91

I am a recently graduated PhD, but for the past few years I have been on an 8:00-16:30 schedule with a lunch break at noon. I arrive between 7:45-8:00 and get started immediately.

Now I am on as a continuing research scientist and have been assigned to supervise two graduate students and another post-doc that's new to the field. It's important for our schedules to overlap, so I've instructed them to meet me at 8:00 to get started.

To clarify the frequency, this type of "meeting" would be once a week for the next 13 weeks. I use quotes because it's really just the time we agree to get in the lab and start work together, which is still a meeting but not the one we often think of when we see the word.

Someone I am close to, who has both graduate school and office (industry) experience, tells me this is unreasonable. According to her, even in formal business environments, the first [half-]hour is reserved for checking your email, getting settled, going through voicemails, etc.

As I like to tell people, I was a student for 25 consecutive years, so I know the ropes regarding when academics typically wake up and get started. I'm not asking if starting work at 8:00 AM is typical, but rather if it is unreasonable and why I should or shouldn't change my policy.

ff524
  • 108,934
  • 49
  • 421
  • 474
user1717828
  • 3,861
  • 3
  • 20
  • 28
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Note that comments on a post can only be moved to chat once, so henceforth they can only be deleted. – ff524 Sep 28 '16 at 05:58

21 Answers21

410

It depends entirely on whether you have consulted the other meeting participants. There is nothing inherently wrong about an 8 a.m. meeting if it is convenient for everyone involved.

If you have set the time without consulting the other participants, there are two serious problems.

You may be giving one or more of them a practical problem. For example, consider a parent whose child's school starts at 8 or later. You may be disrupting carpool arrangements. It may conflict with a class one of the students wants to attend.

The other problem is more subtle, and applies even if none of the participants actually has a problem with the meeting time. Setting the time for a small meeting without consulting the other participants and considering their views is very disrespectful. It tells them that you consider your schedule, your convenience, to be so much more important than theirs that you don't need to consider them at all. That sort of message is not good for a working relationship.

Patricia Shanahan
  • 33,247
  • 15
  • 63
  • 103
  • 55
    I especially appreciated the sensitivity to the parent's role in this answer, which no one else mentioned. – aparente001 Sep 27 '16 at 14:29
  • 86
    +1 for emphasizing that "reasonable" means reasonable for the people involved, which many other answers seem to avoid. – Kimball Sep 27 '16 at 14:34
  • 2
    Amen. I was all set out to write "You must not be a parent" scathing rebuttal to the OP, but your answer puts it perfectly. Kudos. – DVK Sep 27 '16 at 17:03
  • 36
    You seem to be getting some "amens" for the parenting point. I just wanted to mention, there are plenty of other ways this could be nuisance, even if everyone involved was single and childless. (For example, some people like to work out in the mornings. An 8am time might also be inconvenient when winter rolls around, depending on the geographic area.) – J.R. Sep 27 '16 at 21:12
  • 6
    I strongly agree with @J.R. I just picked a fairly arbitrary set of examples of practical problems. The parent one came to mind because I have known parents who had that sort of hard time requirement. An early meeting would have been difficult to arrange. – Patricia Shanahan Sep 27 '16 at 21:31
  • 68
    Same with people who depend on public transportation to get to work. 8am might mean taking the bus that arrives at 7:01 while a meeting at 8:15 will allow them to take the bus one hour later and thus allow them an extra hour to do other stuff or sleep at the cost of moving away from your preferred meeting time by only 15 minutes. The lesson is: talk to them. – Sumyrda - remember Monica Sep 28 '16 at 05:00
  • 50
    "That sort of message is not good for a working relationship." Exactly. The OP's approach feels very authoritarian, which is not unheard of in academia, but has a way of killing morale quickly. Combine it with the lack of experience of the OP (recently graduated) and the students will quickly lose respect too. – Szabolcs Sep 28 '16 at 14:08
  • 1
    +1 for consulting with the team; discussing needs/wants sends a great message, even if the leader ultimately can't meet everyone's preferences. --- Semi-related rant, this question seems better suited to Workplace SE. The discussion about late start times etc applies to any job; special concerns for academic positions (while fully on topic) just screams #FirstWorldProblems to me. Most of the world is lucky to have steady work, let alone fulfilling, intellectual work. Sometimes you need to just suck it up, be an adult, and meet the job's requirements, even if it keeps you from sleeping late. – brichins Sep 28 '16 at 20:50
  • 4
    @brichins A workplace usually has more defined rules about working hours than a research group, and people accepting a job are aware of those rules. – Patricia Shanahan Sep 28 '16 at 21:24
  • 1
    @Patricia Shanahan Another factor you could mention to strengthen this answer would be to refer to the power imbalance between user1717828's somewhat dictatorial "I was a student for 25 consecutive years, so I know the ropes regarding when academics typically wake up and get started" and a non-morning person like me who might feel bullied into adjusting my schedule to this new "boss" – mcottle Sep 30 '16 at 02:51
  • 8
    This is a much better answer than the accepted one. – Jack Aidley Sep 30 '16 at 07:42
  • 6
    @MilesRout Despite your annoyance, the reality is that in many cultures a parent's duty to ensure proper care and supervision of a young child does override just about everything else. Leaving a 5-year-old alone for a couple of hours may be a crime for which the parents could be prosecuted, and "My boss called an unexpected early morning meeting." would not be a legal defense. – Patricia Shanahan Oct 01 '16 at 15:23
  • @MilesRout It cannot be my parental responsibility to do anything - I am not, and never have been, a parent. – Patricia Shanahan Oct 02 '16 at 03:18
  • 3
    @MilesRout: "The reality is that it is your parental responsibility to arrange for childcare." - child care before 7 AM is rare or even unavailable in some places. – O. R. Mapper Jul 11 '17 at 10:16
  • 2
    @MilesRout: I disagree. Most other reasons can be told to wait, tended to at a later time, and left alone until then. (Small) children cannot, you cannot just leave them alone or unsupervised. – O. R. Mapper Jul 12 '17 at 05:20
171

