Comments on: Planning Managerial Capacity http://timebackmanagement.com/blog/planning-managerial-capacity/ Working At The Intersection of Personal Productivity and Lean Manufacturing Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:11:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: The problem with priorities. « TimeBack Management http://timebackmanagement.com/blog/planning-managerial-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-595 The problem with priorities. « TimeBack Management Tue, 06 Jul 2010 10:02:52 +0000 #comment-595 [...] written before about the necessity of understanding your “production capacity.” If you had infinite [...] [...] written before about the necessity of understanding your “production capacity.” If you had infinite [...]

]]> By: suplementy http://timebackmanagement.com/blog/planning-managerial-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-185 suplementy Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-185 Hi. I like your blog. well done! Hi. I like your blog. well done!

]]> By: Marc Hersch http://timebackmanagement.com/blog/planning-managerial-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-189 Marc Hersch Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-189 I like the concepts you are kicking around in this entry. The idea of what constitutes "work" is problematic. For example, I have consulted to numerous software development companies. The common sense notion of "work" was time spent at a computer console generating lines of code. Careful observation revealed that the lines of code typed typed at the keyboard where actually the product of dialog and gestation that occurred during "non-working" activity. The upshot was that the inefficiencies of idle conversation, skylarking, and down-time, were the essential well-springs of productivity and innovation. In my experience, this phenomenon applies to production lines as well and the back rooms of retail stores as well. So what is "work" and what is "not work"? Once an enterprise understands the nature of the whole person in the context of the whole of the system of people, it will create a system that embraces such inefficiencies. I like the concepts you are kicking around in this entry.

The idea of what constitutes “work” is problematic. For example, I have consulted to numerous software development companies. The common sense notion of “work” was time spent at a computer console generating lines of code.

Careful observation revealed that the lines of code typed typed at the keyboard where actually the product of dialog and gestation that occurred during “non-working” activity. The upshot was that the inefficiencies of idle conversation, skylarking, and down-time, were the essential well-springs of productivity and innovation. In my experience, this phenomenon applies to production lines as well and the back rooms of retail stores as well.

So what is “work” and what is “not work”? Once an enterprise understands the nature of the whole person in the context of the whole of the system of people, it will create a system that embraces such inefficiencies.

]]>