The Zen Habits guy - Leo Babauta - made a rather radical suggestion recently. One that came down to essentially working for just a few hours a day, then rewarding yourself with a nap. (Not Seth, obviously.)
The difference in this kind of day versus the eight, nine, 10 hour days someone else worked?
That two to four hours was only to be spent on something amazing.
The kickers (which he doesn't get into) are these:
1. Amazing isn't necessarily fun. So picking that something amazing to work on doesn't mean the time is going to fly by. It's work. And sometimes the most amazing results come from doing the stuff we hate most.
2. Can you even pick something amazing to do for that time? Or has your job come down to so many unimportant details that you find your plate doesn't actually have any amazing projects on it to work on?
Do you have something amazing to do for a couple of hours a day? Can you find it? Less than amazing is just wasting your time. And you don't get your nap.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=b7de7291-2be1-45e2-a203-f0c20c5d48f8)
I have to agree. I have been trying out wordpress myself and I now understand how programmers end up getting immersed in their work. I am the farthest thing from a programmer but carefully editing and testing bits of code can keep you involved like you would not believe.
Unfortunately I am the typical 70 hour employee, putting quantity over quality at times. It is something I am working on changing!
Posted by: Chris | 05/31/2009 at 11:36 AM