Early (or late) meetings are generally unreasonable. Some people naturally wake up early, while others stay up late and are more productive in the evening. If you force people to attend meetings that are too early or too late for them, they will be physically present but may not contribute that much due to being too tired.

What constitutes an early or late meeting depends on the society and culture. At the institute I currently work at, people are generally expected to be around from 10:00 to 16:00, and regular meetings outside those hours would be unreasonable.

Jouni Sirén
  • 2,977
  • 2
  • 11
  • 16
  • 29
    It doesn't only depend on the society and culture, but also on the preferences of the participants (as mentioned in Patricia Shanahan's answer). I don't think it would ever be unreasonable to have a meeting at a time that all participants agreed to, even if the time was unconventional. – Tara B Sep 27 '16 at 16:11
  • 2
    i am definitely not a "morning person", and while i would eschew meetings at 08:00 local time (unless there are extenuating circumstances), i don't think that 09:00 meeting times is unreasonable at all. that said, i would rather not have to commit to getting to a meeting any earlier than 10:00 and rarely had i needed to get to work-related meetings sooner than that. – robert bristow-johnson Sep 27 '16 at 17:04
  • 46
    It's not just preferences, it's physiology. Even if you get me to show up at 8 AM, you aren't going to get anything but incoherent mumbling out of me until 10 at the earliest, and I'm far from unique in this. Worse, that early arrival is going to negatively impact my productivity the rest of the day. – jamesqf Sep 27 '16 at 18:05
  • 2
    @jamesqf You're definitely not alone. I've outright stated at times that if you want me to be smart in a meeting, it needs to be 10 or later. – Fomite Sep 28 '16 at 04:19
  • 22
    I'm in industry rather than academia, but if you get me to show up for a meeting at 8 AM every single week, you will get incoherent mumblings from me for the duration of my notice period, then nothing at all. I don't even take jobs that require me to be present before 9 AM (at the earliest), let alone those that require us to be sat down, coffee ready, emails read, and prepared for a meeting at 8 AM?! Not everybody is an early bird. Meetings from 10 AM onwards should be an acceptable compromise for everyone. – Lightness Races in Orbit Sep 28 '16 at 11:57
  • 4
    @LightnessRacesinOrbit A lot of people in industry (tech support for example) works shifts ... or are on call and don't have any choice about what time they start/finish. – DavidPostill Sep 28 '16 at 13:14
  • 10
    @DavidPostill: I know but equally a lot don't! I don't, and the OP doesn't, and the OP's students don't. So... – Lightness Races in Orbit Sep 28 '16 at 14:00
  • 7
    @DavidPostill: Sure, working certain hours may be a job requirement, but we usually have a choice about whether we take such a job or not. – jamesqf Sep 28 '16 at 17:52
  • Many offices I have worked in will attempt to only schedule regular meetings from 10:00 to 12:00 and 14:00 to 16:00. This allows people the greatest flexibility in planning when to commute. For me that had meant a 30 minutes journey at best rather than 90 minutes being a typical traffic pattern. – TafT Oct 05 '16 at 10:52
116

It is not unreasonable, but it might annoy your graduate students. I myself wouldn't like it because it would mean that I have to get up an hour earlier than my girlfriend.

Maybe one should set the question the other way round: What is your disadvantage if you meet at nine? Is it important for you to meet your students first thing in the morning?

Comparing your need and your students needs, you should find a sensible compromise.

