October 19, 2018 at 14:30Recycling harms both products and employees
- Transfer
Almost all companies now put pressure on employees, prompting them to work more hours than specified in the contract. This pressure is masked by various euphemisms: beautiful words about the mission, personal contribution, march-throw. Those who express a willingness to process often receive encouraging attention from management: “Joe worked out one hundred and fifty percent to help us achieve our goals: he worked late, went on weekends. He sacrificed his time for our mission. ”
Fortunately, I myself did not have to work in companies where my aversion to overtime would be disapproving. Nevertheless, I believe that it is unacceptable even to speak approvingly of such a practice. This is a symptom of problems that cannot be encouraged. Under no circumstances.
At its core, the need for processing comes from problems with professionalism, prioritization and flexibility. For the most part, I will talk about overtime work in IT companies, but the same negative impact on productivity and quality of work can be observed in any other area.
Professionalism is tied to discipline. In any case, the development of skills and competence requires discipline. Processing, on the other hand, shows that companies compile scheduling without care (and not only him). But the main thing is that it shows an inability to conclude the work process in a clear framework and not allow it to crowd out other activities.
The phrase "work until you drop and rest to the fullest" is associated with many with the way of thinking that encourages people to process. The idea here is that you need not to spare yourself when you go to some goal, but when it is achieved, you can allow yourself to stretch to the fullest. But what if this moment never comes, that if there is simply no time left to rest, because one goal will always be followed by another? If we accept the processing as the norm, such an attitude will start to give rise to new and new reasons to work until late, so that it will never reach the second part of the quote.
The phrase: “work at full strength, and then go home” sounds more reasonable. It is assumed here that a balance is maintained between work and other aspects of our lives. Every day we come to work, we make every effort to do everything that is required, and then when the working time comes out, we get up and go home. What we do when the daily volume of work is completed is our concern. We have complete leave everything related to work, at work, and to manage our time ourselves.
This approach gives people the opportunity to decide what is important to them. Someone may say that they just want to give priority to work, but in this case, recycling is not the best way; later we will look at several reasons why. Professionalism is impossible without respect for foreign borders and discipline. Therefore, you can’t force people to choose between career and family, work and friends, business and entertainment. Professionals and organizations that want maximum productivity from them must strictly maintain this balance.
Another area closely related to professionalism is prioritization. In the vast majority of cases, when I was asked to work longer or when I watched such cases from the outside, the whole fuss began with the fact that someone was confused, which of the tasks is more important. Someone somewhere was pierced in the prioritization. The most important and urgent work was not planned for the most successful time. Of course, it happens that during the work process errors occur or circumstances change. But more often it is about the wrong priorities.
In turn, this is due to a drawdown in communication. It is necessary to ensure that during the work of the team regularly and clearly give each other feedback. Whenever this rule is violated, there is a greater risk that we are not doing what most needs attention at the moment. The reality is this: if the value of something is not entirely clear, you should not waste time on it. Efforts to eliminate any ambiguities help to focus on the main thing. If we can outline what the meaning of this or that action is, most likely there is no need to carry it out at all. Wrong priorities call into question the success of the product - because we have no confidence that exactly what users need is done.
When the value of the actions is clearly defined and arranged in order of importance, it becomes easier to plan the order of work. Understanding the value makes it possible to correctly set the scale and schedule. More significant things can be raised up, and less significant things can be postponed or even thrown out of the plan. The emphasis on the importance of priorities allows us to get rid of one of the root causes of the need for processing and return to the normal schedule.
For the past fifteen years, I have mainly worked as a programmer. But in between writing code, I also did a lot of support for computer systems for business. Sometimes these systems failed and, to fix the problem, had to work out of schedule. This is also part of the workflow — the need to redistribute work hours sometimes. But - and here again we return to the question of professionalism - this should not result in the employee working full time, and then, moreover, spending his personal time.
I was lucky: I worked in companies where I didn’t mind that in case of unforeseen situations I would accordingly reschedule my schedule. If at two in the morning I was repairing the server, then no one expected that the next morning I would return to the office and work as usual. My daily duties shifted so that I could make up for lost time to rest and protect myself from burnout. It is important to separate such adjustments in the working mode, which you have to resort to when someone needs to work outside the schedule, and forcing overtime work (or even voluntary consent to it).
The first principle in the Agile manifest of software development is: “People and interaction are more important than processes and tools.” Any organization that follows agile development methodology first of all thinks about its employees. In order for the necessary work to be done well, you must first take care that the people who will perform it are well. Also among the principles that formed the basis of the manifesto, the need to adhere to the pace of development, realistic in the long term, is mentioned.
Processing directly contradicts this principle. The fact that it is necessary means that a failure has occurred in the processes. In a flexible organization, overtime indicates other systemic issues. So review priorities, volumes, quality, identify the problem and solve it, no matter what it is. Do not get out of the situation by simply accepting recycling as something inevitable or necessary.
