http://gizmodo.com/marissa-mayer-you-too-can-work-130-hours-a-week-if-y-1784822446?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_twitter&utm_source=gizmodo_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
QuoteMarissa Mayer: You, Too, Can Work 130 Hours a Week If You Plan When to Take a Shit
Sophie Kleeman
According to Marissa Mayer, who was Google's 20th employee and its first female engineer, the key to success at the search giant was hard work. Specifically, the kind of hard work that required strategically planned trips to the john.
Speaking to Bloomberg Businessweek for its 2016 interview issue, the Yahoo CEO shared her thoughts on the "Google story."
QuoteThe other piece that gets overlooked in the Google story is the value of hard work. When reporters write about Google, they write about it as if it was inevitable. The actual experience was more like, "Could you work 130 hours in a week?" The answer is yes, if you're strategic about when you sleep, when you shower, and how often you go to the bathroom. The nap rooms at Google were there because it was safer to stay in the office than walk to your car at 3 a.m. For my first five years, I did at least one all-nighter a week, except when I was on vacation—and the vacations were few and far between.
Beautifully, interviewer Max Chafkin responded with, "Wow." Do you think Google employees ended up synching their bathroom breaks with each other, like women and menstrual cycles?
Besides detailing the level of commitment needed to make it work at Google, Mayer also discussed her future at Yahoo ("I plan to stay. I love the company, and I want to see it go into its next chapter"), the challenges of balancing work life with home life (she recently gave birth to twins), and the surprises that emerged after she took over at Yahoo ("I didn't know how much time I would spend studying things like tax law and forming an opinion on Chinese e-commerce").
I'm still stuck on the bathroom comment, though. If any Google employees are reading this, please, get in touch. I am very interested to learn more about your strategy.
That is amazing. My productivity would take a nosedive after 60 hours. Amazing one can not only work that much but still be useful doing it. And I guess not throw yourself out the office window at some point.
130 hours only leaves you 5.4 hours to sleep each night.
Working 130 hours a week by itself isn't going to make you successful. But working 130 hours a week, being in the right place at the right time, and getting under the right person enough times, that can make you golden.
Quote from: DGuller on August 06, 2016, 01:04:04 PM
Working 130 hours a week by itself isn't going to make you successful. But working 130 hours a week, being in the right place at the right time, and getting under the right person enough times, that can make you golden.
This. It's physiologically impossible to be productive for such hours, but there *is* value in *pretending* to put in this much work.
I hope she is happy with her life choices. :)
Americans :bleeding: :weep:
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 06, 2016, 01:11:57 PM
Americans :bleeding: :weep:
It is a stupid tendency that often see in the US. I know computer programs often work ungodly hours during "crunch time".
Quote from: Razgovory on August 06, 2016, 03:22:08 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 06, 2016, 01:11:57 PM
Americans :bleeding: :weep:
It is a stupid tendency that often see in the US. I know computer programs often work ungodly hours during "crunch time".
We need to start a movement to grant rights to computer programs!
Quote from: Valmy on August 06, 2016, 01:01:52 PM
That is amazing. My productivity would take a nosedive after 60 hours. Amazing one can not only work that much but still be useful doing it. And I guess not throw yourself out the office window at some point.
good chance she used stimulants
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 06, 2016, 01:11:57 PM
Americans :bleeding: :weep:
As long as it made her happy...
My original comment was not made to be sarcastic. I would most likely not share her enthusiasm for this kind of arrangement, but it is possible her enthusiasm was genuine and she took satisfaction from it. What other purpose is there to life than that?
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 06, 2016, 01:11:57 PM
Americans :bleeding: :weep:
Saw this commercial this afternoon, I thought of you--
https://youtu.be/3H_PCKxTjMU
Quote from: Valmy on August 06, 2016, 01:01:52 PM
That is amazing. My productivity would take a nosedive after 60 hours. Amazing one can not only work that much but still be useful doing it. And I guess not throw yourself out the office window at some point.
Some people truly love their work; I think that is the difference. Some people are consumed by video games and play them constantly; for some people that same dynamic is at play with work.
Quote from: DGuller on August 06, 2016, 01:04:04 PM
Working 130 hours a week by itself isn't going to make you successful. But working 130 hours a week, being in the right place at the right time, and getting under the right person enough times, that can make you golden.
I'm guessing she was exaggerating 130 hours just because there are physical limitations at work. But a really smart person who is so consumed with work she puts in massive amounts of hours is going to be really tough to stop. That doesn't mean she will end up running a major corporation and worth hundreds of millions, but she won't be washing dishes either.
That's not hard work. That's long work. Totally different thing.
