Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule

Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule

Want to start a startup? Get funded byY Combinator.

July 2009

One reason programmers dislike meetings so much is that they're ona different type of schedule from other people. Meetings cost themmore.

There are two types of schedule, which I'll call the manager'sschedule and the maker's schedule. The manager's schedule is forbosses. It's embodied in the traditional appointment book, witheach day cut into one hour intervals. You can block off severalhours for a single task if you need to, but by default you changewhat you're doing every hour.

When you use time that way, it's merely a practical problem to meetwith someone. Find an open slot in your schedule, book them, andyou're done.

Most powerful people are on the manager's schedule. It's theschedule of command. But there's another way of using time that'scommon among people who make things, like programmers and writers.They generally prefer to use time in units of half a day at least.You can't write or program well in units of an hour. That's barelyenough time to get started.

When you're operating on the maker's schedule, meetings are adisaster. A single meeting can blow a whole afternoon, by breakingit into two pieces each too small to do anything hard in. Plus youhave to remember to go to the meeting. That's no problem for someoneon the manager's schedule. There's always something coming on thenext hour; the only question is what. But when someone on themaker's schedule has a meeting, they have to think about it.

For someone on the maker's schedule, having a meeting is likethrowing an exception. It doesn't merely cause you to switch fromone task to another; it changes the mode in which you work.

I find one meeting can sometimes affect a whole day. A meetingcommonly blows at least half a day, by breaking up a morning orafternoon. But in addition there's sometimes a cascading effect.If I know the afternoon is going to be broken up, I'm slightly lesslikely to start something ambitious in the morning. I know thismay sound oversensitive, but if you're a maker, think of your owncase. Don't your spirits rise at the thought of having an entireday free to work, with no appointments at all? Well, that meansyour spirits are correspondingly depressed when you don't. Andambitious projects are by definition close to the limits of yourcapacity. A small decrease in morale is enough to kill them off.

Each type of schedule works fine by itself. Problems arise whenthey meet. Since most powerful people operate on the manager'sschedule, they're in a position to make everyone resonate at theirfrequency if they want to. But the smarter ones restrain themselves,if they know that some of the people working for them need longchunks of time to work in.

Our case is an unusual one. Nearly all investors, including allVCs I know, operate on the manager's schedule. But Y Combinatorruns on the maker's schedule. Rtm and Trevor and I do because wealways have, and Jessica does too, mostly, because she's gotteninto sync with us.

I wouldn't be surprised if there start to be more companies likeus. I suspect founders may increasingly be able to resist, or atleast postpone, turning into managers, just as a few decades agothey started to be able to resist switching from jeansto suits.

How do we manage to advise so many startups on the maker's schedule?By using the classic device for simulating the manager's schedulewithin the maker's: office hours. Several times a week I set asidea chunk of time to meet founders we've funded. These chunks oftime are at the end of my working day, and I wrote a signup programthat ensures all the appointments within a given set of office hoursare clustered at the end. Because they come at the end of my daythese meetings are never an interruption. (Unless their workingday ends at the same time as mine, the meeting presumably interruptstheirs, but since they made the appointment it must be worth it tothem.) During busy periods, office hours sometimes get long enoughthat they compress the day, but they never interrupt it.

When we were working on our own startup, back in the 90s, I evolvedanother trick for partitioning the day. I used to program fromdinner till about 3 am every day, because at night no one couldinterrupt me. Then I'd sleep till about 11 am, and come in andwork until dinner on what I called "business stuff." I never thoughtof it in these terms, but in effect I had two workdays each day,one on the manager's schedule and one on the maker's.

When you're operating on the manager's schedule you can do somethingyou'd never want to do on the maker's: you can have speculativemeetings. You can meet someone just to get to know one another.If you have an empty slot in your schedule, why not? Maybe it willturn out you can help one another in some way.

Business people in Silicon Valley (and the whole world, for thatmatter) have speculative meetings all the time. They're effectivelyfree if you're on the manager's schedule. They're so common thatthere's distinctive language for proposing them: saying that youwant to "grab coffee," for example.

