…for people that don’t (necessarily) care about careers!
As someone who has spent his entire working life since I left university doing things that are very hard to describe without saying “it’s sort of a combination of….”, I’ve always struggled a bit with “career planning” and the inevitable development discussions with my various managers – and they’ve probably struggled just as much with the conversations as I have.
The truth is that the roles I find interesting and challenging very often don’t exist but have be made by taking a role that does exist and then adding my own twist to it. Which means that discussions about developments are extremely difficult because there will almost always be elements of any standard role that I either don’t much care for or aren’t particularly qualified to do. I’ve never really thought of my work as a “career” but more as a series of assignment chosen based on what is available, what is interesting and what is challenging at any given moment – i.e. the “logical next step”. There was no “plan” to start out with and there still (mostly) isn’t now 10-12 years later.
Fortunately then to help alleviate this situation one day a few years ago inspiration struck and I came up with a model that I think better suits me and hopefully also many others with similar profiles. It’s basically just a two-axis grid which shows function or job type on one axis and level/type of involvement on the other. I used:
as my dimensions, but it could just as well be:
or something else that suits your context.
You then plot roughly where you see yourself being right now and then where you want to go. Not exactly rocket science, but very useful as a primer for discussions, because:
This model takes something that is absolute (what do you want to do?) and makes it relative (what do you want to do more of/less of compared to now?) and that makes a big difference because suddenly you can think of individual tasks or assignments rather than positions. It’s also a big difference for “the other side” (i.e. the manager) as you can spend less time discussing positions that may or may not exist let alone be available to fill, but instead give you as a manager an insight into what your team wants to do. This you can then use to “shuffle the deck” in the best possible way and try to give people tasks that they find challenging and inspiring, which in turn should improve development, satisfaction and retention all round.
It’s probably not a silver bullet for all situations, but use it wisely and it should make some of those hard discussions a bit easier. Feel free to leave a comment if you try it 😀
(…with all due apologies to Shakespeare and Hamlet)
Have been involved in a few of these discussions lately and many people seem to present the opinion that centralisation is the best, if not only, way to achieve order, efficiency and effectiveness. Consequently, if you are against centralisation you must by definition (almost at least…) be an anarchist or even a saboteur – because who else would be against efficiency and effectiveness?
However, in my experience (and at least at the process level where I do most of my work) the truth isn’t quite so black and white. My theory is that there is a rough normal distribution of a company’s processes, where both tails should definitely be either central or decentral, but also the majority is somewhere in the middle. In this middle band, you can pursue both strategies with almost equal chance of success, as long as you actually follow through on the decision. By ‘follow through’ I mean that you deal with the inevitable downsides of your decision, meaning:
- Want to do central data creation and maintenance with a CoE-type setup? Well, you get central knowledge and you get the opportunity to leverage scale and over time build a real center of excellence to improve your business,. However, do your current processes support getting information from the people ‘on the coal face’ to the central team that executes changes – and do people feel a sense of shared responsibility and urgency? If you haven’t specifically addressed this and taken steps to analyse, influence and monitor, then the answer is likely to be a no.
- Want to do decentral invoice approval? Great, you get a chance to promote accountability in the organisation and a very good chance to influence unfortunate spending habits where it really makes a difference (with the individual and/or department) – but you need to deal with training, turnover, more training, continuous policy enforcement, even more training for new joiners and so on.
So, the discussion on centralisation is now a strategy vs. execution discussion, where it isn’t what you decide that wins, but instead what you actually act on afterwards that matters. And, as Peter Drucker observed; “Culture eats strategy for breakfast!”, meaning that to strategise is comparatively easy, whereas influencing habits is usually very hard.
So, the next time you are in a room with someone discussing the benefits of centralisation, start probing them on whether they are aware of the consequences of the decision and if they are ready to follow through when it matters…
Inspired by a couple of recent events, I am often reminded of this one:
Sometimes also paraphrased as the simple rule: Always think “Cock-up” before “Conspiracy”…
Below are some of my tips for personal productivity – otherwise known as “how to survive the daily onslaught of emails, meetings etc. that you will encounter in just about any white-collar job today” 😉
Some general principles that I try to stick to:
- Minimise paper
I tend to get lost in stacks of paper, so one of the main things I’ve done to improve my productivity has been to get rid of paper as much as possible. Of course I still use paper printouts for proofreading, sketching, short-term todo-lists and so on, but I then as quickly as possible convert to a digital format and discard the paper copy.