Quote from: Tyr on August 07, 2016, 12:30:15 PM
That's not hard work. That's long work. Totally different thing.
True. She's only worth $500 million and is already 41 years old. She's never made more than even $70 million in a single year. She'll never match your accomplishments no matter how many hours she works, because she doesn't work hard like you, she got stuck working long.
In fact, it's pathetic. Assume that she's worked 20 years, 50 weeks a year, 130 hours per week. That works out to a bit less than $4,000 per hour (even assuming she spent nothing in those 20 years). I bet you made double that per hour over your career with your hard but not long work.
Quote from: grumbler on August 07, 2016, 02:06:36 PM
Quote from: Tyr on August 07, 2016, 12:30:15 PM
That's not hard work. That's long work. Totally different thing.
True. She's only worth $500 million and is already 41 years old. She's never made more than even $70 million in a single year. She'll never match your accomplishments no matter how many hours she works, because she doesn't work hard like you, she got stuck working long.
In fact, it's pathetic. Assume that she's worked 20 years, 50 weeks a year, 130 hours per week. That works out to a bit less than $4,000 per hour (even assuming she spent nothing in those 20 years). I bet you made double that per hour over your career with your hard but not long work.
:bleeding:
No matter what she says (it is not unknown for even the most intelligent of people to have some dumb beliefs) the mere fact of working 130 hour weeks is not what get her where she is.
In Japan this idea that working long hours is automatically good is endemic, I saw it first hand. Its just wrong.
As Tyr and grumbler point out the special thing about people who get rich by working is their efficiency while they work.
Quote from: grumbler on August 07, 2016, 02:06:36 PM
Quote from: Tyr on August 07, 2016, 12:30:15 PM
That's not hard work. That's long work. Totally different thing.
True. She's only worth $500 million and is already 41 years old. She's never made more than even $70 million in a single year. She'll never match your accomplishments no matter how many hours she works, because she doesn't work hard like you, she got stuck working long.
In fact, it's pathetic. Assume that she's worked 20 years, 50 weeks a year, 130 hours per week. That works out to a bit less than $4,000 per hour (even assuming she spent nothing in those 20 years). I bet you made double that per hour over your career with your hard but not long work.
A demonstration of how the US executive compensation system is broken, while interesting for its own reasons, isn't directly relevant to the question of the advisability of the 130 hour work week.
Quote from: alfred russel on August 06, 2016, 09:30:37 PM
Quote from: Valmy on August 06, 2016, 01:01:52 PM
That is amazing. My productivity would take a nosedive after 60 hours. Amazing one can not only work that much but still be useful doing it. And I guess not throw yourself out the office window at some point.
Some people truly love their work; I think that is the difference. Some people are consumed by video games and play them constantly; for some people that same dynamic is at play with work.
This. This isn't really about how much money she made (although the success is her proof, given how much she made) but what she personally got out of it. It is silly to criticise her based on her choices - only she can say whether it was worth it - for her. Different people have different levels of work satisfaction and different priorities. What matters, ultimately, is whether she felt this was meaningful or not - and whether she will feel this way in 10 or 20 years.
Quote from: The Brain on August 07, 2016, 02:46:45 PM
As Tyr and grumbler point out the special thing about people who get rich by working is their efficiency while they work.
Being rich is just one side effect. Another person could spend 130 hours a week to develop a cure for cancer, or work for a non-profit charity. Ultimately, what matters is whether the person in question thinks it is a productive use of their time. You can't take your riches to your grave.
Quote from: Martinus on August 07, 2016, 03:43:12 PM
Quote from: The Brain on August 07, 2016, 02:46:45 PM
As Tyr and grumbler point out the special thing about people who get rich by working is their efficiency while they work.
Being rich is just one side effect. Another person could spend 130 hours a week to develop a cure for cancer, or work for a non-profit charity. Ultimately, what matters is whether the person in question thinks it is a productive use of their time. You can't take your riches to your grave.
wut
Quote from: The Brain on August 07, 2016, 03:57:57 PM
Quote from: Martinus on August 07, 2016, 03:43:12 PM
Quote from: The Brain on August 07, 2016, 02:46:45 PM
As Tyr and grumbler point out the special thing about people who get rich by working is their efficiency while they work.
Being rich is just one side effect. Another person could spend 130 hours a week to develop a cure for cancer, or work for a non-profit charity. Ultimately, what matters is whether the person in question thinks it is a productive use of their time. You can't take your riches to your grave.
wut
He's saying no one remember Crassus but everybody remembers the guy who cured polio.
