leftovers #4 - it doesn't have to be crazy at work (policies)

There have been a few posts over the past month about It Doesn’t Have to be Crazy at Work, but I promise that today is the last one. Though I'm sure this is welcome news to all readers, those who are disappointed with this revelation are encouraged to review the previous posts or check out the unstructured thoughts collected in my book notes.

As noted previously, one theme of the book is how the design of the organization dictates its capabilities. There is perhaps no more obvious place to think about than HR, which is essentially responsible for organizing, evaluating, and executing the policies that govern company operations. Based on the approach they took throughout the work, it didn't surprise me that the authors tended to favor easily executed policies, such as using a transparent wage structure that paid people equally by position, which leaves no room for time-consuming salary negotiations. They also applied this straightforward manner to the way they defined things like benefits (anything that directly helps the employee during off-hours) or vacation (multiple consecutive days off). To the latter, they suggested that employees who need discretionary time during the week should just work it out within their teams rather than rely on a company policy.

What these kinds of insights demonstrate is that there is plenty of room for common sense to serve as a guiding principle within organizations for creating policy and defining its exceptions. I think the challenge is that the way we do things are always on the verge of becoming habits, and it's often easier to stick with a habit rather than make a meaningful change. There is also the temptation to lean on a policy when the alternative is to expend energy while demonstrating flexibility for the people involved, particularly as applying a policy is much faster than granting an exception. But there are times when a little extra work in the moment can prevent larger issues from emerging further down the line. The authors point out one example - how to handle major organizational changes. As far as I know, departing employees are never encouraged (and if I had to guess, discouraged) from communicating with the organization. I am sure this standard practice is grounded in strong thinking. However, if there is any mystery or confusion surrounding a major change, the remaining team members are certain to invent a story based on their limited information unless someone explains the reasons. If it were up to me, I'd prefer an organization publicly encourage clear communication, even if the results are somewhat unorthodox, because the potential short-term harm of allowing a departing member to communicate with the organization outweigh the possible long-term effect of a blurry line between rumor and reality.

leftovers #3 - it doesn't have to be crazy at work (managerial tactics)

There is something that's come up across a couple of my previous posts about It Doesn't Have to Be Crazy at Work - it's not so much that the leadership directs the staff, but rather that they set the culture which influences the organization. The authors give a memorable example - the best way for the boss to encourage vacations isn't to say "take vacations", it's to just take vacations. It's a reality that often escapes anyone with power - until trust is earned, the team will follow examples rather than follow instructions. 

Despite not strictly being a managerial book, they also mention a couple of insights that I thought would be helpful for any manager. The point that most stories are learned in pieces resonated with me - you get the gist from an email, pull in a couple more details from a conversation, and overhear a bit of gossip in a meeting. This means that a well-informed manager is reflective of someone who is constantly gathering information. They also add that the time to switch from collecting information to asking questions is when the time is right to act on the answer. I liked the reminder that the best type of question focuses on the specific - rather than asking "how can we do better?", ask "how can we help you do X?"

To put it another way, a good manager finds ways to collect information and acts on it at the appropriate time. This is best accomplished with a proactive approach. The worst idea of all is to remind the team that "the door is always open", implying that its the team's responsibility to share information. The intention is good, but it's rare for employees to storm into the manager's office with a long list of new issues. (This restraint could be for completely plausible reasons, such as being too busy with the work to take advantage of the open door policy.) This will limit the scope of collected information to whatever the team sees as relevant, which neglects any perspective unique to the manager. If the door is open, then walk through it and take the initiative with the team!

leftovers #2 - it doesn't have to be crazy at work (interruptions, meetings)

I've written a couple of recent posts about It Doesn’t Have to be Crazy at Work, but it turns out I have a handful of other comments about the book. Let's have a look today at interruptions, which follows closely from the theme of the first leftover, time management. The authors reference interruptions in two ways - the first is the spontaneous sort such as a colleague dropping by (or these days, using chat tools) and the second is the lazily scheduled meeting. The shared consequence of these disruptions is the way they can slice up otherwise unbroken blocks of time. This is a particularly dangerous phenomenon for anyone who requires unbroken time to complete meaningful work. I suppose it could be compared to a baker constantly pulling the bread in and out of the oven, but unlike with bread - if it was baked incorrectly, we can taste the difference - with work it's often unclear in retrospect if the product would have improved with a more focused approach.

