Why Doing More With Less Is Not Stopping Work At 80% But Avoiding Waste Work
"80% is good enough, do not strive for perfection" (Manager´s handbook)
This is a statement I often hear from middle and upper management. The statement itself is true but most often interpreted and presented in a wrong context. This statement does not fit to the work of a common worker or employee. This statement is only true for employees who have manager force or lateral empowerment to delegate their own work to other employees.
If the “80% is good enough” philosophy is praised in the wrong way, hence that everyone should prevent him- or herself from working at a 100% level for providing 100% perfect results etc., then – sorry to say – that preacher understood the real “80% is good enough” philosophy wrong. Or just at an incomplete 80% level, maybe?
Yes, it is true, doing something 80% right is better than doing 100% of nothing. But here, we are not talking about doing nothing, it is about perfection when doing something. Yes, publishing data and results that are final at a 80% stage is faster than waiting until it is really final (so when 100% of customer expectation would be achieved). From my experience, such a 80% "shooting star" fast track result comes back to your desk like a boomerang, often in such a speed that it does not make any difference that you ever published/launched it. The "post-launch" correction work is often of much more effort than the effort would have been in case the work had been finalized to 100% customer expectation – and we are now just talking about fixing all the damages the bloody "shooting star" fast track has caused.
The famous Pareto rule can also not be meant because it says – quite contrary – that 80% of the results are achieved by 20% of the efforts. Err, if 80% is good enough, then we only have to work at 20% level? No, this mistakes apples for oranges. This is definitely not the message. Pity!
Now, let us make a funny exaggeration and assume that a production worker is told to do his or her work on an 80% level. We learnt that it is not about doing 80% of the workload, it is to stop at 80% of a work(ing task) – just because 80% is good enough. Sounds crazy? But this is the (wrong) message we learnt. The consequence of the wrong "80% is good enough"-philosophy is, e.g., a 8-step workflow that will be finished at less than 20% of the customer expectation.
Why? Process #1 is finished at 80%, process #2 is also finished at 80% but is at the same time based on the result of process #1. Easy percentage calculation tells that 80% of 80% is 64%. So we lost already more than one third of the expected result after these two process steps. As we have 8 steps, the overall result is 17% of what is expected. This scenario has nothing to do with the true aim of the true “80% is good enough” philosophy!
The true “80% is good enough” philosophy is about delegating tasks instead of deleting them. Delegating tasks efficiently is critical but can mainly be done by managers or similar hierarchy owners. However, these managers might get hung up on harmful micromanagement that stunts success and growth. These managers need to learn and accept that 80% is good enough – for them. The last 20% can take the longest working time, includes just tasks to be executed and have lowest impact on success. Real managers might be better off working on the next important step than seeking perfection of the previous. Perfection is not their major key to success. Delegating is. And the “80% is good enough” philosophy is about exactly this: Managers shall delegate and trust their employees.
However, a manager might feel like being the most knowledgeable and efficient person to handle every single task, but this is a poisonous mindset. The “80% is good enough” philosophy tells managers to prevent themselves from excessive control or attention to detail, but make them watch and support innovation flourish or to recalibrate the course. They need to focus on achieving their 80%, otherwise they start a micromanagement and most probably their department work and innovation could become stagnant.
"Doing more with less is avoiding waste work" (Me and maybe others)
When you do not have the force to delegate work, then doing more with less requires strategic sorting of priorities. Yes, everything is said to be a priority and a classification from low to high priority might be a difficult task. It also not easy for me. Being a passionate process improver (knowing several tools like Lean, Kaizen and Six Sigma), I just started to avoid doing waste work. This is some sort of prioritization.
If work is not explicitly aligned with your goals or the ones of your department, then it is most probably waste work. If the work is failing to produce results that measurably matter, then it is most probably waste work. If meetings lack clear purpose, seem to waste time, provide distraction and no value, then it is most probably waste work. If you read or write emails with long distribution lists on, it is not only unclear who really needs or uses the information, it is most probably waste work. Too much paperwork is not only bureaucracy, it is most probably waste work. If you observe projects that suck up a lot of time and other resources, which die a slow death or are killed outright for lack of interest, then they might be waste work.
Did you ever compare your job description with your actual daily tasks and the expectations raised against you as employee? When did you take your last "annual goal and performance assessment" review really serious the last time? How big is the work time portion you really need to accomplish your annual goals? Do you spend 80% and more of your working time to daily business activities which have nothing to do with your annual goals? You might understand that such a work culture promotes waste work behavior. This means you can follow directions, complete your assignments and even get promotions although spending most of your time on waste work.
Most waste work is planned but not thought-out. People who do waste work do not notice that their work does not produce intended outcomes. These people are very often very, very busy. Incredible busy. But they mistake activity for results. Working hard is nothing that tells something about success because you can work very hard and still not provide intended results. Most people do waste work because they were told to do it or because they are recognized and rewarded for doing it. Waste work thrives when needed results are not clearly and thoughtfully articulated.
However, most people do not want to do waste work but to make positive contributions to meaningful accomplishments. To prevent myself from waste work, I try to apply a sort of quick evaluation test if the work task I want to do next is waste work or not.
These questions must have a more or less positive ("yes") answer:
- Does this work task is in-line with my annual goals or the ones of my department? If not, is it a common part of my daily business activities?
- Is this work task defined in a Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time Bound (SMART) manner?
- Is the aim, goal and/or strategy of the work task clear to and accepted by all stakeholders?
These recommendations should be fulfilled to prevent yourself from waste work pitfalls:
- Focus on the work task part(s) that matters most. For example, if a regularly-scheduled project meeting fails to produce valuable results, remove it from the calendar. Let the meeting host know about your abscence.
- Communication about work issues needs to be simple, clear, direct, objective, compelling, and often repetitive. You are at work, so be professional.
- Understand the people around you. The key is to recognize how other might cause or create waste work for you. Some people have a knack for handing off projects just when the work gets hard and accountability is on the line. Others invent new projects to prop up their reputation.
- Prevent others from doing waste work for you!
When you are asked to do more with less, regard the challenge as an opportunity. Your strategic approach to priorities will set you apart from the complainers and establish a positive example.
That should come in really handy at promotion time. At least this is my hope.