The "Spanish Theory" of software project management
dodgycoder.net
dodgycoder.net
I consider this extra commuting time as unpaid overtime (up to 20hrs a week, even though I'm not "working") and hence want to deal with it as this article says I should: "No way, I quit".
Yet I feel bad about this; what would you do?
1) If you have the six months of emergency funds saved up that you are supposed to, and are either single or married without children, I'd probably quit. Assuming you have actual technical skills I'd move that up to should probably quit.
2) If you have three months or less of emergency funds and/or have children and/or you or someone in your family has a chronic medical condition I would grin and bear it in public, and network furiously to try and find another job so that you aren't "cutting off your nose to spite your face"
3) In both of the prior cases I'm taking it as a given that you are at best ambivalent about your current position or employer. If it's a job you love and it is just the situation that is a problem, then talking with your boss to help explain why it is a problem may be worthwhile. As hard as it may be to believe, some folks out there may look at the setup and not see it as a problem. Either because they're not doing it, or they actually like the ride time to do other things.
Hope this helps...
Sure you can. A good employer will give you time off in lieu later.
Of course, an even better employer would never let it come to that.
Of course, if your employer doesn't compensate with something, you're getting screwed. But that's true for developers, waiters, clerks, everybody, it's not something specific of our kind.
I believe they called it "time and a half."
I didn't knew that there was a "Spanish Management Theory" ;), it seems we are just giving the world awesome things... like the Spanish Flu.
At first glance, I read that as Spanish Fly. Another awesome thing from Spain...
Spanish coal on the other hand seems difficult to mine.
Cue Jared Diamond and all that "there's actually a reason for that" can of worms.
I've been in big stodgy software company where everyone worked exactly 8 hours, and the whole company filed out the door at 5pm as if a factory whistle had blown. I've also worked at a smallish software company where the norm was at least 10 or 11 hours a day, and half the programmers came in on Saturdays and Sundays (and I did too).
I much preferred the latter. Why? The work was more interesting, and the programmers were smarter (and nicer!), but the main reason I preferred it is, "What's the alternative for my free time?"
What do you really do with the rest of the day? Yeah, sure, you have great "personal life with your family". But really, the typical programmer at BOTH companies was single, didn't have a girlfriend, and didn't have many friends.
The free time was wasted on video games, lots and lots of video games, mindless chatter at a bar, watching team sports,... you get idea.
Let's stop with the whining and sniveling about unpaid overtime among programmers. The average programmer is well paid, his work is usually interesting, and his free time will be squandered (applies to me too). I prefer to be at work where at least I'm doing something real.
Have you heard the expression, "Speak for yourself"? It applies to you here.
> no one should be whining about unpaid overtime
Do I think that I and other programmers should be paid for overtime? Yes, of course I do. I would gladly accept payment. My point is that this complaint about unpaid programmer time is becoming a recurring theme, as if it's a huge and terrible problem. What's next: programmers forming a union like Detroit auto workers.
Although an alternative, seen in California, is to bargain at the really collective level and deal with it through legislation that outlaws some kinds of terms entirely.
Would a union allow it's members to contribute to open source projects? Especially those used in commercial products?
If that is indeed correct, then you are off base to an insulting degree. I personally work a 40 hour week and never have enough free time to truly be satisfied despite that. I know no programmers who like working excessive hours simply because they never have anything else they'd rather do.
Maybe you're single and can't think of anything else to do besides video games, bar hopping, and sports, but I'm married with a child and I have more than enough interesting hobbies to occupy as much time as I care to give them.
Have you read "In Praise of Idleness" by Bertrand Russell? It raises some interesting questions.
Somehow, filling chairs seems to be important. Management doesn't take into account the number of hours I think about the software development problems we face and their possible solutions and researching and evaluating how others have solved similar problems in the past. If I were to reserve doing this while in my seat, management and others in the organization would get mad since I wasn't actively typing away on my keyboard. It's also way more difficult to concentrate and remain undistracted in a busy office where people think you are readily available at any moment to answer any question (important or not) that they might have.
This has been addressed before too... managers schedule vs makers schedule.
Also, I prefer and believe I'm more productive mulling over the problem a few days, then coding for 10-14 hours for a day or two (while in flow) then taking a day or two easy or off to recuperate and re-energize. But maybe this is a personal myth I need to break... anyone know of any studies or info to tell me I'm wrong (just wondering).
They either get a personal life and move to a company that allows that, or burnout / go insane because they don't have anything to live for.
Not everyone is built to live just for "code".
At the very least, if all you want to do is work, start your own company. You're probably just making someone else rich who is enjoying life a lot more than you.
You only go around once and you can't take it with you.
* It's more fun (for you) to work with people who like to program and ship software than it is to work with people who just program to pay their bills and would rather be anywhere else than at work.
When employees care about solving problems, they put in extra hours sometimes. Managers have the problem of making sure that team members don't burn themselves out. At these companies you see things like as much time off as you want, work what hours you want, work where you want. There's no need to make people work.
When employees don't care, they spend lots of time in the office getting coffee, checking email, IM chatting, surfing the web, having endless meetings arguing about whether or not source control is a good idea, etc. The managers there have the problem of getting the staff to do any real work at all.
For an employee who wants to work at one kind of company, it's very frustrating to work at the other kind.
At the same time, I've also seen short-sighted management where they're just trying to wring you dry and pulling really stupid stunts that really hurt the people who do care. And when they do those, I find myself starting to care less, because some of the stupid little things they do when trying to save a few pennies can just totally sap your ability to care. Just got a fresh reminder of that, sadly. Cancelled a cheap parts order just because we managed to get the flaky part to work for a short time, but it still breaks down half the time as they'd know if they hadn't left early.
For the reason why, read peopleware, or http://www.igda.org/why-crunch-modes-doesnt-work-six-lessons
It keeps amazing me how clearly peopleware spells out how you're supposed to manage software teams, and how few teams are actually managed that way.