7 Signs You're in Over Your Head
By Steve Tobak | January 21, 2011
Nobody wants to believe they’re the problem. Why that is, I don’t know. But it’s far and away the stickiest issue that plagues organizations big and small. That’s why it keeps coming up again and again here.
In last year’s most clicked post - 7 Signs You May Be a Bad Manager - we talked about how most bad managers aren’t consciously aware that they are bad managers. That was news to a lot of people.
It seems that, while we talk about denial all the time, we don’t really understand what it means: that, on some level, we are aware of our behavior and our issues; we’re just not consciously aware. That requires a measure of self-awareness few of us possess.
As I alluded to at the time, this phenomenon isn’t at all limited to bosses, but applies to executives, managers, employees too. What that means is that, no matter who you are or what you do, you can be in over your head and not realize it.
As we all know, realizing a problem is the first step to resolving it. But, for those of you who still aren’t convinced that knowing the truth about your level of competency is a good thing, here’s a different way to say it: If you bury your head in the sand, you’ll likely suffocate. How’s that for motivation?
So pay attention to these 7 Signs You’re in Over Your Head
1. You’re more anxious and stressed-out than usual. Why is that a sign? Because, on some level, you’re aware that you’re in over your head and the disconnect between that awareness and the lie you keep consciously telling yourself - and others, in all likelihood - is causing you great anxiety and stress.
2. Goals you thought were reasonable now seem insurmountable. Congratulations, you’ve fallen victim to one of the most common pitfalls in the working world: pedestal thinking. Don’t feel too bad, it’s just god’s sick little gift to overachievers. Just remember that the next time your ego wants to write a check that your capability can’t cash.
3. You’re feeling depressed when you should be feeling fine. You’ve been given a chance, an opportunity to prove yourself, maybe even a promotion. You should be on top of the world … but you’re not. Again, that’s the disconnect talking. And maybe, just maybe, you can’t help but wonder if you haven’t been given just enough rope to hang yourself with.
4. Your schedule is constantly slipping. Maybe your budget, headcount, and capital requirements, too. If it’s not one thing, it’s another. And management’s starting to get really tired of it. Every time they ask, “Is that going to do it,” you say “Absolutely.” But you have no idea if that’s true or not. Dangerous game to play.
5. I can do this has turned into I’m going to do this if it kills me. Well, it probably won’t kill you, but it might set your career back a bit or even get you fired. The point is that there are diminishing returns when it comes to being so driven that you push yourself to do things you’re either not ready for or are not capable of doing. And frankly, nobody wins when you do that. Nobody.
6. You find yourself working even when you’re not … and shouldn’t be. You find yourself thinking about work at all times of the day and night? While you’re eating, sleeping, on weekends, even during sex? Working longer and longer hours but coming home with less and less accomplished? Yup, that’s a sign alright. Been there many times.
7. You’re screwing up … and you’re not a screw up. I know it sounds sort of obvious, but I can remember times when I made excuses for errors in judgment that I probably wouldn’t have made if I wasn’t stretched so thin or pushing the envelope. Why did I do that? I guess I’m not the sort of guy who gives up easily. But again, there comes a point when that can actually work against you.
Once you’ve recognized that you’re in over your head, what do you do about it? In a nutshell, it’s always a good idea to be honest with yourself and face the fact that maybe you need to get some help, i.e. fess up to your boss, ask for more time and resources, that sort of thing.
If you’re a young up-and-comer who’s just pushing the envelope, i.e. no pain no gain, I’d give you a pass for sticking your neck out and taking risks, as long as you learn from the experience and don’t make it a regular thing.
If this is chronic with you, then there’s a distinct possibility that you’ve risen to your level of incompetence, i.e. the Peter Principle. In that case, you might want to read What’s the One Thing Limiting Your Success? and deal with it.
MY THOUGHTS
this can happen. absolutely. you're not good. you're very,very good. in fact, you're excellent. all you past performances can back that up. so, here you are. in a new post. a new assignment. and you just can't hack it. believe, the signs outlined in this article? these are killers. and the more you postpone getting help, the risk that you're setting yourself up for failure gets higher and higher.
