Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway713 | Hacker News Reader

As a maker (individual contributor), I have been having this issue a lot, but my attempts at pushing back do not seem to be going so well. Any time I reserve a large chunk of time on my calendar, people set up meetings on top of it anyway, or message me asking if that block time is "real" (as though quiet focused work isn’t a thing).

My days are filled with little dabs of 30 minutes here and there that are barely enough to remember what I had been working on before another meeting started, so I normally end up getting my actual work done late at night after an early dinner, which my wife is not particularly happy about.

Any recommendations? I’ve broached the topic lightly with my manager but don’t want to come across as whining, so I’ve generally just been trying to push back on meetings in the friendliest way that I can.

View on HN

> so I normally end up getting my actual work done late at night after an early dinner, which my wife is not particularly happy about.

Until that stops, they won't knock it off. Start telling them exactly what you're doing in those time blocks and how much the meeting will make that slip by. Do not work after hours. If they want to pay you to sit in meeting rooms rather than ship features, that's their choice, but you have to make them choose, or they'll take both.

[EDIT] mind, make them choose by communicating. Email (or whatever your management-tier uses to communicate) is your friend. Explicitly call out your expected meeting burden in estimation sessions and politely but firmly alert (send an email/message) when that burden is exceeded. Bring it up in retros. This is especially effective if you have someone up the chain who wants features shipped and who is not the one calling these meetings. Part of their job is to make other people knock off unproductive shit. Give them the info they need to do their job (that you're being scheduled for too many low-value meetings).

Your only other alternative is to start delegating, until you're accidentally a "lead" and like 50% of your time is supposed to be meetings, another 25% delegating, with the balance helping other devs getting unstuck.

>people set up meetings on top of it anyway, or message me asking if that block time is "real"

Your problem here is you. You were booked. When someone sends you a double booking, hit "DECLINE" and they get an email right away saying you declined it.

Then you say "Hey I already had something in my schedule for that time, can't make it. You have access to my calendar why would you make meetings when I'm busy? That isn't very respectful."

If someone asks if a block of time is "real" always say yes. your problem is that apparently you have blocks of time that aren't real. if you only have real blocks of time in your schedule, nobody will guess which aren't or are real.

If someone asks you in person, have the backbone and willpower to say "Hey I'm already booked" and suggest another time.

You're the one causing your problems, but you're describing it as other people doing it to you.

This can be difficult to do in certain contexts. This approach could easily cause them to be perceived as arrogant, "not a team player", or some other cliche. If their calendar is open to others (so it shows event details more than just free/busy), it's hard to portray those blocks of time as equivalent to "real" meetings.

Involving your manager is potentially a great step—though you have the best gauge as to whether it's the right move. If you've discussed your approach with them, they can provide some much-needed cover if colleagues complain that you're not available enough.

Again, this is why you

1) Start from the 'respect' angle.

2) Suggest an alternate time so that it can work.

3) Leave a paper trail.

I would only involve a manager if it became a serial issue and you've made your concerns clear and in writing.

Whether you come off as disinterested, not a team player, or just busy and the other person isn't willing to respect your schedule is up to you.

But it all depends on you.

The problem is that when you do this, and then don't go to the meeting, and then a decision is made that you don't agree with, you are told, "well you had a chance but you didn't come to the meeting".

The other problem is that sometimes people will literally see you working in your cube/office during the meeting and then ask you why you declined if you clearly weren't busy, because they don't equate coding with being busy. Sitting at your desk == not busy in their mind.

So now you have a political problem because you're seen as uninterested/not a team player.

>>Sitting at your desk == not busy in their mind

Maddeningly, these are the same people who feel like you have to be in the office 100% of the time so they feel like you are working.

Thats why you suggest an alternate time, so that the onus is on them. Alternately if you know someone competent and willing to attend to make sure it goes right, ask them if they'll go.

Whether you come off as disinterested or busy is up to you.

>The problem is that when you do this, and then don't go to the meeting, and then a decision is made that you don't agree with, you are told, "well you had a chance but you didn't come to the meeting".

I would have if the item, I cared about was on the agenda.

This is why agenda are a) important b) should be sent out 24 hours or more before the meeting c) should be rigdly followed.

Anything else is either poor communication or a waste of productivity.

This gives everyone time to review the agendas. Making a decision which is worth attending,which is worth escalating.

Beside the manager should be representing you anyway.

>if you clearly weren't busy, because they don't equate coding with being busy. Sitting at your desk == not busy in their mind.

