matters. We had our boss
there, so anything we decided at lunch was ready to go ahead with.

Back at the office we almost never had to have meetings, because we didn't
need them. This alone is pure gold.

Outside of work some of us were actively friends, and others not. But this
really didn't change lunch. Nobody was forced to go to lunch, and there was no
unwritten rule that non-lunchers were outsiders. It's that lunch was
pleasurable, relaxing, with good food, and we naturally talked about what we
had in common.

Since that time it's never quite reached that level, but I've come close
occasionally. If you've never experienced it I imagine that it might be hard
to grasp how nice it can be.

I think some of what I've said above is inline with what Joel is talking
about, but it's a slightly different take. Make of it what you will.

------
hinchley
It seems Joel finds it difficult to believe that people can eat alone without
being lonely. I am an introvert that is rejuvenated by spending time alone. I
like eating lunch by myself. It helps clear my mind.

The idea that new starters are "not allowed to sit by themselves in a corner"
is draconian, and in my case, it would prove counterproductive. It would make
me feel like I was back in school, being told where to sit by my teacher. This
is not the mindset you want to instil in your employees.

I think the best approach is to provide a working environment where people
have the _opportunity_ to gather together. Those that want to socialize can do
so, and those that prefer periods of solitude aren't made to feel guilty for
spending time alone.

------
puls
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 types
and more to do with cohesion.

Put differently, the types of teams who want to eat lunch together are the
types of teams you should want to be on. The company shouldn't need to enforce
it; they should just help to facilitate it.

~~~
tomstuart
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.

~~~
antiterra
It's not even that simple.

There are introverted people who are largely introverted because they find the
dance of formal social interaction puzzling or unrewarding. Once that's taken
care of for them, they're perfectly happy interacting with others and crave
being social.

Then there are sorts who are fine with social interaction but rebel against
perceived social obligation or pressure to enjoy or do something. They become
angry at this pressure and instead choose to alienate themselves.

I don't think I'm necessarily in the last group. However, I bristle at the
idea of not being able to have my own personal time to daydream without
interruption while I cram food into my fat idiot face.

------
barkingcat
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.

------
gdulli
Joel's free to want to eat lunch however he wants, but who is he to decide
that people who are happy to eat alone are "loners", "don't like people" or
are pretending not to be sad?

------
jaysonelliot
I rarely get time to eat lunch. When I do, it's a precious 30 or 60 minutes of
solace where I can actually get away from people and enjoy some time to
myself.

Why on earth would I want to spend it jammed shoulder to shoulder with people
chewing and talking about work?

------
garyrichardson
I guess I'm just a lone wolf who likes to get things done during lunch.

Typically, I go for a walk and get some errands done. Or sit quietly and
reflect. Or I'll go have lunch with non-work friends.

Occasionally I'll go out with work friends.

------
jowiar
I think taking Joel's thoughts on lunch in isolation from his thoughts on
workspace design is a mistake.

In my experience, when my workspace has been more quiet/isolated, I've enjoyed
lunch as an opportunity to get to know colleagues, wrap my head around what's
going on, and otherwise get my quota of human contact for the day.

On the other hand, in more "social" work environments, i.e. stereotypical
startup open floor plan, lunch is a nice opportunity to escape, walk in the
park, watch kids chasing pigeons, reset my brain, process the morning, and
figure out the rest of the day.

As Joel is a huge advocate of private offices in the work environment, the
social lunch is a natural compliment to that.

------
ScreaminScott
I'm glad I found you all, 'cause I so desperately wanted to comment on Joel's
post, but his discussion group is closed.

I'm one of those people who eats lunch alone everyday, mostly just to take a
break from work and catch up on my reading.

So the statement that bothered me the most was this one: "Maybe they’re
reading a book or checking their email while they eat so they don’t look sad"

I don't understand why so many people think that reading a book is only
something you do, when you don't have anything else better to do. I read 2-3
books a month and lunchtime is when I get a vast majority of my reading done.
It annoys me to no end when people interrupt me because they think I’m
“lonely”. No, I’m READING! If I was looking for conversation, the book would
be closed and I would be looking around to make eye contact. What part of the
whole nose-in-a-book-with-a-totally-engrossed-expression do you not
understand?

Having said that, I do think Joel simply makes the office environment
conducive to eating together. I just hope he doesn't look down on people who
don't take advantage of it.

