5 ms·

> "List last week’s prioritized tasks, and if they were achieved." In theory this sounds good, but that is an emotionally charged and negative way of saying it

by cel1ne 10y ago

> "List last week’s prioritized tasks, and if they were achieved." In theory this sounds good, but that is an emotionally charged and negative way of saying it. "Tell me what you promised to do and if you actually did it." You would not use such a construct in a negotiation except to intimidate the other. In certain people, this destroys motivation, even when they didn't achieve a prioritised task because they found a better way or reprioritised for good reasons.

ianai 10y ago
Yes, definitely feels a little intimidating and static.
eric-hu 10y ago
That's one way to interpret it. Here's another: be honest and open about what you committed to. If it was done, great. If it wasn't, do you understand why? Did you underestimate? Did something block you? Was it deprioritized? How will this not happen again, or why is it now okay? If someone is less motivated by honest discussions about productivity, I'm not sure they can improve their productivity and collaborate with others long term.
- dkrich 10y ago
  I don't understand the point of this. So the goal is to get better at estimating? In my experience tasks vary in difficulty from one to the next, and it's very difficult if not completely useless to formulate an estimate for the time required to do it. The only time work estimates are useful, IMO, is when you are estimating an exact fixed amount of labor which you have completed under similar circumstances at least a few times. I think if you badger employees about their estimates and not getting things done that they promised, that will lead to those employees overestimating the amount of time required, just to be sure that they don't end up not meeting the estimated timeline. That seems like a net loss for productivity. Rather than encouraging people to stretch themselves and get more done, you're leading them to believe that it's much more important not to miss self-imposed deadlines.
  - repeek 10y ago
    Sounds great in theory, but most companies need to have some level of confidence of when things will get done and how much it will cost. Estimating is important because it gives management the ability to deploy resources strategically and manage expectations. Bad managers think estimates are a promise/guarantee. Assuming the estimates were arrived at with as much clarity as possible (planning poker), good managers understand that estimates are a tool to aid decision-making.
    - engi_nerd 10y ago
      To support your point: For many companies, having a defined degree of confidence in estimates is a requirement of doing business. Any DoD contract in excess of $25 million USD, for example, must be performed by a company with a DoD certified Earned Value Management plan. You had better get your estimate process right there, because you're held accountable for it.
      - dkrich 10y ago
        As a person who has worked for several years with two major government contractors, several agencies, and countless projects, this is humorous to me, because I have never, not once, seen a large project estimate end up anywhere close to reality. Typically the process is that the contractor has an internal pricing team that figures out how much to bid on a contract. After the contractor wins the bid (assuming fixed price), they then staff it with some combination of employees with various rates to meet the bid cost. Then those employees write up a detailed set of requirements (keep in mind that this occurs after the bid has been accepted), and then the project begins and things really get screwed up. Life happens. People leave the company. Clients are waaaaaaaaaay slower than anticipated taking care of required administrative work like approving user access and granting PIV cards. Clients change their mind or didn't account for several important considerations that may or may not involve huge amounts of work. So how do the companies remain profitable through all this? It's usually that as the due date moves closer and closer, employees are expected to just work more hours to account for the missed estimate. This may come off as cynical, but the truth is that there is not a soul on Earth who could accurately estimate how much time will be required on a multiyear contract given how many variables are involved. So, I'm back to my original point- estimates are largely worthless and a waste of time. Yes, they are a means to an end, but are in no way a reliable indicator as to how much time or effort is actually required to complete the work.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- nitwit005 10y ago
  Even for experienced people, being off by a factor of 2 or 3 appears to fairly normal. That means, the correct answer to "How will this not happen again?" is to say that it will happen again, and that that isn't preventable. At least, no one seems to have succeeded at preventing it. My experience has been that the only questions management should bother with are usually the issues that managers can actually fix. That tends to be a surprisingly limited set of things.
- cel1ne 10y ago
  > Here's another: be honest and open about what you committed to. That is my point. If you want openness from people the original phrasing might not be the best. Nailing them with questions won't help either. If a manager is not able to take into account human nature and it's quirks, they certainly can't improve anybody's productivity long term.
SmellTheGlove 10y ago
> In theory this sounds good It doesn't sound good to me, even in theory. If I'm becoming aware of what is or is not getting done on my teams via an email once weekly, I'm really not doing my job. I should have a general sense of where things are at a more granular level than that, and be able to synthesize that information through the regular communications of my teams so as to not impose administrative burden (which takes time away from their work). Assuming I'm doing that, I can be the one that writes about it if someone else really wants that from me. That's part of my managerial responsibility to keep shitwork away from my folks.
clifanatic 10y ago
> "Tell me what you promised to do and if you actually did it." More like, "Give me one good reason why I shouldn't fire you right here and right now. Ok, well then, give me another."

