And that's a disaster too, but it would be helped by adding process, not hurt.

Also, dude: learn to say no. Learn to prioritize for yourself instead of expecting your slag pile of a management structure to do it for you. i.e. ask: "What things must I get done to make sure I'm successful long term?" (which is entirely different from "What is the highest priority thing I have been asked to do?") and make sure you prioritize your work to get those things done (which is an entirely different thing from "work on those things"). And if your workplace environment really doesn't permit that, move on.

Doing just that :)

It's basically a startup with 10 of us where I am the only in house developer.

I've tried many things like asking folks to Skype me instead of walking over to my desk or calling my name. I've gone to great lengths to get em to understand why skyping to get my attention is different than other ways. None of these guidelines really lasted more than ana few hours.

    Other Dude: Hi.
    Me: Hello

    Other Dude: I'm having a problem
    Me: How can I help

    Other Dude: ACTUAL PROBLEM THAT THEY NEEDED HELP WITH
    Me: Oh, here is your resolution which took all of 15 seconds to give to you.

I mean, CHRIST, if this happened once in a blue moon, fine, whatever, but it seems like EVERY motherfucker uses IM the same way. EAT DICKS.

...

I might have went a little overboard on this.

Then refuse this, set your status to "don't bug me, if you have a question just bloody ask it" and check your IM when you've got a lull[0]. If it's not a question, kill the window it's not relevant. I don't need "social interaction" on IM when I'm coding, if the other guy can't get to the point screw him, I'm not interested.

[0] If IM is specifically a way to get you immediately, start blacklisting people who can't get to the point and waste your time and have they go through email.

But of course they won't use email, they need the answer NOW. No, they'll come over to your desk and start tugging on your shirtsleeve.

If people start with "Hi, I have a problem" and don't state what the problem is I just respond with "drop me the details and I'll have a quick think" and get back to my work. Even if they respond immediately to that it might take me ten or fifteen minutes to get look at their message again - that is their time wasted, not mine.

Some problems require a more urgent response so I'll accept a walk-up or a shout for those, and some problems are best illustrated by showing them than describing them, I just have to trust people to know what they are and what is less urgent. And of course a message will come in at a time when I am eminently interruptible, in which case people get an immediate response anyway.

I find it works except for people who insist on not following the process, but they soon learn I'm far more helpful if they don't irritate me!

If people start with "Hi, I have a problem" and don't state what the problem is I close the chat window.

My work IM's status clearly states "if you have a question, ask it, don't ask if you can ask", time wasters simply get ignored.

> Some problems require a more urgent response so I'll accept a walk-up or a shout for those

Absolutely.

In the past I've found that leads to people reporting "I asked him several times over a few hours and got no response" which, if the person being complained to does not know the situation, could look bad for me.

If I feel like being more terse, I just give a one-word response: "Details?".

As I noted, my conditions are clearly spelled out as my IM status text, if they can't bother following simple instructions I can't bother with them.

Actually, it's worse than that. The (average) time it takes to get back into flow is 15 minutes[1], so add the time to respond to them to that to get your wasted time. And if you get another interruption before the fifteen minute descent into flow is complete? Start over - another fifteen minutes. If this happens constantly, you will effectively never get any work done. There's more than one way to kill productivity.

[1] - See "Peopleware", Chapter 10.

Would you send an email that says "Hi", then another that says "I have a question", then another with your question?

"Hi Dude, I've got this thing I need help with. Here is the description of what it is and what I am having a problem with."

It's not an issue if they put it in the same chat message, it's the "Hi", send message, "I have a problem", send message, "This is what the problem is", send message that drives me up a wall.

And if you REALLY need him to get back to let you know if he can help out immediately, you can send a second message along the lines of, "And sorry to be a bother, but I need help pronto. Please let me know if you can take a look at this right now." At that point, it's not a big deal if there's another message, because you haven't wasted time in relaying it.

Stop wasting my time. If sending "Hi" makes you feel better, fine, but the substance had better be on my screen by the time I look at the window, or you've wasted my time.

(FWIW, this is a classic Quality of Service (QoS) algorithm, where traffic on ProjectY is given dedicated bandwidth (2 hours in the day) so that it isn't swamped by traffic from ProjectX.)

What if, while you code, you think out loud, like really out loud... louder than you would talk in conversation? Perhaps if YOU bothered EVERYONE then maybe they'd put you in a private office? It's worth a try while you are looking for other opportunities...

i.e. "LET ME THINK HERE... IF VARIABLE V EQUALS ENUM ACTIVE THEN CALL DOHICKY ELSE DO NOTHING... WAIT IS THAT RIGHT?! NO NO NO LET ME RETHINK THIS?! I BET IF I REFACTOR THIS CODE I CAN..." All day long...if they tell you to be quiet tell them to "shut up" you're trying to think and they are ruining your thought processes and they risk causing you to slow down and/or enter errors and bugs into the code... "what do you mean me talking and noise in general is disturbing to you and your work? How they hell do you think I feel?!?!?" :)

Supposedly since Support is on the phone, they would interrupt everyone (everyone else int he vicinity is sales and they each have private offices) since they talk aloud on the phone. Why's this bad? Because breaking deep thought vs. some noise in the background (which still also exists because of the leakage they have on the phone in a single enclosed room) is much much more unproductive. Worse, the Sales team often forgets to shut their doors so sound leaks out into the open area or between sales calls they congregate a few at a time and have loud conversations disrupting the dev team. Worst of all is if they are in their offices, quietly doing paperwork with their doors open then decide to yell to talk to another salesperson in another office.

I often get up and shut Sales office doors, and constantly have to hush people up. My timid dev team doesn't because, well they are timid and don't want to rock the boat and add friction to inter office relationships. (I can hear, I agree. I need to encourage my dev team to speak up more, perhaps I'm sheltering them too much.)

EDIT: Maybe you'll inadvertently help the next guy. Yeah they might not care much for you but maybe, just maybe, something will click and the folks will realize... yeah I guess disturbing him was stupid on our part. If not and they don't get it... who gives a crap about people that don't give a crap about you!?

Seriously, most of these problems are due to lack of communication, set up a ticketing system, teach people how to use it.

Also, ask if you can work from home since your office environment is bullshit for writing code.

If my whole job was to do tech support all day there would be no problem. Of course it wouldn't be fun and I'd prolly end up leaving, the present situation hasn't been much better and I'm on my way out.

Now that I am leaving soon my boss is very interested for advice on how to attract tech talent. A part of me just wants to send him a link to this thread :)

That's probably the single best thing you could do for him, if he is serious about wanting to attract (and retain!) good technology people.

Been there, done that. The only difference is that they call me on the phone instead of coming up to my desk.

Only thing I miss is my 3 24" monitors.

People do what works. Reinforce their bad behavior, and you have a problem.

edit: Suggest that he ask you if you're busy over skype. Talking face to face is more effective, and I'd hate to try to discuss something over it, but interrupting flow really sucks.

If/when people start getting into your face (perhaps even formally) about performance, you have documentation to back up your argument. (Although, ultimately, most arguments are kind of moot, unless they end up in court or perhaps before an unemployment insurance evaluation -- not something you really want, anyway).

As for the overall experience. While negative, emotionally, you can still view it as a learning experience. Keep in mind that when you are in a better position, with more control, 90 % of the world with which you are competing is / will be what you are now experiencing. So... if you can cut out that bullsh-t, you will have a very significant competitive advantage.

It can be useful, to get a good, hard, close-up look at what you don't want. Just don't let it go on too long.

P.S. A trick I'll occasionally use, in problematic verbal situations, is to summarize the conversation/request in an email to the other party(s). 'We met. Here's what you asked me to do / how I understand it, what I'm going to do, and my anticipated schedule and potential conflicts / other overriding priorities. Let me know if I've misunderstood or you disagree.'

If no one responds, I proceed accordingly. If they bitch, hey, I laid out my approach and circumstances up front and asked for feedback.

It can put people on the defensive and create a negative vibe. But hey, when people tell you / manipulate you with statements of "We're losing confidence", things are not too positive, to start with. (P.S. That's already the sign/signal to bail. "Bail, bail, bail!")

What you are suggesting is easier said than done. I think that most good developers have the mentality you are describing...at first. When you work in an environment like this, however, you get worn down. You can only put up a fight for so long before you start getting all sorts of mixed up and you don't know what the f to do. If you took the best prioritizer in the world and put them in a corrosive environment like this one, the environment would eventually win out. I really feel for guys like the one that posted this original article and some of the subsequent commenters. I have been in that boat before and it is not fun.

Try something like, "Can I get back to you in an hour? Boss wants me to finish this top priority item for him."

And if Boss asks you if you can finish it next week, say no. You're being asked to give an estimate, and it doesn't help to say "Yes, if [this thing doesn't happen which I know it will]". If they want you to be the startup guy, then act like you're the one in charge of your own schedule.

