Time
Robbers
Are you on top of your job or underneath it? Many men in the high-pressure world of business and industry look on helplessly while their responsibilities grow faster than they can handle them.
— Auren Uris
Inefficiency may rank first among all time robbers. A job done poorly, whether in haste or carelessness, that must be done over, is a monstrous thief of time. Expand the category of work poorly done to include work not completed, necessitating retracing of footsteps (such as the review of a record without drawing conclusions... requiring restudy of the same material), and the magnitude of this problem becomes more apparent.
Inefficiency seems at times to gain a foothold in Christian organizations more easily than in secular organizations.
Page 201
Some observers suggest that the reason for this may be the tendency to overspiritualize problems (to blame them on God instead of facing them and trying to solve them). Others suggest that to apply secular standards of efficiency involves judgment of performance — which causes problems for those who believe that no judgment of another is ever justified where Christians are involved. Still others feel that often the fellowship of Christians is emphasized in such a way as to make efficiency appear to be in conflict with fellowship. Distorted views of organizational structure sometimes result from this emphasis to the point where any organizational hierarchy or authority is resisted. The scriptural basis of authority was reviewed earlier. Suffice it to say at this point that an organization in which everyone expects literally to take orders only from God is inviting chaos, confusion and ineffectiveness.
Indecision ranks high among the time robbers. Frequently resulting from the fear of failure discussed in the last chapter, failure to make timely decisions can result in significant long-run waste of effort and loss of time. It has often been observed that a less desirable decision made in a timely fashion and implemented with discernment may result in far more progress than the best decision which is first delayed, then implemented with hesitancy. The risk of decision-making is inherent in the executive position. Those unwilling to take the risks involved do not belong in this position. Most important, yet perhaps least recognized, is the factor of time allowed for corrective action by a decision made and implemented in a timely way. Even if it is not the best decision, prompt action often provides the added margin of time for correction.
Tension, long recognized as a way of life for the business executive, is now becoming a common subject for conversation when Christian executives meet in management
Page 202
seminars. Pursued with great interest is the positive approach of viewing tension as a potentially constructive force within an organization. Tension arises from differing opinions which should be the basis of progress. If no one within an organization ever questioned a policy or a proposed course of action, progress would be in real jeopardy.
"The high value placed on differences — differences among individuals as well as among groups," says David Ewing, "is one of the most important characteristics of the managerial mind."1 Ewing insists that the administrator must reject the notion that tension should be avoided if at all possible. He views tranquility in an organization with alarm, associating it with vulnerable departments and sick enterprises. He finds tension not only acceptable but desirable. While setting limits on the desirable amount and drawing a distinction between tension and chaos, between stress and distress, Ewing seeks to use tension in a positive way for the benefit of his organization. The author identifies six types of tension which have value in the administrative scheme and suggests that one of the marks of the executive is the ability to utilize them in a constructive way for the organization.
Speaking of a special type of tension that can be good, the American Institute of Management has referred to "the spark of divine discontent which convinces managers that there are always better things to do, better ways of understanding why and how they are done."2 According to the Institute one of the distinguishing marks of excellent executives is "an intelligent dissatisfaction with their own results."
Many managers admit to working better under pressure. Tension, understood and utilized, can be a very constructive factor in executive effectiveness. It may become
Page 203
harmful when it exceeds our tolerance for it or represents imagined rather than real dangers.
Successful executives, it would seem, have learned to live with tension. They welcome realistic tension as a healthy incentive to greater concentration of effort and thus find that this supposed foe of executive effectiveness can be turned into a very positive asset.
The manager's environment is filled with surreptitious time robbers which, given the chance, will steal the unsuspecting executive blind. Eric Webster points an accusing finger at them in a discerning article which asks the manager if he is steering the ship, or stoking. "If the captain oscillates between bridge and boiler room," says Webster, "a higher head of steam won't compensate for steering in circles."3 Just as captains are supposed to set the course, so managers are supposed to manage... beginning with their environment.
Surprisingly, many managers make no effort to establish such control. Time and motion studies have been applied to offices as well as to plants with some highly interesting and useful results. The concept of the "functional desk" arose from such studies and has been accepted by many effective executives and management consultants. Utilizing the most accessible locations for the items used most often at one's desk sounds to most of us like a fairly good idea... worth thinking about at least. To a time-and-motion manager it is an imperative, and analysis will quickly make believers out of skeptics.