Coding yes. A skype meeting would be busy in their mind.

Without knowing much about your situation, this could indicate either poor culture in your company, or poor management. In other words, is this really a sign that you should get another job (or another assignment under someone else)?

That being said, assuming you like your job / manager:

> I’ve broached the topic lightly with my manager but don’t want to come across as whining, so I’ve generally just been trying to push back on meetings in the friendliest way that I can.

Don't broach the topic lightly. Be very direct. "I have too many meetings, and I need to reduce them. As a result, I'm doing too much work at home. This is a problem for my family."

See where that goes. Before you discuss this, though, there are some things to consider:

Some people hold meetings as a form of procrastination, or as a way to feel important. It's important to figure out which of your meetings are these kinds, and decline them.

It's also worth looking at how to hold an effective meeting. When I worked at Intel in 2005, "effective meetings" was part of onboarding for all new employees. It gave us a lot of tools to pushback on bogus meetings, including a clear culture of declining bogus meetings.

It's important that you set some clear boundaries / limits, and not give in at all. (Even if this means finding a new job or assignment with a different manager.) What that something is, really depends on your relationships with your manager and peers. It could be that you decline meetings, (as other people suggest,) or it could be that you demand better planned meetings in order to attend. What's important is that you set some clear boundaries, and leave if they aren't respected.

Finally, if you don't get much support from your manager, and you still like your job, I suggest bringing the problem up the chain of command.

My mom was an administrator at the local hospital, and always seemed to have too much on her plate.

The thing my dad would always criticize her about is that she always picked up the slack.

If you are putting in a valid effort, you have to let things slip. Otherwise the people above you won't know that you are being assigned too much.

The first thing you need to do is stop working at night. You are paid to work during the day. Anything beyond that is you taking on unpaid work.

If you can find another individual (or two) who's dealing with the same problem, you can schedule a block of time with them (a meeting) and work side-by-side. May even collaborate.

Name it something important: critical feature optimization, application security audit, system integration... do not call it focusing on your work.

I wholeheartedly agree with the techniques others are recommending for improving the situation, but at the same time I think you should look for ways to cope with what you have as you make the transition.

I would best be considered a mid-level manager with 3-5 additional projects to tackle at any given time, and I face this problem on many different scales. Best case, I'm trying to get longer tasks done, and the longest uninterrupted intervals I can get are about 20 minutes. Other days, I need to complete 3 minute tasks and the longest uninterrupted time I can get is about 40 seconds. In either case, I outline the things I need to get done so that I can track where I am and quickly be reminded after an interruption. If the list ridiculously overflows the time in my day, I go further by writing down the priority order to make sure I don't lose track of that important detail. From there, I tend to get into sticky notes: when I'm interrupted, I write myself a note sufficiently detailed to quickly resume after the expected duration of the interruption. When people come to me with non-immediate concerns, those go on sticky notes to address when I'm not in the middle of things (or it can just stay in email if you're excellent at controlling and addressing your inbox). All sticky notes get addressed or stored before I leave. The handwritten aspect is important because sticky notes take up space, and each additional transfer of them takes time vs CTRL+V.

It's far less enjoyable than having a block of time to focus with minimized task-switching overhead, but maybe it can help you return some of your work to your actual workday while you improve the situation around you.

There can be only one primary task.

When this happens, the question is, "what is worth what?"

You must pose it to them, or others will ask for and expect both. And where they lack knowledge, this must be escalated to someone who can make the call and account for said call; otherwise, you are already accountable for commitments made prior to their request.

Doing both is not realistic, because there can only be one primary task, and this is why you end up doing work off hours.

I would share more calendar details, put what the task is on the time block, and in general set up that question.

Others will attempt to schedule your time so they do not end up doing catch up work off hours too.

It is you or them, or something just is not as important as everyone thinks it is.

Which is it?

Also, make task switch time clear.

A 30 minute meeting in the middle of, say a 2 to 3 hour block of time, may actually cost all or reduce the effective time to a small fraction of what is allocated. One effective way to handle this is to ask how many more meetings can now be scheduled into this wasted block of time?

It can also mean moving that block slightly, allowing meetings at the very end of it, or before it starts. Either can be cheaper, with meetings at the end of it being cheapest generally.

Your whole pushback is centered on there can be only one primary task.

That is as real as it gets. Use it.

> I normally end up getting my actual work done late at night after an early dinner, which my wife is not particularly happy about.

