25. Maker or Manager | $100M Lost Chapters Audiobook
In this episode of The Game, Alex Hormozi explores the fundamental differences between two distinct work styles: makers and managers. He examines how managers operate effectively in short time blocks while makers require long periods of uninterrupted focus to complete their work. The discussion covers how these contrasting approaches to time management can create workplace friction when not properly understood.
The episode delves into practical solutions for harmonizing these different work styles within organizations. Hormozi addresses how managers can better accommodate makers' needs, how makers can protect their focus time, and how companies can implement policies that support both work styles. This exploration of workplace dynamics offers insights for anyone who needs to balance collaborative responsibilities with deep work.
This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Nov 14, 2025 episode of the The Game w/ Alex Hormozi
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
1-Page Summary
Contrasting Time Management Styles: Makers vs. Managers
Time management approaches differ significantly between managers and makers, with each group requiring distinct scheduling strategies to maximize their productivity.
How Managers and Makers Structure Their Time
Managers thrive on dividing their workday into 30-60 minute blocks, viewing these segments as opportunities for meetings and sequential tasks. They efficiently complete work in these small chunks, treating empty calendar slots as opportunities to be filled.
In contrast, makers require large blocks of uninterrupted time for deep work. Their tasks demand sustained focus for problem-solving and creativity. Alex Hormozi demonstrates this approach by dedicating the first half of his day exclusively to "maker work," protecting this time from interruptions that could derail productivity.
The Impact of Misaligned Schedules
When managers don't understand makers' needs, productivity suffers. A single 30-minute meeting can disrupt a maker's entire half-day or full-day of work, as their tasks require sustained concentration. Makers often feel pressured to attend these meetings despite knowing the cost to their productivity, fearing negative consequences if they decline.
Solutions for Managing Different Work Styles
For effective collaboration, managers need to recognize the high cost of interrupting makers' work and be more selective when scheduling meetings. Makers should educate their managers about their work style needs and establish dedicated "meeting blocks" to protect their focus time.
Organizations can support both work styles by implementing "quiet time" policies that protect teams from interruptions during set periods. As Hormozi suggests, establishing mandatory quiet time chunks daily or weekly can help both makers and managers work more effectively while minimizing conflicts.
1-Page Summary
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- Managers may argue that their time is also valuable and that meetings are essential for coordination, communication, and decision-making, which can't always be scheduled within the "meeting blocks" that makers prefer.
- Some makers might find that regular short breaks or meetings can actually enhance creativity and problem-solving by providing a change of pace and preventing burnout from too much isolation.
- The division between makers and managers is not always clear-cut; some individuals may find that they have characteristics of both, and thus a hybrid approach to time management might be more effective for them.
- The idea that all makers need large uninterrupted blocks of time might not apply universally; some may work effectively in shorter bursts or may require frequent feedback and collaboration.
- The concept of "quiet time" policies might not be feasible in all industries or roles, especially in customer-facing positions or those requiring rapid response to dynamic situations.
- The assumption that meetings are inherently disruptive may overlook the possibility of efficient, well-structured meetings that can contribute positively to a maker's workflow.
- The text assumes that all managers do not understand the needs of makers, which may not be true for all organizations; some managers may already be cognizant of and accommodate different work styles.
- The effectiveness of "quiet time" policies may vary greatly depending on the company culture and the nature of the work, and it may not be a one-size-fits-all solution.
- The suggestion to establish mandatory quiet time chunks could be seen as inflexible and may not account for the diverse working styles and preferences of all employees.
- The focus on protecting makers' time could inadvertently undervalue the time of managers, who also need to balance various tasks and may require flexibility in their schedules to address urgent issues.
Actionables
- Use color-coded calendar entries to visually distinguish between maker and manager time blocks. By assigning specific colors to different types of work, such as deep work or meetings, you can quickly assess your day's structure at a glance. For example, blue could represent deep work periods, while red might indicate scheduled meetings, helping you balance your day more effectively.