------
jswinghammer
I'm definitely on board with this. My last job was pretty lonely until we all
started eating together every day. Eventually our long table was taken away by
HR and we had to find somewhere else to go. We all wanted to keep it though
because it made work much better so we found a way to still eat lunch
together.

------
tomx
Do any other introverts feel this arrangement would affect them negatively?
Subjected to this setup, it's likely I'd perform worse.

I work with some loud opinionated people all day, and look forward to my quiet
walk around a park each day. Often I'm walking on complicated problems, and
the last thing I need is an hour of listening to pointless arguments about
movies or whatever.

------
hvs
Eating lunch together (whether to talk technology or just to socialize) is
huge for building a cohesive team that works together and talks outside of the
lunch room. Especially if you don't work with each other directly on a day-to-
day basis, it helps to reinforce that you all work together rather than on
separate teams.

------
soitgoes
I prefer to grab a sandwich and go for a walk. This was especially true when I
was contracting and based in interesting cities that were fun to explore.

------
kloncks
For those that are against spending time eating lunch with your co-workers,
the following Tina Fey quote comes to mind (paraphrased. not exact):

 _Never work with or hire someone who you wouldn't want to run into at 3am._

~~~
oinksoft
I thought we'd all long since done away with the idealism that we can pick and
choose every detail about our work lives.

~~~
kloncks
Well, this at least applies if you're starting a company from scratch. You can
hire someone that might be a genius...but not a team-player or might hurt the
dynamic.

That's where I was going with this.

------
mmagin
I like eating lunch with my coworkers some of the time. (Maybe once a week.)
It's good team building.

However, I'm an introvert, and I pair program nearly every day. This tends to
leave me wanting a nice break in the middle of the day where I can have some
time alone. Also, my idea of a good/healthy lunch usually doesn't intersect
with any sort of work-provided lunch, if such a thing is being provided.

------
mdpm
The best place I ever worked at was small: ~7 people.

We ate together every day. Every day of the week, it was someone's duty to
make lunch. I mean that, make it. You started an hour before lunch, went to
the kitchen and made a meal. Generally a full hot meal. We got every variety
you could think of - people enjoyed the time out creating someting different,
something else for their co-workers to enjoy, and it Worked.

We got to sit outside, in the garden, next to the pool, and eat lunch (and
yes, there was beer). And if it was Friday, well. Then we started a fire, and
had some more beer. And there may have been instruments. And our respective
children running about.

Not bad for a bespoke dev company. Not bad at all.

To address some of the other points raised in the comments -

No-one was forced to be there, if they wanted to go out for lunch they could.
Few did, and rarely. More important than an individual's 'desire to associate'
is whether they fit in. If they don't, they likely don't belong on that team.
Ditto for if they can't communicate honestly (positively or negatively)
about/with peers/managers.

------
thenduks
Unfortunately, eating lunch with a group of people every day tends to get very
expensive. You either need to be working at a big company with a cafeteria
(pass) or for a fancy place like FogCreek, otherwise it's $10-20/day to eat
out all the time. Besides, I like to swing home and hang out with the cats
sometimes, or work on a side project at my desk, or whatever.

------
simulate
How does a small company like Fog Creek handle ordering, delivery, and clean
up each day? In the photo it appears that everyone is eating off of china with
silverware. Do they maintain a cafeteria?

~~~
patio11
There is a catering service which brings them food every day and sets up the
serving area. You wash your own plate, I think.

P.S. FC is a small company with offices literally adjacent to the New York
Stock Exchange. That might meaningfully adjust one's perceptions of the amount
of resources they have for a problem like this.

~~~
rsobers
Yup, pretty much spot on, except we have a dishwasher!

The caterer is great about not repeating meals very often (we probably go 2-3
weeks before seeing the same thing twice). Most everything is healthy, there's
always a vegetarian option, salads, etc.

------
abecedarius
This article could have extolled shared lunches without othering the people
who sometimes eat alone as sad and less than human.

------
mklappstuhl
Well, when I read the Twitter headline I was sure that this is a link I'd like
to share with my coworkers. After reading it however it seems not to have much
of content.

Some other reasons beside the obvious social ones:

1\. If you aren't working on the same project you can use these lunch-
discussions to generate ideas.

2\. You can ask for feedback on any descision from people that are not
actually involved in your project.

3\. If you are working at a company where you can actually influence the
company's principles, rules and processes you can make your job even better by
improving the company's behavior. Which is far more fun if you are not doing
it alone.

