Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses

Ask Slashdot: Does Your Work Schedule Make You Unproductive? 311

Posted by Soulskill
from the only-when-breaking-bad-is-on-at-the-same-time dept.
debingjos writes "Management at my company seems to think that our developers can get extra work done if they work extra long days. However, as one of the devs in question, I don't agree. When I've been coding for eight hours, my pool of concentration is exhausted. Working overtime either fails to produce any extra code, or the quality of the code is very bad. What is the community's opinion on this? This can be broken out further into several questions: What are the maximum number of hours you can work in a day/week and still be reasonably productive? When you absolutely must work beyond that limit, what steps do you take to minimize degradation of quality? If you're able to structure your time differently from the typical 9-5 schedule, what method works best for you? Finally, how do you communicate the quality problems to management?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ask Slashdot: Does Your Work Schedule Make You Unproductive?

Comments Filter:
  • by sinij (911942) on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:45PM (#44907195) Journal
    You will never change them. Find a company that allows flex hours and doesn't manage by putting out fires with more fires. They are out there.
    • by MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) <myfirstnameispaul@gmail.com> on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:02PM (#44907407) Homepage Journal
      This issue occurs across all careers, not just programmers. A friend of mine is an accountant and he has had the same issues. What he has learned is to just move on to another employer. It's not worth the heartache and permanent hair loss to stick around.
    • by gl4ss (559668)

      from the sounds of it he doesn't actually need flex hours.

      he needs a company with a management that understands working day being 8 hours..

      12 hours would still be 12 hours no matter how "flex" it was!

      • I agree but for one bit: It all depends on the individual, and what's going on at the time. A project that is interesting will keep me happily occupied for 12-14 hours straight (yet only feels like a couple of hours). A task that is exceedingly difficult will likely require a couple extra hours to solve (or reach a good stopping point) - just to avoid having to re-familiarize yourself with the problem all over again come the next day (or worse, waking up at 2:00 am to write down ideas and things your restle

    • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

      It's not easy to get another good job these days, so I suggest either having a mental breakdown due to stress and suing your boss or going Fight Club on them and getting paid to do nothing for the rest of your life.

      Whatever you do, make sure your bosses know why you are going. Otherwise they will never learn.

  • by StuartHankins (1020819) on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:46PM (#44907205)
    Now that's just me, but taking a break and stepping back makes a huge boost to my productivity. I also code best late at night because I'm not distracted or disturbed and can get into something without worrying about a schedule. I can do several days of 10-12 hours if needed but not more than that before work quality suffers.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by x0ra (1249540)
      By "distraction" do you mean 3 group of people having right now conversation around me ? I hate openspaces...
      • If I had to work in a cube, someone would die.
        • by x0ra (1249540)
          I much prefer to work from home, provided I have a dedicated work area/machines.
          • I much prefer to work from home, provided I have a dedicated work area/machines.

            Ditto - I found that I was way more productive when there wasn't a stream of folks interrupting, ambient noises, etc. As long as everyone at home knows to leave you be unless the house is on fire, working at home is awesome for productivity.

            OTOH, it does make things harder for you in regards to office politics and all the intangible bits that can make or break your career...

        • If you're in a cube [imdb.com], someone will die.

        • by Alsee (515537)

          Agreed. I always insist upon a tetrahedron in my employment contract.

          -

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Valdrax (32670)

          Having worked in cubes and open spaces, I'll take my cube any day. Inadequate privacy to concentrate in is much better than no privacy.

      • by 1s44c (552956)

        Noise canceling headphones work as long as you don't mind having to listen to music all your working day.

        Sadly they don't stop people from talking to you.

    • by 1s44c (552956) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:06PM (#44907449)

      Pointless telephone calls and stupid 'do you have a minute' conversations waste about half of my day.

      I'm with you on working outside office hours and ideally outside the office.

    • by JaredOfEuropa (526365) on Friday September 20, 2013 @06:12PM (#44908003) Journal
      Good point about distractions. Good managers or team leads will make sure their coders are not distracted. Someone mentioned phone calls and silly questions taking up half of their work day, but interruptions are worse than that: interrupting a coder who is in "flow" even for one minute can easily cost half an hour or more of that coder's productivity. Even worse: nudging a coder out of flow several times a day for an extended period of time will lead to severe fatigue and, when under pressure to deliver, a high risk of burnout.