Showing posts with label productivity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label productivity. Show all posts
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Things We Wish We Could Tell the Boss
7 Things We All Wish We Could Tell the Boss
http://www.bnet.com/photos/7-things-we-all-wish-we-could-tell-the-boss/490886?tag=trunk
By Dave Logan
I’ve visited dozens of companies in 2010 and keep hearing the same message: the person at the top is clueless and unwilling to change. As a result, employees spend absurd amounts of time managing around him (it’s usually a him). It’s not just the Emperor Has No Clothes. It’s that the Emperor Has No Clothes and Looks Funny Naked. But if you had the courage to have these conversations with the man in charge, you could transform the lackluster leader into a great one, and boost the company's bottom line in the process.
1. You're nothing like Lincoln, Churchill or Clinton.
Nothing is funnier, or more tragic, than a mediocre leader who thinks he’s Lincoln, or Churchill or Clinton. And nothing is a greater waste of time than when an “idiot boss” (thanks, Scott Adams) tries to fine-tune his style by reading about the Greats.
A much better use of time would be for someone with credibility to sit down with the CEO and say, “You’re like none of those people, but if you work really hard, you could become a great leader in your own right.”
The great leaders are all originals. Although many were amateur historians (or in Churchill’s case, professional), they didn’t become the people they were by copying behaviors from people in the past. They became great by finding a way to serve people in their time, and in the process, became leaders.
2. Guess what? YOU are the problem.
Imagine this conversation.
Him: Why isn't the company more innovative?
You : Because you, the CEO, drown us in initiatives, metrics, and plans, and so we don’t have any time.
Him: Why isn't the organization more successful?
You: Because the strategy you want us to pursue is inept, compared to what we could do if you got out of the way.
Him: Why isn't the company a great place to work?
You: Because you’re creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation.
The single question I’m asked more than any other is: “Can we use the principles of Tribal Leadership when the top person doesn’t get it but thinks he does?” The short-term answer is to create a pocket of tribal greatness, and let the results show that a new way of leading makes everyone win. The long-term answer is that the person at the top needs to get it, or get out.
3. You put a new thing on my 'to do' list. What are you taking off?
I often repeat a story from the darkest days of the U.S. automotive industry, when a major subcontractor to the Big Three held its managers accountable for well over 100 metrics. That story used to make people laugh. Over the last few years, the reaction has turned into, “so what do we do about that?”
Drucker was a fan of the idea of “purposeful abandonment”—determining which activities will be stopped. My friend David Allen, author of Getting Things Done, likes to say that a person’s success can be measured by looking at how long their “stop doing list” is. The same holds for companies. Most people, and most companies, don’t have a “stop doing list” at all.
CEOs should know that their followers measure them, in large part, by how many metrics and initiatives they purposefully abandon. In most cases, that’s zero.
4. If the employees don't understand the strategy, it's your fault.
Often in executive seminars I’ll go through the “must have” list for corporate competence, and then ask people which item on the list they are most concerned about. (One of the better lists is Jay Galbraith’s STAR model.) Almost always, number one is “strategy,” as in “do we have one?” and “ask 100 people and you’ll get 100 answers of what our strategy is.” I also hear, “the CEO thinks our strategy is the tag line from our ads.”
A strategy, by the way, is “the creation of a unique and valuable proposition” to the market, according to Michael Porter. If employees can’t say what that the unique value proposition is, the CEO has failed.
In most cases, the CEO would retort, “we have a strategy, they just aren’t listening to what it is.”
What’s the problem here?
It’s not about how the strategy is communicated, it’s about the listening that creates the strategy in first place. Anne Mulcahy tells the story of what happened when she assumed the role of president and COO of Xerox. It came down to listening to everyone: employees, customers, and suppliers. She didn’t check her brain at the door and merely combine what they said into the strategy. She checked it against everything she knew about the markets, and she also listened to advice from experts. The result from that long process was a strategy that was clear, concise, and that made people around Xerox say, “yes, that’s right!” If your company doesn’t have that kind of a strategy, the blame rests at the top.
5. You don't build loyalty by blaming employees.
Many CEOs try to send the message “you and I have a special relationship” by bad-mouthing other executives. The result? The message people hear is “I’ll throw anyone under the bus. The minute you’re out of favor, I’ll do the same to you.”
Great leaders throw themselves under the bus by taking responsibility for any failure in the company. When the company succeeds, it’s due to others.
6. Your staff will regard your tenure as the bad old days.
Most large companies remember a time when they had boundless energy and felt the potential of greatness knocking at the door. That was before the bullies, brats, and bureaucrats took over.