J Fabian Meier
  • 13,166
  • 4
  • 37
  • 62
  • 46
    I would rephrase this: "It is unreasonable, since it probably will annoy (some of) your graduate students." – Turion Sep 28 '16 at 10:23
  • 63
    @Turion "Grad student annoyance" is a pretty low bar for unreasonableness. People get annoyed by all sorts of things, but that doesn't make those things unreasonable by default. – Nuclear Hoagie Sep 28 '16 at 12:47
  • 48
    @Matt, of course something is not unreasonable just because it might annoy someone. But if it will annoy someone, and there is otherwise no good reason to do it (and alternatives at hand), then it's unreasonable to cause that annoyance. – Turion Sep 28 '16 at 13:09
  • 22
    Its not just waking up earlier than your spouse or... but when I was a grad student I had a hard time arriving in school sharp at 8:00AM due to several reasons. Using the public transportation was the most contributing factor! Being too tired from the night before (cause I had worked in the lab until midnight) and nee...eeding coffee (and ofcourse a long line in the coffee-shop) was another reason! (I myself am a strict 7:30AM person at work. so when my boss arrives at 8:00 I'm all set for my day!) – AleX_ Sep 28 '16 at 16:49
  • @Turion What if accommodating that one person's annoyance causes annoyances to more than one other person involved? Is it unreasonable to accommodate that one person and annoy 2 or more others? – Zack Sep 29 '16 at 14:45
  • 4
    @Zack, of course you shouldn't choose an option that annoys more people over another. But nothing in the question suggests that meeting later causes an annoyance or any other problem. – Turion Sep 29 '16 at 14:48
  • You don't want to get up a different time than your girlfriend ... but you want a PhD. – jwg Sep 30 '16 at 09:46
  • 6
    @jwg I don't know if you intend to make fun of me or if I just misunderstood you, but to make that clear: There are things that annoy me, but this does not mean that I don't do them. I am not a "morning person" but I ran through much worse things to get a PhD (which I already have) than getting up early. – J Fabian Meier Sep 30 '16 at 13:38
  • 10
    @Matt If something annoys the majority of participants and there is no good reason for it apart from personal preference of one person, then yes it's a perfectly valid reason. I'm usually at work at 8:00 at the latest but I do know that several of the people I manage prefer to come in later, so if there's no good reason I won't set meetings earlier than 9am. It seems that some people here think that being in a position of power makes it alright to dictate terms to your underlings. That's horrible managerial practice and will just lead to conflict, dissatisfaction and a bad work environment. – Voo Sep 30 '16 at 20:49
  • 2
    Graduate students are not really in a position where people care much for what annoys them. – Neil Meyer Oct 02 '16 at 17:21
61

Congratulations on getting to lead a small team!

You might want to look into developing your leadership skills and techniques to help you with your new responsibility. After all, leading people is about more than instructing them.

A good question you can ask yourself about the appropriateness of your requests: How would it feel if this would be other way around?

In this case, what if some other recently graduated PhD student would instruct you to change your schedule to 11:00-19:30 so that you can have a meeting at the end of every work day at 19:15. Would that be perfect, or acceptable, or bad, or horrible?

You write:

It's important for our schedules to overlap, so I've instructed them to meet me at 8:00 to get started.

If the requirement is to make the schedules overlap, why instruct them to make the schedules identical?

Maybe you can meet with your team and talk about your requirements for working together (overlap in schedule, regular meetings, probably more) and also give them a chance to state their requirements. Then you can lead the process of figuring out how to find a solution that works well for everyone involved.

(Note that the solution doesn't need to be reasonable to outsiders, it just needs to work for the insiders. But also note that it not only needs to work for you, it needs to work for everyone on the team).

Toxaris
  • 1,455
  • 9
  • 9
  • 6
    I agree with this. Two additional things to consider: (1) what are the current norms (in grad school my group tended to work 1100-0200, so an 0800 meeting would have been right out). (2) what kind of time on equipment is needed/used by folks in the group - I often got accelerator time from 1800 to 0600, so I wouldn't hang around until 0800 for a meeting with you after being up all night running. – Jon Custer Sep 27 '16 at 14:06
  • 4
    I also don't see any obvious necessity for the schedules to be identical. – Tara B Sep 27 '16 at 16:14
  • 1
    Excellent answer; thanks for posting! Between this and J. Fabian's answer, I marked his as accepted because it was posted sooner, but they both answer the question and offer guidance regarding how to address the underlying issue. – user1717828 Sep 28 '16 at 12:12
  • 1
    This begs the question: If 8 is reasonable and 19 is not reasonable, then of course your hypothetical makes no sense. –  Oct 01 '16 at 16:22
33

So I'm just going to put this article here.

First of all, why is it so important that your schedules overlap? And why is it so important for everyone to abide by your schedule? I spent 12 years in academia and the only time I ever had an 8AM class was when I was a freshman in college. This class was intentionally scheduled at 8AM because they knew that people wouldn't show up, it was a critical class, and if you failed it you got kicked out of the program. LOTS of people failed it.

I would consider it unreasonable to start at 8AM unless you have a really good reason that it needs to start at that time. "That's when I start" is probably not a good reason, and honestly also a little bit inconsiderate. If you decide to start at 8AM, you need to understand that you're probably not going to start on time. You're also going to end up with a bunch of people that don't show up. They're going to resent you for making such an unnecessary decision, you're probably going to resent them for not showing up, and all in all it's probably a really bad decision in terms of team dynamic.

As an alternative solution, why not establish core hours, say from 10AM to 4PM? Give the rest of your team a bit of flexibility with which side of that they want to put the rest of their hours on so that it's not all about your schedule and everyone can do what they need to do. You'll still get your "whole team" time, but it's a much more considerate way of handling it.