- Take control of your calendar – even if you can’t control everything about it.
I am not a morning person – never have been and probably never will be – and the only thing that consistently gets me to the office before 8.30 is jetlag 😀 A while ago I started booking “me-time” between 9 and 11 every day, because even though I am a slow starter, once I get to the office and get started, mornings are actually my most productive office hours. The main benefit is of course that I can get more work done, but actually a more surprising benefit is that I work less in the evening that I did before, because I know that I have undisturbed time the next morning to actually work on issues instead of heading straight into meetings when I walk through the door.
Corollary 1) Many people claim that they can not/should not block time like this. To this my response is that to most people booking meetings they only need a free slot, but whether it is at 9.00 am or 2.00 pm rarely matters. I just take some initiative to show people where it is convenient for me to have meetings.
Corollary 2) Many people also claim that they can’t control their calendar themselves. I am definitely one of them, but even if I can’t control someone more senior putting in an unexpected appointment, I can still reduce the likelihood of it interrupting my most productive hours of the day.
- Understand procrastination: In my world, there are two types of procrastination – productive and unproductive. The productive procrastination means I am working on something meaningful – just not what is most important at the moment – whereas the unproductive procrastination means that I am not working on anything productive at all but instead watching TV or surfing online. Understanding this distinction actually made me more productive because in theory both of these are bad, but in practice I’ve found that the productive procrastination can be surprisingly productive 🙂
- Accept that you are less important than you think: The main result of this is that you don’t have to attend nearly as many meetings as you think 🙂
Disclaimer: Personal productivity is, well, personal! I can’t claim that these tips will work for everyone and their different jobs/bosses/coworkers, but I generally get positive faces when I explain these so they can’t be completely specific to me.
Addendum: How to process emails?
Email is often presented as the scourge of modern office life. It probably is to some degree, but to be honest I like email because unlike phone calls, meetings and instant messages it is an asynchronous method of communication – meaning I can deal with it whenever it suits me 🙂
Handling email I split into two. For managing “on-going” emails, i.e. what comes in during the day, I generally stick to the “Do – Defer – Delegate – Delete” principle where you action an email when you open it the first time. I can’t stick to this 100%, but I try and it does work. For those that don’t know this then briefly: “Do” means doing whatever the email is asking. “Defer” means that you leave it to later for follow-up, “Delegate” means give it to someone else and “Delete” means get rid of it immediately. The key here is to do one of the four things the first time you open the message so you don’t have to waste time coming back to the same email over and over again.
For cleaning up a backlog of email, such as when I return from a vacation I use the following method to clean up the inbox and eliminate as much noise as possible to find the few things in the pile I really need to worry about:
- 1) Sort inbox by sender: First step is to go through and remove anything I don’t need or can process quickly, such as newsletters (internal/external), various project status emails, automated notifications from applications etc. plus of course any borderline spam from airlines, online shops and communities that I get. All of this is read, processed and deleted/archived immediately.
- 2) Process calendar invitations: Next step is to process meeting invitations in sequence. This further reduces the number of messages and also ensures that when i go through the important mails afterwards my calendar is updated so I can check availability immediately.
- 3) Sort through the remaining messages by topic and start reviewing from the back to see if the discussion has been finished. In one recent example I had a 12-mail thread between multiple people where the last message just read “thanks a lot for you help and have a nice weekend”. OK, nothing I need to do about that so I can archive all 12 mails without reading the other 11 (or I can of course just check the discussion to figure out what’s been going on, but it’s fairly certain that there are no actions for me). Anything that is still “in progress” is either dealt with immediately or left for the next step.
- 4) Last step. By now I will have reduced the number of messages to somewhere between 10-20% of what I started with. I have removed the noise and clutter and I am left with the things that really need my attention, either because they take longer to complete or because I need to talk to other people to move on. So, I grab a cup of coffee or tea and I can start working on those 🙂
On a couple of occasions I have done the initial screening on the flight back from a two-week holiday, starting with 4-600 emails. It generally takes me 60-90 minutes to do it, but the difference between showing up Monday morning at the office to 500 unread emails and to 7-8 open issues that you know you have to deal with is incredible.