Slashdot Mirror
The Importance of Lunch
theodp writes "I've been on teams that eat together every day,' writes Joel-on-Software Spolsky, 'and it's awesome. I've been on teams that don't, and lunch every day is, at best, lonely.' Spolsky is firmly in the camp that believes where and with whom we eat lunch is a much bigger deal than most people care to admit. 'There's a lot of stuff that's accidental about Fog Creek and Stack Exchange,' he concludes, 'but lunch is not one of them. Ten years ago Michael and I set out with the rather ambitious goal of making a great place to work. Eating together is a critical part of what it means to be human and what it means to have a humane workplace, and that's been a part of our values from day one.'"
Personally... I'd rather spend that hour working and leave an hour earlier.
Generally I'm at work to make money and not to make friends. I know every company does the rah-rah, we're awesome, "team-building", let's all be friends so we work better together. But I'd rather just be professional, get my work done, and spend my free time how I see fit.
I once spoke to a CEO of a successful startup in Texas. He attributed a large part of their success to the fact that the team ate lunch together every day. They sold the company to a larger company for big bucks, success by some measure at least.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
I've known this for ages. This is why, at the beginning of each day, I make any employees who felt the need to brown-bag it toss their lunch in The Trough. Once in the trough it's blended in with a caffeinated protein slurry.
Now, we can't have the workers getting all uppity because I allow them to eat, so this trough is installed roughly level with the floor, so they have to bow at my feet while they nourish themselves.
It's a wonderful place for me to work.
Regards,
Mark Z.
Again with people forcing extrovert-ism on the world. Why can't people *in general* be accepting of introverts who like to, and gain their energy from, being alone? I find it is an excellent time to put my thoughts together and come up with new ideas while away from my desk.
For instance, the first phase is characterized by the question "How can we make payroll?", the second by the question "Why do we need VC?", and the third by the question "Where shall we have lunch?"
It should be the goal of every startup company to reach the third stage.
If you want to make a "great place to work" in the sense that those you work with are more than resources to exploit, build a cooperative, partnership or mutual.
If you want to throw bones to your more easily won over employees, safe in the knowledge that you can fire them whenever necessary, pontificate on the importance of eating lunch with them.
"I’ve been on teams that eat together every day, and it’s awesome."
"...but you’ll also see a distressing number of loners eating by themselves..."
" Maybe they’re reading a book or checking their email while they eat so they don’t look sad."
"Maybe they genuinely don’t like people and they’re happy to eat alone. Or maybe they’re just telling you that."
This is something I see a lot in workplaces: Extroverted people just not understanding the mind of introverted people. Honestly I'm surprised a person with experience in the tech field (I assume) is falling into this trap.
Not everyone enjoys being around and talking to other people all day long. Maybe it's because they're shy, maybe it's because they don't like their co-workers, maybe it's because they have some kind of disorder, or maybe it's just their natural personality. I gotta be honest, there's no way I'd last at that place, because if my boss/coworkers were on my case every day to come eat with them, I'd be miserable. It's fine if the group wants to go out/gather once in a while, but not every day. Most days I just want to go have an hour where I can be left to myself and not have to talk to anyone else. Wonder how many otherwise good employees he's run off with this policy?
Is lunch with the team counted as on the clock? If not, the boss has no right to tell anybody with whom they should or should not eat.
That's AWESOME!
And if he had attributed the success to keeping a picture of a porcupine on his desk, would it be as relevant?
The key point is that he sold the company to a larger company.
He did not buy the larger company.
It all comes down to how you define "success".
Lunchtime doubly so. Therefore anyone you have lunch with is merely a figment of your imagination.
Blank until
Where I work, a bunch of us sit together for lunch, from my team and people who used to be on the team but went to work on other things.
Talking about work is banned. Lunch is a time to crack jokes, talk about hobbies, outside interest and to put the world to rights.
Taking a complete break from work for half to one hour is very good for concentration and problem-solving. It's amazing how frequently seemingly difficult problems become easily solvable after a proper lunch break.
Some people are fine with half an hour, but I need at least an hour and some strong coffee afterwards. For the last 20-30 minutes, I read the news and have a good laugh at the ranting on slashdot.
Those social bonds formed at lunch time are important. It's easier to go and speak to those people about work matters later and get their advice when you're friendly with them and you know how their minds work.
And it's just nice to have a few friends in the place.
Stick Men
I worked at KMART for a time when I was freshly graduated from school (BS Computer Science) and was unable to find any work.
3rd shift ate lunch together every night, but we were all still working at KMART.
Although this idea is more geared towards office/professional work just wanted to throw that experience out there.