Tam Hartman
  • 2,192
  • 1
  • 9
  • 15
  • It's twenty years that I have classes scheduled at 8:30 am, because that's the typical schedule at our university. And, yes, students show up. It's not that difficult to show up at that time, one has just to put the alarm clock at the right time. Ninety-nine percent of students one day will be employed in industries where they won't have the luxury of showing up late. – Massimo Ortolano Sep 27 '16 at 18:07
  • 13
    There's still a massive difference between 8AM and 8:30AM, and while I understand that I work in tech and it's a little different, I've literally never had a job (even when working as a contractor with the military) where it was required for me to show up before 10AM. Core hours is also a concept that is becoming more and more commonplace across the US. The first time I heard about it was in the context of game studios, but that's what I've had across 4 or 5 different jobs in the past few years. – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 18:09
  • I wouldn't call 30 min a massive difference ;-) Many of my friends who have a high-level job in industry usually work from roughly 8 am - 7 pm: showing up later would mean going home at 9-10 pm, which is not nice if you have a family. – Massimo Ortolano Sep 27 '16 at 18:22
  • 2
    I find it unreasonable to compare times over different countries in a 30 min range. For instance when school tends to start has a significant influence on what is or is not reasonable and/or can be seen as a marker what is reasonable in a given context. – quid Sep 27 '16 at 18:25
  • 4
    @MassimoOrtolano https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/03/09/students-see-benefits-from-later-school-start-times/OOb4vtHm4XZTBLm5X78V9L/story.html yes, it most definitely is a massive difference. – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 18:25
  • 10
    Study after study shows that later start times in schools produce better results. Also why are your friends doing 12+ hour days? That sounds awful. And if it really isn't a massive difference, why would showing up at 8 vs 8:30 make such a difference in the time you would get home? – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 18:26
  • The schedule is mostly determined by the ratio between students and rooms available: during semesters, with 33k+ students, our rooms are roughly filled between 8:30 am to 6:30 pm and sometimes up to 8 pm; we wouldn't be able to start later, even if we it were beneficial to students and faculties. And to avoid traffic jam, when I have lectures at 8:30 am, I'm usually in the office at 7-7:30. For what concerns working hours, all the people I know who have high level jobs frequently work 10-12 hours/day. – Massimo Ortolano Sep 27 '16 at 18:37
  • Maybe I just got really lucky but even when I was at Uni the faculty were only there from 8-4 or 5. Most weren't even there before 10 if they didn't have a class scheduled at that time. The only exception to this was really when we had performances (was a music major in undergrad) and then faculty would pop in and out, come back when it was time to get ready. I did spend a summer teaching programming at a top 10 school, and that was an early one - had to be there at 7:45, but I would be done at 3PM so it never felt crazy. – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 18:45
  • 1
    The point with starting time of schools is that adolescents tend to have a latter rhythm than older adults and this is not accounted for. To extrapolate results for high-school students to everybody seems thus misguided. Sorry to repeat this point but talking about 8am and 7pm as if it had any actual meaning is a bad idea. When its 7am in London it is 8am in Paris, and in a way it is really the same time of the day as there is hardly any E/W difference (and with Madrid instead of Paris it would be still more extreme in that at 8am it is in a way earlier in the day than in L at 7am). – quid Sep 27 '16 at 18:45
  • 2
    At most universities, however, the majority of students will be under 25. Puberty in women tends to end around 18, and in men around 22. I was 15 when I started school. So not extrapolating to the entire population, just to the university population. And if you want to see some information about this in older individuals, there are plenty of benefits to be found there as well: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/15/sleep-work-schedule_n_6327556.html – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 18:49
  • There is really no need to convince me that starting later is much better. :-) But, using time in the way it is done here is a bit meaningless. Let's switch to using UTC so school in the US starts at 4pm or thereabouts. Does this change anything? – quid Sep 27 '16 at 18:56
  • Not really. Still too early. Changing what you call the thing doesn't really make a difference to me what the thing is :p – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 18:57
  • So yeah I guess if 4p makes it easier? – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 18:57
  • 15
    @MassimoOrtolano "It's not that difficult to show up at that time, one has just to put the alarm clock at the right time." If that were true, it would apply just as well to 5am meetings/lectures. You're forgetting that, to get up at a certain time, you also have to go to bed early enough, and eat dinner early enough and... Basically, the time of the first appointment of the day has the potential to completely control your daily rhythm. – David Richerby Sep 27 '16 at 19:05
  • 1
    @quid also at least in the US we don't really care about time differences like that because it usually will not affect the classroom at all. You're not going to have a student commuting from Dallas to LA. Also once I had to coordinate a class in NY with a class in South Korea and another class in Italy. That's kind of the only case in which this idea would make sense for me, but even then we managed to schedule things out in a way where nobody was losing sleep. – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 19:09
  • I think we are talking sideways. If you are in LA and want things to start late just imagine you are on NY time. Of course this does not work but why? And my point is that the same effect exists in the other way. – quid Sep 27 '16 at 19:13