If continuous contact with your top assistant is essential, it makes little sense to locate that office or desk at the corner of the building most remote from your own. Nor does the ultimate filing location of paid invoices belong on the side of the office opposite to the clerk responsible for the filing. Why should your own filing cabinet be against
Page 204
the wall if you need access to it periodically throughout the day? Are the tools you use most often at your desk located most accessibly — the telephone — your dictaphone?
But control of environment must extend far beyond the physical layout of desks and managerial tools. It must include procedures for communication which, if not controlled, may account for greater waste of executive time than any other single factor.
In the clarion call for improved communications, there are those who see a subtle danger for the executive — that of overcommunication. Too much communication can be extremely wasteful of time and effort; damaging to morale as well as to executive efficiency. The wise manager will restrain communication that is unnecessary. The grossest violations occur in written reports which ramble and are unnecessarily verbose. Strong incentives should be provided to induce clear, concise and complete reports.
Meetings and conferences are commonly cited by executives as one of their worst time wasters. The most effective way to restrain this violator is to question the necessity of meeting in the first place. You have seen, perhaps, the cartoon of the manager directing her secretary to "call a meeting on the subject of having fewer things"!
Should the purpose of the meeting turn out, as it frequently does, to be the sharing of responsibility for a decision which the appropriate person prefers not to face alone, the decision-making function ought to be returned immediately to its proper place. When meetings are unavoidable, there are many steps which can lead to limiting unnecessary communication and consequent waste of time. Among such steps are:
Page 205
1. Assurance that only those persons necessary for the discussion are present.
2. Adequate preparation of an agenda and facts to be presented for consideration.
3. Effective chairing of the meeting to insure keeping discussion to the point and achieving a consensus of that subject.
4.Assurance that the participants understand major points.
5. Fixing of responsibility for follow-through on decisions.
Of course, the principal point for consideration in the communications environment is the telephone ... friend of millions ... enemy of millions more. What a powerful tool when properly controlled! What a devastating time waster when uncontrolled! Yet where is the manager who has clearly thought through the best procedures for maintaining control for both incoming and outgoing calls?
Looking first at outgoing calls, we find that nearly all advisers recommended grouping them. Get your calls out of the way at one time. The speed with which a dozen calls can be made by a determined and time-conscious executive has amazed more than one manager. Have your facts marshaled so you are prepared to make your own contribution to the conversation expeditiously. In the light of controlling events, remember that every call you make to another person is done at a time of your own choosing. Calls others make to you are done at times of their own choosing. Thus, when you say to a friend or associate, "Give me a call when you're ready," you are inviting an interruption. On the other hand, if you say, "I'll call you in a day or two," you have maintained the initiative and can
Page 206
make the call when you are ready to talk and find it convenient.
Not only should initiative be maintained, but brevity should also be sought. Failure to handle the manager's end of the phone conversation with dispatch was the point of a timely cartoon in the Wall Street Journal. The manager looked very imposing and one could hear the imperious quality of his gruff voice:
Hello, are you still there? ...
Hello ... hello ...
Are you the type of executive who primarily initiates or primarily reacts? Do you wait for situations to develop before considering what action may be required to guide and influence events or do you consider how to initiate events in the first place? Your response to this question, which you may never have asked yourself, may indicate whether the events which surround you tend to control you or whether you tend to control them. We have all observed friends or associates whose jobs have gotten the better of them... their jobs are running them, we say. It would seem clear that the function of an executive is to do more than simply react. The manager who merely reacts will likely be encircled with problems because events are in control of him. Managers who initiate will probably be involved in opportunities because they are moving in anticipation of events and with the expectation of controlling them instead of letting events control them. Thus the critical question asked by Eric Webster — "Who's in charge? — applies to the manager, personally, and to the environment. Either the manager or the situation will be in control.
Perhaps the most devastating factor with which to contend in the battle for control over our environment is the incoming telephone call. On this tactical battlefield lie
Page 207
the shattered nerves of many a manager who conquered other more imposing time robbers. Executives with secretarial help head inexorably down the road to defeat when they fail to give their secretaries authority in this critical area. If, as some maintain with apparent plausibility, the secretary is not able to handle such responsibility, he or she should be trained to do so or the responsibility transferred to another. The telephone company has capable training supervisors in charge of customer relations who can handle such an assignment in excellent fashion. The battle of the telephone, from the standpoint of executive control, begins with the first one to lift the receiver.
