职业与工作方法hbr.org
如果你如此成功，为什么每周还要工作 70 小时？
If You’re So Successful, Why Are You Still Working 70 Hours a Week?
2018 — 2024，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这篇《哈佛商业评论》文章讨论一个悖论：既然已经成功，为什么仍有人每周工作70小时。文章围绕热爱、意义感、掌控感、行业竞争与薪酬激励等因素，分析长时间工作的动机与代价。
为什么经久不衰：它触及一个跨时代的职场分歧：工作究竟是谋生、追求意义还是身份认同；无论站在哪一边，都能借它反思自己为何停不下来。
HN 评论精选
高薪和专业资产增值让长时间工作成为提前积累财富的理性交易。
过去十年，尤其是2008年后，法律、医疗、科技、金融、咨询等专业人士的工资大幅上涨，即使扣除学生贷款债务和通胀也是如此。这让长时间工作更有吸引力，因为经济回报巨大：既有工资，也能把收入投入股票、房地产等快速升值资产（2009年后的牛市是史上最大最长）。因此，Reddit 和 Hacker News 上许多理财、投资、财务独立等板块的人，在20多岁末或30多岁时积累了可观财富。在20、30岁拼命工作，到40岁拥有一大笔足以覆盖余生的储备金，似乎是很好的权衡。
paulpauper查看英文原文
Wages for professionals, such as law, medicine, tech, finance, consulting, etc., have really ballooned over the past decade, since 2008 especially, even after accounting for student loan debt and inflation. This makes working long hours more attractive, as the financial payoff is so great both in terms of wages but also by investing one's income in rapidly appreciating assets such as stocks and real estate (the post-2009 bull market is the biggest and longest ever). Consequently, there are many people on Reddit and Hacker News on popular subs such as /r/personalfinance , r/investing, /r/financialindependence, /r/wallstreetbets (a lot of gambling, yes, but also many rich people who have 6-figures to play with) and /r/fatfire who have amassed considerable wealth by late 20 or 30s. Putting in long hours in your 20s and 30s to have a massive nest egg that will last you the rest of your life by your 40s seems like a good trade-off.
“意义”和“幸福”是两种不同驱动力，两派常彼此误解。
你可以拥有意义，也可以拥有幸福，但很难两者兼得——至少不是一直都能。这个冲突在《办公空间》这类电影里看得很清楚：男女主角为幸福（和生存）而工作，而工作环境却期待他们为意义而工作。讨论的难点在于，一边的人根本不理解另一边的人，觉得对方言行不可理喻。如果你属于“意义派”，看到这篇文章标题——“如果你这么成功，为什么还每周工作70小时？”——会想：如果成功了，为什么不每周工作70小时？你在做热爱的事，在改变世界！只有那些不成功、为意义工作却效率不高的人，才会花大量时间什么都不做。对两边来说，世界似乎都满是另一边的人，把一切搞糟。要是能在人生早期就把这条关键信息传达给人就好了。很多冲突本不必要，却耗费了大量时间和精力。
DanielBMarkham查看英文原文
You can have meaning or you can have happiness. You cannot have both -- at least not all of the time. This conflict can be seen clearly in a movie like "Office Space", where both the male and female leads are working for happiness (and survival) whereas the work environment expects them to be working for meaning. (How many pieces of flair are you wearing?) The trick to this discussion is that people on one side of the discussion frankly don't understand folks on the other side. The things they say and do don't make any sense. If you're a meaning person, you read the title of this essay -- "If You’re So Successful, Why Are You Still Working 70 Hours a Week?" and think if you're successful, why wouldn't you be working 70 hours a week? You're doing what you love, making a difference in the world! It's only those that are unsuccessful, those who work for meaning but aren't very effective, that would spend a lot of time doing nothing. For both camps, it seems the world is full of people from the other camp, basically ruining things for the rest of us. It would be great if we could convey this critical piece of information to people early on in life. So much time and energy is spent in conflicts with other folks where it's not needed.
能否长期高强度工作，关键在于掌控感和支持系统，而不只是小时数。
你为什么觉得人们不喜欢每周工作70小时？我父亲经常每周工作70小时——他有过医生、商人、公众人物等多重职业。但他有大量帮助：经理、私人助理、司机，家里的事全部外包。他乐在其中，但他有很大的掌控权。我观察到，大多数倦怠的人是因为其他原因：办公室政治、健康不佳，以及最终感觉无法掌控自己的生活。不是每个人都适合这样工作，但有些人是可以的，而且能长期维持。
sharadov查看英文原文
Why do you suppose that people don't enjoy working 70 hours a week? My dad regularly worked 70 hour weeks - had multiple careers doctor/businessman/public figure. But he had a ton of help - manager, personal assistant, chauffeur. Everything on the home front was outsourced. He loved it. But he had a lot of control. Most people, I observe who burn out, do because of other reasons - work politics, poor health and ultimately not feeling in control of their lives. Not everyone is built to work like that, but some are. And they can sustain it for long periods of time.
