Jack Dorsey does 8 hours at Twitter, 8 hours at Square, 0 hours at life, daily.<p>In other words Jack is free to do whatever he likes, but it is not a good example for most of us. I'll cite a very short poetry by a Sicilian poet called Salvatore Quasimodo:<p>"Everyone stands alone on the heart of the earth / transfixed by a ray of sunshine / and it is suddenly night"
Unfortunately, I think a lot of people may miss the most useful point of this article: blocking out days by themes as a productivity booster.<p>The big headline is about working 16 hours days, but that headline grabber will distract from the most useful nugget of information: how he does it.<p>The really cool thing about this article is theme-blocking his days. Has anyone tried that? If so, how has it worked?
Clever guy. First he builds Twitter to make sure all other entrepreneurs are busy checking their tweets. Then he starts another company without any competition.
I think Jack Dorsey is doing an amazing job and it is extraordinary what he has shown at Twitter and Square.<p>That being said, what we are seeing here is basically "story telling" and "legend building" in action. The same happened when Jeff Immelt took over GE and The story was "Look at that guy! The hardest working GE employee, putting in 100 hours a week. What a leader!" (you can Google it).<p>While I believe that Jack didn't craft a master plan for this, somebody is certainly putting some effort into building a coherent story that helps Jack but ultimately also Twitter and Square and therefore its investors.<p>And once again: it get's us talking as well, so I would say: Mission Accomplished.
Regardless of whether or not he actually works 16 hour days, the Monday through Friday scheduling and focus on specific areas of the business are really interesting. An entire Friday dedicated to the company and culture -- fantastic for building a team that's with you for the long haul.
Maybe explains why Twitter is so bad at so many things.<p>Like making money.<p>Why don't they offer a customized twitter feeds of all the GOP presidential candidates and sell ads off of that feed?<p>For example...<p>I have had a strong suspicion that the upper management at Twitter are not really on top of it, they appear lazy, and content with just going along for the ride, instead of steering the what appears to be rudderless ship.
Why is everyone complaining that this isn't a lifestyle to idolize or emulate when the resounding sentiment here is that it isn't a lifestyle to IDOLIZE OR EMULATE?<p>We get it. I get it. You get it. Everyone gets it. I think plenty of the commenters here do a damn fine job of trivializing other readers' intelligence.<p>I'm also certain that Jack Dorsey doesn't work 16-hour days for the attention. We didn't know this up until now, and Twitter and Square have been running just fine. That's what matters, and if Dorsey feels like putting in that much time is necessary, so be it. If he burns out, he'll burn out; if he doesn't, good for him.
<rant>
Four-hour work week? Work smarter, not harder?<p>I just don't buy those kind of ideologies if you really believe your idea will change the world. If you want a lifestyle business that provides for you and your next of kin, more power to you.<p>And if that's the route you take, please stop trying to convenience everyone your path to enlightenment is the right way. For awhile, I found that whole movement to be quasi-religious and therefore quite annoying.<p>When you love what you do, it's not work and therefore there's no reason to want to avoid it. And that's why they win.
</rant>
pfft... All I see in the article are 8 unproductive hours every day. Research has shown that humans really don't need 8hrs sleep to work at their optimal best and 4-5 hrs of sleep should be more than enough. He could use those extra 4 hrs every to further develop the companies or even better try launch another startup on the side. Also walking 2 blocks every day between the two companies? That seems a waste of time which should be spent working, I know it doesn't sound much but walking two block every day adds up as a ton of wasted time. He should iron that inefficiency out of his schedule by having a common office for both jobs and using skype if he really needs to talk to someone. Also taking weekends off? Don't even get me started on that.
Well the schedule looks like its not really "hard" work. When i do all these things in my startup i feel like i am not really working, i only have the feeling of accomplishment when i write code and improve the product. Marketing and Biz dev sure is very important but personally i dont feel like i get stuff done when doing it, which might be bad.
Then again i couldnt put in 16 hours of work everyday, thats insane and i cant believe hes doing that for a very long time.
After 10-12 hours of coding and working on technical things, i am done for the day. Some sport in the evening to stay healthy and blow off steam and thats it. And even that leaves me with very little real life during the week, which sometimes is frustrating.
