7 ms·

Throughout my professional career, I've worked as an engineer for the buy-side (arguably better work-life balance compared to sell-side, i.e. banks). More often

Throughout my professional career, I've worked as an engineer for the buy-side (arguably better work-life balance compared to sell-side, i.e. banks). More often than not, I was working under a manager/team lead that made it abundantly clear to the team that one "will not progress in the company if they think they can leave everyday at 5pm". I've also had a manager who was speechless to find out that we did not, in fact, sign waivers that meant we give up regular working hours and can therefore be forced to work long hours every day or on the weekends. Funnily enough, I can't count the number of times I had an interview and the interviewer described the company as the 'Google of Finance', with an emphasis on work-life balance. It couldn't be further away from the truth in my experience. Management in the financial industry is unfortunately still plagued with people who think that more working hours is perfectly correlated with more productivity.

AndyMcConachie 6y ago
I think it's often less about productivity than it is about instilling a sense of allegiance. Certain companies like it when their employees have no life outside of work because they are less likely to cause trouble and more likely to do what they're told. Management in these places wants to own your time and wants you close so they can keep an eye on you.
- evgen 6y ago
  The long hours also serves as a sort of hazing ritual that can increase bonding to a particular world-view. If you are a company like GS you know you can pull in the cream of the crop by dangling huge payouts at the end of the apprenticeship period. The apprentices will eat entire pies filled with shit day in and day out until they can't take it anymore and quit. Those who survive are now much more closely bonded to both their peers and upper-management (who endured the same thing in the past) and are more likely to take the company world-view as axiomatic from that point onward. You see this in finance, medicine, elite military units, and more close to home you see it all over the startup world.
  - chii 6y ago
    But the question is whether this sort of hazing produce better outcomes (for the company)? You point out elite military units, and medicine. Both of these fields tend to have highly competent, highly motivated individuals, and thus their work is quite valuable. If it were better to not have such hazing, then that implies that these units are not operating optimally. But then if they aren't, why hasn't a better optimal system replaced it?
    - evgen 6y ago
      I guess I would assume that it produces better outcomes from the company perspective but honestly can't think of a good counter-example to use as a comparison. After enduring the hazing it is much easier to convince you to do things that might be a bit morally questionable (e.g. shifting your personal ethical Overton window) by reminding you in subtle ways of what you endured to reach this point, what it means to others that have endured with you, etc. I would assume that in certain adversarial environments it is better to have a small team that will focus on a goal without question than one in which either the goal or the means to accomplish it are ever up for questioning, but someone with any knowledge of academic research on leadership and team dynamics can probably answer better than I.
      - goatinaboat 6y ago
        it is much easier to convince you to do things that might be a bit morally questionable (e.g. shifting your personal ethical Overton window Same reason that executives like to go to strip clubs together, it creates a sense of “if I go down you go down with me”.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - newsclues 6y ago
      It creates loyalty and trust. Important when doing dangerous or illegal things.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > it's often less about productivity than it is about instilling a sense of allegiance Note that the senior people at these firms are usually pulling, while not 80+ hours, at least 60 a week (e.g. 6AM to 6PM Monday through Friday).
  - ghaff 6y ago
    A lot of the commentary here is (correctly) on the associate "hazing." But, yes, partners certainly don't just cruise in for a few hours a day either and there's definitely a hierarchy of partners. In my experience, with investment banking there's a fair bit of high-end FIRE with at least some of those who stick it out retiring in their 40s or so.
- Frost1x 6y ago
  It's also about ekeing out any additional labor because the employer pays a flat rate. It doesn't matter if 20-40 of the hours after 40 hours only gain 10% additional work relative to the 90% done in the first 40 hours. That's still a 10% gain for the business at no cost. Employees are going to cycle out anyways naturally looking for better opportunities so who cares if they get burnt out? Exempt positions shouldn't be an option in any industry, in my opinion. As they become the norm everywhere they become an excuse to abuse labor for whatever reason the employer decides.
  - MereInterest 6y ago
