Really? I always thought that pulling all-nighters hurts more than it helps. Optimizing your bathroom breaks seems really silly to me.
Really? I always thought that pulling all-nighters hurts more than it helps. Optimizing your bathroom breaks seems really silly to me.
Mayer is someone who proclaims to believe in the power of data. I'm curious then what data she has to back her views on crunch==maximization of value creation. Most of the data I've seen says the opposite. It seems Mayer may be letting her anecdotal experience in the early days of Google trump data here. (A it's also possible that anyone, including Mayer, can have misperceived or misattributed the importance of sustained crunch in those days or its causative effect on success.)
Managers who were acutely aware of how little they understood about what went on underneath them tended to be the ones who spent the most time in the office and who cared most about what time people came/left.
They also tend to be the ones who are the most against remote working.
Competent people don't require those metrics.
But life is unfair, and there probably are some people legitimately can put in 130 hours of net-positive work for extended periods of time. And presumably, these people will be disproportionately represented among the "successful".
Another issue is it seems like it'd be hard to tell while you're pulling those ridiculous hours whether or not you're part of the "lucky" subset that actually continues to be productive.
The hours she is working immediately says to me that she is not capable of hiring good people and delegating responsibilities. Now, I don't expect a CEO of a large company to work a 40 hour work week, but 130 hours is ridiculous. Out of that 130 hours of work, none of that could have been delegated? Is she really that special that only she can handle it?