Replying to LO29297 --
Hello Fred and group,
Fred Nickols said:
"Peter Drucker has regularly observed for more than 40 years now, we still
don't know much about making knowledge work productive."
I have some comments on that below. I have inserted the 7E's relevant
between them to make a point at the end.
What is productivity in knowledge work? If we look at productivity as
output/cost, we can see more clearly where the problems are. In physical
output it is easy to measure productivity: just define the output
qualities, count and divide as prescribed. We could also factor in the
element of time, e.g. : output per hour/cost
In knowledge work cost is for the most part fixed overhead so we could
perhaps define productivity as output per year/cost. The cost part should
be fairly easy, but the output part is very difficult because quality is
not constant; it varies all the time. Still, looking at this formula, we
can see that the ways to increase productivity are (sureness):
Increase the value of output (i.e. quality)
Increase the quantity of output
Decrease the cost of output
Decrease the time of output
I think the key to increasing knowledge work lies in looking at all of
these factors together as a whole. At least by a more precise way of
looking at productive Knowledge Work (KW) we know more about what to look
for and make decisions about.
Peter Drucker mentions one method of making KW more productive: ask
K-workers what their job is, then have them keep a log of how much of
their time is spent on that particular goal or activity (depending on how
they answer). At the end, take a look at what other activities they do and
see how their schedule can be free up. This method focuses on reducing the
time of output, on increasing the proportion of total time spent on
productive activities, on aligning role (sureness) with process
(liveness.)
Another method of his focuses on goal precision and feedback (liveness.)
In it one simply records all important decisions and their expected
outcome for regular review. I mentioned this one in another thread.
Drucker also emphasizes for the K-workers to know their own strength,
weaknesses and values (sureness), so that they can find the right
occupation (sureness) and improve themselves by removing weaknesses that
may hamper strengths (wholeness.)
If we take this latter saying of Drucker and bring this to an
organizational perspective this means that one can gain KW productivity by
improving role fit, and that this role fit can be improved by helping
people see their own strengths, weaknesses and values (as in what they
value.) "Strength to role fit" focuses on improving quality and output,
"values to role fit" focuses on passion, i.e. the fuel of
initiative/agility and therefore on all four elements of productivity.
Another important aspect of KW productivity is to make sure that nobody
reports to more than one person (liveness), and that this person is
someone who can add value to the subordinates work through greater
knowledge and experience (sureness), but without meddling too much or too
little (spareness). This helps eliminate unnecessary mental work and
communication due to disharmony (lack of wholeness.)
The subject of passion is very important in KW. In producing countable
units of output, we mainly needed physiological energy, something we can
usually get by taking care of our health. The
countability/observability/consistency made labor easier to manage than
KW. Discipline could bring the productivity needed. But in KW discipline
won't do alone. Managers can not observe much of KW, and even the
individual K-worker has very limited control of his own passion. Passion
is particularly vital to maximizing quality of knowledge work, not the
least when something entirely new is needed. (sureness)
I'd better stop here before this becomes more than an email. I think the
right approach to KW productivity involves the cultivation of passion, but
also of trying to be as precise as possible in setting goals(liveness);
aligning processes(liveness); paying attention to role definitions,
clarity and selection for them (sureness); effective management to
integrate the organization in a manner that adds value and (wholeness);
careful observation and alignment with the environment (wholeness);
finding a balance between agility and stability (digestion); eliminating
time wasters (spareness); promote diversity that leads to the constant
flow of ideas from different perspectives (otherness); make effective
contact rapidly with suppliers, partners, contractors and clients
(fruitfulness). All of this, and others, in light of the 4 factors of
productivity listed in the beginning of this mail.
I have inserted in brackets the 7Es in the above e mail to show that
perhaps the fundamental key to KW productivity is to always look for
sufficiency in terms of them.
Terje
--"Terje A. Tonsberg" <tatonsberg@hotmail.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.