Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Increasing Sustainable Pace

Expand Messages
  • henrikjernevad
    Hi, thanks for comments. ... I d most definitely agree with this. But, it s not the 8+ hours of absolutely focused work I m looking for. You can manage to do
    Message 1 of 32 , Apr 9, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi, thanks for comments.

      > But I do not think a solid, unbroken, nose to the screen and fingers
      > to the keys effort for a solid 8 hours a day is sustainable. I think
      > many people work well in productive spurts of maybe 2 hours, then need
      > a bit of timeout on something else, or nothing else.

      I'd most definitely agree with this. But, it's not the 8+ hours of
      absolutely focused work I'm looking for. You can manage to do more
      than one such spurt during a day, and keep a sustainable pace. So how
      many spurts then? My goal isn't to push someone *over* their ability,
      but just up to it. That's best for both the company and the individual
      developer (given that the developer wants to improve).

      Part of my point is also that I think how much one can work is very
      individual. I think it's very common that programmers even after work
      go home and keep coding (on other things). Thus, it's not ability to
      keep programming that is lacking, it's just the motivation to do so on
      the same project. So how do you make a programmer think "I don't want
      to go home, I want to keep coding on this fantastic project" rather
      than "I want to go home so I can continue coding on my own pet project"?

      For example, Google is insanely smart when they allow developers a day
      a week to do their own pet projects at work rather than at home. It's
      so smart that it's a wonder why other companies doesn't follow. Just
      look at how many of Google's products were started this way.

      > I think that everyone has their own personal pace, their own
      > personal span of concentration and endurance. But any manager who
      > tries to squeeze people to ever greater efforts is kicking a dead
      > horse after a certain, and probably undefinable, time.

      Maybe it is, as you say, undefinable. Then I'm out of luck. But I
      won't give up without trying.
    • henrikjernevad
      ... Thanks for noticing. ;-) That was the main thought I had when I wrote the blog post as well. Unfortunately, however, I don t think it came across all too
      Message 32 of 32 , Apr 13, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Little"
        <jhlittle@...> wrote:

        > Within your post is a great idea: that we should never be satisfied
        > with what we have accomplished. And should always be looking at
        > ways to get better.

        Thanks for noticing. ;-) That was the main thought I had when I wrote
        the blog post as well. Unfortunately, however, I don't think it came
        across all too well.

        > However, in my view you are stuck on one mode of measurement that is
        > not terribly relevant: number of hours worked.

        I believe you are right (as are most others who've commented in this
        thread). Number of hours isn't *the* best metric. It's unclear if it
        is good metric at all. Anyhow, it's the wrong place to start.

        > There are lots of associated issues (technical debt, motivation,
        > etc), but that's too much for a post here.

        It is those associated issues I was hoping to discuss here. As I wrote
        in the article, I believe motivation and discipline are two of the
        main factors in this equation. In retrospect, I regret mentioning
        working hours. I believe the main idea is very much valid without a
        specific reference to hours.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.