Speculative meetings are terribly costly if you're on the maker'sschedule, though. Which puts us in something of a bind. Everyoneassumes that, like other investors, we run on the manager's schedule.So they introduce us to someone they think we ought to meet, orsend us an email proposing we grab coffee. At this point we havetwo options, neither of them good: we can meet with them, and losehalf a day's work; or we can try to avoid meeting them, and probablyoffend them.

Till recently we weren't clear in our own minds about the sourceof the problem. We just took it for granted that we had to eitherblow our schedules or offend people. But now that I've realizedwhat's going on, perhaps there's a third option: to write somethingexplaining the two types of schedule. Maybe eventually, if theconflict between the manager's schedule and the maker's schedulestarts to be more widely understood, it will become less of aproblem.

Those of us on the maker's schedule are willing to compromise. Weknow we have to have some number of meetings. All we ask from thoseon the manager's schedule is that they understand the cost.





Thanks to Sam Altman, Trevor Blackwell, Paul Buchheit, Jessica Livingston,and Robert Morris for reading drafts of this.



Related:

How to Do What You Love

Good and Bad Procrastination

Turkish Translation

French Translation



  • 0
    点赞
  • 0
    收藏
    觉得还不错? 一键收藏
  • 0
    评论
资源包主要包含以下内容: ASP项目源码:每个资源包中都包含完整的ASP项目源码,这些源码采用了经典的ASP技术开发,结构清晰、注释详细,帮助用户轻松理解整个项目的逻辑和实现方式。通过这些源码,用户可以学习到ASP的基本语法、服务器端脚本编写方法、数据库操作、用户权限管理等关键技术。 数据库设计文件:为了方便用户更好地理解系统的后台逻辑,每个项目中都附带了完整的数据库设计文件。这些文件通常包括数据库结构图、数据表设计文档,以及示例数据SQL脚本。用户可以通过这些文件快速搭建项目所需的数据库环境,并了解各个数据表之间的关系和作用。 详细的开发文档:每个资源包都附有详细的开发文档,文档内容包括项目背景介绍、功能模块说明、系统流程图、用户界面设计以及关键代码解析等。这些文档为用户提供了深入的学习材料,使得即便是从零开始的开发者也能逐步掌握项目开发的全过程。 项目演示与使用指南:为帮助用户更好地理解和使用这些ASP项目,每个资源包中都包含项目的演示文件和使用指南。演示文件通常以视频或图文形式展示项目的主要功能和操作流程,使用指南则详细说明了如何配置开发环境、部署项目以及常见问题的解决方法。 毕业设计参考:对于正在准备毕业设计的学生来说,这些资源包是绝佳的参考材料。每个项目不仅功能完善、结构清晰,还符合常见的毕业设计要求和标准。通过这些项目,学生可以学习到如何从零开始构建一个完整的Web系统,并积累丰富的项目经验。
资源包主要包含以下内容: ASP项目源码:每个资源包中都包含完整的ASP项目源码,这些源码采用了经典的ASP技术开发,结构清晰、注释详细,帮助用户轻松理解整个项目的逻辑和实现方式。通过这些源码,用户可以学习到ASP的基本语法、服务器端脚本编写方法、数据库操作、用户权限管理等关键技术。 数据库设计文件:为了方便用户更好地理解系统的后台逻辑,每个项目中都附带了完整的数据库设计文件。这些文件通常包括数据库结构图、数据表设计文档,以及示例数据SQL脚本。用户可以通过这些文件快速搭建项目所需的数据库环境,并了解各个数据表之间的关系和作用。 详细的开发文档:每个资源包都附有详细的开发文档,文档内容包括项目背景介绍、功能模块说明、系统流程图、用户界面设计以及关键代码解析等。这些文档为用户提供了深入的学习材料,使得即便是从零开始的开发者也能逐步掌握项目开发的全过程。 项目演示与使用指南:为帮助用户更好地理解和使用这些ASP项目,每个资源包中都包含项目的演示文件和使用指南。演示文件通常以视频或图文形式展示项目的主要功能和操作流程,使用指南则详细说明了如何配置开发环境、部署项目以及常见问题的解决方法。 毕业设计参考:对于正在准备毕业设计的学生来说,这些资源包是绝佳的参考材料。每个项目不仅功能完善、结构清晰,还符合常见的毕业设计要求和标准。通过这些项目,学生可以学习到如何从零开始构建一个完整的Web系统,并积累丰富的项目经验。
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值