Jeanne Boyarsky wrote:
My peak development efficiency is more than 25 minutes. The Pomodoro timer going off would be a distraction from being in the zone.
My job involves interacting with/mentoring/answer questions/helping others in addition to indvidual tasks. Can't plan when others need help.
They recommend telling a coworker that you are in the middle of a Pomodoro and will get back to them in 25 minutes. However, this IS the interruption. By talking to someone to tell them you can't talk to them, you are already out of the programming zone. (Incidentally, I have a "do not disturb" sign for this purpose. The idea being to prevent people from even talking to me on those occasions it is really needed.)
Why should I optimize my time at the expense of others? If I return all phone calls at the end of 25 minutes, it is a bad time for others, no? What if everyone use Pomodoro on different schedules. (Not that I never carve out time. I do. Did I mention I have a do not disturb sign?)
I wonder whether my concerns sound like justifications or valid.
I'm sure you can find a way to adjust the practice so that it would work for you.
- how often could people wait until the end of the current pomodoro, so that you can spend the next one helping them?
- what would happen if you simply canceled the current pomodoro, and spent the next one helping that person?
- it is not as big an interruption as actually having to answer the coworker,
- people will learn how and when to ask you,
- you already seem to have found a good solution, wo why not continue use it?
I'd suggest that it doesn't matter what they sound like. I'd suggest that it matters whether Pomodoro can help you use your time better or not. I'd suggest that a good way to find out wether it does might be to stop wondering and start trying. ;)