Hack:
The Efficient Office: An internal market for tasks
- work should get done faster, as people tend to work faster when they do what they find intrinsically or extrinsically valuable (operational improvement)
- employees should spend less time "on the job" doing things they don't find intrinsically or extrinsically valuable (morale improvement)
- given the same employees, and with the same number of hours contributed per employee per period, the difference that the proposed solution would make, would be to create more time for recreational mental activity, thereby driving innovation (more strategic resources are made available to the company)
- given the same output from employees, a difference that the proposed solution might make, would be to reduce the cost of salaries (financial bottomline improvement)
My first job in the corporate sector was at Watson Wyatt, which provided me with some exposure to contemporary commercial jargon in the human resources sector.
"It quickly becomes apparent who's good at what, and what needs to be outsourced."
I very well agree with this phrase. In order to have an efficient office, when you outsource you really need to know what and when you will do it because you cannot just outsource any tasks or jobs. Common mistakes of a company is that they just outsource and outsource, they don't plan on what needs to be outsourced and when. Know more about outsourcing here Offshore Business Processing BPO Provider.
- Log in to post comments
I really like this idea, and would love to see some companies experiment with it. One aspect of it that would be interesting to explore is how this kind of work auction would affect the rates that companies would have to pay to get things done. By the laws of supply and demand, popular activities (like flying to Shenzen to cut the ribbon on a new factory) would be in high demand, so the company shouldn't have to pay much for it. While few people would want to perform tedious tasks (like internal auditing), suggesting they would command a higher rate. Could really turn things on their head if a company were to do this.
- Log in to post comments
I agree with you and David - this should be an incredibly easy innovation (nothing wrong with that) for some organisations to make.
Isn't the issue though that organisation is more than just a collection of tasks. People have relationships that enable them to do work, tasks have to fit together within projects. So yes, this type of model works well in some sorts of sectors, eg with TopCoder which has been profiled on the Mix. I can't see it working so well in eg FMCG.
- Log in to post comments
Well gentlemen, I find that the hack works intuitively if you are the sort of person with a general understanding that all work "can," be clearly defined, and managed from a centalised location. The ability to obtain such a general understanding is dependent on each individual's aptitude and personal tendency towards analyticity.
For those without such analytical tendencies, the system still can work for them, if they interact with it as "players," in the game of work. Researchers elsewhere are currently looking into the addictive qualities of video games (most recently, such as Angry Birds and Farmville) to understand why people enjoy these games so much. One perception is that tasks, goals, and rewards are more clearly defined in the game, and as such, the player's risk/work/reward neurology interacts easily with these gamey systems.
The world might get there one day, or it might not. However, one day I'd like to see 80% of the labour market become as clearly commodified as the stock market is these days.
- Log in to post comments
You need to register in order to submit a comment.