- Create a personal "interruption ledger" to track and evaluate the impact of disruptions on your work. Each time you're interrupted, jot down the time, duration, and nature of the interruption, along with how it affected your productivity. Review this ledger weekly to identify patterns and plan strategies to minimize these disruptions, like negotiating specific meeting times that align with your low-energy periods.
- Develop a "focus agreement" with colleagues or housemates where you mutually respect designated quiet times. This agreement would outline specific hours where interruptions are off-limits unless there's an emergency. You could use a physical sign, like a door hanger with "Focus Time - Do Not Disturb" or a shared digital indicator, such as a status update in a communication app, to signal when you're in a deep work phase.
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Contrasting Time Management Styles: Makers vs. Managers
Time management can make or break productivity depending on one's role. Managers and makers follow starkly different approaches to time management based on their distinct needs.
Managers Optimize Time By Dividing Workday Into 30-60 Min Blocks For Meetings/Tasks
Managers View Open Time Slots As Opportunities For Meetings
Managers divide their workday into bite-sized 30 to 60-minute blocks, which allows them to handle various sequential tasks, often differing from one to the next. This division forms 10 to 20 chunks of work time per day, including meetings where they provide direction. An empty slot in their schedule is seen as a lost opportunity—an unspent currency. Thus, the only cost of booking a slot is finding someone else with a corresponding gap.
Managers Efficiently Complete Tasks in Small Time Chunks
Envisioning their day as a series of consecutive meetings and tasks, managers work until their last scheduled appointment, with a clearly defined start and end to their workday. They actively aim to fill every available time chunk to ensure that no time is wasted, often working efficiently in these predetermined blocks.
Makers Need Large Time Blocks for Deep Work
Makers, whose tasks require uninterrupted focus, approach their calendars differently, striving to clear large portions of their day for deep and concentrated work.
Fragmented Time Slots Hinder Makers' Productivity
For makers, attempting to create or innovate in short windows is futile. They require half-day or full-day blocks free of interruptions to achieve productivity, as the nature of their work can't be fragmented into smaller slots without sacrificing quality.
Makers' Work Demands Prob ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Contrasting Time Management Styles: Makers vs. Managers
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While managers may see open time slots as opportunities for meetings, not all managers may view their schedules as rigidly segmented, and some may prioritize flexibility and open blocks for strategic thinking or unplanned issues.
- The efficiency of completing tasks in small time chunks can vary among managers; some may find that certain tasks require longer periods of focus and that back-to-back meetings can be draining and counterproductive.
- Makers might not always require large uninterrupted time blocks for all tasks; some tasks may be well-suited to shorter bursts of work, and breaking up work can sometimes help prevent burnout or stimulate creativity.
- The assumption that fragmented time slots always hinder makers' productivity may not hold true for all individuals; some makers may thrive in environments with varied tasks and may find ways to be productive in shorter time frames.
- The idea that makers' productivity plummets with broken time from meetings may be an overgeneralization; some makers may find meetings to be a valuable break from intense focus, providing opportunities for collaboration and fee ...
Actionables
- You can designate one "meeting-free" day each week to allow for deep work sessions. On this day, avoid scheduling any meetings and communicate to your team that you're focusing on tasks that require extended concentration. This practice ensures you have a predictable time each week to engage in creative problem-solving or complex projects without the risk of interruptions.
- Create a personal "time audit" by tracking your activities for a week. Note down how you spend your time in 15-minute increments, then review the log to identify patterns where your time might be fragmented by meetings or other disruptions. Use this insight to restructure your schedule, grouping similar tasks together and setting aside specific times for meetings, ideally clustering them to preserve larger blocks of uninterrupted work time.
- Experiment with "silent hours" where you mute notifications and ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Negative Impacts on Makers With Uncomprehending Managers
The relationship between managers and their employees, particularly those in creative or development roles (often referred to as "makers"), increasingly emphasizes the need for mutual understanding of work processes to maintain productivity.