      Working coders need to be left alone. Not because they are prima donnas, just because of the nature of their work and the mindset required for it.
      • Good managers or team leads will make sure their coders are not distracted.

        Yes, a good manager shields his team from the rest of the company.

      • by m00sh (2538182) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:05PM (#44909687)

        Good point about distractions. Good managers or team leads will make sure their coders are not distracted. Someone mentioned phone calls and silly questions taking up half of their work day, but interruptions are worse than that: interrupting a coder who is in "flow" even for one minute can easily cost half an hour or more of that coder's productivity. Even worse: nudging a coder out of flow several times a day for an extended period of time will lead to severe fatigue and, when under pressure to deliver, a high risk of burnout. Working coders need to be left alone. Not because they are prima donnas, just because of the nature of their work and the mindset required for it.

        Hamming, a famous programmer at Bell Labs talks about open-doors and closed-doors. The general consensus is that people with open-doors tend to be more successful than people with closed-doors.

        It is very important to keep your ears to the ground and know what is going on in the workplace. Those "distractions" can sometimes be very important information that can save you hundreds of hours of works or advance your career. A "minute" talking to a person can reveal what a thousand words cannot.

  • by Archeopteryx (4648) * <benburch&pobox,com> on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:48PM (#44907239) Homepage

    In fact, I find that after the distractions of the office are gone, either because I am working at home or everybody has gone home, I can get a lot more done.

    • by roc97007 (608802) on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:53PM (#44907297) Journal

      In fact, I find that after the distractions of the office are gone, either because I am working at home or everybody has gone home, I can get a lot more done.

      Agreed. I'm the most productive when everyone else has gone home. But I pay for it by being dull and generally unresponsive the next morning. I'm thinking it's like the old proverb, you can't make a string longer by cutting off a piece and tying it to the other end.

      I think what we're saying is that there are productive hours and hours that you're required to ... be there ... and they're not necessarily the same hours.

      The collateral damage of staying late is that the company will start *expecting* you to stay late.....

  • Ever give a thought to a compressed work week of 4x10-hours instead of 5x8-hours? You could also try 3.5x12-hours (3x12 one week, 4x12 the next week) but that kind of schedule works better when you need 24/7 coverage.

    • by roc97007 (608802)

      Ever give a thought to a compressed work week of 4x10-hours instead of 5x8-hours? You could also try 3.5x12-hours (3x12 one week, 4x12 the next week) but that kind of schedule works better when you need 24/7 coverage.

      My impression is that companies argue (at least to themselves) why do I need to offer 4x10 when I'm already getting 5x10? I'd just be letting them take another day off.

      I worked for a manager once that didn't believe that anyone who practiced WFH actually worked when they were at home. His position was, you must be visibly in your cube to be considered to be working. Or, an employee at all. One might argue that just being seen at one's desk doesn't necessarily mean one is working, but I didn't make that

      • by pspahn (1175617)

        My impression is that companies argue (at least to themselves) why do I need to offer 4x10 when I'm already getting 5x10? I'd just be letting them take another day off.

        And that's when you describe to them the fact that they are exempt from paying you overtime, and part of that deal involves you working whenever you damn well feel like it. =)

      • by 1s44c (552956) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:14PM (#44907515)

        I worked for a manager once that didn't believe that anyone who practiced WFH actually worked when they were at home. His position was, you must be visibly in your cube to be considered to be working.

        Sounds like he was assuming other people would behave like him.

  • Marination (Score:5, Insightful)

    by El_Muerte_TDS (592157) <{elmuerte} {at} {drunksnipers.com}> on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:50PM (#44907269) Homepage

    Solving problems is like marinating meat. It takes time. If you rush it, you get a quick solution, but not the best. A quick solution might be acceptable for one meal, but not for future meals.
    The "Eureka effect" isn't something new.

    • Re:Marination (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Pino Grigio (2232472) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:06PM (#44907439)
      Please mod up everybody. This man has hit the nail on the head.

