working hard when I was younger (grad school, then postdoc, and later a PI at a national lab) opened up freedom and opportunities later in life (higher income, more desirable job options). I see it as a reasonable tradeoff especially given the exponential growth of invested money.
I agree. Putting in hard work usually pays off rather than stifle your chances, under the right conditions.
I think what detractors are reacting to is the attitude that putting in hard work or long hours are a path to success.
They would prefer that having a desire for success would be enough to be successful so that the kid who rolls out of bed at 11 has the same chance at success as the person putting in 80 hours.
Now, I don’t personally think 80 hours is sustainable but for some circumstances it does help, such as early stages of running a business or similar situations.
Of course good planning is better than having to crunch, but sometimes you have to crunch. None the les, I still don't think this is their quibble. Their quibble is that working hard for success makes the workshy look bad.
If you are going to you should strategically work (some ) weekends or extra hours in the way a baseball player puts extra reps in at the cages on their own time or the flutist rehearses to make first chair.
This applies to anyone though. Perhaps more so for young people because they are more likely to be new in their field.
Just working 90 hours week after week for the merit badge won't get you anywhere.
Strategically learning additional skills or uber prepping for a presentation or building a rock solid business case will. These are typically achieved in extra hours. Sorry but it is true.
Now, it might not be for everyone. If you find the right life/work/career balance at your current trajectory then no one is forcing you to do these things. Showing strategic initiative however is one of if not the number one way to push your own advancement.
This is good advice and something similar helped me quite a bit when young (and still when old).
I’ve been lucky enough to usually work on what’s interesting to me. I care a lot about my work and so like to spend time outside of work learning, training, working extra.
Also, there are some firms where there are zero sum situations where competing with co-workers is a real thing. Working weekends gives an advantage.
The question is whether this is fair or sustainable or whatnot. But the reality is that this can be helpful.
I find managers who demand this to be complete assholes though. I’m fine being flexible with my time and me deciding when I want to work extra. Having someone else expect or order is completely lame and having leadership say stuff like this would demoralize me.
I like to keep my weekend work pretty secret so as not to “brag” or let management know this is an option.
In a community of Olympians, the idea of not training on the weekend would be considered laughable and a non starter. It's the same in any field if you want exceptional results.
Olympians are also religious about taking care of themselves. They absolutely will take off as much time as they need to make sure they're performing at their peak.
I've never worked at a place that in my view meaningfully rewarded weekend work like this. In fact my salary went up considerably once I stopped doing it and people seemed to respect me more.
My advice for young people is to make damn sure there actually is a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow and make sure you have in writing exactly how it will be distributed. People who want to actually pay you aren't afraid to put those terms to paper, people who are looking to take advantage run screaming from a paper trail.
My younger self agrees so much with this. I've found little or negative correlation between pushing myself past 50 hours and career success. I even used to joke to a colleague - "the less I work, the more they tell me how well I'm doing".
I think it's because less work gives more time to think through strategy. Strategy will usually beat tactics.
Is it so binary? Maybe people are reprioritizing work relative to things like family, environment, health.
That rationale makes sense to me, after the year and half of lockdowns and torrent of abysmal climate news, regardless of whether it is the right strategy to solve the problems we have.
The author of the tweet may be talking about how to be successful in a narrowly defined context of business, and getting a lot of blowback from people suggesting there may be other ways to define success that don't require the fetishization of career growth.
Absolutely, the best way you can kickstart a career in which you will be heavily exploited by your employer is to show early on that you're super happy to be exploited.
I've worked on select weekends to make my life easier, those were worth the investment. Working yourself sick seems like a type of mental health issue people don't address, stuck in a hussle cult.
I worry that all these debates don’t take into account all the major problems facing our society.
I believe strongly in work life balance. But have also found that truly difficult problems to be solved often tip that balance.
I feel a “let me focus on other things“ attitude at a mass population level is at odds with things like retooling the economy around green energy, rebuilding infrastructure, making fundamental changes to healthcare, education, countering hungry, authoritarian regimes, etc.
We need a balance of people doing enough hard work solving hard problems so others can work 25 hour weeks. Who is going to do that?
22 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 38.8 ms ] threadI think what detractors are reacting to is the attitude that putting in hard work or long hours are a path to success.
They would prefer that having a desire for success would be enough to be successful so that the kid who rolls out of bed at 11 has the same chance at success as the person putting in 80 hours.
Now, I don’t personally think 80 hours is sustainable but for some circumstances it does help, such as early stages of running a business or similar situations.
Of course good planning is better than having to crunch, but sometimes you have to crunch. None the les, I still don't think this is their quibble. Their quibble is that working hard for success makes the workshy look bad.
If you are going to you should strategically work (some ) weekends or extra hours in the way a baseball player puts extra reps in at the cages on their own time or the flutist rehearses to make first chair.
This applies to anyone though. Perhaps more so for young people because they are more likely to be new in their field.
Just working 90 hours week after week for the merit badge won't get you anywhere.
Strategically learning additional skills or uber prepping for a presentation or building a rock solid business case will. These are typically achieved in extra hours. Sorry but it is true.
Now, it might not be for everyone. If you find the right life/work/career balance at your current trajectory then no one is forcing you to do these things. Showing strategic initiative however is one of if not the number one way to push your own advancement.
I’ve been lucky enough to usually work on what’s interesting to me. I care a lot about my work and so like to spend time outside of work learning, training, working extra.
Also, there are some firms where there are zero sum situations where competing with co-workers is a real thing. Working weekends gives an advantage.
The question is whether this is fair or sustainable or whatnot. But the reality is that this can be helpful.
I find managers who demand this to be complete assholes though. I’m fine being flexible with my time and me deciding when I want to work extra. Having someone else expect or order is completely lame and having leadership say stuff like this would demoralize me.
I like to keep my weekend work pretty secret so as not to “brag” or let management know this is an option.
The equivalent of training in the IT field is learning, not working.
My advice for young people is to make damn sure there actually is a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow and make sure you have in writing exactly how it will be distributed. People who want to actually pay you aren't afraid to put those terms to paper, people who are looking to take advantage run screaming from a paper trail.
I think it's because less work gives more time to think through strategy. Strategy will usually beat tactics.
I feel bad for her. Hope it gets better.
That rationale makes sense to me, after the year and half of lockdowns and torrent of abysmal climate news, regardless of whether it is the right strategy to solve the problems we have.
The author of the tweet may be talking about how to be successful in a narrowly defined context of business, and getting a lot of blowback from people suggesting there may be other ways to define success that don't require the fetishization of career growth.
I believe strongly in work life balance. But have also found that truly difficult problems to be solved often tip that balance.
I feel a “let me focus on other things“ attitude at a mass population level is at odds with things like retooling the economy around green energy, rebuilding infrastructure, making fundamental changes to healthcare, education, countering hungry, authoritarian regimes, etc.
We need a balance of people doing enough hard work solving hard problems so others can work 25 hour weeks. Who is going to do that?