There are introverted ways to enjoy a group lunch. Eating, listening, and perhaps occasionally participating in a discussion when it's relevant. A group lunch isn't a cocktail party, and just being at the table reminds people you are part of the team and keeps you informed on what other people are doing, having trouble with, etc. The information that gets revealed there can give you opportunities to be more helpful and needed in the team - which will contribute both to your own success and that of the group.
I am in introvert who has learned the importance of lunch, among other things. Introversion doesn't need to become solipsism or self-absorption.
I normally pack a lunch and scarf it down while I keep working at my desk. I'd much rather get done that much earlier in the day.
Having said that, I do often take lunches with coworkers, but only when it's convenient, and I actually like them.
My team has an interesting alternative to lunch, which is far more constructive in my mind. Around 2pm, any of us in the group can call for a "yo" break if we need it. Then we all go stand around and shoot the breeze for 15-30 minutes outside the building. This allows us to socialize, blow off some steam, and get our minds focused again. It is well worth the company time because by around 2pm, you are already need a break to clear the cobwebs.
Discussions like this explain a lot about what motivates employees in various organizations. And the cultures of these organizations.
Different people are motivated by different things. Study Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Some people seek friends. Some seek accomplishment, the esteem of others or themselves, or creativity and problem solving for its own sake. I think groups who place too much emphasis on socialization attract people somewhat lower on this motivational scale. And in many cases, this is a conscious management strategy. Keep people down on the ladder, so to speak, and they are easier to manage.* Excluding people from social groups, particularly if they are needy in this area is an effective tool.
* Due to some economic circumstances, I found myself able to retire very comfortably at the age of 28. Nevertheless, I continued to work. Not for the money, but just for the sake of accomplishing something. Unfortunately, this put me at odds with quite a few managers who sought to control their employees with the paycheck. It never worked on me and, as a result, I never lasted very long working for them. Even if my job performance was judged exemplary.
Have gnu, will travel.
Joel-on-Software Spolsky promotes himself as an authority on software development, but he only runs a tiny company that makes applications for a relatively simple problem. It's still a tiny company, after over a decade of operation. I'd rather hear from the people who managed the software for Voyager. Or the vehicle stabilization system for a modern car. Or the radio inside the iPhone. (I know the guy who headed that team; he waited until the iPhone shipped, and then quit Apple in disgust with having to work for Steve Jobs.) Or the file system that keeps Google working even when machines fail.
I think you missed the point.
The point was that the CEO can (and often does) attribute his "success" (success being defined by him) to whatever he WANTS to based upon his pre-existing bias.
And if he fails, that doesn't mean that he was wrong. It just means that something else cancelled out his great idea. At least in his mind.
Success in business usually comes down to
being in the right place
at the right time
with the right product
and the right personal connections.
Back in the "dot com boom" it was very easy to start a company, get name recognition and then sell out to a larger company for a wad of cash. Even if your business model was impossible to support. Even if you didn't have a product to sell.
And that is why there are so many cycles of management fads and books.
Your state laws may not allow that option
if you're an exempt employee, I'm not aware of any law that would force you to take a lunch break. Your employer can tell you to work through breakfast lunch and dinner, and your only recourse is to quit.
If you're non-exempt, in California you have to take a 30 minute (unpaid) lunch whether you want to or not. (there are a few exceptions that would allow an on-duty meal break)
If the kid wants to, he should be "allowed" to work 12 hour days, 6 days a week in a coal mine. Damn the state for getting involved!
If the company needs me to come in on Saturday and Sunday and put in 20 hours unpaid, goddamn the state for telling them to pay me!
You know what, a bunch of you at work like to use the job and their co-workers as their social group, terrific, knock yourselves out. But it's not for everyone and the company is missing out on important talent if this is a condition of continued employment. How about just leaving people alone. They may actually have lunch together now and again spontaneously.
I'm looking forward to the software dev job situation swinging back the other way to where these touchy-feely companies are back on the short end of the bargaining stick. You clowns have too much power and you seem bored. Not a good combo. It's a job. We go there to solve problems, get paid and work.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to have lunch with my significant other. My current job supports me on this. Ciao.
That might get you out of the mandatory lunch, but it probably won't get you out of the office an hour early every day.
Just got back from a lunch with my coworkers. I think that you should not just surround yourself with people like you, I have a veiled Muslim woman and a militant atheist who always eats pork in my group. The fact that we formed a social bond and help each other out is a HUGE plus.
