Chapter 2 2

When discussing the work tasks of managers, most of them start with work plans, which sounds reasonable.But there is a problem with this argument, that is, it is not feasible in practice.Plans are ideas on paper, just wishful thinking, and rarely come true. In my opinion, effective managers don't start at work.They tend to start with timing rather than planning.They first need to understand how their time is used, and then try to rearrange their time and cut down on work that takes time but does not generate value.Finally, they merge the intermittent time at their disposal into large sustainable time units.The following three steps are the basis for effective management:

*Record time * Manage time *Uniform arrangement time Effective managers understand that time is a limiting factor.The output of any process is constrained by the scarcest resource, and in the process we call "production," that constraint is time. Time is also an extraordinary resource.Among other major resources, funding is actually abundant.However, we did not know before that it was not the insufficient supply of funds that constrained economic growth and economic activities, but the low demand for funds.Talent is the third constraint, but it is always possible to hire talent, although it is not easy to hire enough ideal people.However, it is true that we cannot rent, hire, buy, or otherwise acquire more time.

The supply of time is not elastic.No matter how strong the need, there is only so much the supply of time.It cannot be regulated by price, nor can a marginal utility curve be drawn for it.In addition, the time is fleeting and there is no way to store it. Yesterday's time is gone forever.Therefore, time is the most scarce thing. Time lost is completely irreparable.Within a certain range, we can substitute one resource for another, for example, copper for aluminum, capital for labor.We can use more of our intellect and we can use more of our physical strength.But nothing can replace lost time.

Doing any work takes time, and time is a condition that must be possessed.Getting any job done takes time.However, the vast majority of people don't take this unique, irreplaceable, and indispensable resource for everything.If there is one thing that sets effective managers apart from the rest of the population, it is that they value their time. People often fall short in how they spend their time. Although man has a "biological clock" like other living things, "feeling more pronounced" when he is flying across the Atlantic Ocean, man still lacks a reliable sense of time, as has been confirmed in the laboratory. If the "individual Shut him up in a room where he cannot see outside light or darkness, and he will soon lose his sense of time.Even in the dark, most people can still maintain a sense of space; but even after a few hours in a room completely isolated from the outside world with the lights on, most people cannot estimate that they have How long have you been in the room.

So, if we only rely on our own memory, I am afraid that we cannot tell how time is spent. I sometimes ask some management testers who think they have a strong memory to write down how they use their time, and then I temporarily save these written estimates.At the same time, I asked these managers to record their actual use of time.After a few weeks or months, I found that the records reflecting the actual use of time were far from their original estimates. The chairman of a company told me with certainty that his time can be roughly divided into three parts.A third of the time, according to his perception, was spent with the company's top executives; another third with key clients; It's active.We later spent more than six weeks keeping detailed records of his actual activities, and the result was clear: he spent very little time in the three areas mentioned above.He knew himself that time should be spent in these areas--memory is always helpful, and it will tell him that time has been spent on these things.However, the actual records show that he spent most of his time doing scheduling work, keeping track of the order status of some customers he knew, and constantly calling the factory for their orders.In fact, most of these orders went well, and his intervention would only delay the implementation of the order.However, when his secretary came to his office with the record, he didn't trust the secretary's record at all.After seeing similar records several times, he began to believe that records are much more reliable than memories when it comes to the use of time.

Therefore, the effective manager understands that in order to use his time well, he must first know how his time is actually spent. Managers are often under pressure to spend their time on things that do not produce any value.Any manager, whether he is a manager or not, often has to spend a lot of time on things that do not produce any benefit to the organization.A lot of time is inevitably wasted.The higher up in the organization the more pressure he feels in this regard. The person in charge of a grand duke once told me that he had been the general manager for two years. During this period, he spent almost every night on the dinner table, with the exception of Christmas and New Year's Day.These dinners are "official affairs" and each takes several hours, but there is nothing he can do to change this.It doesn't matter whether these banquets are held for employees who are about to retire after 50 years of service, or for the governors of some states with which the company has business relations.The general manager is always present.Meetings of this courtesy are one of his tasks.My friend has no illusions about this kind of communication. He knows that this kind of dinner will not bring any benefits to the company and his personal development, and eating like this every day is not in line with his interests and hobbies.Even so, he had to go to such a dinner party, and he had to be hospitable to the guests.