Most CEOs talk a lot about problems that they’ve solved. But the reality is that the overall vibrancy and vitality of the company is collapsing. People hunger for a leader who will really do things the right way. And until you learn that, you’re just another person steering the ship into the sand.
I should add that most CEOs are good people, wanting the best for their companies. So why does the Emperor Have No Clothes and Look Funny Naked?
It’s due to a variety of factors, including that organizations, by their design, limit or stop upward feedback. Most CEOs become increasingly isolated and cut off from the real issues and so their decisions become increasingly out of touch. Another reason is “CEO shuffle”—hiring from outside the company, based on competency and not shared values, so that the new person comes in with an agenda to change everything. Most successful CEOs in our study were home-grown and promoted from within.
7. Great leaders listen and you don’t.
Any questions?
Ever wanted to have this conversation and didn’t? I hope you’ll let me know, by email or in the comments below.
MY THOUGHTS
bosses! who is not having (or did not have) problems with a boss? one way or the other,at some point in time, we have whined and complained (and probably moved jobs) because we have an incompetent, dictatorial, unfeeling, inhuman, *&#$% boss. don't you get it? the problem is not the boss. it's you. first of all, if "the boss" is that insufferable what are you still doing there? if you have nowhere else to go, then don't you think you owe the hateful boss? he hasn't fired you, has he? even if no one else will hire you!!!
we dream (and probably having nightmares) about that time when we can tell our boss exactly what kind of boss he is. you think that's not possible? think again. it can happen. you can do it. but you have to play your cards right.
i once worked for a man, a brilliant, frustrating man that everyone hated. just the sound of his name made people want to crawl under the desk and never come out. he pushed and he pushed. with ideas that went completely way over your head.it was so frustrating the first thing i do when i get to work is print out a resignation letter with a new date.
guess what? if you ask me, the highlights of my career were those years i worked with the man. i did things i never thought possible. he inspired me to accomplish things that no one else can accomplish for him. he made me forget about titles and job descriptions. he showed me that i am limited only by what i think i can do.
how did it happen? i let him be my boss! obedience is the first key. he was the boss, not me. as soon as i accepted that, i saw him for what he is. a hard, no non-sense, whirlwind boss whose motivations are never questionable. someone to be respected. that allowed me to focus on my work(instead of wasting time thinking of ways to oust him).
that showed him i can be respected, too.as a professional and as a person. i didn't have to dream of telling him exactly what kind of boss he was. he asked. and he always valued my opinion.
http://www.bnet.com/photos/7-things-we-all-wish-we-could-tell-the-boss/490886?tag=trunk
By Dave Logan
I’ve visited dozens of companies in 2010 and keep hearing the same message: the person at the top is clueless and unwilling to change. As a result, employees spend absurd amounts of time managing around him (it’s usually a him). It’s not just the Emperor Has No Clothes. It’s that the Emperor Has No Clothes and Looks Funny Naked. But if you had the courage to have these conversations with the man in charge, you could transform the lackluster leader into a great one, and boost the company's bottom line in the process.
1. You're nothing like Lincoln, Churchill or Clinton.
Nothing is funnier, or more tragic, than a mediocre leader who thinks he’s Lincoln, or Churchill or Clinton. And nothing is a greater waste of time than when an “idiot boss” (thanks, Scott Adams) tries to fine-tune his style by reading about the Greats.
A much better use of time would be for someone with credibility to sit down with the CEO and say, “You’re like none of those people, but if you work really hard, you could become a great leader in your own right.”
The great leaders are all originals. Although many were amateur historians (or in Churchill’s case, professional), they didn’t become the people they were by copying behaviors from people in the past. They became great by finding a way to serve people in their time, and in the process, became leaders.
2. Guess what? YOU are the problem.
Imagine this conversation.
Him: Why isn't the company more innovative?
You : Because you, the CEO, drown us in initiatives, metrics, and plans, and so we don’t have any time.
Him: Why isn't the organization more successful?
You: Because the strategy you want us to pursue is inept, compared to what we could do if you got out of the way.
Him: Why isn't the company a great place to work?
You: Because you’re creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation.
The single question I’m asked more than any other is: “Can we use the principles of Tribal Leadership when the top person doesn’t get it but thinks he does?” The short-term answer is to create a pocket of tribal greatness, and let the results show that a new way of leading makes everyone win. The long-term answer is that the person at the top needs to get it, or get out.
