[genbattle]

This is an interesting counterpoint to the original time post; it's better to think about the amount of energy and focus you're putting into something, because in the end these resources are much more finite and variable than time.

Time is a known quantity, and at any one time you know how much time you or your employees have available (more or less). You can burn through energy and focus at very different rates depending on how you spend it. It's also not as measurable as time, which is why people like to just equate time to effort/focus, and then just measure effort based on time spent.

In reality, some people are better at spending their effort in short sharp bursts over a longer period of time, while other people prefer to spend it all once until a task is done or they run out of energy, and there's all sorts of people in between. This also highlights the importance of taking time to recharge, and making sure you have a reasonably balanced life.

I think this is the big reason for the success of some implementations of hammock driven development and paid company holidays in increasing the value generated by employees. In the end it's important not only to consider time spent, but also to consider productivity. A focus purely on time spent is what gives us 40-hour work weeks chained to a desk. Because logically the more time you spend at your desk, the more work you'll get done, right? We all know the fallacy of this type of thinking.