Slashdot Mirror


Jason Fried On Focus and Avoiding Interruptions

BigTimOBrien writes "Jason Fried, founder of 37signals, talks about the day-to-day operations of 37signals. How does the company work, and what are the guiding principles behind the design of Basecamp and Campfire? He talks about the importance of avoiding interruptions and the relative unimportance of both physical space and mandatory meetings."

30 of 102 comments (clear)

  1. If you've never heard of them by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've never heard of the company, though I'm pretty clued up with the tech world, and I suspect others are in the same boat. FTA:

    So 37signals; we do a few different things. But primarily we design web-based applications for collaboration for small business. So you can share to-do lists. You can share ideas. You can share calendars and files and things like that with clients, or just internally online. Basecamp, Highrise, Backpack, Campfire; those are our main products. We've also written a couple of books. And we do a lot of speaking around the country about our ideas about business and entrepreneurship and things like that.

    1. Re:If you've never heard of them by mini+me · · Score: 5, Informative

      They are also the guys behind Ruby on Rails. Considering that topic is brought up quite often on Slashdot, I'm sure most people here have heard of it.

    2. Re:If you've never heard of them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That information should be included in the article. I'm a developer (not Ruby/RoR obviously) and I had never heard of Jason Fried or 37signals

    3. Re:If you've never heard of them by ednopantz · · Score: 4, Funny

      These are the guys who say: "Get Real"

      meaning: Release your software with less features than your customers want. Users who ask for features are assholes. We know what you need. You don't. //Why we stopped using basecamp

    4. Re:If you've never heard of them by mini+me · · Score: 2, Funny

      I said heard of Rails, not 37signals. Since you know that Ruby on Rails is for web developers, obviously you have heard of it.

    5. Re:If you've never heard of them by NoNeeeed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have just helped demonstrate their point.

      If you don't like their product then you are free to use something else, a huge number of people are very happy with their products. If they tried to provide everything that you, and everyone, else wants (which will of course be different things), then the end result would be a mess. There are *always* people who don't like a product. 37s are just honest about this and don't try to make out that their products will be right for everyone.

      Out of curiosity, what did you move to? Basecamp is too expensive for me, so I'm on the lookout for something that that does that kind of job.

      Paul

    6. Re:If you've never heard of them by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Stick a wiki up on a webserver. That's pretty much 90% of Basecamp anyway. Hell, that's pretty much 90% of all 37signals apps.

    7. Re:If you've never heard of them by nyargh · · Score: 2, Informative

      We use Basecamp at our small consultancy, and it is just great. We get daily turnaround times for any bugs/issues with the product, and having client exposure and notification on our todo lists and other project planning saves us a mountain of "status check" emails from our more neurotic clients.

      These guys have nailed the "do one thing, and do it well" philosophy of designing a product, and we have benefited greatly from decreased interruptions and happier, more informed clients.

    8. Re:If you've never heard of them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Stick a wiki up on a webserver. That's pretty much 90% of Basecamp anyway. Hell, that's pretty much 90% of all 37signals apps.

      Not really. To truly emulate the 37 signals apps, you'd need to install mod_throttle or some other way of inducing latency to make each page of the wiki take 10-15 seconds to load.

      I can't say if it's improved since we stopped using it, but my main memory of the experience of using Basecamp was how slow it was. Like 37 signals, my company sells a SaaS web application, though we have a completely different kind of application. For us, if a page is taking more than 2-3 seconds to render, we consider it too slow and try to improve the performance. Most of our pages will load in under a second when accessed over a LAN. Sometimes it isn't possible to make pages perform like that, though that is mostly just the reports using complex OLAP queries. Network latency and bandwidth can make pages take somewhat longer, but we still find it generally unacceptable for pages to take more than 5-10 seconds to load in a real-world environment, unless there's just a lot of data being sent to the client. Honestly...none of this is very hard to achieve.

      The 37 signals apps routinely took 10-15 seconds to load simple pages. Until they fix that, it's hard to take anything they say seriously. Perhaps they should listen more to what others have to say instead of pretending to be an authority on this kind of thing.

    9. Re:If you've never heard of them by nmg196 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Any decent website developer should have heard of them

      I've been a web developer for 10 years and I've never heard of them. Why should I have done if I've not used Ruby on Rails? What else have they done for example, in the ASP.NET world? Probably nothing.

