Archive for the ‘Productivity’ Category

How I use my notebook

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

I recently decided to stop bringing a laptop to meetings. That doesn’t mean I just sit idly by during meetings (that’s not to say there aren’t those meetings where I wish I could just sit idly by); I still need to capture notes that are important to me, as well as next steps of action that I need to accomplish.

Initially, I used one of those standard yellow legal pads to take notes, but I’ve never liked moleskine.jpgthe options that are faced once a page fills: To tear or fold back, that is the question. Tearing off pages invariably leads to pages getting lost, and folding leaves a near-permanent bend in the top of the paper. On top of that, both methods result in the corners of the pages becoming bent, or ‘dog-eared’, all of which is unsightly.

The option of using a spiral bound notebook was there, and in the past I’ve used the “reporter’s notebook” format, and it worked well. However, I still had the problem with the dog-eared pages after extensive use.

Then I read about Moleskine.

The hard cover prevents pages from becoming bent, and the elastic strap keeps the front and back cover together when shoved into a packed case (or laptop bag). Best of all, there’s a model that fits the reporter’s notebook format, which I find helpful because it does not take up much desk real estate, a big win at a crowded conference table.

The most important thing about a notebook is not what it looks like or how it’s constructed, but, instead, what’s inside of it. There are three categories of notes that I take during meetings:

  1. Action items (or next steps) that I need to address (I purposely do not keep track of what others need to do; that’s their responsibility)
  2. Statements or decisions that will impact my work.
  3. Followup questions or clarifications.

I usually bring two colored pens to meetings, one black and the other red. I use the red pen to write my action items down, and black for all the other types of notes. The red ink stands out from the rest of the notes so that as I capture my notes, I can quickly identify the action items and put them into my task list.

Note that I only keep track of the action items I need to address; short of dependent deliverables, I have no need to know, or track, action items belonging to others.

The “normal” notes I take, written in black ink, are limited to statements of fact that I wasn’t aware of, milestones and schedule dates, and points where a consensus was reached.

The third point above (noting questions you have) is a note taking tactic that I like to encourage others to do, and for two reasons. The first is that I find it rude to interrupt someone’s train of thought with a question. I don’t like to have it done to me, and I try very hard to keep from interrupting others. When a point of question arises, I note it down, and wait for the train of though to complete, or wait for a natural break in the conversation, and then ask the question. The other reason involves a bit of trickery on the speaker’s part. If a speaker believes that they will not be interrupted, they may embark on a long diatribe, and then assume consensus when nobody asks questions when they finish after 10 or 15 minutes of non-stop talking (this is a part of a tactic that I refer to as ‘obfuscation by information overload’). If questions are written down during the monologue, you have an opportunity to ask those questions after the speaker finally runs out of words.

After the meeting, or sometimes at the end of the day, I’ll transcribe the notes in my notebook to electronic form. I find this helps reinforce my understanding of the meeting, as I’ve written about here. I’ve used plain text files or Word documents in the past, however, now I use Evernote to capture my notes. The benefit of using Evernote is that I can access and search the notes online, as well as through a Windows client. The Windows clients also provide the ability to synchronize with a central server, so my notes are up to date regardless of which computer I’m using.

Topless meetings: a rebuttal

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

While intended to be a productivity measure, the practice of barring laptops from meetings may have the opposite effect when the meeting has ended. The San Jose Mercury News and the Los Angeles Times ran stories earlier this year on the phenomenon of the “topless meeting”. While this sounds like lunch at Hooters, it’s actually the practice of barring laptops, along with PDA’s and cellphones from meetings, in an attempt to make meetings shorter and more productive.

Being that I’m at my wit’s end with endless meetings at work, I’m willing to give this a shot. My first reaction is that it’s not going to work well for me. I’m a fairly good notetaker, and I can type much faster (not to mention be much more legible) with a laptop than I can writing on a piece of paper. But I’m going to get behind it 100%. With that, here are my concerns about topless meetings:

  • Taking notes by hand takes longer and is more error-prone
  • It takes longer to transcribe the notes afterward.
  • Unable to post notes immediately after the meeting. This could result in notes being lost and not disseminated. This even applies to the practice of not taking minutes, and only capturing “next actions” on the agenda.

I agree 100% with the PDA/phone ban. I don’t care if phones are brought to the meeting, but the must be either off, or completely silent. Completely silent does not mean ‘vibrate’. I can hear most phones vibrating, and find it distracting. What’s worse is when people bring phones on vibrate mode in their pocket to a meeting, and just ignore the vibrating. Personal pleasuring aside, I find it not just annoying, but rude. If you find yourself in a position where you cannot spare 30 minutes away from your phone or PDA, then you shouldn’t be going to the meeting (and this comes from a self-confessed Crackberry addict).

The interruption hierarchy

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

If you work with people, and you probably do, you can rest assured that you’ll be interrupted from time to time. Sometimes, hopefully rarely, there will be multiple interruptions at the same time. This article shows how you should prioritize those interruptions to maximize your productivity.

The order (or interruption hierarchy) in which I process interruptions goes like this:

  1. In-person visits
  2. Phone calls
  3. E-mail and Instant Messaging

In-person visits

The in-person visit, or “walk-up” is when a co-worker visits you in person. This should receive the highest priority, as someone has taken the time to actually get up from their seat, and walk over to see you. They have taken the initiative to ask a question or resolve an issue using direct communication, the most productive way to do such a thing for both parties involved.

This is the source of one of my greatest pet peeves in a retail context. There have been times when I’ve visited a store (the “bricks and mortar” type, as the e-commerce crowd calls it), and will be in the process of finalizing a sale when the clerk drops everything because the phone rings. I’ve taken the initiative to come in to the store and really buy something, with real money, but I’ve been put on hold because a perspective customer, who may or may not come into the store, is calling. Take care of the for-sures first, then move on to others.

