Ask HN: How to deal with constant interruptions at work (with ADHD)
What are some strategies that have worked for you?
I find new input in slack more stimulating than my difficult tasks at hand. Going offline on slack is probably not an option.
I find new input in slack more stimulating than my difficult tasks at hand. Going offline on slack is probably not an option.
96 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 152 ms ] threadBlock your calendar to stop virtual interruptions.
I tried (and was successful) for years with gun mufflers with earplugs, but I got into a company where some salespeople couldn't get the message, so the switch to headphones over earplugs.
It's the next best thing to a strong ADD med :)
Also, considering your seemingly constant barrage, the pomodoro method (easily googled)
> Going offline on slack is probably not an option.
Out of curiosity, what makes you say this? What would happen if you were to close slack for an hour?
Turning slack off is totally an option.
Going offline from Slack for 1-2 hours a day might not be impossible? That’s a start. Try it and then evaluate after a week or two.
i3wm achieves something similar on Linux.
What I do is keep any chat and such closed and only accept e-mail. I then have two set times a day where I check it by going through the mailbox. There should be no argument that you can't do this unless you're employed to be always on-call and need to be responsive in 5 minutes.
Make sure to generate a paper trail when asking.
The only way is to go nuclear: uninstall it from your phone and close the desktop app. But that isn't doable in most companies.
I'd rather have one developer take a hit to their productivity to answer a coworkers questions and keep the whole team moving forward than have the team blocked so that one employee can complete their ticket in a single uninterrupted block.
While focusing on work it will be harder to notice the red dot but won't be turned off.
Music helps when it's hard to focus, I prefer some genre of instrumentals.
This is key for me. Not just the sound (since I keep the audio muted across the board anyway), but turning all notifications off entirely and keeping them that way. I mean all notifications, not just comms-related ones. Then you can use little dots to see if someone needs you in a comms and periodically check things manually when you're in a spot where that's not disruptive.
Notifications are one of the worst things ever.
Limited time? Who thought that was a good idea?
This is a list of things I’ve done on and off for the last 2 years and feel like it improved my focus.
- get rid of possible distractions (phone-turned off all the notifications) - read books constantly (I made a rule to read at least 1 page a day) - meditation - morning pages (is more like a journaling, but continuous flux of thoughts written on 3 letter pages every morning)
The morning pages I think helped me the most not only for my focus, but also for my mental wellbeing.
Unless you're in a support role and actively on-call for coverage for a period of time, I think I would revisit this assumption and be sure you collapse the "probably" to something more definitive.
If you're in a more typical development role, turning off Slack for periods of time is probably an option. Talk to your manager, describe the problem you're facing, your proposal to trial going off Slack for 2 hours (or whatever) at a time, and see what they think.
Ironic it is called Slack, and we are more productive when not "Slacking off."
Depends on the role and the org I guess, but for me I just mute notifications and then close the Slack app whenever I need to focus. (Mute so that the phone app won’t start spamming me after I’ve closed the Desktop app.)
I was taking the cue from OP's post that they thought that was "probably not an option" so I suggested they clarify as they seemed unwilling to "just do it".
- Unless someone is coming to you with an urgent ask, either delay getting back to them or just tell them that you need heads-down time right now.
- Pause notifications in Slack. On top of this, add your phone number to your Slack profile and make it clear to everyone that they can still reach you if everything's on fire.
- Mute most of the Slack channels you feel obligated to join. Why companies and even individual employees believe that more channels is better, I have no clue. Complete waste of time.
- Invent reasons to skip your daily standup. Even a 15 minute interruption can disrupt you from being in your zone. Screw these lame ass status update meetings in disguise.
- Just say no to pair programming if you're in a flow, unless the other person needs urgent help.
- If you work in an office, find a hallway or room deep in the bowels of the office building where no one seems to go and do your work there. There was an office I worked at once where there was a concrete hallway way in the bottom corner of the building where almost nobody went but it had a treadmill desk, so I worked down there a lot in peace. Some lady eventually figured out I was doing this and started spreading rumors that I was creepy or that I had quit. Just ignore idiots like this if that happens. That office environment was loud.