3. You put a new thing on my 'to do' list. What are you taking off?
I often repeat a story from the darkest days of the U.S. automotive industry, when a major subcontractor to the Big Three held its managers accountable for well over 100 metrics. That story used to make people laugh. Over the last few years, the reaction has turned into, “so what do we do about that?”
Drucker was a fan of the idea of “purposeful abandonment”—determining which activities will be stopped. My friend David Allen, author of Getting Things Done, likes to say that a person’s success can be measured by looking at how long their “stop doing list” is. The same holds for companies. Most people, and most companies, don’t have a “stop doing list” at all.
CEOs should know that their followers measure them, in large part, by how many metrics and initiatives they purposefully abandon. In most cases, that’s zero.
4. If the employees don't understand the strategy, it's your fault.
Often in executive seminars I’ll go through the “must have” list for corporate competence, and then ask people which item on the list they are most concerned about. (One of the better lists is Jay Galbraith’s STAR model.) Almost always, number one is “strategy,” as in “do we have one?” and “ask 100 people and you’ll get 100 answers of what our strategy is.” I also hear, “the CEO thinks our strategy is the tag line from our ads.”
A strategy, by the way, is “the creation of a unique and valuable proposition” to the market, according to Michael Porter. If employees can’t say what that the unique value proposition is, the CEO has failed.
In most cases, the CEO would retort, “we have a strategy, they just aren’t listening to what it is.”
What’s the problem here?
It’s not about how the strategy is communicated, it’s about the listening that creates the strategy in first place. Anne Mulcahy tells the story of what happened when she assumed the role of president and COO of Xerox. It came down to listening to everyone: employees, customers, and suppliers. She didn’t check her brain at the door and merely combine what they said into the strategy. She checked it against everything she knew about the markets, and she also listened to advice from experts. The result from that long process was a strategy that was clear, concise, and that made people around Xerox say, “yes, that’s right!” If your company doesn’t have that kind of a strategy, the blame rests at the top.
5. You don't build loyalty by blaming employees.
Many CEOs try to send the message “you and I have a special relationship” by bad-mouthing other executives. The result? The message people hear is “I’ll throw anyone under the bus. The minute you’re out of favor, I’ll do the same to you.”
Great leaders throw themselves under the bus by taking responsibility for any failure in the company. When the company succeeds, it’s due to others.
6. Your staff will regard your tenure as the bad old days.
Most large companies remember a time when they had boundless energy and felt the potential of greatness knocking at the door. That was before the bullies, brats, and bureaucrats took over.
Most CEOs talk a lot about problems that they’ve solved. But the reality is that the overall vibrancy and vitality of the company is collapsing. People hunger for a leader who will really do things the right way. And until you learn that, you’re just another person steering the ship into the sand.
I should add that most CEOs are good people, wanting the best for their companies. So why does the Emperor Have No Clothes and Look Funny Naked?
It’s due to a variety of factors, including that organizations, by their design, limit or stop upward feedback. Most CEOs become increasingly isolated and cut off from the real issues and so their decisions become increasingly out of touch. Another reason is “CEO shuffle”—hiring from outside the company, based on competency and not shared values, so that the new person comes in with an agenda to change everything. Most successful CEOs in our study were home-grown and promoted from within.
7. Great leaders listen and you don’t.
Any questions?
Ever wanted to have this conversation and didn’t? I hope you’ll let me know, by email or in the comments below.
MY THOUGHTS
bosses! who is not having (or did not have) problems with a boss? one way or the other,at some point in time, we have whined and complained (and probably moved jobs) because we have an incompetent, dictatorial, unfeeling, inhuman, *&#$% boss. don't you get it? the problem is not the boss. it's you. first of all, if "the boss" is that insufferable what are you still doing there? if you have nowhere else to go, then don't you think you owe the hateful boss? he hasn't fired you, has he? even if no one else will hire you!!!
we dream (and probably having nightmares) about that time when we can tell our boss exactly what kind of boss he is. you think that's not possible? think again. it can happen. you can do it. but you have to play your cards right.
i once worked for a man, a brilliant, frustrating man that everyone hated. just the sound of his name made people want to crawl under the desk and never come out. he pushed and he pushed. with ideas that went completely way over your head.it was so frustrating the first thing i do when i get to work is print out a resignation letter with a new date.
guess what? if you ask me, the highlights of my career were those years i worked with the man. i did things i never thought possible. he inspired me to accomplish things that no one else can accomplish for him. he made me forget about titles and job descriptions. he showed me that i am limited only by what i think i can do.