"So I know your project is important but projectX is still our #1 priority so to the extent Jenny needs you please prioritize her work"

Honestly, don't take this as an insult, but it just doesn't sound like you're the right person for the position. If you have trouble pushing back when you need to, then you should find a spot where there is someone pushing back for you.

I've, err we, have mostly failed.I can go on about why but at the end, I think we all share the blame and evaluate parts we could have personally done better and apply it next time round.

One of the big realizations for me is that they need someone older and more confident. I'm in my mid 20s and once founded a startup that got 30x the traffic but even months in, the boss would be unsure if I was a good programmer. We tried everything from emailing my code samples to his CTO friends to code reviews by other devs(all of which gave positive feedback) but I feel he could never totally shake that doubt. I called him out on it finally(basically if you can't tell after 8 months if I can program you should let me go). I've been programming since 12 but the lingering doubts actually started making me question my own abilities at which point I decided I need to move.

Let the managers fight it out.

Make damn sure though that people understand a short interruption "for a quick meeting" when you are at the time "powering through" stuff sometimes kills as much as a full hour of development time if you are working on something complex as it can completely break your train of thought (especially if you are tired due to recent overtime!), or worse if you are coordinating with other people and/or are working on something timing sensitive (so the interruption might mean a key coordination point is delayed).

If you can show what the demands on your time are, a good manager will try rearrange things so that you are interrupted less often. Sometimes simply merging those small interruptions into a scheduled period or two each day is enough to make all the difference to your mid/long term work: problems that didn't really need you magically go away (as the person who was going to interrupt you does that 30 seconds of extra thinking/research that was needed to give them the clue) and the others "interrupt" you a few times a day rather than several times over an hours or two.

This seems like a communication problem between the managers. (I can speak from experience, since I messed this up once when I reallocated our engineers' time without fully being on the same page as the engineering manager)

Boss: Could you do this thing for me?

Badclient: Well, as you know, I have Project X as my highest priority. I'm happy to oblige, but Jenn has dibs on my time at the moment. If you can talk to her and come to an agreement on how I should distribute my time, I'll be happy to work on your thing.

Whatever happens, your boss is on the same page as Jenn, and all you have to do is execute the agreed upon plan.

2. Never let anyone get you in the position to set priorities yourself (unless you're the boss). Refer them to your manager or whoever is highest in the chain of command and assigned you a task to make this decision.

This is really more a working culture problem. You'd think it's in the management's best interested to make sure nobody ever violates 1. + 2.

I mainly stuck around because it was my first FT job and I'd promised myself I won't bail on it for one year no matter how bad. In past I've regretted quitting on projects too quickly...at least I won't have that regret here.

One week we all decided to keep a notepad and paper next to our desks and keep a log of every time we were interrupted and asked to context switch and do something random. It was so bad, before the end of Monday our boss was so dumbfounded he completely re-jigged everything so it wouldn't happen like that again.

We ended up calling one developer pair the "consulting developers" each week, and only that pair could be interrupted. There was a huge sign above their desk advertising them for the week. We sacrificed one for the good of all, and it worked really, really well. AFAIK, they are still doing that.

I think the root issue is they need a developer who just does tech support for the other 10 non tech people. And then a developer who can actually build shit quietly.

I will push this stance more aggressively having read your post.

Petty requests for emails that someone should have are their responsibility. If you think about it, why should your resourcefulness help them complete their job while it blocks your own progress?

Your boss is doling out reviews, he's #1 priority. Everyone else gets "no" and no access to your time without talking to him first.

"Being a team player" is a fluffy way of saying "do other peoples jobs for them". Sure, help people out and don't be a dick.

It does sound like a mess, but this type of mess exists everywhere. When you meld highly technical people with less technical people you will get these scenarios. Before you know it, you will be expected to replace the toner.

The original MIT meaning is closer to what I recently heard described as meta-yak-shaving, which is when, before you can start shaving the yak, you discover that each hair of the yak contains a subyak, and each subyak has to be shaved individually.

If you want something more light weight look into the Pomodoro technique. People can bring issues to you but only in breaks between blocks of uninterupted work.

If you go with either then you can explain away refusing to be distracted as merely following a proven methodology. This gives you an easy out as people will vent any frustration at it rather than you.

You don't look bad for declining requests. You will get your shit done. Just learn to say no. Really.

None of the other people here are being particularly unreasonable, they're just ignorant. And given that "how to work with programmers, writers and mathematicians" is not part of any educations, it's not really their fault.