
Stop working so hard - jpadilla_
https://medium.com/i-m-h-o/ef4772e3c628
======
webwright
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.]

~~~
neilk
> Empirically

Citation needed.

There are studies out there showing that productivity is proportional to days
spent on the problem, not hours. It's likely that for a knowledge worker,
sustained schedules with long workdays actually reduce average productivity.

[http://www.jamesshore.com/Articles/Business/Software%20Profi...](http://www.jamesshore.com/Articles/Business/Software%20Profitability%20Newsletter/Crunch%20Mode.html)

There may be some exceptional people who can defy this rule, and it's possible
they are concentrated in startups, but I'm dubious.

~~~
webwright
"There may be some exceptional people who can defy this rule, and it's
possible they are concentrated in startups, but I'm dubious."

Right. They are concentrated at the top. Here's one study (doesn't include
work time at home or weekends):
<http://www.people.hbs.edu/rsadun/CEOs/presentation.pdf>

It makes logical sense-- combine the ability to work long hours (rare) with
talent and you will blow the normal fatigue-able people out of the water in
terms of output and (in a sorta-meritocracy) rise to the top.

~~~
zeidrich
It looks like that study shows that the median CEO works 50 hours per week,
with 10 of that spent in travel or eating.

To me that sounds like a very typical work week without spectacular overtime,
crunch, hustle, whatever.

It says that some CEOs work more hours, but doesn't correlate that with higher
productivity.

It says that few work less than 40 hours per week discounting meals and
travel.

50 hours per week is 10 hours per day. Maybe like 8 to 6. Anyone complaining
about expectations for crunch time would relish hours like that.

~~~
PAULHANNA84
CEO...sure, but how about a founder? Entrepreneur? CEO who is the original
founder? I could guarantee the figures are far different.

~~~
thedragon4453
I know an entrepreneur that bought a well known franchise. He told me he
worked without a day off for the first year before finally taking a Sunday
off. My gut was to call bullshit. Employees around from that time confirm.
He's very successful today.

That's gotta fuck up the average.

------
noelwelsh
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.)

~~~
bjhoops1
God, I hope this is true! Wife and I just had our first kid a month ago, and I
can tell ya it's hard to find (or justify) time for side projects with that
little bugger* wreaking havoc on my shut-eye __! :)

* I do so love him __It's totally worth it

~~~
FourthProtocol
Congratulations - mine's a year old. It gets easier :-)

~~~
joshrotenberg
But then it gets harder again. And then easier. Etc.

~~~
bjhoops1
Ha yes, I've noticed that - my 13-year old brother is giving my parents hell
right now. I would _not_ trade places with them.

------
crazygringo
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.

~~~
robryan
I see this again and again and I just don't buy it in all situations. Say in
my own company I take your advice and stop working at the 30 hour mark each
week.

I am going to have to cut back somewhere, I program and take on support when
stuff is thrown to me from other handling it full time. I also like to go
through our support to keep a feel for how things are trending and what sort
of issues we are having. I also like to stay in the loop on high level
business decisions or strategy.

So in cutting back to keep development and the business moving I would
probably have to get more hands off with support, which may negatively impact
customer satisfaction and business direction at times. I also feel that hiring
right now isn't the right option and running lean is somewhat of a competitor
advantage for us.

Maybe I am wrong, but I don't feel that I could make it work right now with
reduced hours and I assume a lot of startups feel the same.

~~~
rwallace
I agree, it does _feel_ that way. However, it is known that our feelings on
this matter do not correspond to reality. Whenever actual performance
measurements are taken, it turns out that the productivity loss from chronic
fatigue, more mistakes and more time spent trying to fix same etc. more than
outweighs any benefit from the extra hours. In other words when you work long
hours, you're actually damaging your company as well as your personal life.

------
lubujackson
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.

------
kirinan
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.

~~~
Smudge
> The market doesn't go who gets done first, it goes to the person who dos it
> best.

Except when it goes to the first movers. If your product's success depends on
a virtual land grab, it might be better to work those 100's of less productive
hours, to get something out the door first.

~~~
rodgerd
Apple trailed laughably behind Creative in the MP3 player and WinMo, Palm, and
Blackberry in the smartphone market.

Who's winning?

