[q_revert]

I started work at google pretty recently, and expressed an interest in working on a particular project. I made some notes about some of my ideas, and was putting some stuff together to show to one of the teams, to get some input before prototyping.

I asked a senior team member to have a look at the notes I had made, and see if they were ready to show to the wider team.

His advice?

"Go build something, then we can have meetings"

Coming from an academic background I find this type of thinking very refreshing.

[DonPellegrino]

I was under the impression that the work load at Google is so heavy that it is almost impossible to get "20% time" anymore. During what time did you work on your idea? Are they freeing you of all responsibilities to build your prototype or do they expect you to do it in your free time and then donate it to the company?

Thanks, I'm very curious about this aspect of Google's culture.

[cromwellian]

I think it depends. If you're working on something with a hard upcoming deadline, chances are you have no 20% time. If you're working on a launched product in incremental/maintenance mode, chances are you have extra time.

Sometimes greenfield projects or rewrites also permit lots of 20% time, because you've got existing implementations, so you can have some people maintain the old one and some people go work on the new rewrite using new tech.

I'm one of the unlucky ones with very little free time at the moment. :)

[mgraczyk]

I joined Google a few months ago and have not had this experience. The company is gigantic so everybody's situation is a little bit different, but plenty of people still have 20% projects. The culture strongly emphasizes a "build first and ask questions later" attitude.

[davidw]

Another guy saying he still uses his:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8431951

[acqq]

Skeptical view of 20% time:

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2011-12-19/

[johan_larson]

At least in the part of Google where I worked, there wasn't much pressure, and people generally kept business hours. If you got in at eight you were one of the first in the office, and if you left at six you were one of the last in the office.

Twenty percent projects were a real thing, but less than five percent of engineers participated. As far as I could tell, side projects were not the way to get ahead. The people who advanced were the ones who did what their bosses told them, full stop. For all that Google makes a big deal about having an egalitarian peer-based culture, the end result was remarkably strict and top down. That Japanese proverb about nails fits Google to a T.

[collyw]

Its difficult to get any momentum spending with something if you are only spending 20% of your time on it. While it sounds good, I might prefer to stick to as few projects as possible, so you can actually focus on getting stuff done rather than just context switching.

[Cthulhu_]

I don't know, if the 20% time is part of Google's core principles, then claiming that 20% time will / should trump deadlines.

[skj]

Launching products is also part of Google's core principles.

[michaelochurch]

I was under the impression that the work load at Google is so heavy that it is almost impossible to get "20% time" anymore.

You don't get in trouble for not working enough hours. A six-hour day is more than enough effort to keep you employed. As in most corporate jobs, you could probably get away with 2-4 (spending the other hours at your desk, but learning skills for the next job) if it's not obvious.

You get in trouble for 20%T (being "distracted") if it pisses your manager off, if it looks like you're trying to engineer a transfer off an undesirable project, or if you appear to be putting 50% of your time into the project.

The reason 20%T usually fails (on employee-initiated side projects) is that it's really hard to launch at Google without a full-time launch. The standards are really high. You have to cover a lot of bases that you wouldn't be expected to worry about in a startup, and you'll need to get enough SRE (reliability engineer) support to cover 24 hours. It's not unreasonable that Google is that way, because they have an understandable brand concern when it comes to reliability in new services.

Most successful uses of 20%T are to engineer a transfer, but managers are wise to that and not supportive. That game is actually a bad thing, because it means that to get a transfer requires auditioning, dividing your efforts, and putting your standing on your main project at risk. It's actually a lot harder to transfer to a good project within Google than to get a job at Google. This also means that you can 20%T for the purpose of transferring, only to get screwed on "headcount" and have put your standing on your main team at risk for nothing.

I don't think that your typical, run-of-the-mill manager is going to punish you for 20%T alone, but if the Perf gods decide that he has to stick someone with a "2.9" (bad Perf) this cycle, then having one foot out the door puts you at risk of being the one thrown under the bus. And once you get a 2.9 it's impossible to transfer.

[thrownaway2424]

I've got two 20% projects: one for Saturday, and one for Sunday.

  -- Googler saying.

[RogerL]

Bringing this back to the slides, I don't see how this applies to most companies. At most places we are utterly swamped with work; the idea that we can go just build something to allow us to have a conversation is pretty mad. Most companies don't have Google's resources, and I don't see how this advice is remotely possible. I can't build the things I need for what we are already expected to do; I certainly am not going to put that further in the hole to build something that will also not have enough resources to succeed.

I'm not arguing with your position, just reflecting on the slides. They seemed to be saying 'this is how you (not google) should be doing it', ignoring the kind of cash flow that is required to make that happen.

[warfangle]

I just started reading the book --

But one of the key points so far is a 50/50 mix of engineers/other-roles.

If you're swamped with work - especially if it's busywork! - there's a case for an internal product. If it's not busywork - it means you need to hire ;)

If you can't afford to hire, you've got bigger problems.

[dfritz]

That's the same in most companies. But when they say "go build something", it really means "go build something at home, not during your working time!". In my career, the most interesting things I worked on were mostly done on my spare time. Then, I left the company and lost the right to use my own code. Retrospectively, I'd have rather spent this time on my own projects.

[judk]

Not true. In most companies, your novel ideas are not welcome, even if you build them on unpaid overtime. They aren't part of the Plan.

[kamyfc]

Inspiring and made me change my thinking.

Gracias.

[dkarapetyan]

What academic background is that? I'm curious.

[q_revert]

I'm a physicist (semiconductor lasers), now doing tech support, it's a big change for me, but so far it's been great

[randomguy7788]

thats quite a change. what made you make that huge a switch?