b5media.com

Advertise with us

Enjoying this blog? Check out the rest of the Business Channel Subscribe to this Feed

Slacker Manager

Showdown Day 3: Fred Gratzon

by Bren on March 24th, 2005

Welcome to the third and final day of the Productivity Blog
Showdown. Before we begin, I’d like to thank Fred and Steve for their
willingness to participate in the Showdown, and for the good humor
while doing so. No matter which way you swing, productively speaking,
you’ve got to admit these are a couple of quality guys. Onward, then.

Today’s questions are as follows:

Working hard and setting limits…
a.    Can a person work a maximum of 40 hours a week at something and still be successful?
b.
  Real-life story problem #1: I’ve recently graduated from university
and launched into full time work with the company I have been working
part time with for the last 3 years. I love working there and I get
paid on an hourly rate so that the more hours I work, the more money I
get.  I like the idea of working 40 hour weeks or less, so that I have
more time to do my own things, but my boss is encouraging me to treat
those 40 hours as a minimum! Consequently, I find myself surrounded by
workers that work 60+ hours a week and myself working 50 hours a week
or more. So I guess I’m torn between working a 40 hour week and having
more time to focus on other things in my life or working 50+ hours a
week and getting the extra money and industry experience. So should I
work more hours or less? Why? What other factors should I consider?
c.
  Real-life story problem #2: Extreme programming is a set of
rules/mindsets/methods for programming. On the one hand, several of
those methods aim at keeping you as hard working and productive as
possible. On the other hand, the official "rules" almost forbid you to
work more than 40 hours per week. So working as hard as you can for 8
hours, 5 days a week, but not more. This ‘d be a nice statement to
react upon for both of them.
d.    Is a day’s work it’s own reward,
or is there a way to change your perspective regarding mind-numbing
work so that it becomes fun?

Fred Gratzon is the author of The Lazy Way to Success, and also keeps a blog over here.
He has also founded two very different companies, an ice cream
manufacturing company and a long distance company–more info about that
in this interview.
His unique point of view is delivered from a comfortable perch within a
hammock–ostensibly somewhere near palm trees, but I think it’s
actually nearer to Iowa, USA. So, without further commentary, here is Fred’s response…

a.    Can a person work a maximum of 40 hours a week at something and still be successful?

Success is not determined by how much time you spend. It is not about work. A great idea can be worth more than a billion hours of work and a great idea comes effortlessly, as do all thoughts.

But if you insist on talking about time, in the businesses I started, I hardly ever put in an 8 hour day, plus I rarely stayed late or came back at night. Generally speaking, I’d show up around 10 AM. At noon I’d go home and spend an hour or so eating lunch with my family. In the afternoon, I’d go home around 4:30. Since I don’t have any business skills like finance, or legal, or technical, or managerial, or clerical, or anything, I attracted exceedingly competent people and let them do the whole thing. I’d just cruise, schmooze and yuk it up all day.

(One important insight regarding hiring: a first rate person hires other first rate people. A second rate person hires third rate people. If you want your organization to degrade quickly, hire less than first rate people.)

I am all about finding ways of accomplishing more by doing less. I believe those creative insights and discoveries come more frequently when you are rested, happy, relaxed, and healthy. I therefore think that caring for your inner equipment is more vital to your success than spending hours straining away and generating fatigue and stress.

b.    Real-life story problem #1: I’ve recently graduated from university and launched into full time work with the company I have been working part time with for the last 3 years. I love working there and I get paid on an hourly rate so that the more hours I work, the more money I get.  I like the idea of working 40 hour weeks or less, so that I have more time to do my own things, but my boss is encouraging me to treat those 40 hours as a minimum! Consequently, I find myself surrounded by workers that work 60+ hours a week and myself working 50 hours a week or more. So I guess I’m torn between working a 40 hour week and having more time to focus on other things in my life or working 50+ hours a week and getting the extra money and industry experience. So should I work more hours or less? Why? What other factors should I consider?

There is only one factor to consider - yourself. You have to be true to yourself. I think it is inhumane to require someone to work one minute, so 40 hours to me sounds like a prison term to me and 50+ like slavery. If you were my employee, I’d be more concerned if you were laughing enough.

c.    Real-life story problem #2: Extreme programming is a set of rules/mindsets/methods for programming. On the one hand, several of those methods aim at keeping you as hard working and productive as possible. On the other hand, the official "rules" almost forbid you to work more than 40 hours per week. So working as hard as you can for 8 hours, 5 days a week, but not more. This ‘d be a nice statement to react upon for both of them.

Everything in Nature cycles between rest and activity. Periods of rest are followed by periods of activity which are followed by periods of rest and so forth. For activity to be maximally effective there needs to be a period of rest that preceded it. The deeper the rest, the more dynamic the activity.

With regard to extreme programming, it all comes down to your inner experience. If you are exhilarated by the process and flowing with creativity then that is great. But I would caution you not to get so caught up in the activity where you forget about the rest that nourishes that activity.

d.    Is a day’s work it’s own reward, or is there a way to change your perspective regarding mind-numbing work so that it becomes fun?

I see a day’s work as a day’s punishment.

But yes, there are ways to find success in mind-numbing work. It starts with your mindset or attitude. You must turn the work into play like Tom Sawyer did with whitewashing the fence. Or you can look at the task from a fresh angle and find a way to avoid the work completely but still get it done. Perhaps you’d end up inventing some cool way that does the job and saves everyone from being miserable in the future. Then you market it and make your fortune.