~~~
robryan
The smartphone market is characterised by a 2 year upgrade cycle, it is a lot
harder for a company to generate long term loyalty when the consumer is fairly
free to pick whichever phone they want after a contract.

Apple also move the market with a mostly new class of phone which changed
people's expectations. Which is generally a way to beat a land grabber.

------
bjhoops1
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.

~~~
tomsthumb
Intensity is certainly important and you can lose that if you push too much
for too long.

This entirely anecdotal, but I probably wouldn't have graduated with if it
weren't for the solutions i 'worked out' during naps. Maybe there's also
something to be said for working while not working, not to be too round about.

~~~
bjhoops1
And don't forget in the shower!

If I hadn't taken a break during which it occurred to me that I was doing it
all wrong, there are problems I'd still be working on!

------
omnisci
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:)

------
kbouw
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.

~~~
mmagin
Why should you care about whether they are "truly passionate"?

It seems like in your working interactions with people, either they're
delivering enough (and delivering what they promised) or not, and they can be
judged on that, rather than on abstractions of feelings.

~~~
rdouble
I'm not sure if the guy is American or not, but Americans are more ideological
than practical. Being "passionate" about something is more valued than being
good. Contrast this to other countries like Germany and Switzerland where a
cool headed and calculating competence is seen as more of an ideal attitude
towards work.

~~~
kbouw
American, yes. Do I compromise quality at the cost of passion? Most certainty
not. But there is something to be said for the value of hiring with a criteria
of passion for the idea and space.

I made no implication it was either or. You can certainly have a passionate,
cool headed and calculated player on your team.

~~~
ovi256
>passionate, cool headed These terms are pretty much exclusive, you may want
to check a dictionary for "passionate". Unless it's used in some secondary
sense different from the usual definition.

------
cheald
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.

------
dgbsco
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.

~~~
sageikosa
Amen. And jamming people into little veal fattening pens...I mean,
cubicles...doesn't exactly make the use of space more effective either.

------
trxblazr
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?

~~~
dyno12345
Tell them that in exchange for 20% more time you expect a 20% pay raise. Talk
about all the things you're going to have to give up if you take that extra
time, and how that makes you unhappy. Since they're asking for something from
you, they can't get mad at you for negotiating something in return. No one can
call that unfair with a straight face. Most likely if you do this they
probably won't actually give you 20% but will may offer you something much
smaller. You can decide to either accept this, or, you can say that their
counteroffer is not good enough for you, so you can't take the extra time.
That way your reason to refuse is completely impersonal, and not because you
don't care.

Regardless, start looking for another job in the meantime. The culture of
where you work sounds completely inhumane.

------
kilroy123
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.

------
ruswick
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.

~~~
jaytaylor
40-70 hours a week is healthy? This makes me laugh.. why not just select an
even bigger range.. people who work 30-120 hours a week? Sounds _great_.

------
PAULHANNA84
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.

------
alphakappa
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)

~~~
JonnieCache
Just because you _really_ want to create a great product, why does it follow
that you should work 7 days a week? What is this SV obsession with haste? If
your business won't be as valuable if you bring it to market 28% slower than
you were planning to, maybe it sucks.

Or maybe there's some other aspect to this trend I'm not seeing.

~~~
nhangen
I don't know, maybe getting to the point where you generate enough revenue to
pay the bills?

------
noahrsg
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."

~~~
RougeFemme
That's assuming that you are not expected to simply extend the hours in those
4 days so that your hours per week remain the same or decrease only slightly.
. .as some companies currently do.

------
athiercelin
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.

------
phryk
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.

------
wellboy
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. :)

------
jgreen10
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.

------
mrmiller
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.

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

------
thrush
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

~~~
jes5199
consider graduating! It's a neat trick that helps reduce your workload.

------
miles_matthias
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?

~~~
samedwards
Once your skillset is good enough, you can charge enough so that those hours
you do work are enough to get you by. Sanity and health are huge. I've also
had health problems by working too many hours nonstop in the past. Not worth
it in the long run.

------
jfinnson
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.

