I have been thinking a lot about Time recently—mostly because I have so little of it under my own control. Don’t get me wrong; it’s nice to be busy. However, when something you value becomes scarce, it also becomes incredibly precious.
So here are a few somewhat-connected (at least in my mind) perspectives on Time, and how it affects our work and our organizations. I’ve chosen to focus in particular on how well-managed organizations (and effective individuals) allocate their work activities using Time as a major sorting mechanism.
One of the most classic ways of thinking about organizations and hierarchy is to separate their activities into three broad categories:
1. Doing (the day-to-day, short-term activity focused on producing products or services that create value for customers). Time frame: days, or at most weeks.
2. Managing/Coordinating – the task of overseeing the Doers, and of short-term planning. Time frame: weeks, or perhaps months and quarters.
3. Leading/Strategizing – the longer-term, direction-setting role of “senior management.” Time frame: sometimes the next quarter, but more importantly the next several years, or even decades for larger organizations.
Those three levels of focus led to the traditional image of the organization as a pyramid, since historically there were always many people involved in the Doing, fewer doing the Managing, and even fewer providing long-term direction-setting.
Obviously, most large organizations have far more than three levels of hierarchy today; some of the most bureaucratic ones (both public and private sector) have as many as twelve to fourteen layers of responsibility and decision-making scope (that's one reason it takes them forever to resolve issues and change direction!).
That model worked reasonably well for centuries; it reflected the realities of the Roman Army, the Catholic Church, and industrial corporations as they grew up in the mid-1800’s. The model grew out of a stable world, where the task of leading was essentially looking in a constant and very predictable direction, out towards the horizon. The task of Managing was then largely one of translating long-term direction into short-term assignments, and the task of Doing was one of following directions from above.
Now, of course, the world has become far more dynamic and unpredictable; and technology has introduced massive automation into the Doing and Managing levels of responsibility. The classic pyramid has broken down. Many of the Doers today are not on assembly lines; they are knowledge workers who are solving problems, creating new products and processes, and thinking for themselves.
And because information technology makes it so easy for the senior executives among us to track daily production, product shipments, and revenues, it can actually seduce them to become too focused on today, and to forget that their job is to look beyond the horizon—to explore the future, and to launch long-term projects that will change what the Doers are doing five years from now. Let the Doers and the Managers deal with today and even tomorrow.
Clearly, the most common reaction to this new state of perpetual and unpredictable change has been to dissolve the hierarchy, to remove levels in the bureaucracy, and to enlarge decision-making authority (and responsibility) up and down the organization.
In one sense this is all to the good; today in many ways each of us operates at all three of these levels in our own individual work. We define our own Strategies; we Manage our own activities (we create To-Do lists, we set priorities, we coordinate our work with our peers); and we “Do” everything ourselves as well (often including specialized tasks that others could do for us far more quickly and inexpensively than we can do ourselves).
While flat organizations sound wonderful in theory, I am convinced that our confusion between short-, medium-, and long-term responsibilities is creating most of this chaotic “busy-ness” we all complain about. We don’t know how to separate our time commitments among Strategy and Planning, Managing and Coordinating, and just plain Doing.
I certainly know that lately I have personally been spending too much time doing, and not enough planning and priority-setting.
If I am going to be my own CEO and my own Manager, then I have to get much clearer about my purpose, my plans, my priorities, and my commitments (as much to myself as to my clients). And I have to become more disciplined about the way I spend my time every day. It’s way too easy to let the urgent drive out the important.
This note is thus a public commitment to getting better “organized.” I’m going to work hard to spend my precious time and energy on only three kinds of activities:
1. Meeting commitments I have already made;
2. Creating new commitments that meet my purpose and priorities;
3. “Green time” for brainstorming, exploring, and renewing my purpose
What do you think?
- About WFS
- Contact Us
- Frequently Asked Questions
- History of WFS
- Board and Council
- Press Room
- Futurist Gear
- Are You the Next CEO of the World Future Society?
- Book a WFS / Futurist Magazine Speaker
Essays and comments posted in World Future Society and THE FUTURIST magazine blog portion of this site are the intellectual property of the authors, who retain full responsibility for and rights to their content. For permission to publish, distribute copies, use excerpts, etc., please contact the author. The opinions expressed are those of the author. The World Future Society takes no stand on what the future will or should be like.
Free Email Newsletter
To sign up for Futurist Update, our free monthly email newsletter, enter your email in the box below and click Save.
You’ll rule tomorrow’s digital world. If a company fails to please you, you can wipe it off all your screens. With your finger on the kill switch, businesses will dedicate themselves to you. Routine identification will transform customer relationships and commerce. You will be known and treated personally. The most successful businesses will please everyone all the time. New tech will usher in a world where everyone wins.
In Our Final Invention (St. Martin’s Press 2013), documentary filmmaker James Barrat presents three scenarios for the long-term future of Artificial Intelligence. Unfortunately, as a skeptic he provides no preferred scenarios.
One of the advantages of being around for a long time is perspective. In particular, perspective in the field in which I chose to work many years ago – organizational and social transformation. I’m not talking about transforming a company or a city; I’m talking about transforming the whole world.
The latest resupply mission to the International Space Station (ISS) by SpaceX, Elon Musk's private company, met several milestones last week. First it delivered almost 3,500 pounds of supplies, including a space garden for growing vegetables, and legs for the on-board robot, Robonaut-2. But even more interesting was what happened at the back end of the launch.
Last night I watched an HBO documentary called "Questioning Darwin." It took an in-depth look at those who reject Darwin's theory of natural selection on grounds of faith in the words of the Judeo-Christian Bible. At the same time it presented the personal journey of Darwin from his roots to his presentation of his theories in the book, "The Origin of the Species," in which he described the mechanism of natural selection, the theory upon which our scientific understanding of how life evolves on this planet.
Google’s Director of Engineering, Ray Kurzweil, has predicted that we will reach a technological singularity by 2045, and science fiction writer Vernor Vinge is betting on 2029.
Sometimes simple ideas work, and this one is pretty simple.
There’s a new study out which, press outlets are telling me, shows that the United States is now an oligarchy, ruled by the rich and powerful, and perhaps that the US has been sliding in this direction for decades.