To all those that say: I'm at work to only make money and go home: You are spending 8h/day 5 days a week there. You should enjoy it, or you will be taking out frustration on your family which is not cool. The lunch should be a no work zone though. Talk about other stuff to socialize. IE. We all discovered we like different instruments in rock band. We have discussions on politics, current events, how to raise kids. It helps you respect your peers and trust them more.
So? If the state laws don't allow it, ignore them. Similar laws exist in my country and I never ever would lunch with my coworkers. It's on par with ignoring speed limits, everybody does it and the odds of being caught are even lower. What are they going to do? Inspection? Well, go on lunch if that ever happens. If asked, you took lunch outside in the park.
I have no problem lying about this. I mean, they can't prove it's not true.
The problem with ignoring labor laws is not the happy content employees are are willing to put in extra time and other things necessary to just "get the job done".
The problem is when you end up with a disgruntled employee that wants to make things bad for the company - they can make a labor complaint, show that the the manager required all 20 people on the team to participate in group lunches, and then suddenly the employer is faced with paying 2 years of overtime to all 20 team members.
This is why HR departments exist - to protect the company from future litigation.
Right after the only other art form where you are allowed to put something inside your audience.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I do enjoy work. If the only thing that makes your job enjoyable is socializing with your coworkers, then you need to get a new job.
Different people handle situations differently. You enjoy socializing and it helps you unwind. It doesn't help me. At best it's boring and extends my workday by an extra 30-60 minutes, which is time I would be rather spending with my real friends. At worst it creates more stress thus requiring more unwind time leaving even less quality time for my friends and family.
There are also introverted ways to get out of a group lunch. You obviously can't have it your way every day but there's nothing wrong with saying "I really appreciate that you thought of me but right now I just need some quiet time to recharge". And just like that you've shown sincere appreciation for being included and politely rejected the invitation.
Hanging out with the extroverts is a balancing act, you have to find that middle ground between mental peace and maintaining strong relationships, but being a shadow-dweller doesn't make one solipsistic or self-absorbed either.
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
Because under IDEAL conditions your co-workers would have been selected for their capability to perform the job. Not because they had the same religious / political / etc opinions as you.
IF someone else who you work with has the same opinions as you then it is great if you can become friends.
But to put the focus on that means that the focus is not on getting the work done so you can get out an live your non-work life. Which is a problem.
Yep. And if Bill and Tom had the same skill levels and such, then that would one thing.
But in my experience (your experience may differ) it is the more social person who lacks the technical skills. Simply based upon personality type. The stereotype of the nerd who spends his waking hours hacking on his computer instead of attending parties is a stereotype for a reason.
Really? Are you really so content with where you are and what you know? There's no room for growth?
None of my coworkers have been selected based on "religious / political / etc opinions" but they have been selected based on their skills. Which may be different from my skills. So there may be something I can learn from that person, even if their interests are different than mine.
So it may be worth my while to get to know the other people in my office. And lunch is a good time to get to know people I don't work with directly on a daily basis.
While I like what I do, I wouldn't mind opportunities to work on other projects and in other capacities.
The idea that being antisocial == leet skillz and social == PHB is simple ignorance.
The tone of TFA is abhorrent. "Ooh, he must be so unhappy because he has something worthwhile to do instead of talking to me. I know I'd shrivel up and die if I couldn't get an ego boost from my comrades."
One thing that should tip you off about the TFA is the mention of long cafeteria-style tables. He doesn't want a happy family of people who work well together. He just wants to LOOK like a happy family of people who work well together.
He specifically mentions the long table as the alternative to round tables. At a long table, you can get scores of people at the same table, but each can really only interact with the closest 5 people.
At a round table, you may only get 10 people to a table, but everyone at the table can see and interact with everyone else at the table.
Where do you people work that you can actually TALK to someone? These days people have their faces buried in their smartphones 24/7 sending LOLS and Youtubes to each other. I mean, this goes beyond even work. It goes to bars, camping etc. No one actually talks to each other anymore.
True introverts can't understand true extroverts and vice versa.
An introvert gains energy during solo moments and looses it during social gatherings. An extrovert is drained of energy alone and gains it during social events.
So, a company meeting will leave the introvert drained and the extrovert charged up. Even if the meeting goes well, what happens AFTERwards is the real issue. The extrovert will be rearing to go and act on all the things discussed. The introvert wants to take a nap.
It doesn't even matter much when you do it. In the evening the introvert will be exhausted from the day of social interaction and be REALLY exhausted afterwards, while the extrovert has no where to spent all his pent up energy. Do it early and your introvert will be drained during the working day.
So, get rid of introverts? Pity they are often more stable, less easy to corrupt and in any case, most developers are introverts.
Most managers are extroverts. See the problem?
It is even worse for developers who like to get into the zone. No good with a manager who needs constant social interaction.
Just check, how many coders do you know with a cat vs managers with a dog?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
In my experience, the correlation isn't between lacking social skills and having great technical skills... it's between lacking social skills and THINKING that you have great technical skills. One of the best and most brilliant developers / architects I've ever known was also an amazing story teller with an incredible sense of humor. One of the least skilled guys I've known who was head of software development was a sociopath who thought he was a god.
Yes, I've also known the classic guys who had few social skills and were clearly very bright. I'm just saying that lacking social skills in a developer means zero about their technical skills. The other thing about the guys with few social skills is that they might be very smart and might do what made sense to them, but what they did wasn't necessarily useful to the customer.
In today's job market you should be more aware than ever that even in technical positions, it's often who you know, not what you know that gets you the job, that lets you keep the job, that keeps you over the cut-off line when there's layoffs, that has you in line for raises, that has you spearheading the neat new technologies, that has non-technical folks deferring to you.
I know the idea of a code ninja who silently fixes problems with nary a word might seem romantic. I get it when people say they need personal time for introspection and analysis. There are many people out there who simply work better by themselves.
Just keep in mind that your skills need to be exponentially better than those of your peers if you're going to stand out by product/efficiency/quality alone. The guy who keeps asking you for help and self-promotes his achievements is going to end up with a raise while your name is going to pop up at the budget meetings as a potential cut after several years of 'meets expectations' evaluations.
So, do yourself a favor, find some quiet time and think about it.
Another sane advice from the guy who claimed that writing a new web-browser was the worst decision the Mozilla Foundation could make.
MOD THE CHILD UP!
If the company pays for lunch, why not? If not, we should all be free to bring something from home, eat whatever we want, or even skip lunch and do something else (sleep, exercise, etc.).
Lunchtime is when I run errands and generally take any excuse to get the heck out of the office.
I don't know about y'all but, for me, "the office" is a fabric-covered box in a big, windowless room. Want your creativity to improve? Get the heck out of the flourescent-lit geek fattening pen and get some natural sunlight. Go for a walk. Get some fresh air. Anything to get out of that soul-killing cubicle farm. Even if it's only for a while. You'll find your afternoon is much more productive and you'll do much better at retaining your sanity.
At lunch, my co-workers are busy talking about who tweeted what or what happened on "Big Bang Theory." Or who's reached what level on WoW (not so much of that, lately). I consider Twitter to be a pointless waste of time. I don't watch the same shows they do. I'm not a gamer.
I'm also a decade or more older than the rest of them. Some of them were still in diapers when I finished high school. One was born about the time I became old enough to drink. He has a B.S. CompSci, like I do. I think you can do the math.
In short, we have very little in common, other than the fact that we draw our paychecks from the same employer.
So, why would I want to eat lunch with them? I used to do that, trying to build a rapport with at least some of them. After a year of that, I finally decided that was a pointless waste of time and gave up.
The company even has a quarterly lunch where the company caters the food. I'm on a carb-restricted diet, and the caterers doesn't seem to comprehend that such a thing exists. Not even the green beans are safe (their special recipe involves adding a bunch of brown sugar; more people eat them, that way). Mashed potatoes, baked potates, various kinds of bread, cookies, you name it. They look at you funny if you just want protein and veggies and aren't oinking out on the carbs. I quit showing up for those events. There are only so many times I can go back for more salad.
Joel is trying to promote a workplace where you would actually want to be. For the vast majority of us in IT, that's too much to ask. Let me earn my paycheck in peace, then don't be surprised when I leave, at the end of the day, and go do something completely unrelated to the job, the office or my co-workers.
Clearly, I'm not Joel's target demographic.
... by the Dew of Mountains the thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning
Am I the only one who is so bored with talking and eating at the same time? To me, food is something sacred, it is a part of me. What I eat, becomes me. And during that process, I like to focus on eating, not talking with co-workers. Talking with co-workers takes the focus away from the process of eating and digestion, making me not notice what I am putting in my system and how my system is reacting to this food.
How many times have you overeaten while talking at the same time ? It is easy not to notice what is happening while eating if trying to talk at the same time and focus on external things. If we focus on the stuff we talk, that focus is directly out of the eating process. This is why I don't like business lunchs, you forget the importance of food and it just becomes something you munch down usually.
I think we should take it slower, enjoy food, look at the food we are eating, think about how it is effecting us. This way we can process it much more effectively, letting our bodies focus on one task at a time.
GeoKone.NET