|
But the reality is talented people are able to sustain a high level of productivity at long hours . . . They work 70-80 hour weeks. And they sustain that level indefinitely. Studies have shown otherwise; why does he think businesses went to 40 hour weeks in the first place? Concern for their employees? Don't make me laugh. Maybe there are exceptions to this rule, and maybe all these Uber-hard working smart people congregate at startups. Of course, there's also always been the adage of "work smarter, not harder", and the longer you work (past a certain amount), no matter how good you are, the less clearly you will be thinking (in other words, you will not be working smarter). This is also the argument that PG puts forward in different ways (eg, http://www.paulgraham.com/gh.html and http://www.paulgraham.com/icad.html). Basically, if you can produce the same product, of the same quality, in less time, then you don't need to work more hours than your competition, and they will never be able to beat you if the productivity factor is high enough. Ergo, less hours, with better tools and people, will beat more hours. |
Mostly because of union pressure, actually.