how did it happen? i let him be my boss! obedience is the first key. he was the boss, not me. as soon as i accepted that, i saw him for what he is. a hard, no non-sense, whirlwind boss whose motivations are never questionable. someone to be respected. that allowed me to focus on my work(instead of wasting time thinking of ways to oust him).
that showed him i can be respected, too.as a professional and as a person. i didn't have to dream of telling him exactly what kind of boss he was. he asked. and he always valued my opinion.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Want to Avoid Workplace stressand be more productive? Stop Working
How to Be Productive: Stop Working
By Margaret Heffernan | August 10, 2010
Industrial companies put a lot of effort into “asset integrity” — which really just means protecting critical plants and machinery from damage and wear and tear. At companies like BP, it’s clearly more of an aspiration than a reality, but anyone trained in a manufacturing environment learns that asset integrity is a top priority. But what about service industries — companies where the only assets are the brains of the people who work there? Shouldn’t they worry about asset integrity, too? Astonishingly, most of them don’t. Instead, financial services, consulting, the law and even the medical profession perpetuate working hours where all-nighters are heroic, driving with jet lag is the norm and anyone who actually has lunch risks becoming lunch.
But, they argue, we’re in the midst of an economic downturn, the worst recession in our lifetimes. Shouldn’t we all be working as hard as we can? Who has the luxury of time? What do you mean weekends aren’t for working?
Well, for the last 100 years, every productivity study in every industry has come to the same conclusion: after about 40 hours in a week, the quality of your work starts to degrade. You make mistakes. That’s why working 60 hours may not save you time or money: you’ll spend too much of that time fixing the mistakes you shouldn’t have made in the meantime. That’s why software companies that limit work to 35 hours a week need to employ fewer QA engineers: there isn’t as much mess to clean up.
In a knowledge economy, where thinking and creativity are the raw materials from which products and profit flow, brains are assets. They need to be cherished, nurtured and protected, not abused. Leaders need to take seriously a century’s evidence that 1) overwork doesn’t make us productive, it makes us stupid, 2) looking away from a problem is often the best way to solve it, and 3) burnout is what happens when people are asked to work in ways that obliterate all other parts of their lives.
Also: we need to hammer the last nail into the coffin of multi-tasking. No, you can’t safely drive and hold conference calls, nor can you text while driving. And checking emails while in meetings means you may as well not be there. What modern businesses need isn’t distracted Blackberry addicts but human beings who haven’t forgotten the gifts of focus, concentration and mindfulness.
When the cognitive scientist Dan Simons looked at the vast mountain of evidence that demonstrates the futility of multitasking, he was inevitably asked whether there were anything we could do to enlarge the capacity of our minds. The answer was an emphatic “no.” There are hard limits to what our brains will do, and no amount of Baby Mozarts or Brain Trainers will alter that. Practice, Simons says, will improve specific skills but not general abilities. Doing Sudoko will make you better at Sudoko; it won’t raise your GMAT scores.
Is there anything that truly enhances cognition? Yes, says Simons: exercise. Experiments by his colleague Arthur Kramer showed that walking for a few hours a week led to large improvements on cognitive tasks. Stretching and toning exercises had no cognitive benefits, but aerobic exercise, which increases blood flow to the brain, did. Seniors who walked for just 45 minutes a day for three days a week showed better preservation of their brains in MRI scans. Exercise, Simons concludes, improves cognition broadly by increasing the fitness of your brain.
Care about asset integrity? Get out of the office and go for a walk. And make sure the people who work for you do, too.
MY THOUGHTS
the short but brisk walking helps. i walk around the block sometimes if i need to work well into the night. clears the brain, relaxes the muscles and makes me more productive.
By Margaret Heffernan | August 10, 2010
Industrial companies put a lot of effort into “asset integrity” — which really just means protecting critical plants and machinery from damage and wear and tear. At companies like BP, it’s clearly more of an aspiration than a reality, but anyone trained in a manufacturing environment learns that asset integrity is a top priority. But what about service industries — companies where the only assets are the brains of the people who work there? Shouldn’t they worry about asset integrity, too? Astonishingly, most of them don’t. Instead, financial services, consulting, the law and even the medical profession perpetuate working hours where all-nighters are heroic, driving with jet lag is the norm and anyone who actually has lunch risks becoming lunch.