Managers Overlook the High Cost of Brief Meetings on Maker Productivity
Managers sometimes fail to recognize the significant impact that task switching has on employees immersed in creative or development processes. They might view a 30-minute meeting as a minor commitment without considering its disruptive effect on a maker's schedule.
A 30-minute Meeting Disrupts a Maker's Half/Full-Day
For a maker who requires lengthy periods of uninterrupted time to be productive, even a brief meeting can fragment their workday. The manager's assumption that such a meeting has little cost can cause a maker to lose concentration and momentum, potentially disrupting half or even a full day's worth of work.
Over-Scheduling by Managers Leads To Productivity Losses
Most people within an organization, including managers, operate on what can be referred to as a "manager’s schedule," with days cut into one-hour intervals suitable for meetings and calls. This scheduling mindset can be counterproductive for makers, who often suffer productivity losses due to increased task-switching and the inability to immerse themselves in their complex and time-consuming work.
Makers Feel Trapped Without Managers' Respect for Uninterrupted Work
An environment that doesn't respect the need for sustained, uninterrupted work can make makers feel trapped and undervalued. This tension can be heightened by the pressure to conform to managerial expectations regarding attendance at meetings.
Makers Pressured to Attend Meetings, Fear Consequences of Declining
Makers may feel obligated to accept meetings out of fear of negative consequences or a desire to seem cooperative, despite knowing it will hamper their productivity. The expectation to be available for meetings, often a ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Negative Impacts on Makers With Uncomprehending Managers
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- "Makers" refers to employees who focus on creating, building, or developing products, software, or content. Their work often requires deep concentration and extended periods of uninterrupted time. Unlike roles centered on communication or management, makers produce tangible outputs through focused effort. This term highlights the contrast between creative/development work and routine managerial tasks.
- Task switching occurs when a person shifts focus from one task to another, requiring mental adjustment. This shift causes cognitive load, reducing efficiency and increasing the time needed to regain full concentration. Frequent task switching leads to fragmented attention, making deep, creative work difficult. As a result, overall productivity and work quality decline.
- A "manager’s schedule" divides the day into many short blocks, typically one hour, to accommodate meetings and quick tasks. A "maker’s schedule" requires long, uninterrupted periods, often several hours, to focus deeply on complex work. Managers often think in terms of meetings and coordination, while makers need sustained focus to produce creative or technical output. This fundamental difference causes conflicts when managers schedule frequent interruptions that disrupt makers' flow.
- Makers often need long, uninterrupted periods to enter a state of deep focus called "flow." Interruptions, even brief ones, break this flow and require time to regain concentration. The mental effort to switch tasks reduces overall efficiency beyond the meeting's duration. Thus, a 30-minute meeting can effectively consume several hours of productive work.
- Creative and development work often requires deep focus to solve complex problems or generate new ideas. Interruptions break this focus, forcing the brain to repeatedly switch contexts, which slows thinking and reduces quality. It can take 15-30 minutes to regain full concentration after an interruption. Therefore, long, uninterrupted time blocks enable sustained mental effort and higher productivity.
- Frequent check-ins and unscheduled meetings increase managerial control by constantly monitoring and interrupting makers' work. This disrupts deep focus needed for complex tasks, causing cognitive switching costs. The interruptions fragment time, reducing the ability to complete tasks efficiently. Over time, this leads to lower overall productivity and increased stress for makers.
- Makers often derive motivation and satisfaction from deep focus and meaningful progress in their work. When frequent interruptions or mand ...
Counterarguments
- Managers may have a broader perspective on the needs of the organization, including the importance of meetings for communication, alignment, and decision-making.
- Some meetings may be essential for the maker's work, providing necessary information or decisions that enable progress.
- Not all makers may require the same level of uninterrupted time; some may thrive in more collaborative or dynamic environments.
- Managers may be under pressure to demonstrate progress and accountability, which can sometimes necessitate more frequent check-ins.
- Task switching, while disruptive, can sometimes lead to serendipitous ideas and creative problem-solving when returning to the primary task.