There is little, it seems, that can be done by the constantly interrupted individual, and the authors seem to agree - their solutions are at the leadership level of an organization. One possibility is to implement an office hours policy, which would allow each employee to set fixed hours for ad-hoc questions. Another option is to precisely define the necessary conditions for calling a meeting. If possible, the culture should encourage replacing a meeting with a written update or summary, particularly if the topic at hand is more along the lines of delivering news rather than completing work. As noted in the past on TOA, there are two good times for a meeting. The first is when it's unclear how the work will get done; the purpose is to make a decision. The second is to discuss issues that do not come up naturally during the workweek, which I feel requires the unstructured nature of a recurring conversation.

leftovers - it doesn't have to be crazy at work (time management)

I mentioned in my initial post about It Doesn't Have to Be Crazy at Work that the broad message of the book centered on the maintenance work necessary to run a calm company. One of the most important skills they discussed was time management, particularly in the context of the growth-related issues I mentioned last time. The authors suggest that learning how to "say no" is the core skill for good time management because it allows you to constantly refine the best use of the forty hours in each week. They also mention some useful tactics - one example is discouraging Friday deadlines, which may lead to rushed work while potentially forcing teams to work over the weekend if any errors are noticed after releasing the final product. The best deadline, I think, finds the balance of coaxing high-quality work while leaving enough time to work out any last-minute issues.

Experienced workers may note that in some organizations the above considerations are often outside the staff's control. This observation highlights the important role an organization's leadership plays in terms of setting the culture. One consideration is how work ethic is defined within a company - if it's associated with time spent on the job, then the top employees will focus their efforts on accumulating hours. I've learned from my experience that poor design within an organization will often override the clear thinking of most employees - the "whatever it takes" mentality, for example, may have a time and place, but it will never help the team improve their time management skills. Speaking broadly, if the culture of an organization discourages employees from determining the best use of their time, then the employees won't make the best use of their time, making the eventual result somewhat inevitable - the organization will find itself unable to make the best use of its time.

reading review - it doesn't have to be crazy at work

Longtime readers may recognize these authors from my previous reviews about Rework and Remote. Their latest release is a blueprint for how to structure a calm company, one that rejects the frenzied attributes often counted among the necessary evils of the modern workplace.

It Doesn't Have to Be Crazy at Work by Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson (April 2019)

The book's insights into growth were a microcosm of the work's broader message - without careful maintenance, a calm company can quickly descend into chaos. For Fried and Hansson, growth is one risk factor for such a deterioration. The mundane reality of a small company often obscures the threat of growth. A small organization naturally maintains independence among teams because the volume of work generally allows each unit to complete projects without relying on another group. As the organization grows, the company redesigns itself to handle work at scale. This process almost always means specialization, which creates dependencies among teams. The result is that unexpected issues delay the work of not just the team directly impacted by the issue - it delays the work of all subsequent teams in the workflow. The consequence of these dependencies is rushed jobs to make up lost time ahead of a deadline, which corrodes morale due to both the increased workload density in busy periods as well as the loss of flexibility in completing the work.

The authors offer a handful of suggestions for avoiding such a mess. One idea is to slow (or stop) growth whenever teams are exchanging too much independence for the return of scaling up. Another is to grow via iteration - one example is to offer the newest versions of products only to incoming customers, which skirts the possibility of alienating existing customers who are happy with their current product. A suggestion taking a slightly different tone is to simply remain profitable throughout the growth period (which is timely suggestion in this age when many companies pursue growth for its own sake, running up huge losses in the process). Profit helps the mentality within an organization because employees will be less likely to link growing pains with job security, knowing that no matter how bad it gets at least the company can still afford to retain the team.

TOA Rating: Three growth spurts out of four.

toa quick hits – december 2019

Hi all,

Like I did last month, here are some quick notes about the books for which I’ve yet to post a full review.

A Pattern Language by Christopher W. Alexander, et al (March 2019)

This one thousand plus page brick doghouse of a book is probably enough reason to stop doing reading reviews altogether. Alexander and his team describe the principles of design in public and private spaces, tying it all together by identifying the shared or larger patterns relevant to each detail. The idea of south-facing design making the most use of natural sunlight has made a big change to how I’ve looked at spaces. I also thought the comment that people learn best when they help someone who knows what is going on was a brilliant insight into the learning process.

It Doesn't Have to Be Crazy at Work by Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson (April 2019)

Longtime readers may recognize these authors from prior comments about Rework or Remote . This latest book is more tactical than their past works, detailing specific strategies for achieving their ideal of a calm company – one that rejects the frenzied attributes most take for granted in the modern workplace. Their note that remaining profitable is critical to achieving this goal made a big impact on me. A company in the red cannot do anything meaningful to calm their employees because in the back of their minds is always the lingering possibility of imminent bust.

Maniac Magee by Jerry Spinelli (April 2019)

Yes, I still recommend it. I may have noted this in the past but I find it interesting how so many books are about orphans (including some of my other favorites such as Eureka Street and the Harry Potter series).

It's Better Than It Looks by Gregg Easterbrook (March 2019)

I have a mixed history with Easterbrook’s work that has gone largely undocumented (most of the reading happened pre-TOA). He is a broadly optimistic figure whose insights grow from a willingness to question any widely accepted opinion. His note that agricultural advancements mean our planet can feed between 10 and 20 billion is a good example of what you’ll find here. For me, his comment that models can only ‘predict’ the conclusions built into their programming was one of my favorite ideas of the year.