But, they argue, we’re in the midst of an economic downturn, the worst recession in our lifetimes. Shouldn’t we all be working as hard as we can? Who has the luxury of time? What do you mean weekends aren’t for working?
Well, for the last 100 years, every productivity study in every industry has come to the same conclusion: after about 40 hours in a week, the quality of your work starts to degrade. You make mistakes. That’s why working 60 hours may not save you time or money: you’ll spend too much of that time fixing the mistakes you shouldn’t have made in the meantime. That’s why software companies that limit work to 35 hours a week need to employ fewer QA engineers: there isn’t as much mess to clean up.
In a knowledge economy, where thinking and creativity are the raw materials from which products and profit flow, brains are assets. They need to be cherished, nurtured and protected, not abused. Leaders need to take seriously a century’s evidence that 1) overwork doesn’t make us productive, it makes us stupid, 2) looking away from a problem is often the best way to solve it, and 3) burnout is what happens when people are asked to work in ways that obliterate all other parts of their lives.
Also: we need to hammer the last nail into the coffin of multi-tasking. No, you can’t safely drive and hold conference calls, nor can you text while driving. And checking emails while in meetings means you may as well not be there. What modern businesses need isn’t distracted Blackberry addicts but human beings who haven’t forgotten the gifts of focus, concentration and mindfulness.
When the cognitive scientist Dan Simons looked at the vast mountain of evidence that demonstrates the futility of multitasking, he was inevitably asked whether there were anything we could do to enlarge the capacity of our minds. The answer was an emphatic “no.” There are hard limits to what our brains will do, and no amount of Baby Mozarts or Brain Trainers will alter that. Practice, Simons says, will improve specific skills but not general abilities. Doing Sudoko will make you better at Sudoko; it won’t raise your GMAT scores.
Is there anything that truly enhances cognition? Yes, says Simons: exercise. Experiments by his colleague Arthur Kramer showed that walking for a few hours a week led to large improvements on cognitive tasks. Stretching and toning exercises had no cognitive benefits, but aerobic exercise, which increases blood flow to the brain, did. Seniors who walked for just 45 minutes a day for three days a week showed better preservation of their brains in MRI scans. Exercise, Simons concludes, improves cognition broadly by increasing the fitness of your brain.
Care about asset integrity? Get out of the office and go for a walk. And make sure the people who work for you do, too.
MY THOUGHTS
the short but brisk walking helps. i walk around the block sometimes if i need to work well into the night. clears the brain, relaxes the muscles and makes me more productive.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Everything You Know About Productivity is Wrong
Everything You Know About Productivity is Wrong
By Jessica Stillman | February 17, 20
Want to get more done at work? You need to buckle down, work consistently and hard for longer hours and quit procrastinating, right? Only if you work on a factory floor, counters blog Chief Happiness Officer from author and consultant Alexander Kjerulf. And as you’re reading a blog right now, you probably don’t work in an industrial job.
“For knowledge workers,” asserts Kjerulf, the old ideas about productivity “are not only wrong, they’re actively harmful.”
Instead, he suggests five new rules of productivity:
Your productivity will vary wildly from day to day. This is normal. In an industrial setting, you know that if the plant operates for X hours tomorrow you’ll produce Y widgets. For knowledge workers, you can’t possibly know in advance whether tomorrow will be a day where you reach a brilliant insight that saves you and your team weeks of work, or the day where you spend eight hours gazing dejectedly into your screen. This variation is normal -– if a little frustrating. You shouldn’t judge
your productivity by the output on any given day but rather by your average productivity over many days.
Working more hours means getting less done. A client asked me to conduct a study on the effects of work hours on productivity and errors, my findings were quite simply that… productivity decreased by half after the eighth hour of work. This may be counter-intuitive but it’s important to grasp: for knowledge workers there is no simple relationship between hours worked and output!
Working harder means getting less done. In an industrial environment, you can most often work harder and get more done. For knowledge workers, the opposite is true. You can’t force creativity, eloquence, good writing, clear thinking or fast learning -– in fact, working harder tends to create the opposite effect and you achieve much less.
Procrastination can be good for you. Sometimes you’re in the mood for task X and doing X is ridiculously easy and a lot of fun. Sometimes doing X feels worse than walking barefoot over burning-hot, acid-covered, broken glass and forcing yourself to do it anyway is a frustrating exercise in futility. Sometimes procrastinating is exactly the right thing to do at a particular moment.
