4 ms·
This kind of reads like the idea that "High level people shouldn't be doing work that is beneath them". Which is rather offensive. Moreover, I'd guess the over
by rocqua 8y ago
This kind of reads like the idea that "High level people shouldn't be doing work that is beneath them". Which is rather offensive.
Moreover, I'd guess the overhead of communication probably means it is more efficient for a marketing director to make his own presentation and charts. After all, he is the only one that knows what he wants to present, and what data should be in the charts.
If I had to communicate that, I'd probably make a crude powerpoint and say "Like that!".
- AstralStorm 8y agoShouldn't be forced to do such job. The computer systems caused secretaries to get fired while managers get to do secretarial tasks of feeding computer systems with data... There are probably much better uses of actual managers. The thing is, managers employ person to person skills and unstructured data handling. Forcing the manager to structure their output so that the computer / bureaucracy can handle it is a waste of time. If you want this kind of accountability, hire an accountant or secretary. Welcome lean processes and reporting based on word and thin paper trails only for very important or regulatory matters. Or change the computer system to accept unstructured input.
- gowld 8y agoIt's not offensive to put people to work in a way that generates the best results for the team. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
- rocqua 8y agoTrue, but it is bad to say "I have a degree, therefore I feel that doing X is beneath me". Note that I distinguish that from "I cost the company a lot of money, so it would be more efficient to have someone else do X".
- analog31 8y agoIndeed, it has to be said much more diplomatically, and/or carried out more strategically. The CEO doesn't say "I am a CEO, so doing X is beneath me." He simply gets X done for him, and that's that.
- golergka 8y ago> Which is rather offensive. If something is offensive, it doesn't mean that it's not true. People differ in ability: some have valuable skills and others don't.
- TeMPOraL 8y agoIt's not even that. We're talking jobs, not people. It doesn't matter whether a low-skill job engages 100% of worker's skill or only 10% - the point is, someone doing a low-skill job can be a massive productivity multiplier for someone else doing a high-skill job.