  • @DavidRicherby I had a PhD student who, when in Italy, used to show up around 9:30-10, saying that he really couldn't wake up earlier. He then completed his PhD in the US in a research center: toward the end of his PhD I went to meet him and the local supervisor. "What time can we meet?", I asked to my student; "I'm in the lab since 8 am", he answered. I was amazed: "Is that you?! My very same student?". If he wanted to stand a chance to find a job there, he had to start at that time, which was usual for his group. With the right motivation, one can wake up enough early. – Massimo Ortolano Sep 27 '16 at 19:16
  • 1
    Funny you should mention that, I lived in LA for 5 years before returning to NY a year ago. My family is always on east coast time. This doesn't make a difference. I'd totally be upset if someone was like "oh you don't want to start at 8AM in LA? Well, it's 11AM in NY!" of COURSE it's 11AM in NY, but I'm not going to have people in NY get up at 2AM so that they can sync up with people in London who start at 8AM either. Totally unreasonable. – Tam Hartman Sep 27 '16 at 19:16
  • 4
    @TamHartman I am pretty sure you are missing quid's point (or I am..) The point I think is that the sun rises and sets at a different hour in different places, even in local time, because the granularity of time zones is not that fine. So sun rise can vary by as much as an hour between the west and the east border of the same time zone. This is further affected by latitude: the day is much longer in the summer in Seattle than it is in LA, for example. So, even on the same day of the year, and in the same time zone, 7am can mean pitch dark in one place, but not in another. – Sasho Nikolov Sep 27 '16 at 22:01
  • 1
    "This class was intentionally scheduled at 8AM because they knew that people wouldn't show up, it was a critical class, and if you failed it you got kicked out of the program. LOTS of people failed it." o.O Then why did they schedule it at 8AM... – Lightness Races in Orbit Sep 28 '16 at 11:58
  • 3
    @MassimoOrtolano: "It's not that difficult to show up at that time, one has just to put the alarm clock at the right time." I'm happy for you that your brain chemistry allows you to do this with ease, but you cannot declare this to be true of all people. I would find it insanely physiologically difficult to commit to 8 AM meetings, no matter how early I went to bed, and I am definitely not the only one. It becomes infuriating after a few years when people don't understand this, and say things like "don't be lazy", "go to bed earlier", "set an alarm clock" and "it's not that difficult". – Lightness Races in Orbit Sep 28 '16 at 11:59
  • 3
    @MassimoOrtolano: "Ninety-nine percent of students one day will be employed in industries where they won't have the luxury of showing up late" No but for the most part they have the luxury of deciding which career to pursue, and you won't see me pursuing one which is likely to require me to be in a meeting as early as 8 AM. Ever! If you turn up before 10AM and the meeting is at 10AM, then you are not "late". – Lightness Races in Orbit Sep 28 '16 at 12:01
  • @LightnessRacesinOrbit I'm not claiming that it's easy, but if I have to do it, I do it. And, believe me, many graduates won't be able to choose a job where they can show up at 10 am. I have many friends who work in industry that have a bad opinion of people from academia exactly for the comments and complains like the ones you can read above: in this sense, the academic environment, from its ivory tower, is not doing a good job in preparing students for a large part of the job market. – Massimo Ortolano Sep 28 '16 at 12:19
  • 9
    @MassimoOrtolano: The question is not "should students do it if they have to?" It's "should I tell students that they have to?" – Lightness Races in Orbit Sep 28 '16 at 12:19
  • @SashoNikolov yes, that's what I meant. And it is even more than an hour as, e;g., a considerable part of continental Europe is put into the same timezone "against geography" so to speak. From Belgrade to A Coruña it should be more like two hours. I think a still more extreme case is China, which is all +8 while touching zones from +5 to +10. – quid Sep 28 '16 at 12:39
  • 1
    @MassimoOrtolano I work in industry, not academia. If a job wanted me in at 8am they'd better be paying over the odds and even then I'd probably only accept a short term contract. Every job I've ever been in is flexible and in fact the current team I'm in has one guy who regularly works 7am->3:30pm, I tend to work 9:10 to 5:40, another works 10 till 6:30. This is normal...certainly for programming jobs. – Tim B Sep 28 '16 at 13:06
  • 2
    Everyone has commitments, transport issues, childcare. Some people are naturally biologically better at evenings or at mornings. Sometimes it's simple stuff. For example if I wanted to be in the office at 9:00 I'd need to leave home 30 minutes sooner, not 10 minutes sooner, due to the way train timetables work out. Sometimes circumstances or people change. Trying to shoe-horn everyone into the same rigid box is something society is moving away from...not moving towards. – Tim B Sep 28 '16 at 13:08
  • @TimB Notice that the OP doesn't want you there at 8 am every morning: he wants you there once a week for 13 weeks. There's a lot of difference. And not all jobs are programming jobs, and even among programming jobs there are differences: have you ever talked with someone who develops programs for plants automation, where every single minute of plant stop because of a bug can costs tens of thousands of dollars? – Massimo Ortolano Sep 28 '16 at 13:14
  • 1
    @MassimoOrtolano Sure there are jobs where time matters. Shift work for example. There are also plenty where it doesn't, so sweeping statements about not preparing people for industry is incorrect. Not preparing people for some industries maybe, and then only relevant if those people intend to enter those industries. – Tim B Sep 28 '16 at 13:22
  • 4
    I don't see how your example is relevant, I've worked in TV automation where a singled missed advertising spots can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars (although most aren't that expensive). Currently I work in financial trading systems so I'll let you draw your own conclusions about potential losses if something goes wrong. There are plenty of ways to handle those risks and none of them involve people working rigidly from 8am or in fact have any relation to what hours the programmers work. (Beyond specific events like releases or investigating a prod issue, which can happen at any time). – Tim B Sep 28 '16 at 13:24
  • 1
    Please take extended discussion to [chat]. – eykanal Sep 28 '16 at 14:21
27