      So many times I've been at work doing nothing because I didn't have a solution or at least I had a gut feeling that the approach I was taking wasn't a good one. A night's sleep and a hot shower next morning and ta-da! The solution is suddenly makes itself available.
  • by intermodal (534361) on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:51PM (#44907271) Homepage Journal

    In creative endeavours like coding, an 8-hour day of actual work is never, ever 8 hours of successful coding, and often results in questionable code that I have to rewrite later because looking busy when you really need a bit of time away from the desk. I think that if I could get away from the desk more without being perceived as slacking off, I would actually get more done.

    Get up, take a walk around the block, play a little guitar, or whatever suits your fancy. As long as it gets your mind off the present obstacle. Come back with a fresh perspective and a fresh mind.

    It certainly does worlds of good for my own free-time projects, but at work? It seems more like people believe they are paying for time, and not for actual work done.

    • by roc97007 (608802)

      I absolutely agree. When talking about the number of hours worked, for any creative process, you're almost certainly asking the wrong question.

    • by mjwalshe (1680392)
      I all ways reckoned a walk to a nearby pub and a pint and a few game son pinball helped to clear my mind if i was stuck on a coding problem.
  • by hypergreatthing (254983) on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:51PM (#44907275)

    I recommend a 4 hour work day with same pay as the standard 80 hour work week.

    No i sort of jest. You have to figure a few things. Management isn't rated on how well the code is written or how productive the people they're managing are... well in the most cases where you have the upper management who are brain dead. What instead is how much they can push their employees to make them look like effective managers.
    Let me give you a basic example. If i work 8 hours a day, and the work i have assigned will take 3 weeks but i only have 1 week to do it in, a good manager will convince you to work twice as fast but not meet the deadline and then complain that they don't have enough resources. A bad manager will say it can't be done to upper management. Guess who is rewarded? The guy who puts on the dog and pony show for the upper management showing they can rally the troops in doing extra whether or not they met their goal.

    So back to the point. It doesn't matter how effective you are. It matters how much they can squeeze out of you. Change that mindset and you've won. Good luck though, i doubt you'll change anyone's mind.

  • For me, it depends on the context of what I'm doing.

    If I am doing something very complex, with many pieces that I have to keep in my head at once, I am much more productive if I stay with it and work late, even through the night.

    But if I am doing mundane bs stuff, one hour is too long before I start becoming unproductive.

    I have found multiple days of late hours will fry me if I do too many back to back. I need a night off somewhere in there or I wind up sitting in my chair just staring and doing nothing.

  • by penguinbrat (711309) on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:52PM (#44907283)

    As a developer, once I'm in the 'zone' I can code until I'm practically asleep... Although if I was forced to code for X hours, I couldn't say if I could 'enter' that zone or not - my guess is I wouldn't considering I would probably be thinking more about how pissed I was.

    • by Pino Grigio (2232472) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:07PM (#44907455)
      +1 for mentioning "the zone". I've experienced this. It's that time when you know what you're doing and how you're going to do it and every line of code you write is progress.
      • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

        I discovered that "the zone" isn't just something that happens randomly, you can get into it regularly and at a time of your choosing with some practice. You have to be well rested, well fed, free from stress and distractions, comfortable. In other words the biggest impediment is bad management.

    • by Kjella (173770)

      As a developer, once I'm in the 'zone' I can code until I'm practically asleep...

      Yeah, imagine you were working for yourself and set your own hours, would you really believe yourself saying "Nope, put in eight hours today no way I could get anything more done." or not? At the expense of having a life, sure I could put in more hours.

      my guess is I wouldn't considering I would probably be thinking more about how pissed I was.

      I'd be thinking about all the overtime pay I'd be getting, 150% and if they went all out then 200%. Did I mention I don't live in the US?

      • I've 'coded' for 16+ hours straight both 'on the clock' for a given company, and working on my own. It comes down to wanting to accomplish something or not, personally if I've come up with a funky way of doing something (code wise) I'll stick with it until it works or it doesn't.

        If you don't live in the US, your getting ripped off in the first place - the majority of the US is "ONLY" about profit, not living in the US changes the ball game completely.

    • by hey! (33014)

      I've been there, too, but I couldn't put my hand to my heart and swear that the stuff I produced after twelve hours was any good. I've never looked into it.