Whatever else you do, don't do this.

Work is simply not that important.

If you constantly perform miracles, no one is inclined to fix the problems.

As a high level IC, I run into this a lot and still struggle. Largely it boils down to setting expectations, sticking with them, and having support. I have to push back on meetings, along with manager support for 'no meeting days', task offload, WFH, etc. Some weeks are better than others.

The solution (if any) will depend on your company, and position within it. First is manager support. Without it, you're stuck. During 1:1s, sprint retros, its entirely valid to say something to the effect of "I couldn't get X done, because I had to spend most of my time in meetings. I need X chunk of focused time to get it done." A manager should have your back and be able to push back on others to keep your time free for non-meeting work. The answer should not be to work more hours.

Some of these tactics won't work unless other people who need your time are aligned with this. That includes things like maker hours -- if one team has them, and another doesn't, its bound to not work well.

The main questions around any meeting I ask are:

(1) Is the meeting necessary? Is there a clear agenda? Can this be answered in email or a 5 minute chat? Often people schedule a meeting, and leave the thinking for later.

(2) Do I need to be there? Without me physically present (or giving out of band input via email), will the meeting fail or have a bad end result (like a bad decision), politics, etc.

(3) How urgent is this? Frequently, meetings are scheduled for the requestors' convenience. Not the attendees. Sure if its a high level meeting where its hard to get everyone in the same room, you might be stuck. Most of the time, that's not the case and gentle pushback to reschedule is fine (give options!).

Locate other distraction sources and figure out how to manage them:

(1) Sources of toil -- Do you frequently spend time on tasks that could be automated or otherwise made to go away?

(2) Are people always coming to me vs my manager or team? Ideally you should not be the single source for all things. You want to train people to bug your manager or team (mailing list or group chat) and not you. In other words, if you're busy, do you really need to be L1 support all the time? This also promotes cross training.

(3) Other co-workers -- Sometimes headphones just don't signal "go away" enough. Especially in open offices where everyone may be wearing them. Can you WFH one day a week and 'hide'?

(4) The internet :)

Do you have anybody in a project manager kind of position (who is responsible for delivering things as fast as possible). I'd talk to them and tell them that you can't get anything done if you constantly have meetings, and ask if they could be scheduled together. I feel like this might work better if it was a company or team policy rather than just you trying to do enforce this by yourself.

I wonder if you could start the blocks small and then grow them over time. If you have half an our reserved somewhere, maybe people won't schedule a meeting against it. Then make it an hour, after a month and hour and a half, etc.

Or just block out the four hours you need by filling it up with loads of fake important-sounding half-hour meetings.

>Any recommendations?

Yes. That 'maker' time is a 'virtual' meeting.

If you can schedule it with a name. E.g. TPS report meeting with Bob it is much more respected. Your in a meeting, so you must be very busy.

Harder in an open plan or Easy to see office

Works best with a couple of friendly coder from another site in the company.

Set up a notebook to skype with each other then mute it. Pop headset on.

You must be busy with all those people in that zoom meeting.

They will respect meetings with other coders in a way they won't respect make time.

Make sure it's regular on the calendar. Remember to mark how your most productive work comes out of the "pair programming meeting"

Last year I resorted to blocking off 11-230 every single day of the week. Sometimes people grumble about the lack of openness on my calendar but end up scheduling around it anyways.

So now I get that whole time to myself and take a lunch break either at the beginning or ending of that block.

Maybe link them this article and phrase it as an experiment. If velocity increases then your manager will know it is worthwhile.

I am in this situation pretty frequently. Are you just a solid communicator? I know I tend to get roped into meetings because I'm good at leading meetings, while other engineers are frankly terrible at it.

"Damn, it, I have PEOPLE SKILLS!"

But seriously, it seems to me sometimes, that having a "meeting guru" would be truly helpful sometimes... a SPOC that can filter all meeting requests by the email / 5 minutes / required vs inflated attendees / agenda / etc criteria before they even happen.

Most of those questions aren't detail specific, so someone well versed in asking them politely and choosing the appropriate action could save so much time and attention suck.

>a SPOC that can filter all meeting requests by the email / 5 minutes / required vs inflated attendees / agenda / etc criteria before they even happen.

That's the project manager's job. The more meetings they allow. The more the project suffers. The more that are missed. The less poltical power. So they need to focus on fewer quality meetings for the ICs. More meetings for the PM.

Just reply that you can't make the meeting, you don't have to give them a specific reason.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com