    Except that every productivity study shows the exact opposite. For a week or two, you can spend more hours to produce more. On any longer timescale, the extra hours decrease your productivity/hour so much that the total output goes down. It's not just abusive on the part of the employer, but is also just plain stupid. Definitely agree on overtime-exempt positions. The terminology is also really messed up. Normally, being exempt from something is a good thing. Here, "non-exempt" and "exempt" should be referred to as "paid for overtime" and "screwed for overtime".
    - 1123581321 6y ago
      An “up-or-out” pyramid structure doesn’t see as much of that longer-term effect because it creates a selective environment for people who can work longer hours, and because it is overworking a stream of new interns and graduates who don’t stay for as much of the low productivity period as employees would in a traditional organization.
      - MereInterest 6y ago
        How long does it take to get promoted out of the initial hazing? Productivity at 40 hours/week beats productivity at 60 hours/week over any time scale longer than a month. I sincerely doubt that the turnover/promotion rate is only a month long. I do agree that there is a misalignment of incentives. An employer is not financially responsible for the burnout that they induce. If it takes the employee an extra 2-3 months between jobs due to recovering from that burnout, that is a financial hit to the employee on top of the emotional hit, even though they were not responsible for causing the burnout in the first place.
raverbashing 6y ago
What do you mean by the buy-side exactly? Investment funds?
- phyalow 6y ago
  Yes Hedge Funds usually. Sell side is banks selling services and the buyers are Hedge Funds, Asset Managers etc.
- ludwigschubert 6y ago
  Yeah, funds, or anyone who makes investments essentially. Unlike banks, which focus on the sale and generating revenue from fees etc. rather than investment insight. Investopedia isn't always the best source, but for definitions they come in handy: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/buyside.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/buyside.asp (I had a brief internship in finance on the buy-side and had to look up a ton of terms like that, to the degree that I was given this tongue-in-cheek "guide": https://www.amazon.com/Damn-Feels-Good-Be-Banker/dp/1401309682 https://www.amazon.com/Damn-Feels-Good-Be-Banker/dp/14013096.... It's immature af, but managed to teach me the cliches and terminology.)
- Galanwe 6y ago
  Financial jargon. Buy-side are traditionally firms that are the "leaf" of the system: investment funds, hedge funds, etc. These are buyers of services. Sell side refer to firms that are selling a service for the buy side, brokers, banks, etc.
jasim 6y ago
I once worked for a German company (remotely) who made it clear that working beyond 6pm wouldn't lead to much progress, and my lead consistently logged out at just the time. So I had to follow his example and couldn't potter around after. I still love the team for that. But we consistently did a solid day's worth of work everyday and there wasn't much juice left to continue after.
- globuous 6y ago
  My dad was working for a big oil company. He once told me a pretty funny story. The company had just switched CEOs, and the new CEO was walking around the office around 7:30pm, knocked on my dad's door and asked him "sir, are you bad at your job ?" My dad was surprised because he thought he had a reputation of being pretty good at it. The new CEO then asked him "so if you're good at your job, why are you still in the office at 7:30pm ?". The ideo being that someone good could finish his workload soon enough to be back home with his family by 7:30. That contrasted so much with the "stay at work as long as you can to show you're working hard" culture so many companies have.
  - iancmceachern 6y ago
    This. This is good management.
  - standardUser 6y ago
    That practically brings a tear to my eye. We need a world with a lot more of those bosses.
  - vbtemp 5y ago
    I love this. First time I was a engineering lead, things were going great, to the point we simply weren't busy... Long lunches, chill days, making good friendships. The younger staff became worried that they weren't busy and didn't have anything to do, because they were so used to always having backlogs of bugs and other random assignments to do. I simply said, this is what life is like when you're good at what you do - you reward good work with pleasantness instead of more work!
- 6y ago
logicchains 6y ago
>Funnily enough, I can't count the number of times I had an interview and the interviewer described the company as the 'Google of Finance', with an emphasis on work-life balance. It couldn't be further away from the truth in my experience. Management in the financial industry is unfortunately still plagued with people who think that more working hours is perfectly correlated with more productivity. Some HFTs are better in this regard, as developer quality/productivity matters a lot more for high-frequency trading than it does at a slow-trading bank or hedge fund, and mistakes are more costly, so they have incentive to treat their developers better.