      But lets assume for sake of argument that "being in the zone" produces top notch code, that you're just as productive after ten or twelve hours in the zone as you are after three or four. You can't *demand* that somebody be in the zone. You can't make it happen by chaining somebody to their workstation for ten hours. In fact, the best thing if you

  • I have found that I really only have a few good hours of high productivity (not a programmer now, but applies just the same to other work). This is usually in the morning and I find I can get a lot done if I don't have meetings and interruptions. The rest of the day I just schedule low engagement tasks.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I am productive in "sessions", usually lasting about 1.5-2.5 hours. I usually have two sessions a day (morning, afternoon). The remaining time I browse the web (hello, Slashdot!), or go to meetings (does that count as "productive"?). I could easily produce the same amount of quality working 5 hour days, instead of 8 hour days. After 6 hours, I'm pretty much useless, other than answering silly questions.

    On top of that, I am more productive than entire departments (because I automate those departments!).

  • Studies say (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fustakrakich (1673220) on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:54PM (#44907313) Journal

    6 hours max per 24...

  • My experience (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:57PM (#44907347)

    I one took a job for a company developing a Futures Trading system, and they pushed us hard (at least 12 hours a day, 6-7 days a week) in order to meet their imposed deadline.

    We finally got the system to pass the entire test suite on a Sunday afternoon.

    Monday morning, when I arrived at work, the outer office was full of boxes containing all of the personal belongings of the developers, along with the CFO, who was handing out pink slips.

    Amazingly, they actually issued a press release boasting of how they had gotten rid of all of their expensive software developers since they were "done" with software development.

    In 3 months, they were out of business.

    Hope you fare better!

  • by Rigel47 (2991727) on Friday September 20, 2013 @04:58PM (#44907359)
    Any company that measures progress by how many hours your ass is in the chair is not a company worth working for. It's a sign management is not only incapable of measuring real productivity but that they are also indifferent to your well being.

    It's not the same thing but I work from home a couple days a week and it's great. I save a couple hours/week on the commute and get to spend some time working in a way that's best for me. And if after lunch I'm tired.. I go hit the couch for 20 mins of shut-eye. Wake up refreshed, far more productive, and in a better mood for when the kids and wife get home. WINNING.
  • I can work about 30 minutes on really boring stuff before I want to start sabotaging the work so no one is ever tempted to try to get me to do that kind of work ever again, and I can work like 16 hours a day on something if I find it really interesting.

    For my current job I am obligated to work 9 hours a day, and that seems pretty doable most of the time. I do however get a disproportionate amount of interesting work compared with other developers though.

  • I find 12 hour days 7 days a week are okay for a while. After about 6 weeks you start to burn out and need to get some down time. I used to work 20 hours a day for weeks at a time back in my 20's and 30's. Now that I'm 50 I can't pull that kind of schedule. It's kind of like you work, eat and sleep and nothing else. Life turns into a fog.

  • by seniorcoder (586717) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:00PM (#44907377)
    Eat your hearts out.
    I'm recently retired and loving it.
    I'm currently building a kayak rack in my back yard without any deadlines.
    Sometimes I just put down the tools and paddle off to check my crab pots.
    At the start of every day I sit on my patio overlooking the water, drink my coffee and decide what (if anything) I will do for the rest of the day.
    I wish I could have retired 40 years ago.
    So long and thanks for the fish.
  • by NoImNotNineVolt (832851) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:00PM (#44907385) Homepage
    I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work.
  • by ErichTheRed (39327) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:02PM (#44907397)

    One problem that IT folks often come across, especially with development jobs and especially at startups, is the expectation that long hours produce better results. Large companies also do this -- Google, Microsoft, etc. have on-site everything as a perk for employees, but also to keep them there for the maximum possible time. This works very well when you're just out of college -- you're used to working long hours to finish stuff, the dorm-like atmosphere is inviting, etc. But it really gets old when you're older, more established and have things outside of work like a marriage, family, etc.

    Also, employers hate to add staff in IT roles because most of them see the entire function as a necessary evil. If you're in one of these places, you'll never get free of being called to fix stuff out of hours and working like crazy to put out fires. On top of that, many see themselves as "great places to work" and don't think that their workers feel any of this pain.