Thank you, Mr. Slacker, for this opportunity. The whole process was fun. I hope it was worth the time people spent in reading all of this. To the readers who have made it this far, I wish you all effortless success so much so that you laugh all the way to the bank.

P.S. I’ve been encouraged to tell my story. I’ve also been asked a bunch of questions. I will try to give my answers on my blog in the near future and hope they are instructive. Finally, I will address the most important of all questions - how to find your calling in life. Needless to say, the answer will be via the Lazy Way.

Technorati tags: ,

POSTED IN: best of, creativity, productivity, tips and tricks, weblogs, what the...

10 opinions for Showdown Day 3: Fred Gratzon

  • Steve Pavlina
    Mar 24, 2005 at 6:56 am

    Hmmm… I partly agree with you, Fred, but I don’t believe a day’s work is a day’s punishment. Does this mean you were punishing each person you hired to work for you? If work is pain (for you or for anyone who works for you), that’s a sign you’re on a path without a heart.

    More on that here:
    http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2005/03/productivity-showdown-day-3/

  • Fred Gratzon
    Mar 24, 2005 at 9:22 am

    I do unto others just like I want others to do unto me. I hate work and I don’t want other people making me work. Therefore I would never ask or require anyone to work.

    What I do is set up a dynamic, creative, gloriously fun situation that is irresistibly attractive to people. I invite the best ones to join me. They then contribute their “play” which makes the enterprise even better. Starting a business from ground zero and growing it to over $300 million in annual sales shows that what I do rocks.

    Now you could call that “work” but that doesn’t do justice to what is really happening and what people are really feeling or why my business grew so breathtakingly fast.

    What I do is a whole new paradigm.

    Please visit my blog for a discussion on semantic differences that I just posted.

  • None of Your Business
    Mar 24, 2005 at 10:36 am

    I want to work for this guy

    Fred’s got a great attitude. I love the sound of his management style and totally agree with this post. I’m quickly learning that working smarter is more valuable to everyone involved than working harder. People who make rational, creative decisions…

  • joeschmoe
    Mar 24, 2005 at 3:13 pm

    Was the guy who cleaned the toilets doing creative, gloriously fun play?

  • Crimson
    Mar 24, 2005 at 3:14 pm

    Fred and Steve,

    People fundamentally don’t understand the difference between “play” work and pointless soul-sucking work. I encounter this all the time. I routinely have a cheery optimistic attitude and people often ask me if I get mad or stressed out about anything and some wonder if I take my “work” seriously because I don’t have veins popping out of my forehead due to intense dedication to my job. The reason is that I know I’ll do my best to succeed given the available resources (I can only do that when I’m mentally loose), but fundamentally I really don’t care THAT much if I “fail”. It’s not like the CEO can take a gun to my head if a project is late.

    But of course, I don’t share this deep truth with coworkers or bosses, many of whom I’m positive would take it the wrong way. At the same time I’m incapable of walking around acting as if my life would end if we don’t get a contract, or if I can’t deliver on an impossible schedule.

    I read Fred’s interview with the MBA student (http://www.svabhinava.org/friends/PaulWilson/LaziestMan-frame.html)
    and noticed his attitude towards work are a little like mine. Eventually this attitude got him forced out of a multi-million dollar company he founded!

    Well, fortunately (or unfortunately from Fred’s POV I suppose :) ), I “work” more than five and a half hours per day and do more than “laugh and schmooze” with coworkers all day, so I’m HOPING this kind of thing doesn’t happen to me. Yet I still feel pressure to “sell” others on the idea that I’m working hard and care about the work.

    I wonder if any other readers encounter this.

  • Steve Pavlina
    Mar 24, 2005 at 5:17 pm

    What kind of work (if any) would be so fulfilling to you that you’d be willing and eager to do your absolute best at it?

    IMO if I’m not willing to do my best, I’m in the wrong line of work. It means I just don’t care enough about the mission, or I dislike the path to get there.

    I don’t think it makes sense to try to become more productive at doing work that doesn’t entice you to want do your very best each day. Under those conditions, the attitude of the slacker makes absolute sense. But this is the same attitude of people in prison work camps. If you find yourself in such a situation, don’t slack. Your #1 priority should be to escape.

  • Lifehacker
    Mar 28, 2005 at 8:02 am

    Productivity showdown wrap-up

    Final day of the Productivity Showdown between “lazy Fred” Gratzon and hard worker Steve Pavlina raised the question, Can a person work a maximum of 40 hours a week at something and still be successful? Both gentlemen say a 40…

  • John
    Mar 31, 2005 at 11:31 am

    –RE: (One important insight regarding hiring: a first rate person hires other first rate people. A second rate person hires third rate people. If you want your organization to degrade quickly, hire less than first rate people.)–

    So then who hires the second rate person?

    And technically, if you were a first rate person, then you would only hire first rate people anyway, right? But if you were a second rate person, can you ever hire first rate people in the first place?

  • Flow to Bliss
    Apr 18, 2005 at 2:41 pm

    Four Questions

    I’ve been following the lively debate over at SlackerManager between Fred Gratzon (the lazy way - book here) and Steve Pavlina (hard work), which…

  • Flow to Bliss
    Apr 18, 2005 at 2:42 pm

    Four Questions

    I’ve been following the lively debate over at SlackerManager between Fred Gratzon (the lazy way - book here) and Steve Pavlina (hard work), which…

Site Meter
Close
E-mail It