- The assumption that all meetings are unproductive for makers may not hold true; some meetings can be energizing and provide valuable feedback.
- Makers can sometimes overestimate the negative impact of interruptions and may benefit from developing strategies to quickly regain focus after meetings.
- The text assumes that all managers do not understand the creative process, which may not be true for all managers, especially those with a background in creative or development work.
- The idea of uninterrupted work being essential for productivity may not account for the benefits of taking breaks, which research has shown can improve creativity and problem-solving.
- The concept of a "manager's schedule" may be an oversimplification, as many managers also require periods of deep wo ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Solutions For Resolving Conflicts in Makers, Managers, and Organizations
Conflicting schedules between makers, who need long periods of uninterrupted time for deep work, and managers, who operate on a schedule with frequent meetings, can be detrimental to productivity. Here are some strategies to minimize these conflicts:
For Managers:
Higher Cost of Short Meetings on Maker Productivity
Managers should understand the significant cost of coordinating times and the disruption short meetings have on a maker's work. Each interruption can break the flow of a maker’s deep work, leading to reduced productivity.
Value Makers' Contributions: Be Selective and Purposeful In Requesting Their Time
Managers should recognize the value of a maker’s time and ensure that requests for it are truly worth the potential cost to productivity. This means being selective and purposeful when scheduling meetings with makers.
For Makers:
Educate Managers on Maker vs. Manager Work Styles and Importance of Uninterrupted Time Blocks
Makers need to educate their managers about the importance of uninterrupted time blocks for deep work. They should communicate the differences in work styles and schedules between makers and managers to foster better understanding and planning.
Set "Meeting Blocks" For Appointments, Safeguarding Time for Focused Work
Makers should set "meeting blocks" for appointments to safeguard time for focused work. Hormozi advises that having standard meeting blocks where you accept meetings can help protect dedicated time. Makers can establish specific time slots for meetings and defend these blocks from unnecessary interruptions, ensuring they have ample time for uninterrupted work.
For Organizations:
Implement "Quiet Time" Policies to Protect Teams From Interruptions and Meetings During Set Periods
Organizations should implement "quiet time" policies to protect teams from interruptions ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Solutions For Resolving Conflicts in Makers, Managers, and Organizations
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While "quiet time" policies can be beneficial, they may not be practical for all types of businesses, especially those that require constant client interaction or immediate responsiveness.
- Managers might find it challenging to be selective with meeting requests if the organizational culture values collaboration and frequent check-ins, which could be seen as necessary for team cohesion and project alignment.
- Makers educating managers on their work style assumes that managers are not already aware or sympathetic to these needs, which might not be the case in organizations with good communication practices.
- Setting "meeting blocks" could lead to inflexibility, where urgent issues cannot be addressed promptly because they fall outside of the predetermined meeting times.
- The idea that short meetings are always detrimental to makers' productivity does not consider that some makers may thrive with regular check-ins or short breaks that meetings can provide.
- Implementing organization-wide "quiet time" policies may not account for the diverse working styles of all employees, some of whom may not benefit from such rigid structures.
- The assumption that uninterrupted time always leads to higher productivity does not consider the potential for procrastination or lack of focus during these periods; some individuals may work better with more structure.
- The strategies presented may not scale wel ...
Actionables
- You can use visual indicators like colored flags or lights at your workstation to signal your availability for meetings or need for uninterrupted work time. For example, a red flag could mean you're in deep work mode and shouldn't be disturbed, while a green flag indicates you're open to brief interactions or meetings. This simple system can help communicate your current work mode to managers and colleagues without the need for constant verbal reminders.
- Develop a personal "interruption journal" to track and analyze the impact of disruptions on your work. Note down each time you're interrupted, the reason for the interruption, and how long it takes you to regain focus. Over time, you'll gather data that can help you identify patterns and propose specific changes to your schedule or work environment that minimize productivity loss.
- Create a "meeting request template" ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Create Summaries for anything on the web
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser
