3 ms·
To share a contrarian view, what I have always observed is that if an organization has an ingrained culture of 80-20, then by the time something percolates 3-4
by sfifs 5y ago
To share a contrarian view, what I have always observed is that if an organization has an ingrained culture of 80-20, then by the time something percolates 3-4 hand offs, the org half-asses the execution and more often than not fails. Organizations that can execute even somewhat more consistently instead run rings around and completely destroy the 80-20 organization over time and people lose their jobs.
The secret is to figure out from an organization standpoint what is really a "good enough to succeed" end-deliverable or end-execution and organize to deliver that "good enough" thing consistently with perfectionism. Paired with this , there needs to be a process which continuously stretches what it means to be "good enough" over time with productivity and feature enhancement investments.
- rsanek 5y agoHow would 90-10 work vs. 80-20 -- even less work for 10% more gain? Perhaps you could have 90-25 or 90-30 but it seems to me like 90-10 is impossible in comparison to 80-20 unless the 10 is not a subset of the 20.
- sfifs 5y agoyeah - you're right, the analogy doesn't really convey the point i'm trying to bring across. I'll edit it :-)
- hinkley 5y agoPower laws and fractions man, they'll get you every time. (I'm actually pitching the reverse situation at work. People keep chasing big wins to improve our system and then taking forever to deliver half of what they suggested at the start. Especially where performance is concerned. Meanwhile I'm knocking out little gains that are 20% of what they're chasing but doing it every fortnight to a month. Six months of 2% a week is 40% overall, and that would beat anything these jokers have delivered in four years.)