One of the requirements of the Agile system is a healthy balance in the lives of employees, that is, the ability to relax. Work will not be effective if it turns into an endless continuous process. Sooner or later, we will start to give a bad result, and then we will be forced to stay at work even longer and redo what did not work the first time. Therefore, it is easier to deal with those shortcomings in the system that cause the need for processing, and then such jumps in the return can be avoided.
To all of the above, studies show that recycling is a waste of time. The longer people regularly work overtime, the more their productivity decreases. And apparently, this recession will completely nullify the quantitative increase that additional hours give. New data indicate that while sitting in the office until late, we perform approximately the same amount of work as usual, only at a slower pace. Overtime, as the title of the article hints at the link, is simply useless.
Processing has a bad effect on productivity for a number of reasons, so it is best avoided by default. Why waste time on ineffective attempts to work, when you can just break off, have a good rest and return in full combat readiness? There are no convincing arguments in favor of this practice - we just accustomed ourselves to perceive it as the norm. We engage in self-deception, remaining deaf to what science and our own intuition say.
Finally, there remains the issue of quality. Processing does not promote discipline and the consolidation of good practices that allow us to consistently maintain the quality of work at a high level. It in itself is a way to “cut corners”, and a similar attitude leaks into the process of performing overtime tasks. The fact that we are forced to work until late means that we are deprived of the opportunity to write code thoughtfully and without haste.
From the fact that we lose our motivation to think about what we are doing and to keep order in work, product quality begins to decline. We are increasingly starting to do without tests, because there seems to be nothing complicated in this part of the functional. We arrogantly decide that you can make good products without bothering to think in the future and use the appropriate methods. Such arrogance never justifies itself: we all tend to overestimate our capabilities. Practices for the long-term maintenance of quality and labor discipline are the best help in order to maintain a sober look at the product. Recycling takes away from us the key component of both of these things - time.
Product quality inevitably suffers when overtime work becomes routine. Sometimes this does not happen right away, but as it begins to be considered an acceptable way out and welcomed, prudent practices are gradually being destroyed and even the best developers of the company are being suppressed by a responsible attitude to completing tasks. If we want to maintain quality products and a strong team, recycling should not become the norm. It never in reality brings the benefits that it promises, and often we do not even suspect what price we pay until we get a huge bill.
*
How to solve this problem? Well, personally, I just refuse to work overtime. I do not hide my annoyance when I hear that someone is being praised for sitting up late. I protect the interests of those who do not do this themselves, whether they want it or not. In general, you should start with what is clearly indicated: recycling is a problem. The first step should be like this.
Overtime is a sign of a malfunction in the system, a signal that somewhere something went wrong. If someone has had to work more than the allotted time, we must do everything to prevent similar situations in the future. We must not allow processing to develop into professional burnout - and by encouraging it, this is precisely what we are heading for. In this regard, organizations must have reinforced concrete rules.
Fortunately, I myself did not have to work in companies where my aversion to overtime would be disapproving. Nevertheless, I believe that it is unacceptable even to speak approvingly of such a practice. This is a symptom of problems that cannot be encouraged. Under no circumstances.
At its core, the need for processing comes from problems with professionalism, prioritization and flexibility. For the most part, I will talk about overtime work in IT companies, but the same negative impact on productivity and quality of work can be observed in any other area.
Professionalism
Professionalism is tied to discipline. In any case, the development of skills and competence requires discipline. Processing, on the other hand, shows that companies compile scheduling without care (and not only him). But the main thing is that it shows an inability to conclude the work process in a clear framework and not allow it to crowd out other activities.
The phrase "work until you drop and rest to the fullest" is associated with many with the way of thinking that encourages people to process. The idea here is that you need not to spare yourself when you go to some goal, but when it is achieved, you can allow yourself to stretch to the fullest. But what if this moment never comes, that if there is simply no time left to rest, because one goal will always be followed by another? If we accept the processing as the norm, such an attitude will start to give rise to new and new reasons to work until late, so that it will never reach the second part of the quote.
The phrase: “work at full strength, and then go home” sounds more reasonable. It is assumed here that a balance is maintained between work and other aspects of our lives. Every day we come to work, we make every effort to do everything that is required, and then when the working time comes out, we get up and go home. What we do when the daily volume of work is completed is our concern. We have complete leave everything related to work, at work, and to manage our time ourselves.
This approach gives people the opportunity to decide what is important to them. Someone may say that they just want to give priority to work, but in this case, recycling is not the best way; later we will look at several reasons why. Professionalism is impossible without respect for foreign borders and discipline. Therefore, you can’t force people to choose between career and family, work and friends, business and entertainment. Professionals and organizations that want maximum productivity from them must strictly maintain this balance.
Priorities
Another area closely related to professionalism is prioritization. In the vast majority of cases, when I was asked to work longer or when I watched such cases from the outside, the whole fuss began with the fact that someone was confused, which of the tasks is more important. Someone somewhere was pierced in the prioritization. The most important and urgent work was not planned for the most successful time. Of course, it happens that during the work process errors occur or circumstances change. But more often it is about the wrong priorities.