    The one common myth throughout IT employment is that every place is like this. It isn't -- I happen to work for a place that allows flexible hours. And although we're lean in the staffing department and often have to work *a little* extra time, the workload isn't crushing. There are trade-offs, and people who work here know them. Pay isn't at the top of the range, the stuff we work on is typically not cutting edge (but not ancient either,) and the work our department does (systems integration) is very difficult if you don't have the right attitude/mindset/troubleshooting brain. In addition, those flexible hours get cashed in for marathon work sessions on very rare occasions. My company basically says "keep sane hours, make sure you're around for meetings, and we reserve the right to fly you halfway across the world if a disaster happens." I could get a job working myself to death for an investment bank or video game company, but I have a family at home now.

    Seriously, not everywhere has a toxic culture. And yes, I'm aware that there are a lot of people who love working insane hours and have very little to do outside of work. That's why different companies have different work styles.

  • Used to (Score:5, Informative)

    by Oligonicella (659917) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:04PM (#44907427)
    This will all be 'used to':

    What are the maximum number of hours you can work in a day/week and still be reasonably productive?

    Entirely dependent on the project. If I was intensely interested, I could work much longer.

    When you absolutely must work beyond that limit, what steps do you take to minimize degradation of quality?

    There is no 'absolutely must'. If you have a limit, it's a limit. It's unhealthy to push past that, people have died.

    If you're able to structure your time differently from the typical 9-5 schedule, what method works best for you?

    Four long days followed by three off.

    Finally, how do you communicate the quality problems to management?

    Walk up, say "Hey....

  • by Fubari (196373) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:06PM (#44907445)

    Management at my company seems to think that our developers can get extra work done if they work extra long days.

    Your management's "thinking" is nothing new.
    *shrug*
    What you're really asking is how to deal with your management.
    So here, check out Death March by Yourdon. [amazon.com]
    This will answer all your questions (as well as things you didn't think to ask), with more wisdom and insight than you're likely to find via "Ask Slashdot."
    It will also give you some perspective to make informed decisions about your options.
    The reviews on Amazon will tell you if this is a book for you.

  • In a perfect world managers would just tell their employees

    Your job description and duties are those that an average person of your skills can do with a 40-hour workweek. You can set your own schedule and work as little or as much as you need to, just get the job done and be available for meetings on short notice during "core business hours." If you get bored, let me know, there is always more work to do.

    There is no such thing as a perfect world.

    • by mx+b (2078162)
      I wish the perfect world manager was much easier to find! I have noticed that when I am focused on a project, I can actually work for a whole day -- 10-12 hrs or even longer sometimes (with 15 min breaks here and there for a snack or bathroom). It can be incredibly productive because I keep on the same train of thought without interruption and just hack out all of my ideas. However, when I do that, the next day I need to recover and relax and not do anything useful. If I could set my hours and work a couple
  • management (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Tom (822) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:09PM (#44907469) Homepage Journal

    Unfortunately, management is a largely evidence-free space. Research on all your questions, and a thousand more, exists. 99% of managers don't seem to know anything about management nor people. Not in the way anyone else knows anything about their profession. That's largely because few people actually study management, most are something else by profession and were promoted to management positions, and if you're lucky they got two weeks of training.

    Your case is typical. Managers don't know about how people work, so they try to manage them like any other resource. But, as the excellent little book "Peopleware" put it: "Adding manpower to a late project makes it later."

    If you want to have a good job - leave. A company with that kind of management is unlikely to change.

    If you can't or don't want to, buy your manager that book, or some other. Send it to his private address, anonymously. You don't want to embarass him. He most likely knows that he needs help, but he would never admit it.

    • by Kjella (173770)

      Your case is typical. Managers don't know about how people work, so they try to manage them like any other resource. But, as the excellent little book "Peopleware" put it: "Adding manpower to a late project makes it later."

      Umm I think they got that chapter and figured "Well if we can't add people, the people we already have must work more." At least that was the implication I got from the summary.

