Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!sharkey!cfctech!teemc!hpftc!mco
From: mco@hpftc.UUCP (Mark C. Otto)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Low Productivity of Knowledge Workers
Message-ID: <20471@hpftc.UUCP>
Date: 16 Oct 89 04:01:51 GMT
References: <9676@venera.isi.edu> <189@crucible.UUCP> <291@voa3.UUCP> <7971@microsoft.UUCP> <6441@ficc.uu.net> <9605@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> <3326@ur-cc.UUCP> <9716@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Reply-To: mco@hpftc.UUCP (Mark C. Otto)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, AMSO Midwest, Dearborn, MI
Lines: 79

In article <9716@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> phil@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Phil Meyer) writes:
>In article <3326@ur-cc.UUCP> mpip@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Robert Annechiarico) writes:
>>- Give your users the right tools.  Don't let
>>- them choose their own, and bicker over the merits of each.  Most good managers
>>- listen to the needs of the whole, and then dictate policy.
>>
>>This astonishing, authoritarian attitude is itself a good explanation of
>>why so many choose personal computers.
>>
>
...[lots of smeary junk deleted]...
>
>Of course you want a Pee Cee.  Of course you can benefit from it.  But will
>your company/firm/organization reap the same benefits, or will they even
>be harmed by you.  If you really do well, your peers will dislike you and
>your tactics.  Your superiors will fear your success.  This is a real
>situation.  It is only the 'authoritarian' policy of management that can save
>your career, and help the 'rest' of the workforce come to the same level of
>proficiency that you possess.  An attitude of 'everyone for himself' cannot
>exist in corporate America, and is the attitude promoted by 'Personal
>Productivity'.  The 'me generation' will fail, unless WE can learn to work
>with others less enthused about computers and technology than we are.
>
>End of soapbox.
>
Yeah. Right.
You sound like the sorta guy that just came back from a thorough indoctrination
by Jerry Falwell.  You rhetorical questions don't even have question marks on
them - as if you were stating a fact.

The real fact of the matter is that PEOPLE MUST COUNT INDIVIDUALLY for ANY
organization to thrive.  Management is simply the task of motivating each
individual into WANTING TO CONTRIBUTE their best effort to the task at hand.

In a well-managed organization, workers readily accept tools which made their
work easier, faster,
and more enjoyable - freeing them to explore the higher-level aspects of their
job where they can really apply their knowledge and/or skill to the best
advantage.  Unfortuneately, most office workers are forced to use 'productivity
tools' which complicate and debase the very work which they are supposed to
simplify and generalize.

It is true that the great majority of the semi-automated office workers in
business today find themselves working on P.C. products.  These P.C.'s are
generally purchased for the workers by insecure and generally computer
illiterate managers.  These managers are convinced that P.C. products are
the solution of choice for three reasons -

1. P.C. hardware is cheap, so if their choice is wrong it probably won't
   damage the company too much (and thus affect their rise to power).
2. P.C. software is plentiful and cheap, so that even if their choice is
   far from optimal they can probably find a vendor that sells something
   that they can press into service and then blame the poor software vendor
   and/or their underlings for poor productivity (and thus not affect their
   rise to power).
3. The "everyone else is doing it this way so it must be O.K." syndrome.
   Until just recently "nobody ever got fired for buying XYZ" was the most
   commonly held belief amongst managers.

Only managers who are truely willing to spend the time, money, and personal
effort necessary to truely find and aquire adequate tools for their employees
(and these people are *VERY* few and far between) will reap the tremendous
fruits which can be borne from a well-managed project with frugal staffing
and high productivity.  These are the mangers that will rise to greatness
in well-structured and intelligently run organizations.  They quickly earn
the respect of their peers, provide tangeable results with a minimum of fuss
for their superiors and foster the undying loyalty of their underlings.

Managers that are not literate in an area such as computers, yet are forced
to make decisions about their purchase, application, viability, etc., are
almost doomed from the start.  Companies that are smart should provide training
before supplying capitol expenditure dollars.  I firmly believe that if this
had been done prior to companies dumping millions of dollars
into P.C.'s, then the world would be a better place for all of us.

-- 
Mark C. Otto     Sysop Extrordinare   UUCP: {teemc | fmsrl7 | rjf001}!hpftc!mco
Voice: 1-313-390-5001    USnail: 15301 Mercantile, Dearborn, MI. 48120
Disclaimer: NOBODY SHOULD EVER BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING THEY EVER SAID