    10. Re:If you've never heard of them by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's the 10% that takes the other 90% of the time.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  2. Meetings Suck by canUbeleiveIT · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not sure that Fried's philosophy will continue to hold up if 37signals grows much more, but I like his point-of-view about meetings and work flow.

    I have found meetings to be an extraordinary waste of time in most cases, and often the result of lack of leadership and/or organizational ability on the part of those in charge. I was recently on the board of a very small non-for-profit charity that had weekly two-hour meetings. The "leader" of the organization claimed that he needed the two hours every week to "vision-cast," but--being a typical political flack--what he really wanted to do was hear himself talk and also to run every little matter past the board so that he could cover his ass instead of just making the decisions he was paid to make.

    I quit after about ten months of that. The organization folded soon thereafter when donors stopped giving due to a ridiculous administrative overhead.

    1. Re:Meetings Suck by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not all meetings.

      I work for a company that has very few meetings -- basically, we do a Scrum-style meeting every day, and that's it. The rest is just impromptu discussions -- we're all close enough that if there's an urgent question, or something which can't be communicated well via Trac or email, we walk over and talk about it.

      Now, the Scrum alone might add up to an hour a week, but I think it's worth it -- makes it a lot easier to figure out who's stuck, and who can help, that kind of thing. And if it sucked, hey, it's over in 10 minutes.

      It sounds like what you had wasn't a meeting, it was a lecture. Lectures do suck.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    2. Re:Meetings Suck by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have found meetings to be an extraordinary waste of time in most cases, and often the result of lack of leadership and/or organizational ability on the part of those in charge.

      Such meetings are a waste of time and indicative of poor management. However, meetings can also be productive and useful tool - as long as they have a defined purpose, and someone who ensures that purpose gets met.

    3. Re:Meetings Suck by cowscows · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you're right that with the right kind of leadership and organization, a company can keep formal internal meetings to a minimum and everyone will be happier because of it.

      If that works well all the time for 37Signals, then good for them. But it's important to realize that it works for them to a large degree because of the nature of their work. The "product" that they're producing is fairly simple in the sense that it can be done with a small in-house team. It's feasible for one individual to completely wrap their head around every aspect of a project if needed. That's not possible in every industry.

      There are many lines of work where you just need way more people. There are consultants, and engineers, and manufacturers, and code officials, etc.

      I know these guys are working hard, but I think they should step back and make sure they appreciate the relative freedom that exists in much of the software industry. It's far less accountable than most jobs and far less regulated. I have many days where I wish I didn't have to constantly deal with safety codes and governmental reviews.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  3. Who was fried? by splutty · · Score: 3, Funny

    Okay.... That title is just wrong, it immediately made me wonder what sort of talkshow this 'Focus' was where Jason was fried.

    I guess that goes a long way towards Fried's philosophy as well :)

    --
    Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
  4. But... by Oligonicella · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't care what Jason is fried on, getting high is not the answer.

    1. Re:But... by Odin's+Raven · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't care what Jason is fried on, getting high is not the answer.

      Dude, like seriously man - if getting high is not the answer, then you're asking the wrong question...

      --
      A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
  5. It's true! by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Funny

    I was getting so much done this morning before I stopped to read this article.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  6. but his "campfire" sessions are just meetings by petes_PoV · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ... and just as annoying as a source of interruptions, too.

    It seems that he says one thing and then instantly contradicts himself. Yes, too many meetings are bad - as are interruptions (at least for the interruptee, presumably the interrupter achieves their goals). However, having someone continually IM'ing you (or whatever - all these things are basically as bad as each other) is just as much a distraction and source of interruptions.

    Oh yes, and making dumb statements like

    It's really hard to change that organization if you don't have the power to change it

    doesn't make him sound like he knows what he's talking about - either

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:but his "campfire" sessions are just meetings by Grey_14 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As someone who has spent a lot of time in 'meetings' on IRC, I can tell you without a doubt that collaboration in a chatroom is much less disruptive to workflow than a real life meeting, and certainly not nearly as distracting,

      Also, his 'dumb statement' taken out of context like that does certainly sound pretty dumb, but it's a transcript of a live interview and sometimes people say things without having thought their exact wording out, (Which he states earlier in the interview, is why he prefers text mediums for communication), the paragraph above the quote means that what you quoted makes sense if you aren't a complete idiot (It's definitely not the best wording, but it's understandable). he means it's hard to change a traditional organization all at once, he then goes on to suggest ways to introduce change to those organizations even if you aren't someone who would have the power to directly implement those changes.