AndyMcConachie 6y ago

I think it's often less about productivity than it is about instilling a sense of allegiance. Certain companies like it when their employees have no life outside of work because they are less likely to cause trouble and more likely to do what they're told. Management in these places wants to own your time and wants you close so they can keep an eye on you.

evgen 6y ago
The long hours also serves as a sort of hazing ritual that can increase bonding to a particular world-view. If you are a company like GS you know you can pull in the cream of the crop by dangling huge payouts at the end of the apprenticeship period. The apprentices will eat entire pies filled with shit day in and day out until they can't take it anymore and quit. Those who survive are now much more closely bonded to both their peers and upper-management (who endured the same thing in the past) and are more likely to take the company world-view as axiomatic from that point onward. You see this in finance, medicine, elite military units, and more close to home you see it all over the startup world.
- chii 6y ago
  But the question is whether this sort of hazing produce better outcomes (for the company)? You point out elite military units, and medicine. Both of these fields tend to have highly competent, highly motivated individuals, and thus their work is quite valuable. If it were better to not have such hazing, then that implies that these units are not operating optimally. But then if they aren't, why hasn't a better optimal system replaced it?
  - evgen 6y ago
    I guess I would assume that it produces better outcomes from the company perspective but honestly can't think of a good counter-example to use as a comparison. After enduring the hazing it is much easier to convince you to do things that might be a bit morally questionable (e.g. shifting your personal ethical Overton window) by reminding you in subtle ways of what you endured to reach this point, what it means to others that have endured with you, etc. I would assume that in certain adversarial environments it is better to have a small team that will focus on a goal without question than one in which either the goal or the means to accomplish it are ever up for questioning, but someone with any knowledge of academic research on leadership and team dynamics can probably answer better than I.
    - goatinaboat 6y ago
      it is much easier to convince you to do things that might be a bit morally questionable (e.g. shifting your personal ethical Overton window Same reason that executives like to go to strip clubs together, it creates a sense of “if I go down you go down with me”.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - newsclues 6y ago
    It creates loyalty and trust. Important when doing dangerous or illegal things.
JumpCrisscross 6y ago
> it's often less about productivity than it is about instilling a sense of allegiance Note that the senior people at these firms are usually pulling, while not 80+ hours, at least 60 a week (e.g. 6AM to 6PM Monday through Friday).
- ghaff 6y ago
  A lot of the commentary here is (correctly) on the associate "hazing." But, yes, partners certainly don't just cruise in for a few hours a day either and there's definitely a hierarchy of partners. In my experience, with investment banking there's a fair bit of high-end FIRE with at least some of those who stick it out retiring in their 40s or so.
Frost1x 6y ago
It's also about ekeing out any additional labor because the employer pays a flat rate. It doesn't matter if 20-40 of the hours after 40 hours only gain 10% additional work relative to the 90% done in the first 40 hours. That's still a 10% gain for the business at no cost. Employees are going to cycle out anyways naturally looking for better opportunities so who cares if they get burnt out? Exempt positions shouldn't be an option in any industry, in my opinion. As they become the norm everywhere they become an excuse to abuse labor for whatever reason the employer decides.
- MereInterest 6y ago
  Except that every productivity study shows the exact opposite. For a week or two, you can spend more hours to produce more. On any longer timescale, the extra hours decrease your productivity/hour so much that the total output goes down. It's not just abusive on the part of the employer, but is also just plain stupid. Definitely agree on overtime-exempt positions. The terminology is also really messed up. Normally, being exempt from something is a good thing. Here, "non-exempt" and "exempt" should be referred to as "paid for overtime" and "screwed for overtime".
  - 1123581321 6y ago
    An “up-or-out” pyramid structure doesn’t see as much of that longer-term effect because it creates a selective environment for people who can work longer hours, and because it is overworking a stream of new interns and graduates who don’t stay for as much of the low productivity period as employees would in a traditional organization.
    - MereInterest 6y ago
      How long does it take to get promoted out of the initial hazing? Productivity at 40 hours/week beats productivity at 60 hours/week over any time scale longer than a month. I sincerely doubt that the turnover/promotion rate is only a month long. I do agree that there is a misalignment of incentives. An employer is not financially responsible for the burnout that they induce. If it takes the employee an extra 2-3 months between jobs due to recovering from that burnout, that is a financial hit to the employee on top of the emotional hit, even though they were not responsible for causing the burnout in the first place.