by cel1ne 10y ago

ianai 10y ago

Yes, definitely feels a little intimidating and static.

eric-hu 10y ago

That's one way to interpret it. Here's another: be honest and open about what you committed to. If it was done, great. If it wasn't, do you understand why? Did you underestimate? Did something block you? Was it deprioritized? How will this not happen again, or why is it now okay? If someone is less motivated by honest discussions about productivity, I'm not sure they can improve their productivity and collaborate with others long term.

dkrich 10y ago
I don't understand the point of this. So the goal is to get better at estimating? In my experience tasks vary in difficulty from one to the next, and it's very difficult if not completely useless to formulate an estimate for the time required to do it. The only time work estimates are useful, IMO, is when you are estimating an exact fixed amount of labor which you have completed under similar circumstances at least a few times. I think if you badger employees about their estimates and not getting things done that they promised, that will lead to those employees overestimating the amount of time required, just to be sure that they don't end up not meeting the estimated timeline. That seems like a net loss for productivity. Rather than encouraging people to stretch themselves and get more done, you're leading them to believe that it's much more important not to miss self-imposed deadlines.
- repeek 10y ago
  Sounds great in theory, but most companies need to have some level of confidence of when things will get done and how much it will cost. Estimating is important because it gives management the ability to deploy resources strategically and manage expectations. Bad managers think estimates are a promise/guarantee. Assuming the estimates were arrived at with as much clarity as possible (planning poker), good managers understand that estimates are a tool to aid decision-making.
  - engi_nerd 10y ago
    To support your point: For many companies, having a defined degree of confidence in estimates is a requirement of doing business. Any DoD contract in excess of $25 million USD, for example, must be performed by a company with a DoD certified Earned Value Management plan. You had better get your estimate process right there, because you're held accountable for it.
    - dkrich 10y ago
      As a person who has worked for several years with two major government contractors, several agencies, and countless projects, this is humorous to me, because I have never, not once, seen a large project estimate end up anywhere close to reality. Typically the process is that the contractor has an internal pricing team that figures out how much to bid on a contract. After the contractor wins the bid (assuming fixed price), they then staff it with some combination of employees with various rates to meet the bid cost. Then those employees write up a detailed set of requirements (keep in mind that this occurs after the bid has been accepted), and then the project begins and things really get screwed up. Life happens. People leave the company. Clients are waaaaaaaaaay slower than anticipated taking care of required administrative work like approving user access and granting PIV cards. Clients change their mind or didn't account for several important considerations that may or may not involve huge amounts of work. So how do the companies remain profitable through all this? It's usually that as the due date moves closer and closer, employees are expected to just work more hours to account for the missed estimate. This may come off as cynical, but the truth is that there is not a soul on Earth who could accurately estimate how much time will be required on a multiyear contract given how many variables are involved. So, I'm back to my original point- estimates are largely worthless and a waste of time. Yes, they are a means to an end, but are in no way a reliable indicator as to how much time or effort is actually required to complete the work.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
nitwit005 10y ago
Even for experienced people, being off by a factor of 2 or 3 appears to fairly normal. That means, the correct answer to "How will this not happen again?" is to say that it will happen again, and that that isn't preventable. At least, no one seems to have succeeded at preventing it. My experience has been that the only questions management should bother with are usually the issues that managers can actually fix. That tends to be a surprisingly limited set of things.
cel1ne 10y ago
> Here's another: be honest and open about what you committed to. That is my point. If you want openness from people the original phrasing might not be the best. Nailing them with questions won't help either. If a manager is not able to take into account human nature and it's quirks, they certainly can't improve anybody's productivity long term.

SmellTheGlove 10y ago

> In theory this sounds good It doesn't sound good to me, even in theory. If I'm becoming aware of what is or is not getting done on my teams via an email once weekly, I'm really not doing my job. I should have a general sense of where things are at a more granular level than that, and be able to synthesize that information through the regular communications of my teams so as to not impose administrative burden (which takes time away from their work). Assuming I'm doing that, I can be the one that writes about it if someone else really wants that from me. That's part of my managerial responsibility to keep shitwork away from my folks.

clifanatic 10y ago

> "Tell me what you promised to do and if you actually did it." More like, "Give me one good reason why I shouldn't fire you right here and right now. Ok, well then, give me another."