If they have 8 hours of work time and finished their tasks in 6, does that mean they have exhausted their usefulness to the business? Why not spend these 2 hours doing some small miscellaneous tasks?
>Why not spend these 2 hours doing some small miscellaneous tasks?
Because that's scope creep and it can create the expectation that it's part of my job, so then I'll be responsible for it. Down the line, if one of those misc tasks becomes the ire of someone else and my name is attached to it (comment, commit, etc.), they'll contact me further down the line, perhaps when I'm dealing with something of my own. Then, at least, I have to explain that I don't maintain that and in the worst case (which has happened), I have to fight to not be responsible for it right then.
There's a balance in having your name associated with 'things' in a business. Some people might be good at being a know-it-all, being well-known, and handling everything (why aren't they running their own company?), but you'll increase your chances of interruption the more wide-spread your name is.
Yep exactly. Try adding unit tests to legacy code when your coworkers consistently ignore it. They'll be praised as fast workers who kinda sorta get the job done. All you'll get is called out for being slow and be tasked with fixing someone else's mess and your code won't be a maintenance burden.
It feels like in software dev we can just make messes and move on without accepting responsibility. Increasing scope on yourself with those small misc. tasks also means accepting more responsibility than most software devs accept which makes you a target when things don't go smoothly either through your fault or someone else's.
The biggest catch is that those 2 hours that you have butt in seat means you can't work on your own skills/side project for fear of the employer owning the code. The only thing you can do is take online courses at Coursera or Udemy as they're general enough skills.
Often lack of infrastructure, or communication about what needs doing. Traditional businesses are poorly documented, and not transparent, so knowing what you might do and how is often extremely difficult.
Partly. But there is usually no method of discovery either. In a software company there is an issue tracker and you can just go and fix bugs if nothing else, that doesnt exist in a traditional company.
Wouldn't a traditional company also benefit from using the same or similar tools for managing work as software companies? (mostly a rethorical question)
A lot of white collar workplaces have their homebrew Excel workbooks to keep track of tasks and a lot of meetings that fill up everyone's time in order to organize activities, leaving little time for the actual work to be done.
It isn't just the ability to see what needs to be done, or the desire to put in extra effort or risk. When the individual sees no additional benefit for the risk they will not partake in the activity. It is precisely because the worker isn't compensated for working harder or more efficiently that they don't.
I have worked on plenty of projects that are time critical where compensation scales with the quality of the output. Think a theater performance or catered event. Time on clock matters, but completing the project faster and with a higher quality benefits ALL parties involved via profit sharing. The owners of capital want to pay based on time because they want a higher payout.
Sure but that's daily grind boring stuff that doesn't improve your skills very much and doesn't instill confidence in the long-term future of the company.
Because if you fill those extra 2 hours Bob's managed to accrue with more work Bob will be sure to inject a few more HN/Reddit/etc visits into his 8 hours next time. There's rarely any motivation, gain or benefit in taking on extra work in your standard 9-5 job
Because now you are responsible for all followups on those small miscellaneous tasks, and those might come up when you don't have two extra hours in the day.
I know you're probably saying it tongue-in-cheek, but not really. I'm a fairly lazy person; it bothers me to no end. I wish I could do more work more reliably, but I can't (yet! growth mindset).
A degree of laziness might look like having your priorities in order, but they're not really the same thing
If you feel like it's a problem and you're trying to fix it, I honestly wish you nothing but the best of luck. Personally I'm wary of being obsessed with being productive -- especially at work.
I had a bit of breakdown towards the end of my university days, due to setting some unrealistic requirements for myself. I wasn't allowing myself time off because I had 'quotas' to meet, and that took a toll and I had to basically hide away for a few months, while it dawned on me that the quotas didn't come from anywhere and I needed to calm the fuck down and get my priorities in order.
Now I have a regular job and I'm doing OK. But I don't let my time estimates rule me, I make time for breaks, and I don't stay after hours unless there's a deadline. And honestly even now I hope to knock a few hours off my weekly contract soon, because I feel like I'm spending too much time at a desk working on other people's projects (for money) when I could be, you know, baking bread or reading Wikipedia or hanging out with friends (if they weren't all at work, that is). In contrast, I have a co-worker who seems to love staying till 8 in the evening closing Jira tasks being "productive". Hatever. That's not where I want my wrinkles to come from.
edit -- I suppose maybe you're right, though. What I mean is maybe more that "what looks like laziness from one perspective can be called prioritizing from another". Less sound bite-y, though.
There is laziness and there is procrastination. Leaving that soda bottle on the floor is procrastinating picking it up; I'll still have to do it later. Having a small box to fill with soda bottles that I dump once every few weeks is laziness. Not making my bed when I'll have guest over or I need to make it before going to bed is procrastination. Not making it because there is no reason for it to be made before I get back into it is laziness (of course there are suprise visitors and such, but that is just cases where hueristical optimizations are imperfect).
For software developers, being lazy is a good trait. Say you knock out all the work you needed to do in a day in 6 hours and then fill the other 2 hours with fixing bugs or other low level tasks to fight the "I don't want to be lazy" urge.
Chances are those bugs or low level tasks are truly unimportant and not a priority for the business, right? If they were, then one of your team mates would have been working them as a priority.
You probably can't start tomorrows work since you are waiting on a team mate to finish their work for the day. If you try to help them out it will slow them down.
This is probably only for knowledge workers. If you are doing manual labor like building a shed for bicycles, you should be able to help out and do other tasks.