raverbashing 6y ago

What do you mean by the buy-side exactly? Investment funds?

phyalow 6y ago
Yes Hedge Funds usually. Sell side is banks selling services and the buyers are Hedge Funds, Asset Managers etc.
ludwigschubert 6y ago
Yeah, funds, or anyone who makes investments essentially. Unlike banks, which focus on the sale and generating revenue from fees etc. rather than investment insight. Investopedia isn't always the best source, but for definitions they come in handy: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/buyside.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/buyside.asp (I had a brief internship in finance on the buy-side and had to look up a ton of terms like that, to the degree that I was given this tongue-in-cheek "guide": https://www.amazon.com/Damn-Feels-Good-Be-Banker/dp/1401309682 https://www.amazon.com/Damn-Feels-Good-Be-Banker/dp/14013096.... It's immature af, but managed to teach me the cliches and terminology.)
Galanwe 6y ago
Financial jargon. Buy-side are traditionally firms that are the "leaf" of the system: investment funds, hedge funds, etc. These are buyers of services. Sell side refer to firms that are selling a service for the buy side, brokers, banks, etc.

jasim 6y ago

I once worked for a German company (remotely) who made it clear that working beyond 6pm wouldn't lead to much progress, and my lead consistently logged out at just the time. So I had to follow his example and couldn't potter around after. I still love the team for that. But we consistently did a solid day's worth of work everyday and there wasn't much juice left to continue after.

globuous 6y ago
My dad was working for a big oil company. He once told me a pretty funny story. The company had just switched CEOs, and the new CEO was walking around the office around 7:30pm, knocked on my dad's door and asked him "sir, are you bad at your job ?" My dad was surprised because he thought he had a reputation of being pretty good at it. The new CEO then asked him "so if you're good at your job, why are you still in the office at 7:30pm ?". The ideo being that someone good could finish his workload soon enough to be back home with his family by 7:30. That contrasted so much with the "stay at work as long as you can to show you're working hard" culture so many companies have.
- iancmceachern 6y ago
  This. This is good management.
- standardUser 6y ago
  That practically brings a tear to my eye. We need a world with a lot more of those bosses.
- vbtemp 5y ago
  I love this. First time I was a engineering lead, things were going great, to the point we simply weren't busy... Long lunches, chill days, making good friendships. The younger staff became worried that they weren't busy and didn't have anything to do, because they were so used to always having backlogs of bugs and other random assignments to do. I simply said, this is what life is like when you're good at what you do - you reward good work with pleasantness instead of more work!
6y ago

logicchains 6y ago

>Funnily enough, I can't count the number of times I had an interview and the interviewer described the company as the 'Google of Finance', with an emphasis on work-life balance. It couldn't be further away from the truth in my experience. Management in the financial industry is unfortunately still plagued with people who think that more working hours is perfectly correlated with more productivity. Some HFTs are better in this regard, as developer quality/productivity matters a lot more for high-frequency trading than it does at a slow-trading bank or hedge fund, and mistakes are more costly, so they have incentive to treat their developers better.