Didn't many of the pharoahs take riches to their graves? (as just one example of a culture with such a practice)
One can take almost anything to the grave. It's beyond that that things get sketchy.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 06, 2016, 07:06:18 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 06, 2016, 01:11:57 PM
Americans :bleeding: :weep:
Saw this commercial this afternoon, I thought of you--
https://youtu.be/3H_PCKxTjMU
:lol: Basically.
But with America and China we're heading to 60 hour work weeks and having to pretend to enjoy it :bleeding:
Hour long lunches and six weeks of holidays should be enforced on all. Aggressively <_<
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 07, 2016, 02:52:42 PM
A demonstration of how the US executive compensation system is broken, while interesting for its own reasons, isn't directly relevant to the question of the advisability of the 130 hour work week.
As AR noted, the 130 hours is almost certainly an exaggeration, except in exceptional circumstances, but there are lots of people who work long hours effectively and get paid a shitload of money for it. Tyr's claim that Marissa Mayer worked long but did not work hard is not borne out by the evidence. Even if she has made four times as much as she should have because of "how the US executive compensation system is broken," she still made something like $1,000 an hour over her career. She probably had to produce to get that much.
Quote from: Sheilbh on August 07, 2016, 06:35:05 PM
But with America and China we're heading to 60 hour work weeks and having to pretend to enjoy it :bleeding:
Bummer, dude. You guys really think you are so inefficient you will need to work 50% more hours than Americans? I suppose the "having to pretend to enjoy it" part just comes with the stiff upper lip. :console:
Quote from: Liep on August 07, 2016, 04:36:36 PM
Quote from: The Brain on August 07, 2016, 03:57:57 PM
Quote from: Martinus on August 07, 2016, 03:43:12 PM
Quote from: The Brain on August 07, 2016, 02:46:45 PM
As Tyr and grumbler point out the special thing about people who get rich by working is their efficiency while they work.
Being rich is just one side effect. Another person could spend 130 hours a week to develop a cure for cancer, or work for a non-profit charity. Ultimately, what matters is whether the person in question thinks it is a productive use of their time. You can't take your riches to your grave.
wut
He's saying no one remember Crassus but everybody remembers the guy who cured polio.
Not really. Again, would you care if you are remembered once you are dead? I don't think so.
My point is that, if you work 130 hours a week, your motivation better be something more than just money - and as far as I can tell from reading biographies and accounts of many successful and rich people, it very often is something more than just money.
In other words, people have a tendency to reduce these things to pay-per-hour and to me this is entirely secondary.
If you are working a soul-crushing job that you absolutely hate and that makes you feel terrible, then even working 35 hours a week for a decent pay is too much.
If you are working a job you are passionate about and which brings you satisfaction, then working 130 hours a week can be rewarding.
Now, it so happens that the latter usually pays much more (or at least makes you advance faster), but as I said, it is just a side effect, not the main motivation.
Edit: And of course, for most people, neither extreme is true and they work a job that they feel lukewarm about and that pays decent - and that's fine, provided they find their passion/satisfaction in other areas of life and they just use money generated from work to fuel such other areas. But I think such people would not want to work 130 hours a week in their job for any extended periods of time, no matter the money.
Ugh I hate agreeing with Marti.
I work at least 60 hours and usually closer to 70-80 a week. But as I love my work it really doesn't trouble me working those hours.
Quote from: katmai on August 08, 2016, 12:40:06 AM
Ugh I hate agreeing with Marti.
I work at least 60 hours and usually closer to 70-80 a week. But as I love my work it really doesn't trouble me working those hours.
Yeah, when I still worked somewhat regularly in film shoots, 70 hour weeks weren't rare. I had a blast, too.
Quote from: grumbler on August 07, 2016, 08:02:17 PM
As AR noted, the 130 hours is almost certainly an exaggeration, except in exceptional circumstances, but there are lots of people who work long hours effectively and get paid a shitload of money for it. Tyr's claim that Marissa Mayer worked long but did not work hard
That's your claim :contract:
Quote from: Tyr on August 08, 2016, 02:27:42 AM
Quote from: grumbler on August 07, 2016, 08:02:17 PM
As AR noted, the 130 hours is almost certainly an exaggeration, except in exceptional circumstances, but there are lots of people who work long hours effectively and get paid a shitload of money for it. Tyr's claim that Marissa Mayer worked long but did not work hard
That's your claim :contract:
And... we enter the "Tyr Weasel Phase" of the discussion, and I'm out.
Quote from: alfred russel on August 06, 2016, 09:30:37 PM
Quote from: Valmy on August 06, 2016, 01:01:52 PM
That is amazing. My productivity would take a nosedive after 60 hours. Amazing one can not only work that much but still be useful doing it. And I guess not throw yourself out the office window at some point.