- Observe what area of the office floor is the least noisy (and possibly furthest away from your interrupt-happy team members) and ask management if you can switch to a desk over there.
- Recognize when being distracted isn't a bad thing. Everyone's mileage may vary, but personally, being ultra-focused all the time made no impact on my career versus working diligently but not punishing myself if I felt like stepping away from work for a while. Time spent at the keyboard doesn't have a one-to-one relationship with productivity in tech. Above all, you're not a cog.
My team won't update ticket comments, they wont read emails, they won't read Teams channel questions directed at them. I try to keep these things at a minimum so that I can't be accused of making a point about over-stimulation - I get it.
But if they start to skip standup, the one time each day I can ask them where the hell one of my things I need is, then I have no reliable connection to them at all. And I'm not a boss so all I can do is beg.
You're in a tough position, it sounds. You're a lead, yet likely restricted to leading technology and not so much people. I don't know what your leadership style is, but I've noticed some people are treated like bosses for merely acting the part, so that's something to consider.
Also, what I meant to say was that a person should skip standup if it actually benefits their productivity. They should show up to some standups, perhaps most. Hypothetically, standups could be done well, but I don't usually experience this. I don't think people should never show up to team rituals.
There must be an interesting story that explains why companies everywhere created the powerless tech lead position separate from manager. The tech lead is stuck in an impossible situation, apparently.
I hate being in hundreds of channels but it's the way people found to segment long discussions or projects. I've heard tools like Zulip have better ways to organize this but I haven't tried them extensively (and I doubt I could convince the whole company to switch).
I think this is on Slack, tbh.
Excellent advice for many, but those don't work for everybody. Doing those things increases my anxiety quite a lot and reduces my ability to work even more.
After years of carefully managing/challenging expectations of me, here's what my work situation looks like today.
- I work 100% remotely. If I go into the office, I will only be interrupted constantly, dragged into meetings, etc.
- My Teams status is set to "offline" at all times, with notifications disabled. No exceptions. I check Teams messages between tasks, before/after lunch, and at the end of the work day.
- Unproductive Teams messages, like impromptu requests for status updates, questions which have well-documented answers, or that I've answered directly on multiple recent occasions, are completely ignored.
- All work requests which are not submitted via official channels are ignored. The remainder are addressed only if they are submitted, or assigned, directly by my manager. I completely ignore all other work requests.
- I've created dozens of mail rules to filter out almost all of the noise in my inbox, including the company newsletter, timesheet reminders, office-specific messages (bagels in the lunch room!?!), etc.
I know I'm a pain in the ass, but at least my sanity is stable after years of overwhelming frustration while trying to effect even the slightest change in others.
Some of the most incredible programmers I’ve had the pleasure of working with were just like this, and I felt like it was my job as their boss to help them keep it that way.
There’s a bias for visibility and not actual work that I think makes it really difficult for those on the spectrum or who have adhd or just difficulty refocusing after getting interrupted have to deal with that doesn’t get a lot of support in the modern workplace. To boot, this culture drives type-a, need to talk face-to-face, achievement focused personalities absolutely crazy.
I can’t tell you have many times I’ve had to say no to some over controlling stakeholder who “needs in person morning status updates” every day. It absolutely killed our code velocity when we tried it and the late night crew thought they were hitler.
Ime. Depends. If it’s in service to the work, and the developers find it useful, then sure. But I’ve seen teams work a whole lot of different ways and be successful.
But the important thing is that the team finds it useful.
There are plenty of ways to build a product or a company that doesn’t rely on a daily meeting.
Remember that Scrum doesn't care about the format: that's up to the developers to decide. Scrum only cares that people stay on the same page and most importantly are productive in helping move forward with open communication and collaboration to hit the sprint goals.
I’ve seen this meeting used by clients and executives to micromanage everything, and sometimes telling the “business owner” they aren’t invited to the meetings isn’t possible. For example, telling a non-technical, micromanaging startup CEO who’s just discovered the power of SCRUM while under pressure for a raise and feeling behind on their product delivery to sit down and just listen very easily. Or in some teams doing a daily meeting works only around releases and they don’t feel like it’s useful all the time. There are a lot of forms that works successfully, but everyone has strong opinions on what does and does not work.