It is true that the person on the phone represents the organization to the public, and, therefore, courtesy and respect are of paramount importance. But do not forget that of all the surreptitious time wasters surrounding the executive, the telephone is the most successful.
Begin by authorizing our secretary, or the switchboard operator, or an assistant, to screen your calls. Consultants estimate that more than 50 percent of all calls to executives can be handled — therefore they ought to be! — by others. For the assistance of the person doing the screening, list those persons from whom you will always wish to take a call. List circumstances of an emergency nature in which you will always wish to be called. Have a clear understanding of how other calls should be handled — how to request the name of the caller and the purpose of the call; how to refer calls to the appropriate person; how to handle the insistent caller. For those managers who are plagued by merciless telephonic interruptions but lack the courage to end them, perhaps a picture of futility will help:
Page 208
Visualize a harried manager who finally decides to close the office door at times to indicate to his or her assistant and others that interruptions will not be tolerated. The assistant, an enterprising and determined occupant of a middle-management position, makes the delightful discovery that the boss is always available by phone whenever the door is closed. In fact, the boss is more approachable than at other times... seems more relaxed... and less inclined to end the conversation. Amazing discovery! The assistant wishes the manager would close the door more often, since telephoning works so well... and doesn't take up so much of the assistant's time!
Beyond a doubt, the random ringing of the telephone, uncontrolled, can ruin the best-planned day of any executive.
Incoming mail... its handling... and distribution ... poses one of the most surprising of all time wasters. First in order of unforgivable sins, of course, is that committed by the executive who is so anxious to "keep the feel" of the organization that he or she insists on opening the mail personally. The "feel" of any organization struggling to survive under this level of management ought to be too alarming "to keep."
More often, the inefficiencies connected with incoming-mail-handling occur first in the failure to effect appropriate sorting. At whatever point of distribution that is feasible, the executive's mail ought to be classified and the urgent communications, regular communications, and third-class mail separated conveniently. Matters appropriate for handling by assistants or associates ought to be referred immediately, probably with notes to that effect put in their places. A communication which calls for information or data from other departments for proper response ought to have the data noted in the margin with the source noted, if important. Key dates or facts might helpfully be underlined. Facts required but not immediately available should
Page 209
be so noted, with the understanding that the memo or letter will be returned to the executive's desk as soon as the secretary is able to obtain the necessary information. Routine letters or memos should be placed on the executive's desk along with the answers prepared for signature by the secretary. The principle of delegating authority to the lowest level consistent with good judgment has an extremely important application in the efficient use of a secretary. Excellent use of this principle has been observed in at least one Christian organization where well-trained secretaries have been expected to handle up to 75 percent of all correspondence on this basis.4
The principle of retraining unnecessary communication has application in the dictation of responses to correspondence. Shorter answers are possible, and therefore desirable, in a great majority of responses dictated by executives. As a check, have your secretary review your letters and memos from a given day or week for a quick estimate of how many of them could have been written in considerably fewer words. Slight effort in this area will yield many minutes in the average day. When you include in time saved that which formerly went into reading unnecessarily long memos from others in your organization, the combined savings of time may be out of all proportion to your expectations.
The place of communications as an element in the executive environment requiring control seems clear. Reginald Allen, as a methods consultant with E.I. du Pont de Nemours, concluded, "A manager must tighten up his communication techniques just as he does production techniques. He must make sure they are getting him closer to his objectives with the least waste of time."5
While inefficiency has been listed as a factor in the waste of time, overconcern or preoccupation with
Page 210
efficiency may be equally serious. Auren Uris, writing on "The Hazards of Efficiency," cautions the executive against, "the emphasis on efficiency without regard to results."6 This can result in loss of the overall objective. Such shortsighted misapplication of emphasis is the point of the cartoon depicting the new Ivy League recruit under the watchful eye of his superior. "Blasphington," observes the boss, "I have the impression that you're not very efficient."
"Maybe so," replies the rookie, "but, sir, somebody's got to get the work done around here."