You try to distinguish between atypical and unreasonable but I don't think this is possible.

Unless you are in a culture where it is typical for PhD students and researchers to be in the office at 8am, it is unreasonable to require your team to be there at that time if the only reason is that it's your usual schedule. The other answers give all kinds of reasons why it might be somewhere between awkward and very inconvenient for people to be in the office that early, if that is not the usual culture.

Of course, those reasons might not apply to the specific people you're meeting with. The natural thing to do would be to ask them if 8am meetings is OK. However, since you're in a position of power over them, they may feel pressured to agree with something that is bad for them.

If it is not usual for people to be in the office at 8am in your culture, you should ask yourself why you're trying to impose your unusual schedule on the other three-quarters of your team. Is it really so important that you're all there at the same time? Is it impossible for you to work 8-4:30 and them to work, for example, 9-5:30?

David Richerby
  • 33,823
  • 6
  • 74
  • 143
26

It can depend on the institution (and the culture), but I would consider it unreasonable, yes. In fact, the university buildings in the place I work do not even open before 8am, and no-one, really no-one, is expected to show up that early. You should consider that people also might have to travel, and as it is indeed very reasonable to expect that people need half an hour or so to get some coffee, check mails, plan their day, and so on, you effectively require them to be there at 7.30. To me, this does not sound like a reasonable requirement in academia.

damian
  • 5,022
  • 1
  • 20
  • 26
18

Addressing the section about not starting immediately after people plan to be in work, there are a few points against it:

  1. Commuting delays - if there is extra traffic or someone can't find a parking space, or the train/bus is late, then they will miss your meeting or be late. Starting 30 minutes after everyone normally gets into the office gives everyone a bit of a buffer without needing them to get out of bed half an hour early just in case there is an unexpected delay.

  2. Time to unpack and get their belongings together - People bring bags, have coats etc and might need things from their desk like pens and paper. So they don't walk in the front door of the building and straight into the meeting room. People need a few minutes to grab what they need for a meeting. Also if they were travelling for an hour they might need the bathroom.

  3. Going from 0 - 100% takes a bit of time - You might have everything in mind that you want to discuss, but normally I like to go over what will be discussed before. If I am talking with someone on the way in, or driving, then I don't think much about what I will be doing until I'm through the door.

For these reasons leaving the first half hour for people to "settle down" in the office gives a better chance that they will be punctual for your meeting and prepared. Anecdotally, my previous company generally kept the first hour free unless it was a meeting everyone agreed was important and should take place ASAP, and even then it was accepted that people might be a few minutes late due to delays.

If everyone is in the office at 7:45 most days like yourself then it's probably not a problem. If people arrive between 9-10am then expect people to occasionally be late to the meeting or not present at all, in which case it is a bad idea to schedule it so early or they don't need to be invited in the first case. Your group might be happy to have the meeting early to give them a larger block of uninterrupted work, or they might hate the prospect of having to plan to get in the office at 7:30am to allow for the possibility of delays. Everyone is different.

Rob
  • 289
  • 2
  • 5
8

"Unreasonable" is perhaps not the exactly-right word, because one can make arguments in favor of it. But it is obviously aggressive, possibly creating burdens for people (childcare, commuting, daily rhythms), and is in fact arguably obnoxious in that it makes a demand for compliance in a part of the day that is not universally easy to organize "to suit". Thus, although possibly people can do so, it often does/would require a disproportionate amount of effort to comply. Ergo: unreasonable. Done. Instead, ask the people what times-of-day would be convenient for them to meet... (or, oppositely, ask what times would be inconvenient, and then do that, instead). Meeting times are even more artifactual than speed limits... duh.

paul garrett
  • 88,477
  • 10
  • 180
  • 343
7

Yes, it's unreasonable. Meet toward the middle of the day so people get in and leave generally when they want. People who do like being in that early probably enjoy the lack of meetings where they can actually get work done. Similar goes for people who stay late.

For reference my company runs roughly 11a-4p as meeting friendly time.

6

Congratulations on becoming a supervisor!

A team is made up of people who may have different preferences, working styles and expectations. For a team to work together in harmony, everyone will need to practice give-and-take, i.e., even though I prefer option A, I am willing to go with option B, because that appears to be better for the team overall.

