I understand that in a research lab or in academia, this is common practice. But in the more menial coding industry that most of us are probably in, how do you find time for this? Do people read papers in their spare time and discuss over lunch, or are there enlightened managers who support this during working hours?
Good question. Most people read the paper on their own time, and we meet over lunch. The meetings themselves are just an hour, so it's not a massive time block. I've found that the people who show up are the ones who are genuinely curious and would be reading this stuff anyway (and sometimes just need a commitment/accountability to do it). Having a group gives them a reason to do it on a schedule.
That implies that you have a fixed time for lunch and also chat during lunch. I may be the minority but I prefer to eat when I'm hungry and focus on the food instead of chatting. And there is also allergies, as a celiac, I have big troubles eating together with others - they may accidently contaminate my food
I'm not sure what you mean by menial coding but all my employers have supported this in the past. This was a variety of companies, big tech, startups, etc. I think its more likely your employer is the outlier.
In 35 years in the industry, reading and studying during work hours were always supported. Frankly, most places would let us play video games during work hours as long as we met our deadlines.
Speaking as a SWE manager who explicitly “mandates” (not actually mandatory but I strongly encourage following your passions and interests in an academic kind of way!) we do exist, I assume I’m not the only one :)
My team almost always can find an hour between tasks organically so I’ve never really had to push
This is a very good question. I also struggle to find a good solution to process various signals (papers, tecniques, etc.) with my co-workers while maintaining proper work-life balance. Either you have to be a full time geek, or be left behind..
I would be interested to hear others experiences with running these types of groups. We’ve tried this a couple of times at my current job and both times it’s petered out - people don’t do the assigned reading and then just stop attending.
Any suggestions on how to keep such a group alive?
I lead a book club once (Designing Data Intensive Applications)- read a chapter and meet every two weeks. Was a real flop. Attendance remained high, but only one other person actually finished the book.
What was a real slap in the face - maybe a year after that book had concluded, someone told me I should lead another one about this other topic. She had not finished the first book, and she wanted me to regurgitate another to the group?
Hi HN, I've been organizing a systems reading group at Microsoft for five years now. I wrote down some takeaways on what worked (and what didn't). I'd love to hear if anyone else has successfully kept an engineering reading group alive at their company, or if you have any favorite systems papers we should add to our list!
This is great and congrats on the success. Many years ago I tried starting a cybersecurity reading group in my city since the startup I was working at was small and people there weren’t interested in that topic. I got a lot of very green, aspiring and non-professionals to show up. We couldn’t really agree on where to start and people had different ideas of where to focus or even how much they wanted to contribute. Mostly people wanted to hear a summary and didn’t really put in the kind of effort that I had hoped. It didn’t last long. Congrats again on making it 5 years and covering so much ground.
Thank you! I think the biggest factor for us was that most attendees already had some technical baseline. That makes it way easier to pick papers and have productive discussions. A cross-experience group sounds much harder. We occasionally have non-technical people who attend (e.g., designers), but they usually are very eager to learn. The guided series format might have helped in your case, where you pick the topic and sequence upfront so there's less debate about direction each meeting. Honestly, just getting people to show up is hard at first, so the fact that you got it off the ground at all says something.
> I think the biggest factor for us was that most attendees already had some technical baseline. That makes it way easier to pick papers and have productive discussions.
Thanks for sharing your experience.
How do you suss out peoples technical aptitude, and what was the minimum level you were looking for?
There are other groups within Microsoft, but they usually follow a presentation format rather than a collaborative discussion. Off the top of my head, Phil Bernstein[1] and Hanuma Kodavalla[2] run great database seminars for invited speakers. I regularly attend and have presented in both forums; Phil's crowd is mostly researchers, while Hanuma's is mostly full of SQL engineers. Different from a small reading group, but still great.
Appreciate the paper link! We like going back to the basics sometimes, so I'll definitely take a look.
It depends on the theme. If we're picking something in a space the group already knows well, like databases, I'll look at "Best Papers" from recent VLDB/ICDE/SIGMOD conferences. If we're exploring a topic most people are unfamiliar with, we'll go with something more foundational instead. For example, we're starting an arc on datacenters (servers, racks, networking, load balancing, power, cooling, failures, etc.), and most attendees don't have deep background there, so I found a book on the topic that we're going to read through[1].
How exactly are the meetings structured? I.e is someone leading discussions? Does each person go around and share thoughts? Etc
No company I’ve worked at has ever had dedicated time for reading papers or articles
Maybe I’ve only worked at outliers?
One company had a +1 day. You worked 4 days, had 1 day for learning - everything relevant for the job was fine.
My team almost always can find an hour between tasks organically so I’ve never really had to push
Any suggestions on how to keep such a group alive?
What was a real slap in the face - maybe a year after that book had concluded, someone told me I should lead another one about this other topic. She had not finished the first book, and she wanted me to regurgitate another to the group?
Thanks for sharing your experience.
How do you suss out peoples technical aptitude, and what was the minimum level you were looking for?
How were your discussions structured?
BTW heard about this paper[1] a few weeks ago, but not completely aligned with database and probably a bit too introductory for your group.
[1]https://www.cs.fsu.edu/~awang/courses/cop5611_s2024/vnode.pd...
Appreciate the paper link! We like going back to the basics sometimes, so I'll definitely take a look.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Bernstein
[2] https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=9eNQbZUAAAAJ&hl=en
[1] https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-01761-2