律师计费小时目标从1200到1600涨到2000，根源是市场全国化与按业绩分配导致竞争加剧，而非单纯文化。
文章描绘了一些专业公司里的人，却忽略了这些专业人士所处市场的变化。ABA研究显示，1965年律师典型的目标计费小时是1200到1600，而今天2000小时是常态。这不能只用文化解释。法律行业一直吸引“缺乏安全感的高成就者”。现实原因是市场变化：几十年前，费城公司把案子交给华盛顿律所很不寻常，今天却很平常——你的竞争对手是全国性的。和本地商人打高尔夫已不足以带来业务。和其他行业一样，工作也转向大市场（纽约、芝加哥、旧金山、华盛顿）的大玩家。外部竞争也滋生内部竞争。我曾在一家纽约律所工作，那里合伙人间没有竞争，按资历严格锁步付薪。业务开发意味着吃完午饭回来查留言。合伙是终身制，合伙人从不离开。这在30到40年前很典型，今天却非常例外，只有少数拥有重大机构关系的律所保留这种模式。今天典型模式是“吃你杀死的猎物”：合伙人按带来多少业务获得报酬，并经常根据谁给的钱最好而在律所间跳槽。当然这一切不一定坏。竞争加剧意味着更多工作……
rayiner查看英文原文
The article profiles people in a bunch of professional firms, but ignores the changing market for those professionals. An ABA study showed that in 1965, a typical billable hour target for a lawyer was 1200-1600. Today, 2000 hours is a typical target. That can’t be explained by culture. Law has always drawn “insecure overachievers.” In reality, it’s due to the changing marketplace. Decades ago, it would be highly unusual for Philadelphia company to retain a DC firm for a matter. Today, it’s routine—your competition is nationwide. Golfing with local business people doesn’t cut it for business development anymore. And like other industries, the work has shifted to larger players in big markets (NYC/Chicago/SF/DC). External competition also breeds internal competition. I used to work at a firm in New York. There was no competition in the partnership, by design: everyone was paid in a lock step fashion strictly by seniority. Business development meant checking your messages when you got back from lunch. Partnership was for life and partners never left. That was typical 30-40 years ago. Today it’s very much the exception, a model retained by a handful of firms that have major institutional relationships. The typical model today is “eat what you kill.” Partners are compensated based on how much business they bring in, and regularly hop from firm to firm depending on who is offering the best pay package. Of course all this isn’t necessarily bad. Increased competition means more work, more hours, more availability. But where there is a lack of competition, that’s often a sign of people being kept down. Back in 1965, many firms didn’t hire Jews, Asians, African Americans, women, etc. Business was given out over drinks instead of having competing firms pitch for it in a transparent way. All of those things increase competition and decrease the value of “good old boy” networks.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
用十年时间自学编程（1998）
Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years (1998)
Peter Norvig 1998 年的经典文章，回应“21天/24小时学会编程”一类速成书，主张真正精通编程需要约十年持续、有意识的练习。
职业与工作方法上首页 11 次 · 2007–2025norvig.com编辑精选如何成为一名程序员：简短、全面而个人的总结
How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary
一篇广为流传的程序员成长指南，作者以个人经验系统总结了成为优秀程序员所需的各项技能——从调试、测试、沟通到团队协作与身心健康。
职业与工作方法上首页 6 次 · 2008–2015samizdat.mines.edu编辑精选不要自称程序员
Don't Call Yourself a Programmer
经典职业建议文章劝软件工程师不要把自己局限在“程序员”这个标签上，而要从公司业务角度说明自己创造的价值；文中讨论了成本中心与利润中心、头衔、求职与职业选择，也顺带批评了学术界的价…
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2011–2021kalzumeus.com编辑精选创作者的日程与经理的日程
Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule (2009)
Paul Graham 在这篇文章里把时间表分成两类：管理者的日程以小时为单位，会议可以填满一天；创作者（程序员、写作者等）的日程则以半天为单位，需要长时间不被打断的连续块。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021paulgraham.com编辑精选为什么程序员的薪酬不与生产力成正比
Why programmers are not paid in proportion to their productivity
讨论为什么程序员的薪酬往往不随其生产力成比例增长：生产力难以客观量化，薪酬更多受组织预算、岗位定价和个人议价能力影响。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2022johndcook.com