In turn, this is due to a drawdown in communication. It is necessary to ensure that during the work of the team regularly and clearly give each other feedback. Whenever this rule is violated, there is a greater risk that we are not doing what most needs attention at the moment. The reality is this: if the value of something is not entirely clear, you should not waste time on it. Efforts to eliminate any ambiguities help to focus on the main thing. If we can outline what the meaning of this or that action is, most likely there is no need to carry it out at all. Wrong priorities call into question the success of the product - because we have no confidence that exactly what users need is done.
When the value of the actions is clearly defined and arranged in order of importance, it becomes easier to plan the order of work. Understanding the value makes it possible to correctly set the scale and schedule. More significant things can be raised up, and less significant things can be postponed or even thrown out of the plan. The emphasis on the importance of priorities allows us to get rid of one of the root causes of the need for processing and return to the normal schedule.
Out of schedule
For the past fifteen years, I have mainly worked as a programmer. But in between writing code, I also did a lot of support for computer systems for business. Sometimes these systems failed and, to fix the problem, had to work out of schedule. This is also part of the workflow — the need to redistribute work hours sometimes. But - and here again we return to the question of professionalism - this should not result in the employee working full time, and then, moreover, spending his personal time.
I was lucky: I worked in companies where I didn’t mind that in case of unforeseen situations I would accordingly reschedule my schedule. If at two in the morning I was repairing the server, then no one expected that the next morning I would return to the office and work as usual. My daily duties shifted so that I could make up for lost time to rest and protect myself from burnout. It is important to separate such adjustments in the working mode, which you have to resort to when someone needs to work outside the schedule, and forcing overtime work (or even voluntary consent to it).
Flexibility
The first principle in the Agile manifest of software development is: “People and interaction are more important than processes and tools.” Any organization that follows agile development methodology first of all thinks about its employees. In order for the necessary work to be done well, you must first take care that the people who will perform it are well. Also among the principles that formed the basis of the manifesto, the need to adhere to the pace of development, realistic in the long term, is mentioned.
Processing directly contradicts this principle. The fact that it is necessary means that a failure has occurred in the processes. In a flexible organization, overtime indicates other systemic issues. So review priorities, volumes, quality, identify the problem and solve it, no matter what it is. Do not get out of the situation by simply accepting recycling as something inevitable or necessary.
One of the requirements of the Agile system is a healthy balance in the lives of employees, that is, the ability to relax. Work will not be effective if it turns into an endless continuous process. Sooner or later, we will start to give a bad result, and then we will be forced to stay at work even longer and redo what did not work the first time. Therefore, it is easier to deal with those shortcomings in the system that cause the need for processing, and then such jumps in the return can be avoided.
Productivity
To all of the above, studies show that recycling is a waste of time. The longer people regularly work overtime, the more their productivity decreases. And apparently, this recession will completely nullify the quantitative increase that additional hours give. New data indicate that while sitting in the office until late, we perform approximately the same amount of work as usual, only at a slower pace. Overtime, as the title of the article hints at the link, is simply useless.
Processing has a bad effect on productivity for a number of reasons, so it is best avoided by default. Why waste time on ineffective attempts to work, when you can just break off, have a good rest and return in full combat readiness? There are no convincing arguments in favor of this practice - we just accustomed ourselves to perceive it as the norm. We engage in self-deception, remaining deaf to what science and our own intuition say.
Quality
Finally, there remains the issue of quality. Processing does not promote discipline and the consolidation of good practices that allow us to consistently maintain the quality of work at a high level. It in itself is a way to “cut corners”, and a similar attitude leaks into the process of performing overtime tasks. The fact that we are forced to work until late means that we are deprived of the opportunity to write code thoughtfully and without haste.
From the fact that we lose our motivation to think about what we are doing and to keep order in work, product quality begins to decline. We are increasingly starting to do without tests, because there seems to be nothing complicated in this part of the functional. We arrogantly decide that you can make good products without bothering to think in the future and use the appropriate methods. Such arrogance never justifies itself: we all tend to overestimate our capabilities. Practices for the long-term maintenance of quality and labor discipline are the best help in order to maintain a sober look at the product. Recycling takes away from us the key component of both of these things - time.
Product quality inevitably suffers when overtime work becomes routine. Sometimes this does not happen right away, but as it begins to be considered an acceptable way out and welcomed, prudent practices are gradually being destroyed and even the best developers of the company are being suppressed by a responsible attitude to completing tasks. If we want to maintain quality products and a strong team, recycling should not become the norm. It never in reality brings the benefits that it promises, and often we do not even suspect what price we pay until we get a huge bill.
*
How to solve this problem? Well, personally, I just refuse to work overtime. I do not hide my annoyance when I hear that someone is being praised for sitting up late. I protect the interests of those who do not do this themselves, whether they want it or not. In general, you should start with what is clearly indicated: recycling is a problem. The first step should be like this.
Overtime is a sign of a malfunction in the system, a signal that somewhere something went wrong. If someone has had to work more than the allotted time, we must do everything to prevent similar situations in the future. We must not allow processing to develop into professional burnout - and by encouraging it, this is precisely what we are heading for. In this regard, organizations must have reinforced concrete rules.