Happiness is the ultimate productivity enhancer. The single most efficient way to increase your productivity is to be happy at work. No system, tool or methodology in the world can beat the productivity boost you get from really, really enjoying your work.
For me, selling accomplishment without sweat and pain is a bit like selling snake oil. Writing, creativity and learning sometimes do involve beating your head (metaphorically) against the screen for hours, and every burst of inspiration is backed up by hours of donkey work. Still, I agree with Kjerulf’s point that outright misery is counter-productive and that allowing for humans to actually be human (quirky, variable, susceptible to exhaustion and inspiration) is essentially productive. It’s all a matter of balance. Do you agree?
MY THOUGHTS
"it's all a matter of balance". and this balance has to flow from the top. how can people below balance things when the demands given to top management are unrealistic. naturally, the domino effect would be unrealistic demands (and work hours) for people way down below. this is the biggest challenge for middle-management though. you don't really have control (not very much) on the supposedly strategic goals. you can influence it. but at the end of the day, your job is to implement what has been decided upon. so, if the the demands are unrealistic from way up, middle managers task is to ensure that demands are less unrealistic for the staff. otherwise, you're bound to lose people. and then top management will get your hide. and so, the unrealistic demand will be on your shoulders. and dno't say you don;t have a choice. you do.
By Jessica Stillman | February 17, 20
Want to get more done at work? You need to buckle down, work consistently and hard for longer hours and quit procrastinating, right? Only if you work on a factory floor, counters blog Chief Happiness Officer from author and consultant Alexander Kjerulf. And as you’re reading a blog right now, you probably don’t work in an industrial job.
“For knowledge workers,” asserts Kjerulf, the old ideas about productivity “are not only wrong, they’re actively harmful.”
Instead, he suggests five new rules of productivity:
Your productivity will vary wildly from day to day. This is normal. In an industrial setting, you know that if the plant operates for X hours tomorrow you’ll produce Y widgets. For knowledge workers, you can’t possibly know in advance whether tomorrow will be a day where you reach a brilliant insight that saves you and your team weeks of work, or the day where you spend eight hours gazing dejectedly into your screen. This variation is normal -– if a little frustrating. You shouldn’t judge
your productivity by the output on any given day but rather by your average productivity over many days.
Working more hours means getting less done. A client asked me to conduct a study on the effects of work hours on productivity and errors, my findings were quite simply that… productivity decreased by half after the eighth hour of work. This may be counter-intuitive but it’s important to grasp: for knowledge workers there is no simple relationship between hours worked and output!
Working harder means getting less done. In an industrial environment, you can most often work harder and get more done. For knowledge workers, the opposite is true. You can’t force creativity, eloquence, good writing, clear thinking or fast learning -– in fact, working harder tends to create the opposite effect and you achieve much less.
Procrastination can be good for you. Sometimes you’re in the mood for task X and doing X is ridiculously easy and a lot of fun. Sometimes doing X feels worse than walking barefoot over burning-hot, acid-covered, broken glass and forcing yourself to do it anyway is a frustrating exercise in futility. Sometimes procrastinating is exactly the right thing to do at a particular moment.
Happiness is the ultimate productivity enhancer. The single most efficient way to increase your productivity is to be happy at work. No system, tool or methodology in the world can beat the productivity boost you get from really, really enjoying your work.
For me, selling accomplishment without sweat and pain is a bit like selling snake oil. Writing, creativity and learning sometimes do involve beating your head (metaphorically) against the screen for hours, and every burst of inspiration is backed up by hours of donkey work. Still, I agree with Kjerulf’s point that outright misery is counter-productive and that allowing for humans to actually be human (quirky, variable, susceptible to exhaustion and inspiration) is essentially productive. It’s all a matter of balance. Do you agree?
MY THOUGHTS
"it's all a matter of balance". and this balance has to flow from the top. how can people below balance things when the demands given to top management are unrealistic. naturally, the domino effect would be unrealistic demands (and work hours) for people way down below. this is the biggest challenge for middle-management though. you don't really have control (not very much) on the supposedly strategic goals. you can influence it. but at the end of the day, your job is to implement what has been decided upon. so, if the the demands are unrealistic from way up, middle managers task is to ensure that demands are less unrealistic for the staff. otherwise, you're bound to lose people. and then top management will get your hide. and so, the unrealistic demand will be on your shoulders. and dno't say you don;t have a choice. you do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)