------
brandonhsiao
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.

------
kwikx
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.

------
hello_newman
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.

~~~
dualogy
I was like that at 21 (10 years ago) -- sad to report it won't last!

My theory is, at the hormones of late teens to mid-twenties, anything is
awesome. A stoner with a PlayStation and 3 boxes of donuts all day at that age
has the time of his life! A DJ feeling out new tunes has. A coder doing
16-hour days has. An athlete does. A bro at a sports bar, too. Everything is
just amazing at that age because pretty much nothing affects your well-being
in any way, or rather, recuperation from any kind of abuse is at its all-time
peak.

Enjoy the ride! And yeah, take a day off every once in a while to ride bikes
with friends and travel on the cheap. Better to burn out at 28 than at say 23
;D

~~~
Elizer0x0309
You are a fool for capping his passion. Please don't normalize anomalies. If
there is purpose then you can't set a time limit on that.

------
pagejim
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.

------
Elizer0x0309
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.

------
orangethirty
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.

------
bugsbunny4341
Don't wear yourself out trying to get rich. Be wise enough to know when to
quit. (Proverbs 23:4)

------
kris121
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.

~~~
kylebragger
I think that it applies to everyone. To me, it's about the quality of your
work vs. how much you're working. I think that even as someone newer to
programming (or English), building a routine of a few "smart" hours of work
(that is, being productive and effective) will almost always have a better
outcome than working many, many hours but not being effective in how you're
working. Get into a routine. Develop a system for yourself. Set realistic
goals. I think you'll be surprised at what you're capable of accomplishing.

~~~
kris121
Thanks

------
sylvainww
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).

~~~
kylebragger
Finding the right balance is the hardest part, IMO. There's certainly no
"right" answer, so long as you're doing work for the right reasons and can
keep sight of the things which truly matter.

------
tyang
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?

------
hallomac2013
And how exactly are you going to output more quality without more working? Can
someone please explain this to me?

------
markdown
Says man who has essentially 'made it'.

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

------
latifnanji27
Elon Musk is a great example of this post.

~~~
gte910h
I think Elon Musk has said "screw being happy, I want to walk on Mars before I
die".

He's a bit of an outlier most people shouldn't go off of.

~~~
nhangen
Unless of course you want to be an outlier.

------
scottbartell
This article is the perfect length.

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

~~~
crusso
That's what occurred to me as well.

These articles periodically work their way up HN's pages. People argue. In
this very thread as in most others, "You should work hard" posts are greeted
with "show me the data", while the article and comments to the effect of "slow
down" are greeted with feel-good affirmation.

All I know is that in my 25 year career, the periods where I worked my ass off
were the ones that I'm most proud of because of the contracts won, projects
completed, and general sense of accomplishment.

I am highly skeptical of this "work less to achieve more" meme working its way
through the industry. It seems to be one of those things where developers are
trying to convince each other of its validity for obviously selfish reasons.
It reminds me of the religiously minded folks who latch onto any justification
that will reinforce their notions of a glorious afterlife.

~~~
stray
In _my_ 25+ year career, the periods where I accomplished the most and am most
proud of my accomplishments are in fact those times I averaged somewhere
between 25 and 30 hours per week.

Those times when I've been part of a team that valued ass-in-seat-time(tm)
have been the times when I'm most embarrassed of what we produced.

Where I work now, there's a pair of workaholics who produce insane amounts of
code.

Management loves them.

They are the only ones who can understand their code and of course management
thinks that's because they're smarter than everyone else.

I'll be nice and suggest that perhaps there is a different reason nobody else
understands their code.

------
goggles99
I think someone else tried this before. It is not working out very well
though. Who was it.. Oh yeah - it was France...

~~~
epsylon
Yep, the fifth largest economy in the world and the second in Europe.
Definitely not working... Oh wait

~~~
goggles99
Ohh please, it's a mess over there (I have family who has lived there for
almost 20 years who I talk to regularly). France is on a steady decline. If
this was so great - why are things getting worse over there rather than
better?

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

------
TheSOB88
Conversely, start working( harder ).

~~~
benburleson
Do you mean _smarter_?