Some people truly love their work; I think that is the difference. Some people are consumed by video games and play them constantly; for some people that same dynamic is at play with work.
Even at the height of my video game addiction I would rarely ever play for more than 100 hours and even then I would do things like fall asleep at my computer. And I burned out really fast.
That is just insane. So no that is not the difference. I cannot think of anything I love that much that I would be able to physically do it for 130 hours a week. But I lack whatever super powers this woman possesses. To me it just mentally and physically would not be possible.
Quote from: Martinus on August 08, 2016, 12:05:13 AM
If you are working a job you are passionate about and which brings you satisfaction, then working 130 hours a week can be rewarding.
Working 60 or 80 hours? Sure. Working 130 hours? I mean I need to sleep and decompress and shit.
Quote from: katmai on August 08, 2016, 12:40:06 AM
Ugh I hate agreeing with Marti.
I work at least 60 hours and usually closer to 70-80 a week. But as I love my work it really doesn't trouble me working those hours.
Having done some amateur camera work I applaud your endurance.
Actually I make about $100.00 a month typically working as camera man so I guess it is not actually amateur in a technical sense. Merely in an ability sense :Embarrass:
Quote from: Valmy on August 08, 2016, 07:25:44 AM
But I lack whatever super powers this woman possesses.
:secret: That superpower is called "brazen bullshitting".
Quote from: DGuller on August 08, 2016, 07:49:58 AM
Quote from: Valmy on August 08, 2016, 07:25:44 AM
But I lack whatever super powers this woman possesses.
:secret: That superpower is called "brazen bullshitting".
That's not particularly nice to Brazen. :angry:
Quote from: katmai on August 08, 2016, 12:40:06 AM
Ugh I hate agreeing with Marti.
I work at least 60 hours and usually closer to 70-80 a week. But as I love my work it really doesn't trouble me working those hours.
There's a big difference between 60-80 and 120+
I wonder when she found the time to date Larry Page? Or was that part of work?
That's true. I can't think of doing anything for 130 hours a week. Even leisure time. Even a super addictive game I would struggle to manage 80 tops without destroying my health.
Quote from: grumbler on August 08, 2016, 07:21:17 AM
As AR no
And... we enter the "Tyr Weasel Phase" of the discussion, and I'm out
Awesome. Here I thought you were going to go all grumblers debate club meaning I'd have to invoke the grumbler rule.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 08, 2016, 09:09:33 AM
There's a big difference between 60-80 and 120+
And a big difference between claiming that you worked 120+ hours back in the day, and actually having done it.
There are rare but legitimate cases where someone really does work 130+ hours a week. In many New Jersey waterfront ports, shop stewards regularly put in 168 hours work weeks. But most of the time when people say they work 130 hour work weeks, they really mean that they had one hectic week when they were physically in the office for 100-110 hours.
My brother works probably 80+ hour weeks during football season and I've seen the toll it takes on him. 120+ just seems kind of unlikely.
Way back when I worked summers for the city government back home, some of the guys who worked there full-time told me that they had worked hours like that a few times in winter during major snowstorms, driving snow plows to keep the streets clear. BUT--for the most part, they were only working about half that time. The city would send two men out as a team, and one would drive for 8-10 hours while the other slept in the cab, and then they'd switch off; the second guy was only there if they ran into trouble. And of course, they only did that at most 2 or 3 of times a winter; otherwise, they mostly just worked their regular 40 hour shifts.
When I worked for Shoney's, and later when I worked at Family Dollar, I was working 80-90 hours most weeks, which is one of the main reasons I stayed less than a year at both places. It's simply not worth it putting in those hours every week; you don't have any life away from work. I can see someone thinking it might be worth it if they were making a lot more money than I was making at either job, but I don't think anything past about 70-75 hours on a regular basis could be worth it for any amount of money--you wouldn't have the time or energy to enjoy the fruits of your labor.
Quote from: DGuller on August 08, 2016, 11:42:55 AM
There are rare but legitimate cases where someone really does work 130+ hours a week. In many New Jersey waterfront ports, shop stewards regularly put in 168 hours work weeks. But most of the time when people say they work 130 hour work weeks, they really mean that they had one hectic week when they were physically in the office for 100-110 hours.
back when I was a naval analyst we would have an ASW wargame every year for the CNO's staff, and for two weeks (12 days, really) the lead analysts would work 18+ hours a day (9 hours or so with the staff, and then 9 hours or so with our analytical teams assessing the results of the day's events and then preparing briefings for the next morning). But that was a known crunch time and we could both prepare for it and recover after it. There's no way we could have kept that up and been at all productive.