You don’t want to be too prescriptive. What my experience has taught me is to have someone in charge of the product delivery — and then allow them to run the show with whatever support they need. That allows for a lot of flexibility while keeping accountability.
that's not bias, someone that behaves like OP without proven record is just eccentric.
Fortunately, my manager agrees that work requests should be submitted via official channels (i.e. the appropriate project management / issue tracking system).
I have good communication with my manager. I regularly ask for their feedback about my behavior, and if they think I should be handling situations differently. I always take any suggestions very seriously and either do my best to accommodate them or discuss my concerns openly so that I'm not putting myself in a difficult situation.
I've tried to explain, but despite being met with agreement regarding my perspective, the behavior would continue time and time again.
I find that simply not responding in such cases is the most effective action. Anything else feels like rewarding the behavior.
Note, however, that I do try and give them the benefit of the doubt. If it seems at all like they've tried to find answers or solve the issue themselves, have searched for and read related documentation, etc., and subsequently decided that my assistance is required, I am beyond happy to help. I really, truly, enjoy being helpful, but sometimes it feels like I'm being taken advantage of.
Most of the questions I get these days include a brief explanation of the effort made before contacting me, which I really appreciate. Needless to say, I absolutely do the same for others, even if they don't have the same expectation of me.
I would press you to either make some consolations on your lack of response and ignoring of messages.
Unless you’re in HFT or an environment that is not dependent on relationships but systems, like government.
If they’re behaving that way unannounced then yeah, it’s not good but if the manager is aware then all that’s needed is “hey team, Andy is on the spectrum and prefers to work this way. Please try to accommodate, any issues let me know”
Those requirements aren’t challenging to meet for a coworker.
Imagine someone comes to your desk and says they need help with something and you say "Please go away, you're distracting me" or you simply ignore their presence. How would they feel?
I'm not saying OP is doing it at that level but I think you can see my point.
Nevertheless I'll try to put this in neutral terms. Hopefully I get my point across without sounding too punchy.
I'm at work to work. It sometimes feels like managers and companies put you in a double-bind. On one hand I am supposed to be a factory-line worker, solving ticket after ticket. Make whatever metric go up so to speak. On the other I'm supposed to be part of a "community", get involved, be proactive, show my brilliance and creativity..
I've found that I have to place heavy emphasis on the code-monkey side of things. Even if the internal communication is the other way around (e.g. by the usage of the word toxic). Because creativity happens for its own sake, shipping product is a second thought at best. We framed the market in rigid and mechanical terms. And Ii the end we have to abide to that sterility in order to succeed.
I would press you to reflect on why you think you have the right to tell a stranger how to behave. Why your opinion of "correct" behavior is the only possible valid option.
People like you have this assumption that autistic people somehow owe you. That you expect them to go through a great deal of stress and effort to act they way you want. If they do, you give them nothing in return. If they instead prioritize their own comfort and wellbeing, you give them abuse and call them toxic.
Edit: for perspective, telling an autistic person they're toxic for doing what they need to cope is the same as calling a person in a wheelchair toxic because everyone else has to walk slower to keep up. This is abuse and does real harm to people.
Isn't that what OP is doing to coworkers?
These agreements should take everyone's individuality into account to find a balance or compromise in terms of personal preference and overall comfort (not to mention meeting the goals of the team from technical and business perspectives) which everyone involved finds acceptable.
My comfort is no more or less important than that of others.
I'm just pointing out the obvious: we are all telling others how to behave to a certain extent.
The response is "disabled people don't need accommodation, you should just act like you're not disabled no matter the personal cost"
The difference is between asking for help and setting boundaries for what you can tolerate, and telling someone else they're a bad person for being disabled.
One is reasonable, if annoying. The other is a direct attack on an individual.
40% disability is very common for diagnosed autistic people, meaning they are categorized with the same amount of impact on their wellbeing as crippled, wheelchaired, or mentally impacted people.
So I think the discussion and comparison that calamari4056 started is very well reasoned and makes sense in the context of "what society expects of you" vs "what you can expect of society".
I'm not sure why you're implying that disabled is a dirty word. That's the word that pretty much every disabled person uses to describe a disability. It's the official legal term for the same.