In my opinion, even though you are in a position of authority and could make decisions as a dictator of sorts, in the long run, it is healthier for the team dynamics if you show your team members that you are willing to take the time to listen to them, to understand what are their needs and preferences, and then to make together a decision that works best for everyone.

In my personal experience, I often have to meet with collaborators outside of regular office hours, due to the fact that we reside in different time zones. We generally try to schedule our meetings at a time which does not cause too much pain to each person involved. On rare occasions, when there is an urgent deadline, one of us may meet at an unusual time (e.g., midnight, 5 AM), but this is usually a sacrifice that the person is willing to make, rather than it being something that the others force upon him/her.

I Like to Code
  • 19,300
  • 24
  • 78
  • 116
6

You have already got many good answers about the timing aspect itself but, reading through your question, I feel there is a larger point that needs to be made.

First, your demand is clearly unreasonable. It does depend on culture (national and organizational) but, through 5 countries and many diverse workplaces (university, research centers, private businesses big and small), I have never seen such stringent requirements for knowledge workers. And you know this yourself, you are trying to avoid the logical conclusion by making a distinction between typical and reasonable but it's not reasonable to impose something like this on your own if it's not typical and already a policy in your organization.

But more importantly, you speak of “overlap” and that can be easily achieved with a rule like being present between 10 and 12 and 14 and 16 (not that you really need to be so formal in such a small team but that was actually the rule at the most rigid and hierarchical organization I worked at as a researcher). This would leave your reports free to arrive as late as 10 and yourself free to leave as early as 16 and also some flexibility regarding lunch break while having plenty of time to attend common business and also an opportunity to work quietly early in the morning or late at night depending on personal preferences. So meeting at 8 certainly isn't necessary to have some overlap!

And you also suggest that this is not about a real “meeting” either but mostly about forcing the other members of your team to show up early, just because you want them to. So it has nothing to do with overlap or any actual need of your research but is entirely about micro-managing everyone's schedule. This is bound to be perceived as “bossing around” (and rightly so) and that is a problem in itself. Is that how you were treated while preparing your PhD? How others are treated in your organization? Do you think it's a good idea? Those are the questions you should be asking yourself.

Relaxed
  • 1,333
  • 9
  • 11
5

For typical grad students, it isn't unreasonable (though some students might resent it).

If the students are parents of young children, it may be unreasonable, as it could unfairly shift the burden of getting kids ready and off to school onto a partner, who may have equally pressing responsibilities.

If the students are single parents, it is very unreasonable.

Significance
  • 6,054
  • 1
  • 21
  • 40
5

This would be as reasonable as hosting a meeting between 1:00 - 3:00 in the morning since I am most productive during those times and I would love more than anything for my team members to work with me during these times. Everything is quiet during those hours and there is less media and news distraction. Plus, it is a time where daily micro-tasks such as replying emails, setting up meeting is at its minimal and best of all no urgent distractions from students or family. What a lovely time to do all the heavy lifting!

In fact, I am currently taking a break to write this at 2:43 AM Est. I cannot sleep at all before these times because I can't stop thinking about the problems surrounding my research. I plan to wake up at 9:30 or 10 just late enough to catch breakfast, then use the little time left before lunch to deal with micro-tasks, maybe attend a talk or two that usually happens around 11:00 am and focus on research after lunch. I can't see why anyone else wouldn't follow this schedule. In fact, it doesn't look like the security guards mind these hours. Nor people who works at local restaurants, or at the convenience store, or taxi drivers... I'd say 1 - 6 am is the new 9 - 5 pm.

That is to say it would be unreasonable for me to impose my personal habits that is considered for most cultures too early or too late.

From my experience, in dealing with one or two people, usually the time is set at a time that is towards the beginning or the end of normal working hours, as the middle of which is usually occupied, but this requires discussion instead of imposition. In small teams with more than 4 people, Doodle poll is a good way to assess availability for a span of one or even two weeks.

Finally, it would be a good idea to follow up when people start to not show up or be distracted during meetings, it could be that they have somewhere to go immediately after, or it is at an inappropriate time, so watch for those signs as well.

Fraïssé
  • 11,452
  • 14
  • 62
  • 97
4

Keep in mind that different people have different circadian rhythms and for some of them this is an effort.

If someone would require me to come at 8 am, I would hate the situation, I will come for the first 1-2 meetings and then I will start to be late or barely on time and I will be mostly useless for the entire day (especially if this is a prolonged situation). And this is not because I'm lazy (as a student/casual researcher I happily worked 14-16 hours a day) but because I simply have a hard time getting up in the morning. Also, I usually ride a bike. So in order to not be all sweaty and tired, I would have to come 15-30 minutes earlier. Also, as others have suggested above, some people have other commitments.

In some cases (e.g. a course or a large team) you simply cannot make everyone happy. But, since we are speaking of a team of 4 people that you are supposed to work with, I think it is quite reasonable to ask for their opinion and find a good compromise for everyone.