18/7 weeks are not unusual when on trial. But like grumbler's example it is something you prepare for and then can ramp down from.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 09, 2016, 11:53:02 AM
18/7 weeks are not unusual when on trial. But like grumbler's example it is something you prepare for and then can ramp down from.
How many times have you been? :unsure:
My longest non-stop work marathon was actually 32 hours with no sleep. We had to sign the deal by the end of the month for tax reasons and the final negotiations push was brutal.
Quote from: The Brain on August 09, 2016, 01:11:21 PM
How many times have you been? :unsure:
Couple times a year.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 08, 2016, 09:09:33 AM
Quote from: katmai on August 08, 2016, 12:40:06 AM
Ugh I hate agreeing with Marti.
I work at least 60 hours and usually closer to 70-80 a week. But as I love my work it really doesn't trouble me working those hours.
There's a big difference between 60-80 and 120+
indeed there is. :P
Most ever did for few weeks straight was just under 100 hours (union gigs mean there has to be at least 10 hours between turnaround from end of one work day to start of another,)otherwise would have put in 100+ hour weeks.
Quote from: Valmy on August 08, 2016, 07:28:00 AM
Having done some amateur camera work I applaud your endurance.
Actually I make about $100.00 a month typically working as camera man so I guess it is not actually amateur in a technical sense. Merely in an ability sense :Embarrass:
well my day rate makes it tolerable putting in long hours, I mean it isn't lawyer $$ for hours, but its okay.
That's still a shitload of handjobs, katmai.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 09, 2016, 08:47:04 PM
That's still a shitload of handjobs, katmai.
carpal tunnel is a bitch man.
The joke was that lawyers are crooked and he himself was being put on trial :P
But yes I believe you are right.
Something should be said about how if you actually have to do that, then you probably aren't that good at your job.
Also, Meyer is the one who, when taking the helm at Yahoo, instituted all kinds of regressive policies about telecommuting. She's not really a good example.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on August 12, 2016, 04:26:10 AM
Something should be said about how if you actually have to do that, then you probably aren't that good at your job.
Also, Meyer is the one who, when taking the helm at Yahoo, instituted all kinds of regressive policies about telecommuting. She's not really a good example.
She's a good example of something. Just not good management style.
I had a job in a factory back in the 80s where I did a few 84-hour weeks. Unpaid breaks and on the clock so they were genuine 12-hour working days. What with travel, eating, sleeping and personal hygiene there was not really any time to do anything else. I got very healthy and very bored and stashed a lot of cash away.
It would have been difficult to increase the hours worked in a safe and profitable way, but imo an 84-hour week is sustainable.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on August 15, 2016, 02:48:12 AM
I had a job in a factory back in the 80s where I did a few 84-hour weeks. Unpaid breaks and on the clock so they were genuine 12-hour working days. What with travel, eating, sleeping and personal hygiene there was not really any time to do anything else. I got very healthy and very bored and stashed a lot of cash away.
It would have been difficult to increase the hours worked in a safe and profitable way, but imo an 84-hour week is sustainable.
But there is a difference between a white collar executive and others. I'm sure she has a driver, a cook, access to professional shoppers, tailors that come visit her office, financial managers, etc. Again: 130+ hours is almost certainly an exaggeration, but it is probably easier for someone like her to put in 100+ hours than for you to put in 84 in a factory.
Also, there is a question of what counts as "work". There is an executive where I work who I heard asked "will you be working this weekend?" His reply, "I work every weekend. I never stop working. Even in the shower I'm thinking about this place."
While he was exaggerating, knowing the guy, he probably really does work every weekend, and probably really does think about work in the shower. But should the shower "thinking time" count as work?
Quote from: alfred russel on August 15, 2016, 10:30:54 AM
While he was exaggerating, knowing the guy, he probably really does work every weekend, and probably really does think about work in the shower. But should the shower "thinking time" count as work?
Sounds billable.
Quote from: alfred russel on August 15, 2016, 10:30:54 AM
Also, there is a question of what counts as "work". There is an executive where I work who I heard asked "will you be working this weekend?" His reply, "I work every weekend. I never stop working. Even in the shower I'm thinking about this place."
While he was exaggerating, knowing the guy, he probably really does work every weekend, and probably really does think about work in the shower. But should the shower "thinking time" count as work?
Well there is the difficulty I suppose. I'd argue that maybe 60 hours in the office and relaxing in the shower and having a bright idea there is better than spending 130 hours in the office. But I'd argue that simply because I want it to be true :D