5 ms·

One reason is that it’s a part time job to manage one and a full time job to manage 4. Generally people put a part time job on the back burner and focus on the

One reason is that it’s a part time job to manage one and a full time job to manage 4. Generally people put a part time job on the back burner and focus on the main full time job. Just speaking from experience.

spaetzleesser 4y ago
That’s true. That’s why is m against people with a 30% allocation on my team. Projekt Managers think you can just split a person’s work into parts but when somebody is allocated at 30% tk you, you actually get way less performance.
- johnchristopher 4y ago
  What about 50/50 in non overlapping skills/experience, eg: windows sysadmin and mobile app dev ?
  - ilc 4y ago
    50/50 is a lie. For the person working it, both sides often expect priority or "more" than 50%. When someone wants to 50/50 me, I tell them, 51/49 is fine. But there must be a clear priority when there's a conflict. Strangely, when I do this, the urge to 50/50 me usually goes away. I have nothing against working 2-4 projects. But there must be clear priorities, or I must be able to set them.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - spaetzleesser 4y ago
      My math is usually that splitting somebody into percentage allocations reduces their total productivity. So 50% + 50% results in 50% total productivity. 30+30+30=30. The only time this can work if the person knows their work really well and can do it in their sleep. Otherwise the context switches are way too much for most people.
      - leaflets2 4y ago
        What about 1 week or month, 1 project, 1 week or month another? 50+50% but each week it's clear what the priority is? And fewer task switches (But I guess most of the time it s better to focus on one & finish it first)
        spaetzleesser 4y ago
        That's probably better. But probably hard to implement.
idiocrat 4y ago
There could be a point of an economy of scale, which is not explicitly mentioned in the article. While I can "come by" managing just one person (cutting the managerial corners), for 4 persons I need to organize myself more efficient.
iLoveOncall 4y ago
> Generally people put a part time job on the back burner and focus on the main full time job. And if "people" was only the manager in question that would be somewhat okay, but usually it's the reporting chain above of that person that thinks the same too. I made the mistake of accepting to manage an intern (not mentor, manage) once, and I was expected to do 100% of my normal job on top of managing him. It takes an unbelievable amount of time.
- leaflets2 4y ago
  Where does most manage-the-intern time "disappear"?

spaetzleesser 4y ago

That’s true. That’s why is m against people with a 30% allocation on my team. Projekt Managers think you can just split a person’s work into parts but when somebody is allocated at 30% tk you, you actually get way less performance.

johnchristopher 4y ago
What about 50/50 in non overlapping skills/experience, eg: windows sysadmin and mobile app dev ?
- ilc 4y ago
  50/50 is a lie. For the person working it, both sides often expect priority or "more" than 50%. When someone wants to 50/50 me, I tell them, 51/49 is fine. But there must be a clear priority when there's a conflict. Strangely, when I do this, the urge to 50/50 me usually goes away. I have nothing against working 2-4 projects. But there must be clear priorities, or I must be able to set them.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - spaetzleesser 4y ago
    My math is usually that splitting somebody into percentage allocations reduces their total productivity. So 50% + 50% results in 50% total productivity. 30+30+30=30. The only time this can work if the person knows their work really well and can do it in their sleep. Otherwise the context switches are way too much for most people.
    - leaflets2 4y ago
      What about 1 week or month, 1 project, 1 week or month another? 50+50% but each week it's clear what the priority is? And fewer task switches (But I guess most of the time it s better to focus on one & finish it first)
      - spaetzleesser 4y ago
        That's probably better. But probably hard to implement.

idiocrat 4y ago

There could be a point of an economy of scale, which is not explicitly mentioned in the article. While I can "come by" managing just one person (cutting the managerial corners), for 4 persons I need to organize myself more efficient.

iLoveOncall 4y ago

> Generally people put a part time job on the back burner and focus on the main full time job. And if "people" was only the manager in question that would be somewhat okay, but usually it's the reporting chain above of that person that thinks the same too. I made the mistake of accepting to manage an intern (not mentor, manage) once, and I was expected to do 100% of my normal job on top of managing him. It takes an unbelievable amount of time.

leaflets2 4y ago
Where does most manage-the-intern time "disappear"?