Good for him.<p>Regardless of whether or not it's sustainable, I simply do not want that type of lifestyle. If I'm not as "successful" because of that, so be it.
I posted this in the other thread about his hours:<p>Being a manager and accutely aware of legal ramifications of hours worked (boring I know), does anyone have any insight into whether there is something in the US akin to the European Worktime Directive? Over here (UK, but the E.U as a whole) the average working week is 40 hours by law, and the worker must opt in to be eligble to work upto a maximum of 70 hours per week. As well as this 70 hour maximum, 11 hours must be taken between end of work one day and start of work the next, and an entire 24 hour period of non-work must be taken once every 7 days, or alternativley a period of 48 hours of non-work must be taken in a 14 day period.<p>Any comments?
having just recently finished reading the Jobs biography, this turn of events for Dorsey reminds me of him: ousted from leadership, appointment on the board, heading a new company (Square vs. Pixar), and then serving as head of two companies simultaneously.
I am not surprised or in awe that he is putting in 16 hours a day. Every passionate founder would likely be doing it. I am sure most of us have heard Steve Job's on how building a company is usually a 18x7 work-week.<p>What I am in awe and admiration is that he is managing two companies and in this case two completely different ones by nature! A rule generally accepted in the startup land is that you don't work on <i>multiple ideas</i>, in order to stay focussed on building one thing well. While twitter is not a startup (any longer) and Square is probably a very big/late-phase startup (if we can qualify it as that), they both definitely need the caring and nurturing of a founder (IMO). Given that, it is remarkable he is able to do the context switch needed to run both the companies. I would love to know how effective his leadership is, in both these companies, given that he isn't there longer than a typical day in either of them.<p>I am so tempted to try doing more than one thing, but then since I am a coder, I guess its not easy to digress daily as he can.
Extremely impressive but is it really sustainable in the long run? I personally do not think that working 16hr days is good for you in the long run. It is not healthy.<p>What use is he if he gets burned out in a year or two? Not much I would wager. Sure one might argue that this pattern of long working hours is crucial in the first few years of a company.
The question if he does so much more in 16 hours than he could have done in say ten or twelve? I doubt you can remain very efficient 16 hours per day.
Well, kudos for being devoted to his business(es), but how much is he bringing to the table during each of those 8-hour periods?<p>If I was working 16-hour days every day, I'm almost certain I'd be less productive than if I was working 'normal' or even reduced-hour days.<p>Maybe he's just _that_ energetic, but my ability to get meaningful work done is not an endless fount. Downtime is important.
I can easily do 60-70 hour weeks as long as I use the weekend too, but 16 hour days are ridiculous. I can't believe that the guy is able to give his 100% every day for 5 days a week at both companies. The most a normal person would be able to do is a half-assed job, but perhaps Jack is just an ubermensch.
I've worked with startups in varying capacities for 6 years and my schedule is always tight. Jack Dorsey represents the limit, but I wonder whether the topical schedule (Mon: management, Tues: product, etc.) is a good organizational tactic for those of us who wear many hats.
"If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald."
For some reason, his Foundation interview made me a fan. Cant call it. He just seemed in control<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQy_HFHOZug" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQy_HFHOZug</a>
I will never, ever work 16 hour days like this. That said, if I cofounded Twitter and Square (and thus had <i>that much</i> of an effect on the world), I sure as hell would work a lot.
Now that is what I call impressive and determined.
This is how you get ahead and be successful, off course with a smart mind and the skills Jack has, it makes a difference!
This is not something to be idolized. Maybe it works for Jack, or maybe it's really exaggerated but there are going to be people reading this that are going to want to try it. I feel bad for those people. Your first instinct is to think that you can't succeed without killing yourself. Then you figure out that if you're killing yourself youve forgotten why you started to begin with.
That's impressive, but I can't understand how either of these companies are happy with that situation. It's like trying to argue a polygamist can be fully dedicated to both families.
He should maybe buy an island and retire, since both Twitter (less and less used and not used by anyone under 30) and Square (with NFC on the horizon) can basically only go down.