This artcile is written by a graduating Flow Coach.
Introduction
In the modern world of software development, on-call refers to the practice of solving urgent technical issues for which employees are available during both working and non-working hours. As products have evolved, features are released more rapidly, and global connectivity has increased, providing 24/7 coverage has become almost mandatory; thus, on-call shifts are increasingly more popular. Left unresolved, technical issues can result in significant reputational and financial losses for companies. Moreover, despite extensive efforts to build resilient systems, on-call interruptions remain inherently unexpected and likely, unpredictable. With such high stakes at play, one can only wonder, how can on-call engineers bring their most optimal performance to solve these issues perhaps in the middle of the night or simply, after a very long week? Is it even possible to make it a sustainable practice and avoid employee burnout?
Thankfully, one particular area of research can help us find the missing link between performance and well-being: flow state. As beautifully described by the father of flow, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, flow happens when what we feel, what we wish, and what we think are in harmony. Csikszentmihalyi recognised and gave name to the state we enter when we are fully absorbed in what we’re doing, a space of effortless immersion and joy where we’re driven by the sheer pleasure of the experience itself. In flow, there is a lack of self-consciousness: we give our full effort and attention to the task at hand, and in return, we receive continuous and unambiguous feedback. Not only the goals are clear and our motivation high, but to continue being in flow, we constantly have to expand our comfort zone and strive to achieve mastery. After years of exploring the concepts of happiness, creativity and human fulfilment, Csikszentmihalyi concluded that seeking optimal experiences is fundamental to a life well-lived and the essence of human existence.
So how could software developers harness this optimal experience called flow during on-call? Or are they two fully contrasting events? In the following sections of this essay, we look at the underlying themes of individual and team flow and assess their compatibility with the practices of on-call. Considering the collective effort involved in training employees, along with the significant impact their on-call experience has on mental health, it’s clear that both individual contributors and the organisations employing them stand to benefit from making on-call work a more enjoyable, flow-oriented activity. Where feasible, recommendations are provided to foster improvements and enhance the overall quality of the on-call experience.
A Closer Look at On-Call
Even in the IT field, the nature of on-call can vary depending on how each company implements this practice. In most cases, certain expectations are set, such as the length of shifts, the response time for acknowledging a call, and the escalation process for larger issues. In an effort to standardise the on-call process and share its decades of experience, Google has published numerous resources on how to best facilitate large-scale incident management. Their findings include that:
the “ideal” number of people to involve in a 24/7 on-call rotation is six to eight, assuming week-long shifts and depending on the geographical distribution of the team (i.e. single-site team versus dual-site that “follows the sun”, where for example, one half of the team is based in Europe and the other half is based in the United States);
the average time for dealing with an on-call interruption (from root-cause analysis, remediation and follow-up work) is six hours; thus the maximum number of incidents in a 12-hour shift should be two.
This way, teams also have the opportunity to reflect on their performance during incidents and ensure that action items are being addressed. Learning from failure is a crucial aspect of such highly complex and distributed teams, and so, a more formal practice like writing postmortems has been adopted by many companies. What stands out about postmortems is that it is encouraged for them to be “blameless” and that they usually cover answers to what went well, what could have gone better (or what went poorly), and where people got lucky. Postmortems offer the chance to understand how outages could have been prevented and the core belief behind them is that it is the systems that fail us, not people. Therefore, postmortems are meant to be constructive and collaborative and support knowledge transfer between employees - key elements that we will be examining later on when looking at a team’s flowability.
Despite the emerging and diversified need for on-call work, research on the mental health aspects of it has been limited, and typically focused on only one profession - primarily medical staff. The results do not look very promising: worse depressive symptoms, burnout, and sleep problems were linked to the frequency of on-call. When the perceived work experience is a negative one, even a low amount of on-call hours a month can interfere with employees’ well-being and be related to increased fatigue and work-home interference7. There seems to be a vicious cycle going on; ahead of their on-call, employees can get apprehensive about it (likely because the anticipation of a call tends to evoke a negative feeling), therefore they cannot properly rest and they potentially enter the on-call already in a suboptimal state. While night shifts are less common in the IT field, early (e.g. starting from 5 am) or late (e.g. ending a shift around 10-11 pm) on-call hours would be a typical occurrence. This means that employees’ sleep could still be disrupted by an on-call event which, in turn, can significantly affect mood, processing speed and working memory8. On-call interruptions require exactly the opposite, meaning self-regulation, quick decision-making skills and a high level of concentration are essential when dealing with impromptu calls for which the success of the company could depend.