Paul92
  • 576
  • 2
  • 8
3

It depends on the local institution you are in. At my institution, I had meetings at 7:00 AM on certain days and tutorials at 11:30 PM on some Fridays during a term. These times were checked to be ok with the participants, though. (E.g., if they wanted to meet only within the regular working hours, there is nothing I could have done about it.)

So, 8:00 AM is not unreasonable.

I emphasize the dependence on the institution, since, e.g., getting at 8:00 at -20°C in the winter to an institution in Alaska or in northern Sweden can be physically nontrivial.

Leon Meier
  • 3,993
  • 1
  • 13
  • 37
  • 8
    The problem is that you can't really check that something is OK with your subordinates. They will feel pressure to do what they think you want them to do, especially if they're new students. Also, I don't see how your conclusion follows from your argument. How does "It depends on the institution; I used to have meetings at 7am" imply "8am is not unreasonable"? – David Richerby Sep 29 '16 at 00:05
  • 2
    Your conclusion is "8:00 AM is not unreasonable"; your argument, even as clarified by your comment, only supports the conclusion "there are institutions where 8:00 AM is not unreasonable". – David Richerby Sep 29 '16 at 12:33
  • An unqualified statement such as "8:00 AM is not unreasonable" is interpreted to mean "8:00 AM is not unreasonable, everywhere (or, at least, in the great majority of places)" not "8:00 AM is not unreasonable, in certain places". – David Richerby Sep 29 '16 at 13:12
  • 5
    OK. You seem to believe that "X is Y" means "There is at least one set of circumstances in which X is Y" rather than "In all or at least most sets of circumstances, X is Y". That is not how I understand the English language. In the English language that I speak, the short way of saying "8:00 AM is not everywhere and not at all times unreasonable" is "8:00 AM is not always unreasonable" or "8:00 AM is sometimes reasonable." – David Richerby Sep 29 '16 at 13:41
2

A point that isn't coming across is that there are different institutional environments, and in some of them, being told what time to be where, and then showing up, is part of doing business.

In particular, these sorts of situations happen all the time in clinical research, and for non-clinical people who work with clinical people. In such cases, an 8AM start to a workday might even be considered to be late.

In your case, though, I suggest talking to participants, and then scheduling a mutually agreeable time, so long as your schedule can accommodate it.

If you really like the 8AM time, though, and want to instill your students with an early work schedule, you might simply bribe them with bagels.

Scott Seidman
  • 31,120
  • 4
  • 52
  • 121
  • 1
    You make a good point but, if the asker were in an environment where everybody already started work well before 8am, surely they wouldn't need to be asking if it was reasonable to have 8am meetings? – David Richerby Sep 30 '16 at 08:29
2

I've instructed them to meet me at 8:00 to get started.

The only thing that is unreasonable here is your "instruction" to them! I am reading that sentence as misuse of power.

The proper way to do it would be to ask each one of them individually which time suits them. Let three of you sit together to decide which time is least uncomfortable for the meeting.

If you want them to be comfortable to work with you and not see you as a "boss" or a threat, give them and yourself some choice which is acceptable to 3 of you rather than thrusting your opinion on them/anyone.

Consider reading how to deal with people.

Aquarius_Girl
  • 148
  • 1
  • 1
  • 7
1

It's not unreasonable, but people talk. Word will spread that, if someone wants to work with you, they have to meet with you at 8AM. This will be something people will even mention at "grad interviews", so it will be a factor which people have to think about if they are interested in having you as an adviser and choosing schools. For this reason, I think you might miss out on a lot of good students just due to this schedule choice. As always, being flexible is the best option.

Chris Rackauckas
  • 3,804
  • 1
  • 12
  • 25
1

Based upon my research group at University, I would say it would be counterproductive. Everyone: professor, grad students, post doc would be up to late hours either doing their work or catching up on tasks. Even if people regularly sleep for just a couple hours of night, it can't be the most beneficial time to meet.

It comes down to the group of people, their willingness to give up sleep and their other commitments which might affect their rising time. Scheduling assistants such as Doodle are very useful when several people have to come together at one time to get a consensus. Generally, if it just the students to meet with each other, late at night might work and be agreed upon, but usually when a professor is involved the times seem to run from later morning to mid evening.

demongolem
  • 173
  • 2
  • 11
1

One of the main differences of academia compared to other types of jobs is that there is no specific or defined working hours. I have worked in three different labs in three countries, and I never had to start at 8 and I never had to finish at 16:30. Even in Sweden, where it's common for people to start at 8, the general rule is that all meetings have to be between 9-16, as it might be inconvenient for people to be there earlier or later (habits, children, etc). In other places, I have heard that people are kindly asked to come before 9:30 (as in France) and while some labs don't allow to work after hours, the starting time is around 9 (as in Spain). I always considered that working hours in academia are flexible (and I admire those that try to keep the 9-17 schedule - I cannot), and trying to be respectful to other people's needs, I would say you cannot demand someone to come at 8, especially since (I suppose) your schedule is not full with meetings that would necessitate the use of the 8am slot. With that said, I only had an 8:30am meeting when all other slots of my boss were full and the meeting urgent.

BioGeo
  • 1,883
  • 12
  • 16