3 ms·
> I don't know where you are pulling those numbers from, but you are assuming that 6% magically comes out from the 'unproductive' time without factoring in the
by throwaway2016a 9y ago
> I don't know where you are pulling those numbers from, but you are assuming that 6% magically comes out from the 'unproductive' time without factoring in the take home homework and other things that blow up the 2.5-hour mark.
I am pulling that number for 7 years of management experience and talking with other people with similar experience.
And I don't know for sure it will come from unproductive time but I feel comfortable saying that if the teacher is any good they will be very engaged during that 2.5 hours because it is so different than what they do day to day.
But my hunch is it will come from the unproductive time. Studies have shows that shrinking the work week does not mean employees do less work. They do the same amount of work more efficiently.[1]
People will stretch to fill the allotted time. And if they know that they don't have as much time they will work to compensate.
> The 2.5 hours will also scale up with the number of participants, 20 employees who are committing 2.5 each week (at very, very minimum) is a loss of 50 hours per week.
The company is getting concrete value from that. Having cross discipline knowledge allows teams to communicate more effectively, communicate with customers better, and appreciate other job functions more. Never-mind as another person wrote they might be able to automate the tedious parts of their job using scripts they learned how to write. But assuming for a second you are right and the ROI is negative. The ROI of having them browsing Facebook during that time is even more negative.
> I can go even further and add people who did not attend the workshop but felt like they are now entitled to a 2.5-hour break of some sort (and rightfully so).
Absolutely not true at all. These people are not on a break. They are learning. It is work. A different kind of work than they do day in and day out sure but still work. Not only that but they are getting a free (to them) education. Which has a predictable value on the market (look at the cost of a code bootcamp or college credit)
I'm not following the logic: someone is getting training so I deserve to work less? If I was in that scenario I wouldn't demand a 2.5 break. I'd demand 2.5 of training because I know how valuable that is.
I have a word for people who slack off for two hours while their peers are hard at work learning a valuable new skill: fired.
I have never heard of anyone putting so little value on training. You talk like they are playing foosball for 2.5 hours.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/business/international/in-sweden-an-experiment-turns-shorter-workdays-into-bigger-gains.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/business/international/in...
- th4dv 9y ago> But my hunch is it will come from the unproductive time. Studies have shows that shrinking the work week does not mean employees do less work. They do the same amount of work more efficiently.[1] And yet, you want to fire people who let their brains relax for a couple of hours. > You talk like they are playing foosball for 2.5 hours Not a big difference. A lot of those people will forget most of the stuff they "learned" in a few months time.
- throwaway2016a 9y ago> And yet, you want to fire people who let their brains relax for a couple of hours. Not at all. I did not mean to say that if that's what it came out as. My intent was I would fire someone who intentionally works less because they feel they are entitled to because of something another employee is doing. It's also how they do it. If they come to me and say "I don't think this is fair... here's what I think we should do" I would never punish them. Punishing people for expressing a concern to management is a terrible idea. But if they just start doing it because they decided that's what is fair... all the sudden they disappear for hours on end... that person is not a team player. I would never fire someone for taking a break unless it became a problem with the work quality. Heck... one of my team just went and took a nap in the break room for an hour and I'm completely OK with that. He's probably exhausted (he has a kid at home) and will come back more productive. Context matters. > Not a big difference. A lot of those people will forget most of the stuff they "learned" in a few months time. They might forget the technical details but they will retain some of the vocabulary and now know what the developers are talking about. But if even 5% of them is able to save or make their department money because of what they learned in the class it's probably worth it. You don't need 100% success rate to see net positive returns.