And so, it may seem that organisations or employees that overlook their well-being can be setting themselves up for disaster if the on-call duties are left unstructured or inadequately managed. While many companies have proposed changes that may make sense mathematically or from a business perspective (such as theaforementioned staffing models proposed by Google), these solutions often neglect the human element and a more holistic approach is necessary. On-call responsibilities cannot be treated as an afterthought; they must be designed with the employees’ mental and physical well-being at the forefront. After all, isn’t the ultimate goal to create conditions where employees can thrive, even under pressure, by tapping into a state of optimal performance, like flow? To explore this further, let’s examine the key elements of flow and how they can enhance on-call practices.
Individual & Team Flow
When looking at work, there are opportunities for both individual and team-level flow experiences. A key element that sets them apart is the amount of control that a given person can exert in these circumstances; while individual flow experiences can get aggregated into the team’s flow experience, the team’s overall dynamic plays a pivotal role and indicates that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This also suggests that team flow is of greater significance and delivers more intense satisfaction as people get to work in synergy, and “feel and operate as one” while accomplishing something out of the ordinary. On-call work offers chances for both experiences: some tasks require an individual’s focus, while other situations call for either involving more teammates or potentially forming ad-hoc teams to handle bigger issues.
Individual flow experiences encompass nine key dimensions: clear goals, immediate feedback on progress, a perceived balance between challenges and skills, a sense of control or freedom from fear of failure, intense concentration (free from distraction or conflict), intrinsic enjoyment of the activity (known as autotelicity), loss of self-consciousness, altered perception of time, and a merging of action with awareness.
Considering the duties of on-call, some of these conditions may be easier to fulfil than others. Clear goals and unambiguous feedback are elements that could already be present in a team's on-call routine by having pre-established expectations, e.g. how quickly should an incident be resolved, how soon before escalating for more help, how to determine that the situation is improving, etc. The problem is that these guidelines tend to become outdated quickly and there aren't practices in place for reviewing them regularly. Moreover, these expectations are sometimes set without consulting with the actual on-callers and this could interfere with the goal of balancing technical and communication skills with on-call challenges. In that case, not only the employees would need to know themselves well and be able to lower the perceived challenge by, say, asking for help from others, but they would also need to feel comfortable doing so. Fear of failure could be mitigated by harnessing psychological safety in the company, allowing people to get a sense of control over their success at work and reducing reflective self-talk. One way to diminish fear of failure in the on-call world would be to continuously foster the aforementioned culture of blameless postmortems.
Some of the elements on the list also go hand in hand, namely total concentration, merging of action-awareness and a distorted sense of time. A lot of this comes down to the employees' ability to direct their attention to the task at hand, which likely needs to be exercised inside and outside of the on-call hours. However, the system in which an individual is operating also needs to work on eliminating distractions (such as pointless meetings or interruptions external to the team) and that has to be embraced as a mutual commitment by everyone participating in the on-call. Perhaps the element most at risk for not being met during on-call is our last one on the list: autotelicity. Many shy away from the pressure of the on-call, and only a few view it as a mental thrill. For employees, being on-call is like an athlete’s performance event: the moment to showcase their peak skills. It is reasonable to expect that some people would rather be doing something else than on-call. However, most things don't actually become interesting until we devote attention to them1. Even if companies don’t hire the most passionate individuals, guiding them to engage with the on-call experience, rather than avoid it, as many understandably do, can boost awareness of the support needed for employees to perform and feel at their best.
By expanding these individual elements of the flow experience, we can establish the groundwork for achieving flow at the team level. The six prerequisites of team flow are collective ambition, common goal, aligned personal goals, high-skill integration, open communication, safety and mutual commitment9. Unlike individual flow, team flow requires a sense of unity among teammates, with a shared purpose that is rooted in their common values. The team itself is also give and take, meaning that individuals benefit by being part of such a unit and that the team knows how each member expects to be paid (beyond remuneration)10 - an element that is often overlooked in the corporate culture. Moreover, the high-skill integration required to achieve team flow must be developed more deliberately than it is at the individual level. Tasks should be distributed with due consideration for each team member's skill set9 since the initial challenge that was assigned to the team is typically too difficult for a single person to solve. This allows each team member to showcase their unique strengths, solidify their role, and feel a sense of belonging and recognition for their contributions.
