For knowledge workers, it’s easy to get into a mode where you wait until conditions are perfect before you do anything. The word “conditions” could mean anything from your schedule, work environment, co-workers, the tools you use, etc. I have fallen into this trap many times.
In my reading over the years, I’ve encountered a lot of quotes from scientists who directly challenge the notion that you need ideal conditions to do great work. In fact, as we’ll see below, many great scientists believe that an “ideal situation” is detrimental.
Richard Feynman, in his essay The Dignified Professor
When I was at Princeton in the 1940s I could see what happened to those great minds at the Institute for Advanced Study, who had been specially selected for their tremendous brains and were now given this opportunity to sit in this lovely house by the woods there, with no classes to teach, with no obligations whatsoever. These poor bastards could now sit and think clearly all by themselves, OK? So they don’t get any ideas for a while: They have every opportunity to do something, and they’re not getting any ideas. I believe that in a situation like this a kind of guilt or depression worms inside of you, and you begin to worry about not getting any ideas. And nothing happens. Still no ideas come.
Nothing happens because there’s not enough real activity and challenge: You’re not in contact with the experimental guys. You don’t have to think how to answer questions from the students. Nothing!
In similar fashion, Richard Hamming, in his well-known talk You and Your Research (required reading!), articulates a similar viewpoint and gives some examples of how poor conditions have led to key breakthroughs in his career and others.
This brings up the subject, out of order perhaps, of working conditions. What most people think are the best working conditions, are not. Very clearly they are not because people are often most productive when working conditions are bad. One of the better times of the Cambridge Physical Laboratories was when they had practically shacks – they did some of the best physics ever.
I give you a story from my own private life. Early on it became evident to me that Bell Laboratories was not going to give me the conventional acre of programming people to program computing machines in absolute binary. It was clear they weren’t going to. [...] What appeared at first to me as a defect forced me into automatic programming very early. What appears to be a fault, often, by a change of viewpoint, turns out to be one of the greatest assets you can have. But you are not likely to think that when you first look the thing and say, “Gee, I’m never going to get enough programmers, so how can I ever do any great programming?”
Many scientists when they found they couldn’t do a problem finally began to study why not. They then turned it around the other way and said, “But of course, this is what it is” and got an important result. So ideal working conditions are very strange. The ones you want aren’t always the best ones for you.
From my own experience, I believe this issue is partly tied to fear. There could arguably always be a more scenic view from your office window, a more distraction-free culture, longer blocks of time in your schedule, more engaging and generous colleagues, and a more supportive department. But if you are not making progress where you are, believing better conditions are all that is holding you back is a convenient substitute for doing the actual work.
How ideal is ideal enough for you to do something great?
Thanks for sharing this very interesting post.
For me, finding an ideal situation seems to be more related to how fit my mind is, and less related to where I am. I have a large office, about half of the time it’s all for myself, and still I sometimes find myself staring at a sheet of paper, while my mind is planning the next week and making my shopping list and thinking about the thrash that needs to be brought to the recycling boxes… I’ve discovered that my ideal situations are more related to getting enough sleep, having a good planning and finding some time to unwind at the end of the day.
Eva, I think you are exactly right. I will probably follow up on this in the future, but I certainly do think we should strive for the right type of ideal conditions, but the problem is that we often have the wrong notion of what “ideal” actually means. To me, “ideal” has more to do with internal things we can control than external factors which we can’t.
Great post.
For a different take on the exact same idea, see my post:
Turn your weaknesses into strengths http://lemire.me/blog/archives/2009/01/19/turn-your-weaknesses-into-strengths/
Daniel, thanks for pointing me to your post. Very interesting idea re: Einstein — excellent encouragement for graduate students.
Last semester, I was teaching 20 hours a week and taking 2 classes. That meant getting up at 5:30 to ride the train to Berkeley. I though I would never have any time for research, but instead I wrote a grant proposal, did a whole research project, from start to finished paper, and found my thesis topic. I am never complaining about anything again.
Aditi, thanks for your response. I think what you are describing is exactly what Feynman and Hamming are getting at above. It doesn’t logistically make sense, but there appears to be some cognitive benefit from being engaged in so many things simultaneously. I think the benefit largely stems from the interplay between the structure of teaching/taking classes and the ambiguity of research. Anyway, great job last semester!
I think that finding fault with agonizing over working conditions and agonizing over working conditions both stem from the same source. We really want to feel like we’re in control of our work. It’s easy to ascribe causality after the fact, but it’s difficult to actually show causality, and no matter how badly we want it, if causality is not there, we can’t invent it.
There often are causal relationships between a work environment and productivity, but I don’t think it’s as binary as the article seems to imply.
Evan, good points. I do agree that the factors are more nuanced than my presentation. My goal is to push back against the notion that it’s okay to stall on doing real work because of a non-perfect environment. To do that, we have have to focus our efforts in the realm of things we can control. In that sense, I think the causal relationship between environment and productivity may be something more of our own creation than some inherent, external influence.
Ben, The last two posts have been great! First, your insight into the shift to being knowledge workers is one that many still don’t see, don’t grasp.
But I was particularly encouraged to continue “exploring” areas with which I am not very familiar by the previous post about finding useful tools–encouraged to continue reading blogs, following knowledgeable people, listening to people’s insights…I think the chances of finding these things increases with the number of meaningful connections we make with others.
Thanks, Mark
Thanks for the encouragement, Mark. Definitely agree there is a network effect to this and maybe the key is figuring out how to leverage that to optimize signal to noise.
“What most people think are the best working conditions, are not.”
Shockingly, we find that random folk intuitions are not accurate. Untested things are bad. Full story at eleven.
“I believe that in a situation like this a kind of guilt or depression worms inside of you, and you begin to worry about not getting any ideas. And nothing happens.”
Yeah, it’s pretty dumb to give someone stuff and then tell them you expect inspiration out of them. Instead, reward them contingent only on past work, in a way that frees them from future obligations.
It may be that students are good to have around. But I think a truly dedicated thinker will intentionally seek them out if that’s so – and if they have the opportunity, because they can live off the rewards of past work.
For instance, you, Feynman, and Gelman all advocate for having students. So…yeah.
I find it very encouraging that you have started a discussion about the ability and the available facility.it will certainly help some of us to judge ourselves and take new initiatives in our works. Thanx BEN