  • by seebs (15766) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:10PM (#44907485) Homepage

    This is a well-researched topic with hard data available. And it's pretty unambiguously and consistently the case that the hard data show that working extra hours results, not just in lower productivity per hour, but lower productivity overall. Which is why people who start pushing for extra hours can't seem to catch up -- they're making it worse rather than better.

    Your managers are trying to find out just how much gasoline they have to pour on this fire to put it out, and I don't think you can reasonably expect them to get smarter.

    • by slimdave (710334)

      That is all true, but the days of "scientific management" are over, and research does not matter.

      Managers believe that you achieve efficiency and greatness through gut feeling and tough talk and catchy slogans. They are not interested in learning otherwise, and 90% of them were never taught management, they just got promoted into it.

      There are a few companies that will make sensible, evidence-based choices, but the only true fix is to work for yourself.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I work for myself, so no one tells me when to start or stop working. I rent an office and work offsite most of the time so I'm able to come and go as I need to. In some sense I'm the extreme example of someone who is free to work whenever, however, and sometimes whereever I want to. The only complication is that fact that a few of my clients end up schedule regular (very useless) meetings on status. Apart from that I tend to work normal hours - 9 AM to 6 PM. Then, if I have the energy and the appetite

  • by Bacon Bits (926911) on Friday September 20, 2013 @05:24PM (#44907591)

    I worked in hospital IT several years back. Hospitals routinely schedule doctors and nurses for 12 hour shifts 3 days a week.

    While I was there a report was released that said that after extensive study of doctor and nurse patient care habits throughout their work day, they determined that the quality of patient care dropped sharply after 8 hours. During hours 9-12 the risk of being misdiagnosed (incompletely or inaccurately), administer incorrect medications (patient allergies or medication contraindications), administer incorrect dosages of medications, etc. The risks were almost double compared to the previous 8 hours. After hour 12 the risks got even worse. The study estimated that preventable accidents would fall over 75% by changing to four 8 hour days.

    Unfortunately, the attitudes of doctors and nurses were that the quality of their patient care was just fine, and nobody wanted to give up the schedules that they currently had. The medical field has a culture of overworking yourself and working while tired, so they are highly resistant to change even in the face of such profound data revealing how destructive their behavior was to patient well-being.

    • by PRMan (959735)
      Not to mention that with nursing shortages, many nurses work 2 sets of 12 hour shifts at 2 different hospitals. I knew a woman working M W F at one hospital and T Th S at another. 72 hours per week. She had Sundays off.
      • by Skapare (16644)

        Is that better than 8 hours at one place followed by 8 hours at another place, and 6 hours sleep per day, for each of 5 days a week? Probably.

  • A few years ago I was on a very large project (over 1MLOC of C++ code in the end). The customer required us to be using and audited to at least SEI CMM level 3 (I think this is called something different now) and so we underwent putting in all the processes in place. We all predicted we'd hate all the formal process, but an interesting side effect is we got very good at sizing new features and the various other change requests we'd get, and the consequence of this was it was very rare we actually needed to

  • I keep most of my coding for my own self-employed projects because I know that no manger would ever let me work how I want to. I can spend a week mulling over a problem, every waking and sleeping hour and the solution will come to me while I'm jogging or eating or on the can and it will take an hour of coding and twice that testing/debugging. It might only be ten lines of code but it will be something that gives me a glow inside of something being properly right.

    My point is that coding is a creative process

    • by Skapare (16644)

      I did thinking on the throne today for my current project. Started coding. Hit an incompatibility in the script I'm calling. So back to thinking. Back to the throne.

  • Management doesn't want you to think. They just want you to code.

  • Coding is more like writing a book than building a car. There is little reason to enforce a schedule and central location on everyone.
    In the end, it's all about your ability to deliver - that's what determines your worth, so it should be up to each individual to determine what works best for them, as far as schedule and location.

  • by Joe_Dragon (2206452) on Friday September 20, 2013 @06:08PM (#44907973)

    Cut full time down to 32 hours a week or less.

    Also there can be some dead / down time in jobs where you are just waiting for stuff to happen or others to sign off / work there end.

    Also to many jobs have all of this face time BS as well.

The flow chart is a most thoroughly oversold piece of program documentation. -- Frederick Brooks, "The Mythical Man Month"

Working...