The remaining three prerequisites of team flow (open communication, psychological safety, and mutual commitment) broadly relate to minimising distractions and fostering a growth mindset within the team, though each entails deeper considerations. Teammates need to be able to depend on one another and create a safe environment that encourages effort, rather than success, and that allows for risks to be taken without fear of punishment.9 In return, these elements create a sense of joint progress and unity within the team, continuing to build upon mutual trust and fueling the experience with a holistic focus - all of which are characteristics of team flow9.
Looking back at the on-call experience, unsurprisingly, more effort seems to be required in order to facilitate team flow, rather than just individual flow. While on-call duties inherently involve critical work for the company, creating a naturally challenging environment, teams are often assembled ad-hoc due to the unpredictable nature of incidents requiring cross-functional expertise. As a result, fostering flow at the organisational level is essential to ensure teams can engage and collaborate effectively. Another common issue is that on-call is often seen as something that "needs to be done" and not rewarded accordingly; therefore there is little motivation to improve or foster transparent communication between teams.
Clutch vs Flow States
This concept of "making it happen" resonates with another common psychological state from the world of high-performance sports athletes: clutch state. Similarly to flow (the concept of "letting it happen"), the clutch state occurs when there is a perceived sense of control, enjoyment and absorption. However, the focus is very much deliberate (versus effortless) and the level of arousal is high (versus optimal). Where most people experiencing flow state feel energised afterwards, clutch states are associated with feelings of exhaustion due to the conscious effort required during high-stake performances. This distinction is crucial, as the clutch state is likely what most on-callers experience at their peak. In such cases, the need for structured downtime, rest, and recovery becomes paramount. However, while transitions between clutch and flow states are possible, one must ask: which state is more sustainable in the long run, and how can organisations create environments that support not just peak performance, but enduring well-being?
Conclusion
In reality, many factors hinder optimal performance during on-call. Teams are often understaffed, leading to more shifts than ideal, or the volume of incidents exceeds what one person can reasonably manage within a few days. The lines between on-call and other types of work are blurry, and so it becomes the employees’ responsibility to manage their time wisely and focus on one task at a time. Given these conditions, flow is unlikely to happen accidentally; it has to be the result of intentional and regular practice. The more psychic energy we invest in the future of life, the more we become part of it1. The more companies and employees define success during on-call and refine it through open, empowering discussions, the more individuals can gain a sense of control and actively invest in the process.
As we’ve seen through this essay, elements for (team) flow are already in place in the on-call world, it’s just a matter of refining them and equipping employees with self-reflective and restorative practices. Although it may be difficult and harder to measure, it’s time to look at the quality of the on-call experience, rather than at the quantitative aspects of it. Growing research sheds light on how to ignite team flow, making what once seemed out of reach more attainable, even in the midst of stress and urgency. Companies are not alone in this; coaching and other educational avenues are there to support them. It is important events that demand the best of us and call for perfecting the art of flow. It is time to raise our standards and answer this call with curiosity, creativity and well-being at the heart of it.
This article is written by Flow Coach Adina Budrigă
[1] Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement With Everyday Life.
[2] van den Hout, J. J. J., Davis, O. C., & Walrave, B. (2016). The Application of Team Flow Theory
[3] Spadaccini, Andrea. Being On-Call.
[4] Lunney, J., Lueder, S. Postmortem Culture: Learning from Failure.
[6] Ziebertz CM, Van Hooff MLM, Beckers DGJ, et al. The Relationship of On-Call Work with Fatigue, Work-Home Interference, and Perceived Performance Difficulties.
[7] Almarzouki, A. F. (2024). Impact of on-call shifts on working memory and the role of burnout, sleep, and mental well-being in trainee physicians.
[8] Hall, Sarah J, Ferguson, Sally A, Turner, Anne I, et al. The effect of working on-call on stress physiology and sleep: A systematic review.
[9]- van den Hout, J. J. J., Davis, O. C., & Weggeman, M. C. D. P. (2018). The Conceptualization of Team Flow.
[10] - van den Hout, J. J. J., & Davis, O. C. (2019). Team Flow : The psychology of optimal collaboration.
[11] Swann, C., Crust, L., Jackman, P., Vella, S. A., Allen, M. S., & Keegan, R. (2017). Psychological States Underlying Excellent Performance in Sport: Toward an Integrated Model of Flow and Clutch States.
[12] van den Hout, J. J. J., Davis, O. C., & Buseyne, S. (2024). How to spark team flow over time.
