4 ms·

I've only been working professionally for 5 years and this is something I am only recently beginning to appreciate. Optimizing for efficiency makes you get a lo

I've only been working professionally for 5 years and this is something I am only recently beginning to appreciate. Optimizing for efficiency makes you get a lot of work done but it reduces your ability to think creatively which can potentially impact the quality of ones work.

jrs235 5y ago
But the MBAs have already done the [creative] thinking. They just want to throw the spec over the fence and have coders code it. /s
- loopz 5y ago
  Your job is to make their wishful thinking the thundering success they deserve. To counter the original point, I find removing obstacles and latency-inducing loops helpful, to start seeing what the work really should be. Gaining efficiency through simplifying is a good thing, and can be creative too. The goal is not efficiency though.
  - carbonguy 5y ago
    I think you're on to something important here - the word "efficiency" is used to describe optimization in two different mental regimes: one, "how to meet a given quality of work with the minimum of friction/wastage" vs two, "how to perform the maximal work within a fixed resource allocation." They sound similar, which is probably why we use the word "efficiency" to describe improvements in both regimes, but the fundamental constraint is different: in the first case, it's the standard of work that must be achieved; in the second, it's the resources allocated to the work. I'd summarize the first "do enough with enough" and the second as "do more with less." What you describe sounds like "doing enough with enough:" given the work to be done, how can we remove resource-draining obstacles, idle loops, etc. and identify "what the work really should be?" - is that a fair assessment or am I off the mark?
    - loopz 5y ago
      With both words, efficiency and effectiveness, intention is missing. I'd rather people come up with their own ideas.
  - bckr 5y ago
    > I find removing obstacles and latency-inducing loops helpful, to start seeing what the work really should be. Should MBA's be studying DevOps?
    - loopz 5y ago
      XOps. It helps to ask around.
      - bckr 5y ago
        Say more about XOps? From where I sit, DevOps is "about" treating software product more like modern manufacturing products && tightening the feedback loops between development and operations... How does that translate to, say, Graphic design, Finance, X where X==$operational_unit? > It helps to ask around It helps whom to ask whom about what?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
planet-and-halo 5y ago
This might even be rooted in human psychology. "The Master and His Emissary" and other books about neuroscience argue that we have brain functions specialized for focus and other brain functions specialized for context. Activating focus reduces contextual thinking.

jrs235 5y ago

But the MBAs have already done the [creative] thinking. They just want to throw the spec over the fence and have coders code it. /s

loopz 5y ago
Your job is to make their wishful thinking the thundering success they deserve. To counter the original point, I find removing obstacles and latency-inducing loops helpful, to start seeing what the work really should be. Gaining efficiency through simplifying is a good thing, and can be creative too. The goal is not efficiency though.
- carbonguy 5y ago
  I think you're on to something important here - the word "efficiency" is used to describe optimization in two different mental regimes: one, "how to meet a given quality of work with the minimum of friction/wastage" vs two, "how to perform the maximal work within a fixed resource allocation." They sound similar, which is probably why we use the word "efficiency" to describe improvements in both regimes, but the fundamental constraint is different: in the first case, it's the standard of work that must be achieved; in the second, it's the resources allocated to the work. I'd summarize the first "do enough with enough" and the second as "do more with less." What you describe sounds like "doing enough with enough:" given the work to be done, how can we remove resource-draining obstacles, idle loops, etc. and identify "what the work really should be?" - is that a fair assessment or am I off the mark?
  - loopz 5y ago
    With both words, efficiency and effectiveness, intention is missing. I'd rather people come up with their own ideas.
- bckr 5y ago
  > I find removing obstacles and latency-inducing loops helpful, to start seeing what the work really should be. Should MBA's be studying DevOps?
  - loopz 5y ago
    XOps. It helps to ask around.
    - bckr 5y ago
      Say more about XOps? From where I sit, DevOps is "about" treating software product more like modern manufacturing products && tightening the feedback loops between development and operations... How does that translate to, say, Graphic design, Finance, X where X==$operational_unit? > It helps to ask around It helps whom to ask whom about what?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

planet-and-halo 5y ago

This might even be rooted in human psychology. "The Master and His Emissary" and other books about neuroscience argue that we have brain functions specialized for focus and other brain functions specialized for context. Activating focus reduces contextual thinking.