And yeah, it's a personal attack when you tell someone they're a bad person for having a disability that inconveniences you.
Basically;
lazy / inflexible management = productivity losses flexible & inclusive management = empowered people + awesome results
I’m curious if you have seen how the companies you work for handle any of the following problems I’ve seen come with this working style:
- PM breaks down tasks with such granularity that it’s like they’re programming the people doing the work. They learn a programming language through a bootcamp and start doing some tickets themselves, and now you have a key product person who is likely to leave for a developer job.
- PM gets burnt out from dealing with behavior that would be considered extremely impolite on a regular basis.
- No PM you have or could hire is capable of breaking down tasks in a way they will get worked on or responded to, at which point you have to find another dev/firm.
I haven't run into this scenario, but I have encountered project managers who want to read the code and advise on that level, which I don't think is very productive at all.
Unfortunately, in my experience, managers like this need to see for themselves how much time and energy is wasted trying to be this hands-on, as opposed to deferring to the developers.
> PM gets burnt out from dealing with behavior that would be considered extremely impolite on a regular basis.
I've had this happen with multiple project managers. My understanding is that working with people, including dealing with seemingly impolite behavior, is a part of any management role. This is precisely why I'm not interested in management — I'd be terrible at it.
It should also be noted that I've experienced my own feelings of burnout as a result of dealing with the behavior of managers as well, and whether I find such behaviors to be impolite or not, the only control I have is with how I respond to them. I choose to do so in ways that allow me to avoid stress and frustration, and I'd do the same in their position.
As for the company's response to manager burnout in this situation, it's difficult to say because it mostly seems to happen behind closed doors. I've had managers quit projects, and I've been reassigned to other projects which were under different management. I'm fine with either case, as long as we're all able to work reasonably comfortably and have our individuality respected.
> No PM you have or could hire is capable of breaking down tasks in a way they will get worked on or responded to, at which point you have to find another dev/firm.
This has been a concern of mine in the past, and so I always try to provide examples of what I think are reasonable methods of communicating within the group. I design processes, describe roles and responsibilities, and set expectations as best I can, all while taking the preferences and individuality of others into account. I would never require my specific suggestions to be implemented as-described before participating, but I feel that the principles behind them should be understood and that reasonable efforts should be made to accommodate them. And I think all members of the team deserve the same considerations.
My experience is generally in environments where project managers are expected to also manage the people working on the project, at least to some extent, and so I didn't think to make this important distinction.
Now, though, I think "screw that". I want a life. So I just found a way to accept that working in an office environment means that I won't be able to do my best or most efficient work and don't worry about making up for it on my off time.
On days I go to office I focus on being present physically so my attendance is noted.
The commute (1 hour each way through dust and traffic) tires me out and I don't get much done that day either work wise or on personal front and go to sleep tired and early.
For remote work days I am able to take breaks in between and come back to desk when feeling productive and energetic. And I mix in some personal work during the day or office work till 8 or 9 PM as I feel like that day.
If your ADHD is preventing you from working effectively, you have the legal right to reasonable accommodations (going offline on Slack may be one).
Any decent engineering manager would be happy to work with you to find a way for you to work effectively, and the ADA gives them cover to make exceptions to company policy.
This is one of my favorites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqzGzwTY-6w
I fear that the solution to a noisy office being "add more noise" will cause hearing damage.
My solution was a pair of noise cancelling headphones and either really ambient music or brown noise like you mentioned. I've found it to be very effective with helping maintaining deep focus.
An alternative which is almost as good is using a novel enviornment to enforce the desired behaviour. i.e Go to a coffee shop. But this stops working after a while.
Also try using apps which block or limit you from distractions. Sure you could easily disable the blocker but that little bit of resistance is often enough.
I block out time when I look at email, jira, and messaging.
From my own ideas, I do not schedule meetings first thing in the morning. I reserve that time to think and do strategic planning.
Almost all electronic interruptions are optional. Put them in a dedicated browser identity, a dedicated email identity, a dedicated virtual machine, a dedicated physical machine, etc.
2. Flow is not a magical state. Work is how you get into flow. Work is how you recover from interruptions from a flow state. So just start doing something that needs to be done.
3. Drama is interesting. It is not work.
Good luck.