    2. Re:but his "campfire" sessions are just meetings by noidentity · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh yes, and making dumb statements like

      It's really hard to change that organization if you don't have the power to change it

      doesn't make him sound like he knows what he's talking about - either

      Are you kidding? It sounds like he has a good grasp of basic logic. Based on that statement alone, I'd feel confident consulting him for questions like "If it's raining and I'm outside without cover, will I get wet?" and "If my front door is locked and I don't have the key and nobody's home, can I get in?"

  7. 37signals only uses Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Which really guts down on interruptions from employees running games and applications.

    Keeps em focused.

  8. Jason Voorhees was fried? by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Funny
    Okay.... That title is just wrong, it immediately made me wonder what sort of talkshow this 'Focus' was where Jason was fried.

    I thought it was another Friday 13th sequel. They've done everything else to Jason without any permanent effect.

    And really, "37signals" "Basecamp", "Campfire"? They could have been rap groups for all I knew.

  9. Re:So basically.... by NoNeeeed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This thread will be nothing but one big slashvertisement for some company that nobody would otherwise know or care about.

    You mean, apart from the several hundred thousand readers of their blogs on management and software development.

    Or indeed many people who use Ruby on Rails? They are the guys behind that. Whether you use/like it, you have probably heard of it.

    Just because you don't know who they are, doesn't mean that others don't, and it doesn't stop what they have to say being interesting.

    Perhaps we should have no more articles that mention any companies, just in case you don't know who they are?

  10. Probably not lecture by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While I'll aggree with your main point, actually, it doesn't sound to me like he was having a lecture kind of meeting. A lecture at least involves someone, essentially, telling you, "I know how it's done, I decided it's done this way, I'll tell you in detail how." YMMV, but that's the basic idea. The meetings he's talking about, if I understood him right, are more the kind where someone doesn't want to be personally responsible for taking any decision. Quite the opposite. If he can't back out in dumbly applying some semi-irrelevant regulation or rule, he'll back out into, basically, "we all talked about it until everyone was too bored to give a shit any more, therefore we _all_ took that decision, therefore _I_ am not to blame." That is, if a decision is taken at all. Some end without anything being achieved whatsoever.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  11. I need to get my eyes checked by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 3, Funny

    I thought Jason was FIRED.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  12. Basic Philosophy.... by maz2331 · · Score: 2

    The basic philosophy here is:

    1. Cut the bullshit.
    2. Do the work, and focus on it.
    3. Make your product reflect your vision.
    4. Sell to users who want simple "just works" apps.
    5. Minimize overhead relentlessly, eliminate buracracy. (See #1)
    6. Avoid expensive outside PR and other overhead (See #1 and #5)
    7. Keep the vulture capitalists at bay. (See #1, #3, #5, and #6)
    8. Start small and assemble team sharing common basic vision. (See #1, #3, #5, #7)
    9. Profit.

    It all makes sense, at least at a small scale. Overhead, indecision, and excessive levels of non-productive activity hurt productivity. Without productivity, you end up without a product, or end up with a poor one. With too much overhead, you need higher revenues just to break even.

    Some organization and rules are necessary, but keep them minimal and focused on the end result. Push decisions as close to the actual work as possible to avoid paralysis, but keep a feedback loop in place to correct bad decisions.

    Really, it all boils down to two words: "Work Efficiently".

  13. What a tool. by gilgongo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sigh. The guy is about 30 years old. His company has 10 people after having existed through one of the biggest economic booms of all time, and they make software and sell it.

    I ask you: how could you NOT run a company like that in the way he is describing? Nobody would attempt to run a whelk stall like IBM, so how is this news?

    Be that as it may, he says they are about to become 12 people. Let's hope they're all as good at doing their jobs as they think they are, because pretty soon they will know the answer. Personally, I would not want to be Jason Fried, and I certainly wouldn't want his name.

    --
    "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
  14. 10 people? by rtechie · · Score: 4, Funny

    37signals is a 10 man shop. Why is this guy considered an organizational guru given that he runs such a tiny organization? Your average World of Warcraft raid beats the organizational challenges he is facing.