Schedules – How the Concept can Affect Performance

My schedule starts at 8:00 am and ends at 6:00 pm.  The schedule is set up in 1 hour blocks so that clients can choose the amount of time they wish to spend with me being coached or taught.  Why it is that way?  I really don’t have the answer.  Over the couple of decades I have noticed that an hour is enough for most clients.  I have also noticed that thirty minutes can work if a player is just looking for a feel.

The concept that I have seen work is one in which the ball flight is analyzed, the swing is analyzed, and prescriptions are put in place.  If a client is with me for one hour, it is a solid 50 minutes of building the process by putting in prescriptions for training and practice.  We go through the entire process together during the 50 minutes to make certain the athlete knows “how” and “why” they are using the strategy.  Notes of kept on my part on what the client has been prescribed and the amount of reps etc.  Videos are sent to the client in case they may forget or need more clarity.  The one hour session is generally on time and straight forward as to how the player should go about making that little white ball fly straighter.

But there are times when it feels I need more time with the client.  There are times when I know the client feels they need more time with me.  This is where the lines of “coaching” and “teaching” become separate and different.  Coaches don’t live on blocks of time separated throughout the day.  Teachers on the other hand do live on blocks of time separated throughout the day.

Uniquely, I coach players on the PGA Tour, LPGA Tour, Tour, and on the “Junior Golf Tour.”  I have quite literally been at PGA Tour event on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday only to find myself at a junior golf event on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.  The disparity in ability is quite glaring.  However the amount of TIME needed for both the professional player to succeed and the junior golfer to succeed is substantial.

This idea of time has been an enigma to me to define.  This line between coaching and teaching.  Recently I ran upon this rather famous essay and at last it was defined for me what I was seeing and living.  Enjoy the essay.  It was written by Paul Graham.

Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule

Want to start a startup? Get funded by Y Combinator.

July 2009

One reason programmers dislike meetings so much is that they’re on a different type of schedule from other people. Meetings cost them more.

There are two types of schedule, which I’ll call the manager’s schedule and the maker’s schedule. The manager’s schedule is for bosses. It’s embodied in the traditional appointment book, with each day cut into one hour intervals. You can block off several hours for a single task if you need to, but by default you change what you’re doing every hour.

When you use time that way, it’s merely a practical problem to meet with someone. Find an open slot in your schedule, book them, and you’re done.

Most powerful people are on the manager’s schedule. It’s the schedule of command. But there’s another way of using time that’s common among people who make things, like programmers and writers. They generally prefer to use time in units of half a day at least. You can’t write or program well in units of an hour. That’s barely enough time to get started.

When you’re operating on the maker’s schedule, meetings are a disaster. A single meeting can blow a whole afternoon, by breaking it into two pieces each too small to do anything hard in. Plus you have to remember to go to the meeting. That’s no problem for someone on the manager’s schedule. There’s always something coming on the next hour; the only question is what. But when someone on the maker’s schedule has a meeting, they have to think about it.

For someone on the maker’s schedule, having a meeting is like throwing an exception. It doesn’t merely cause you to switch from one task to another; it changes the mode in which you work.

I find one meeting can sometimes affect a whole day. A meeting commonly blows at least half a day, by breaking up a morning or afternoon. But in addition there’s sometimes a cascading effect. If I know the afternoon is going to be broken up, I’m slightly less likely to start something ambitious in the morning. I know this may sound oversensitive, but if you’re a maker, think of your own case. Don’t your spirits rise at the thought of having an entire day free to work, with no appointments at all? Well, that means your spirits are correspondingly depressed when you don’t. And ambitious projects are by definition close to the limits of your capacity. A small decrease in morale is enough to kill them off.

Each type of schedule works fine by itself. Problems arise when they meet. Since most powerful people operate on the manager’s schedule, they’re in a position to make everyone resonate at their frequency if they want to. But the smarter ones restrain themselves, if they know that some of the people working for them need long chunks of time to work in.

Our case is an unusual one. Nearly all investors, including all VCs I know, operate on the manager’s schedule. But Y Combinatorruns on the maker’s schedule. Rtm and Trevor and I do because we always have, and Jessica does too, mostly, because she’s gotten into sync with us.

I wouldn’t be surprised if there start to be more companies like us. I suspect founders may increasingly be able to resist, or at least postpone, turning into managers, just as a few decades ago they started to be able to resist switching from jeans to suits.

How do we manage to advise so many startups on the maker’s schedule? By using the classic device for simulating the manager’s schedule within the maker’s: office hours. Several times a week I set aside a chunk of time to meet founders we’ve funded. These chunks of time are at the end of mem.) During busy periods, office hours sometimes get long enough that they compress the day, but they never interrupt it.

When we were working on our own startup, back in the 90s, I evolved another trick for partitioning the day. I used to program from dinner till about 3 am every day, because at night no one could interrupt me. Then I’d sleep till about 11 am, and come in and work until dinner on what I called “business stuff.” I never thought of it in these terms, but in effect I had two workdays each day, one on the manager’s schedule and one on the maker’s.

When you’re operating on the manager’s schedule you can do something you’d never want to do on the maker’s: you can have speculative meetings. You can meet someone just to get to know one another. If you have an empty slot in your schedule, why not? Maybe it will turn out you can help one another in some way.

Business people in Silicon Valley (and the whole world, for that matter) have speculative meetings all the time. They’re effectively free if you’re on the manager’s schedule. They’re so common that there’s distinctive language for proposing them: saying that you want to “grab coffee,” for example.

Speculative meetings are terribly costly if you’re on the maker’s schedule, though. Which puts us in something of a bind. Everyone assumes that, like other investors, we run on the manager’s schedule. So they introduce us to someone they think we ought to meet, or send us an email proposing we grab coffee. At this point we have two options, neither of them good: we can meet with them, and lose half a day’s work; or we can try to avoid meeting them, and probably offend them.

Till recently we weren’t clear in our own minds about the source of the problem. We just took it for granted that we had to either blow our schedules or offend people. But now that I’ve realized what’s going on, perhaps there’s a third option: to write something explaining the two types of schedule. Maybe eventually, if the conflict between the manager’s schedule and the maker’s schedule starts to be more widely understood, it will become less of a problem.

Those of us on the maker’s schedule are willing to compromise. We know we have to have some number of meetings. All we ask from those on the manager’s schedule is that they understand the cost.


A Maker or A Manager.  What a fantastic way to define the differences between a Coach and a Teacher.  It is also a fantastic way to look at how we as parents, mentors, or coaches are developing athletes.  It is very advisable and applicable to remember that great athletes cannot be created by Managing them.  They all, each of them, have had the blessing of a Maker that did not have a time table when it came to them becoming who they wanted to be.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *