I really don't see how you can do this in a normal work setting. If I work for 30, take 30 off... an 8 hour work day takes 16 hours...
Even if I got 16 hours of work done in that time, it does not matter really to my employer, who would still see it as 8 hours. Because we bill by the hour, what matters is the # of hours that are worked, not how much work gets done in them.
That said breaks in a lot of tasks are immensely useful. I can't remember how many times I've given up after getting stuck on a work task to come in the next morning and figured it out in 30 minutes.
Well this is a problem with the system. Sure, in the short term you are billing by the hour, but in the long term you are really getting paid for results.
Just try going a few weeks sitting at your desk without getting any work done if you don't believe me.
Recently on HN, I read a comment suggesting to bill by the week instead of the hour. An hour is too short of a time period to actually produce anything meaningful but you can get a lot done in a week. I think this method of billing would work much better. I haven't used it yet but I will propose it for my next contract.
When your customer is the government, indirectly, by way of a fixed-fee contract, the actual impact of your quality is often hard to see.
In the typical model, a manager's highest priority is to reduce indirect charges and make sure as much as possible is charged to a contract.
Now I'm not saying anyone is out to defraud, or charge time inappropriately, or etc. But what makes the company money is time it can charge to the gov't. Therefore if they see you spending half your time goofing off, but still getting more done - from their point of view, their legal obligation is to make sure they are charging correctly.
I cannot imagine trying to justify charging half of your time indirectly, with the caveat that "hey, I'm getting even more done". Financially that would be a disaster for them. The only way for it to work out would be to bid double for contracts, which, given how bidding works... doesn't work.
That is because the 30/30 ratio it terrible. I do 50/5 or even 58/2 and it is enough. You need to get up about once an hour and just step away from the computer. It helps a lot to go outside but that can be difficult, so I usually settle for a quick walk around the floor of my building which takes around 2 minutes. Nobody minds.
30/30 is a completely infeasible ratio for a work environment, but the author isn't doing billable work- he's a student. As a student, his concern is raw productivity.
Ratio aside, the principle is sound. The Pomodoro Technique mentioned in other comments seems like a good fit for the workplace. 25/5 is very easy to use on the job, and you still reap the benefits of intent focus plus frequent breaks.
Even if I got 16 hours of work done in that time, it does not matter really to my employer, who would still see it as 8 hours. Because we bill by the hour, what matters is the # of hours that are worked, not how much work gets done in them.
That said breaks in a lot of tasks are immensely useful. I can't remember how many times I've given up after getting stuck on a work task to come in the next morning and figured it out in 30 minutes.
I wish productivity mattered more :(.