There are probably more reasons. This article is really missing some substance
beside the psychological impact of social interactions. Common lunch can also
provide value to the company itself.

------
masterponomo
I usually need to pinch a mega loaf right around lunchtime. I would love to do
it earlier, but getting ready and commuting all use up too much time in the
morning. Call me anti-social, but I treasure the "me time" that allows me to
get it done w/o an unexplained long absence from my desk. Likewise, if I were
expected to show up at the communal lunch table, I'm sure I would always be
late and be met with snide remarks such as "everything come out all right?"
and "out with the old in with the new, eh?" and other such witticisms. No,
give me my very special session in the restroom followed by some time with my
Kindle and a sack lunch in a quiet grotto, and I'm OK with the forced
togetherness of the rest of the workday.

------
nikki9696
Why does Joel hate introverts?

------
Eagleman99
I've often felt ostracized at my employer just for not following the
rite/folklore of lunch together. Joel has a conflict of interest. As owner of
course he stands to benefit if his employees went for lunch together, because
inevitably they'd be talking about work, maybe even solving work-related
problems in the process. While lunch is a great occasion for socializing -
it'd be best to be up to the individual on how to spent that time.

~~~
mkramlich
You nailed it. I think Joel as a business owner likes to have all his staff
eat lunch together, because it helps "build team" and lets him evaluate all of
them further in an alternate setting. It's beneficial for him. But it's not
necessarily the best thing for each individual employee.

------
sterling
I am 49 years old and I work as freelance consultant on e-commerce projets.
Honestly, it is impossible for me to work (which means mostly sitting) for 3-4
hours in the morning and 4-5 hours in the afternoon and also sit during lunch.
If I do that I will either fall asleep or be unproductive for most of the
afternoon. At lunch I spend at least one hour walking, running or biking. At
the least I must get outside, whatever the weather.

------
dr_
It's not always so easy for everyone to eat together however. People have
different work schedules - different deadlines to meet, some may be working
from home at times or while on a business trip, and for some, such as myself,
lunch is really something I just kind of grab and go, don't really sit down
for 30 min to 1hr and eat lunch. That's just my habit, it's a working lunch
(although I make up for it at dinner)

------
yason
While some people certainly enjoy it, this kind of culture might be horrible
for others.

I would detest it; I like to choose who I spend my spare time with, and for
lunch that's often alone. Sometimes I go and have lunch with someone I
consider a friend. Being just the two of us at least opens the window for good
discussions.

Nothing against coworkers, really.

But it's hard to comfortably talk about anything else than work or perhaps
some impersonal superficialities with people who aren't your friends in the
deepest sense of the word. And I certainly do mind talking about work or
impersonal superficialities when I'm supposed to have a nice time off to enjoy
some food. It takes a special group where all members can talk openly about
themselves without boring or irritating others; not going to happen at work.

One knows a friend when one sees one, and they're rare to come by. So the
situation where most of your coworkers would also happen to be your friends is
nearly impossible unless you only have one or two coworkers. I have one friend
at work, another who's a very good acquaintance, but often I just hook up with
some other friend not from where I work.

------
alienfluid
Interesting read, though as always, a little extreme. Eating lunch with co-
workers 2-3 times a week is sufficient - sometimes you have a life outside of
work too!

Also, I can vouch for the fact that cafeterias at Microsoft are NOT cheap -
quite the opposite actually. You can get a better deal almost anywhere outside
campus.

LOL @ "Excuse me, I’d love to introduce myself to you, but it’s very important
that I update my cabbage."

------
EGreg
My, this sparked a lot of discussion.

When I worked at a company, I used lunch as a chance to go out into the sun
and maybe meet a random nice girl. Don't date people at work, they say ... and
they're probably right. Sometimes I would invite my co-workers to a new place.
Why eat in the same cafeteria all the time?

I basically used lunch as a social building time. but that's just me, I'm kind
of bored just eating by myself.

------
kaitnieks
You can achieve the same effect with smoking pauses:

1\. your mouth isn't stuffed and you can and want to talk during smoking. It's
reflexive - as soon as you light the cigarette you're looking for a
conversation;

2\. you have more pauses per day;

3\. the pauses are shorter;

Are there any downsides? Well, some say it's unhealthy... Anyway, I'm not
smoking anymore, but back when I was, we solved lots of problems and came up
with tons of ideas while smoking.

~~~
thenduks
Yea I think you hit the problem with that at the end there. Besides killing
you it's also:

1\. Expensive

2\. Stinky

3\. Addictive

:)

------
mgcross
I spend my lunch hour at the gym. Since I've started this routine, I workout
more frequently, feel like my workday is shorter, and love not having my
workout hanging over my head after hours (when I need the time for helping
kids with homework). If I don't go to the gym, I'll run errands or work on my
own projects. I get enough socialization during meetings.

------
dools
I can't stand the sound of other people eating. I would gladly eat lunch with
my co-workers if I was allowed to wear headphones.

------
balinvadasz
I think this is very important and not because of the fact that you're more
likely to talk shop when eating with your team. What is more valuable IMHO is
that you'll get to know your teammates better as _people_: what they like,
their hobbies, their tastes their culture (if you're in such an team) etc.
It's insanely interesting and valuable: it will make communication much
smoother and misunderstandings much less frequent. A team needs to gel and
having common experiences outside of strict "work" settings is really
important for that. BTW, this can't be forced but can be facilitated by
creating the right conditions and I think that's what Joel's post is about.
One more thing: having lunch with people only loosely connected to your day-
to-day activities is also very interesting and can lead to serendipitous
insights about things totally in your area of expertise.

------
luke_osu
My experience has usually been that lunch with coworkers is awkward. Most
people just sit on their iphones and no one really talks. The conversations
seem forced. Maybe I have worked at the wrong places but this is my experience
at the places I have been.

------
csomar
Being a geek and of an extremely different mind and culture than most of my
peers, I usually find myself alone. I just fail to integrate since I'm quite
different. Being alone, at lunch for example, _was_ very stressful.

Lately, I found a friend of the same mind (or close) and he also don't succeed
to integrate smoothly into the community (although better than me, but has a
girl friend). I then discovered that he does spend a good amount of his time
alone. He'll just get a coffee and sit their browsing on his smart phone.

After that, I take it easy finding myself alone, even if there are lot of
people near me gathering, talking and laughing... It doesn't bother me any
more, I'm actually better off with it.

------
oddthink
Huh. I've never worked somewhere where people do anything other than grab some
food and eat it at their desks. Who has time to actually go out for lunch?

One advantage of the open, trading-floor layout is that you can chat with the
people around you, if you want.

------
bconway
I use my lunchtime for personal pursuits, like reading articles by Joel
Spolsky.

------
jrs235
Points 8 and 9 are a result of not communicating and acting assertively. Stop
partaking in, allowing, and accepting aggressive, passive, and passive-
aggressive behavior and communication. This is what the higher ups in a
company need to foster. I highly suggest reading "Life Would Be Easy If It
Weren't for Other People"
[http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0803968655/ref=as_li_ss_tl?...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0803968655/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=j02-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399349&creativeASIN=0803968655)

------
s00pcan
Video about snacks/dinner at Valve: [http://www.dump.com/2011/04/24/valve-
behind-the-scenes-the-s...](http://www.dump.com/2011/04/24/valve-behind-the-
scenes-the-snack-bar-video/)

------
mikegreenspan
What is the best way to meet new people during lunch at a company cafeteria?

This summer, I visited a friend at Google and stayed for lunch (the food is
incredible, better than most five-star restaurants btw). That day I noticed
the same problem this article highlights. Either groups are meeting during
lunch, or the remaining "loners" are reading the latest tech news on their
computers and appear completely unapproachable. So if you don't want to eat
alone and want to make new friends, what is the optimal way to overcome these
barriers?

~~~
cpeterso
I'm in a similar situation. I will soon working from a satellite office. Few
to none of my new office mates will actually work on my team. I won't receive
"welcome to the team" introductions and none of my office mates will have
shared work topics to discuss.

Some Google cafeterias have tables labeled for people interested in meeting
new people. Lunch can be easier when you know that anyone sitting at those
tables is open to new people joining their conversations.

~~~
danenania
That's a cool idea. It would also be cool to see this kind of thing more often
at cafés or restaurants. I'm introverted, but I also like meeting people and
would often prefer a decent conversation to eating or hanging out alone. I
assume plenty of others are the same, but the threat of awkwardness/rejection
keeps people from striking something up. This seems like a nice low key way to
get around that.

I did some backpacking in Europe on my own several years ago, and one of the
better experiences was a hostel in Prague that provided cheap home cooked
meals in a dining room with big group tables. Made it really easy to meet
people and was the time when everyone made plans for the day/night, so I
always had the option of attaching to a group if I wanted to. I was only there
for a week, but the group of travelers there at that time actually became
fairly close knit, and I'm certain it was primarily due to the group meals.

------
Andys
This might work better where people have their own offices with doors that
close. Where I work we are all in one room and so constantly sharing banter on
and off all day.

------
sklivvz1971
I so wholeheartedly and completely agree with Joel. Things that really "make"
a team:

1) Having lunch together 2) Having booze together 3) Going out together
regularly

~~~
tomx
What about introverted people, who will do good work, but prefer their own
company at lunch time?

~~~
cpeterso
Or people who don't drink?

------
tt
Shameless plug for my own startup: for any San Francisco based company,
Munchery is offering $50 off for any lunch or dinner order over $200.

We have multiple professional chefs who serve the entire San Francisco,
cooking only sustainable, locally grown ingredients. Please ping me if you
want to chat first.

------
statenjason
My lunches are spent at the gym. Nothing helps me focus on work better than
getting away for an hour or so.

------
neworbit
If this is a useful part of corporate culture here (it rarely is) that's one
of the first reasonable arguments I've heard AGAINST telecommuting. In
general, I think I'd opt for a telecapable workforce, but there's certainly
some reasonability to adhoc meetings at lunchtime.

------
yannk
I thought Joel stopped blogging?

------
pauljonas
You know, my 1st instinct is to disagree vehemently with the sentiment here.

But if I reflect upon past job experiences, more often we (at least a good bit
of the team) ate lunch together, the greater and more harmonious the team
experience was.

~~~
logic
Ah, but which is the cause, and which the effect?

Was it lunching together that made you a harmonious team? Or was it the good
teamwork that lead to wanting to spend free time together as well as
professional time?

~~~
pauljonas
Maybe it was a bit of both.

Kind of like a snowball rolling downhill…

------
SebMortelmans
I always felt there is something special about sharing food with others, it
gives a sense of bonding rarely seen elsewhere. For building up a great
company culture, food plays in my opinion a pretty big role on many layers.

------
projectileboy
As @paul says: "limited life experience + overgeneralization = advice"

------
dabeeeenster
Does Joel pay his staff for attending the lunches?

------
mhb
An alternative might be afternoon tea.

------
GrandMasterBirt
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 :(

------
mkramlich
Joel's somewhat right and somewhat wrong. He's both. And for the record, I'll
say right now, without reading even reading it yet, that whatever edw519 says
on this topic is going to be golden and I'll agree with it. ;)

With that said, as I was reading the article, I kept thinking to myself, "The
conditions where what Joel is saying hold true, and have the most benefit, are
ones where you have a bunch of young adults, say early 20's or late teens,
with lots of energy, lots of free time, a fairly simple life outside of work,
little roots, and a sort of bright-eyed and arguably naive sense of wonder
about things. Because then, by golly, you're just gonna lurv having lunch in a
cafeteria with all your other young coworkers because you can goof around and
talk about the latest Ruby PHP AJAX Agile blah blah blah blah or pop culture
thing." And so I keep reading, and then there's this photograph of,
ostensibly, their staff at the cafeteria table. And I see a lot of early 20's
or late teens folks. Nailed it. Case closed.

Which isn't to say that older adults wouldn't like it. They do, clearly,
sometimes. But when you're older and/or more experienced, or have a wider
variety of interests, or more demands on your time, you're much more likely to
want to either (a) spend time with friends/family during that period (meet
them?), or (b) zone/veg out, or (c) knock out some non-work chores
(appointment scheduling, calling people back, etc.), and so on. And bantering
about tech stuff, again, further, in every spare moment, really grows old
after a while. Once a geek, always a geek, but after you've done it for a
decade or more, day in, day out, as a day job, a lot of people want to "claw
back" as much non-tech/non-geek stuff then can into their lives, wherever they
can find it. Speaking from direct experience anyway: doing mass grubs with all
my corporate coworkers was kinda fun in my early 20's, but really loses its
attraction by your 30's and beyond. Many people are just not that interesting
to hang out with. And geeks, especially younger geeks, are often associated
with annoying conversations and choice of topics -- though they usually mellow
out with age.

------
helwr
wtf