Efficiency that puts method ahead of results may be totally ineffective. We can readily visualize the time wasted in the long run by a drive for efficiency which obscures the final objectives and necessitates doing the job over. Perhaps this was the observation leading to the slogan now seen occasionally in work areas:
If you don't have time to do it
right,
When will you have time to do it
over?
No list of time wasters would be complete without including the casual visitor. No executive is immune to this phenomenon ... unless perchance the office is behind security barriers in classified governmental operations. And even there the casual drop-in visitor may be the manager in the office next door. What is your philosophy about such interruptions? Would you, like many other executives, frown at the suggestion of extending a ten-minute coffee break by ten extra minutes to complete a meaningful visit ... but welcome the intrusion of an unannounced visitor from another department who "passes the time of day" not for ten minutes, but, let us say, half an hour?
Consider, for a moment, the matter of justice and equity
Page 211
with respect to those who need time with you. When a drop-in visitor comes unannounced and without having made an effort to arrange an appointment, and you grant as much time as he or she chooses to take ... what are you doing to the rights of others who are expected to make appointments and to respect reasonable time limits?
Next, consider fairness to yourself. If the caller merely wanted to greet you, how much time should this have required? If, in fact, the caller had a purpose in mind, are you entitled to the respect and courtesy of an appointment so that you can prepare for a visit and give the matter undivided attention?
Finally, consider fairness to the visitor. How is he or she helped by your encouragement of this type of unannounced drop-in visit? Many executives have found that a warm, friendly word or two in the reception area, not the office, will convey the idea that their schedules have been previously arranged, probably by visitors waiting in the reception area, who planned ahead. A friendly "Let's plan for time when we can really visit, either here or at lunch" will suffice in most cases. Admittedly, God's will and the providence of circumstances have a place in such considerations. But so also does the orderly and systematic planning essential to effectively carrying out the tasks He has already set before us.
Managers who haven't thought through how to handle this situation will be at the mercy of their environment and will be fortunate if they accomplish much if anything of their own choosing during the busiest days.
Twenty-five heads of Christian organizations meeting in Chicago at a management seminar were asked to list the greatest time robbers they faced. The following, not arranged in any particular order, were included in their list:
Page 212
Misplaced items |
Lack of preparation (conferences, etc.) |
Visitors (drop-ins) |
Correspondence delays (shuffling papers) |
Unanticipated interruptions |
Reading material not relevant to job |
Commuting |
Unnecessary correspondence (outgoing) |
Long letters |
Telephone interruptions |
Waiting for people |
Poor organizations |
Failure to delegate |
Coffee breaks |
Mediocre personnel (instruction required) |
Procrastination |
Routine detail |
|
We have said that the problem which is well stated is half solved. So also with respect to time robbers. Their clear and unequivocal identification is a great step in the direction of their control. With some, control will begin almost automatically upon identification. Consider, for example, "lack of preparation for a conference." Once this problem is viewed from the perspective of time wasted — (that time which, because of poor preparation for the conference, had to be spent later in reconvening the group to make the decision they could have made at the first meeting) — the corrective measure will likely be applied automatically to the conference for which you are presently in the process of preparation. When the extent of time wasted by telephone interruptions becomes evident to you, you will find yourself and your secretary automatically
Page 213
applying remedial measures to the handling of incoming calls.
Many of the time robbers will require much more control than this, however. Careful analysis of how and why you do the things you do may be necessary in many cases. Procrastination, for one, will likely represent a deeply rooted habit which will not easily surrender. Analysis, a plan of action, and commitment to successful implementation will be required for many. This is why, in the Preface, you as the reader were cautioned not to read further if you weren't ready for battle. No, this task plainly is not for the faint of heart. But the rewards for those who persevere far exceed the pain that must precede the victory.
Chapter Fourteen || Table of Contents
REFERENCES:
1. Ewing, David W., The Managerial Mind, The Free Press, New York, 1964.
2. American Institute of Management, Manual of Excellent Managements.
3. Webster, Eric, "Let's Repeal Parkinson's Law," A.M.A. Management Review, December, 1962.
4. Far Eastern Gospel Crusade, 14625 Greenfield, Detroit, Michigan.
5. Allen, Reginald, "How to Reach Department Goals Faster," Supervisory Management, April, 1965.
6. Uris, Auren, The Efficient Executive, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1957.