Phone calls

There are times when a co-worker cannot stop by because they’re not physically located in the same area as you. Sometimes they may be in an adjacent building, in another city, or they may have a position that requires them to travel. For those types of people a phone call is the most productive way of fostering communication, and you should extend a high priority to them. But for others, a phone call is not as good as an in-person visit, but better than non-verbal communications.

However, if you have an in-person visit occurring when your phone rings, let the phone go, regardless of who it is. That’s what voice mail is for. Do not interrupt the tempo of your current conversation by starting another.

Email and/or Instant Messaging

Unless the sender is in a remote location, I assume any email or IM communication is low priority. For a local (i.e. in the same building) co-worker, the only time I find that email is acceptable to start a conversation is when there may be background material necessary for the conversation (Example: sending a specific error message or stack trace, then stopping by to ask about why the error is occurring). Other than that, I view email useful only for ‘follow-up’ messages, or low-priority questions that do not require an interruption, and that can be answered at the addressee’s convenience.

Do not fall into the IM trap of confusing “Instant” with “Important”. If you find yourself stopping whenever an IM window pops up, regardless of content, consider closing your IM client. Chances are that most of the IM’s you’re receiving aren’t worth the time and thought lost by looking at them.

Obviously this changes if either of the two people involved in the communication are working off-site, perhaps telecommuting. However, I’d still prefer phone (or other voice communication, such as Skype) over email and messaging.

Managing your interruptions

A friend once told me of a co-worker that has implemented office hours, much like college professors do. During those hours, the door is open, available for anyone to drop by, ask questions, general chat, etc. However, once office hours are over, the door is shut, and it’s heads-down work. If you could possibly get by with that in your workplace, I’d suggest it. It almost requires an office; I find it hard to ‘shut the door’ on my cube.

Look into creating a “Do Not Disturb” sign policy at your workplace. In order for this to work, you’re going to need buy-in from management. If you get that, and the policy is adhered to, then you can implement at type of “office hours” policy. However, the system cannot be abused; you cannot simply leave the DND sign up all day, everyday, and expect people to respect it.

If you get to a point in a in-person or phone interruption in which you’ve either resolved the issue or reached a point where a consensus cannot be reached, you’ve got to make a move to get the conversation to wind down. In the case of the resolved issue, just repeat the consensual conclusion, and thank the co-worker. If they still don’t leave, politely mention that you need to move back to the work you were doing earlier. Typically, interruptions that reach a conclusion won’t keep going endlessly; however, those interruptions when a consensus cannot be reached can be tricky to end. Tell the co-worker that you understand the issue and will need some time to think about it, then schedule a follow up meeting. Be sure to schedule this meeting immediately to assure the co-worker that they’re not just being blown off. If that doesn’t end the conversation, try the same approach as with the conclusion scenario: tell the co-worker that you’ve got to get back to your original task, and that you’ll follow up shortly.

What is productivity?

Sunday, September 13th, 2009

Welcome to the first in what could be well over two articles on a matter of great importance and interest of mine: Productivity. Here I plan on giving my advice on ways to improve your productivity, based upon ideas of others that I’ve found useful, as well as ideas of my own. I am a software developer, and as such, will relate these articles to the discipline of software development. And yes, I just used the word “discipline” near the phrase “software development”.

The motivating factor in starting this series is that I used to work at one of the most unproductive companies I’ve ever seen. They spent over three years working on a project that shouldn’t have taken more than one year to complete, and weren’t close to a true ‘beta’ (i.e. complete functionality) when I left. I do not have answers to all of the productivity problems at this company, and by writing these, hope to force myself to find some. Prior to starting, however, I need to define what productivity is.

There seems to be confusion as to what productivity is, and how it’s measured. In my world, productivity is the measurement of how much you do in a given period of time. Specifically, the American Heritage Dictionary defines it as:

The rate at which goods or services are produced especially output per unit of labor

However, I will quite often hear something to the similar reported on business news outlets:

XYZ Widget Company reported an increase in productivity for the just ended quarter, thanks in part to the shift to a 10 hour work day.

Sorry, but that’s not an increase in productivity. It is working harder, not smarter. Let me explain a few reasons why I believe this is not an increase in productivity, and may actually be a decrease.

Let’s look at the fictional XYZ Widget Company with the assumption that they produce 1.2 widgets an hour. Over an eight-hour workday, that’s 9.6 widgets a day. If XYZ announces a 20% increase in productivity, it would mean they are creating 12 widgets a day. But if that day extends from 8 hours to 10 hours, itself a 20% increase, that washes out the productivity gain. XYZ is still creating only 1.2 widgets per hour.

To make things worse, if XYZ is a union shop, and the workers get paid 1 1/2 times their normal salary for those last two hours, it means XYZ is spending more on labor, which means XYZ is getting less for their money, another way of saying productivity at a company level declined.

It only gets worse from there. If the creation of widgets is a manual, human-based process, you have to factor in that as humans tire toward the end of the workday, and produce less as they get tired, which means that not only is XYZ paying more for labor, but they’re getting less in return.

Now let’s assume that the widgets that XYZ is producing is actually a software product. The longer software developers work, the more defects (sometimes called ‘bugs’) are injected into the software. These defects must be fixed when found by QA, meaning the developer has to stop the new task they’re working on to fix the old task they did not properly complete. Not only does that add development time (and thus reduced productivity) to the old task, it delays the new task.

To put it simply, working more hours does not mean an increase in productivity, and usually means just the opposite.