[391] in magellan
Food for thought - productivity principles
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Greg Anderson)
Thu Feb 10 17:20:39 2000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1261901500==_ma============"
Message-Id: <v04020a18b4c8e8d5e326@[18.177.0.74]>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 17:16:35 -0500
To: magellan@mit.edu
From: Greg Anderson <ganderso@MIT.EDU>
--============_-1261901500==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
This was passed along by Allison; I think that some of these principles
certainly come into play in Discovery work.
Greg
-------------
>From: "David Allen & Co." <bounce@davidco.com>
>Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 16:46:46 -0500 (EST)
>Subject: David Allen's Productivity Principles
>
>QUOTES
>
>"This responsibility for thinking through what
>one's contribution should be and one's own
>responsibility as a knowledge worker, rests on
>each individual. In the knowledge organization it
>becomes everybody's responsibility, regardless of
>his or her particular job. "- Peter F. Drucker
>
>----------
>
>FOOD FOR THOUGHT
>
>"The New Fundamentals"
>
>From time to time Human Resource managers (who
>have heard about our work) have asked me to
>submit proposals including how what I teach will
>fit in with their management and professional
>development curriculum. Each time without
>exception I have vainly perused their programs
>and failed to find one of their predetermined
>slots into which it fits. I wish it did.
>
>Not that their criteria for effectiveness are
>wrong. It's just that there seems to be something
>beyond or underneath the typical competencies of
>"leadership" and "focus on results" and
>"communication" that is not being recognized as
>critical behaviors for knowledge work.
>
>I wonder, what about the ability to...
>
>- maintain relaxed control amidst overwhelming
>amounts of incoming "stuff",
>
>- define doable projects from ambiguous
>direction, initiatives, and pressures,
>
>- decide actions required when things show up vs.
>when they blow up,
>
>- regroup, recalibrate priorities, and regain
>balance rapidly with new input,
>
>- be alone, in cooperation with everyone else,
>
>- seamlessly capture, clarify, track, and manage
>their total inventory of "open loops",
>
>- renegotiate implicit and explicit agreements
>with themselves and others,
>
>- express and consider any ideas, including bad
>ones, in front of their staff, and then evaluate
>them objectively,
>
>- refocus rapidly on desired outcomes and next
>actions when confronted with challenging
>obstacles,
>
>- consistently update, review, reassess, and
>renegotiate their total inventory of life and
>work commitments, so personal energies are fully
>available for the job at hand?
>
>Am I missing something here? Why have I never
>seen these criteria formally used for evaluation
>of the skills or performance of professionals?
>Would you want to hire or work for someone who
>didn't score well on these?
>
>If someone can't manage himself or herself, how
>on earth could they be expected to manage
>anything else?
>
>"When trouble arises and things look bad, there
>is always one individual who perceives a solution
>and is willing to take command. Very often, that
>individual is crazy." - Dave Barry
>
--============_-1261901500==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii"
This was passed along by Allison; I think that some of these principles
certainly come into play in Discovery work.
Greg
-------------
>From: "David Allen & Co." <<bounce@davidco.com>
>Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 16:46:46 -0500 (EST)
>Subject: David Allen's Productivity Principles
>
>QUOTES
>
>"This responsibility for thinking through what
>one's contribution should be and one's own
>responsibility as a knowledge worker, rests on
>each individual. In the knowledge organization it
>becomes everybody's responsibility, regardless of
>his or her particular job. "- Peter F. Drucker
>
>----------
>
>FOOD FOR THOUGHT
>
>"The New Fundamentals"
>
>From time to time Human Resource managers (who
>have heard about our work) have asked me to
>submit proposals including how what I teach will
>fit in with their management and professional
>development curriculum. Each time without
>exception I have vainly perused their programs
>and failed to find one of their predetermined
>slots into which it fits. I wish it did.
>
>Not that their criteria for effectiveness are
>wrong. It's just that there seems to be something
>beyond or underneath the typical competencies of
>"leadership" and "focus on results" and
>"communication" that is not being recognized as
><color><param>0000,0000,FFFF</param>critical behaviors for knowledge
work</color>.
>
>I wonder, what about the ability to...
>
>- maintain relaxed control amidst overwhelming
>amounts of incoming "stuff",
>
>- define doable projects from ambiguous
>direction, initiatives, and pressures,
>
>- decide actions required when things show up vs.
>when they blow up,
>
>- regroup, recalibrate priorities, and regain
>balance rapidly with new input,
>
>- be alone, in cooperation with everyone else,
>
>- seamlessly capture, clarify, track, and manage
>their total inventory of "open loops",
>
>- renegotiate implicit and explicit agreements
>with themselves and others,
>
>- express and consider any ideas, including bad
>ones, in front of their staff, and then evaluate
>them objectively,
>
>- refocus rapidly on desired outcomes and next
>actions when confronted with challenging
>obstacles,
>
>- consistently update, review, reassess, and
>renegotiate their total inventory of life and
>work commitments, so personal energies are fully
>available for the job at hand?
>
>Am I missing something here? Why have I never
>seen these criteria formally used for evaluation
>of the skills or performance of professionals?
>Would you want to hire or work for someone who
>didn't score well on these?
>
>If someone can't manage himself or herself, how
>on earth could they be expected to manage
>anything else?
>
>"When trouble arises and things look bad, there
>is always one individual who perceives a solution
>and is willing to take command. Very often, that
>individual is crazy." - Dave Barry
>
--============_-1261901500==_ma============--