In the work experience of managers, such time-wasting phenomena can be said to abound.Naturally, a sales manager can't say "I'm busy" when one of the company's best customers calls.No matter how busy he is, he has to answer the phone, even if all the client wants to talk about is a bridge game from last weekend or the possibility of his daughter getting into a certain college.Hospital administrators must attend meetings of departmental committees, or doctors, nurses, technicians, etc. will feel that they are not being valued as they should be.When a member of Congress comes to visit and wants to inquire about the situation in a certain direction, the managers of government agencies will certainly not take it lightly, although the information the member wants is actually as long as he flips through the phone book or the "World Almanac" get.Over the course of the day, there will be a lot of this.

Not being a manager is not much better.They also face a lot of things that take up their time and that don't help them much, if at all, to be more productive.However, they have no way to ignore these things. In every managerial job, a large portion of time is wasted doing things that seem to have to be done but are actually useless. In order to ensure the lowest efficiency, most of the tasks of the manager need to have a considerable amount of time.If the time spent each time is less than this limit, things will not be done well, and sometimes you have to start all over again, which is tantamount to wasting time.

While a report may take 6 to 8 hours, it takes at least that much time to write the first draft.Suppose you are going to spend 7 hours writing this report, but you only write for 15 minutes at a time, twice a day.It was written in two weeks, and it was impossible to write the report in this way.However, if you lock yourself up, don't let the phone call, and don't have other distractions, and put your heart and soul into it, maybe in 5 or 6 hours you can write what I call a "draft"—— The form before the first draft is formed - the report comes.Only after the draft is out can you revise it in small chunks of time, editing it paragraph by sentence.

The same is true for experiments in the laboratory.It takes at least 5 to 12 hours to debug the experimental equipment and complete the test at least once.If it is interrupted in the middle, I am afraid that everything will have to start from scratch. In order to improve work efficiency, every knowledge worker, especially the manager, needs to learn how to save a lot of time.It's not enough to just have the bits and pieces of time.Although the sum of these sporadic times is not small. Even more so when it comes to doing human work.The central task of a manager is to be a human being. Human beings consume the most time, and most of the time is wasted.

If you are only prepared to spend a few minutes doing human work, nothing will come of it.If you want to convince others to accept your point of view, you have to spend enough time.If a manager thinks that it is enough to spend 15 minutes discussing work plans, development directions, and work performance with his subordinates, he is probably deceiving himself.If you really want to influence others, then you have to spend at least one hour or more.If you want to build good relationships with other people, then definitely need to spend more time. It takes time in particular to build relationships with knowledge workers.For whatever reason, regardless of the hierarchies and power gaps among knowledge workers, regardless of whether they take themselves too seriously, they tend to demand more time from their superiors and colleagues than manual workers .In addition, since mental work is not as well-defined as physical work, it is difficult to sum up a person's work in a few words.We can say to manual workers: "The standard is to do 50 per hour, and you only do 42." But to knowledge workers.We can only see how well he does his job by sitting down with him and reviewing what should be done and why.Doing so is of course time consuming. Since the knowledge worker's work plan is arranged by himself, he must understand what others expect him to contribute and why he should make such a contribution.He also needs to know enough about the workings of those who must use the fruits of his knowledge.To do this, he needs a lot of information, he needs to discuss it with others, and he needs others to provide him with guidance, all of which take time.Contrary to popular belief, in doing so he took up the time not only of his superiors but also of those around him. If the knowledge worker is to achieve any performance, he must focus on the work outcomes and performance goals of the organization as a whole.This means that he must save time to do these things, and he must turn his attention from his own work to the results, from his major to the outside world, because only the outside world can talk about performance. In large organizations, where knowledge workers are productive, it is often because senior management takes the time to communicate with them on a regular basis.This exchange has a wide range and sometimes even includes some junior knowledge workers.These senior supervisors would ask, "What should we know about your work as leaders of the agency? What suggestions do you have for the organization? Are there any opportunities that you see that we are not taking advantage of? Do you feel that there are still What are the hidden dangers that we are not aware of? Also, what do you want to know from me about this unit?" In fact, in government agencies, business units, research laboratories, and military agencies, this kind of leisurely communication is also required.Without such communication, knowledge workers tend to lose enthusiasm for their work and become mediocre people; or they just focus on their own professional fields and fail to see the needs and opportunities of the entire organization.However, it is time-consuming to have such an exchange, especially since it has to be done in a calm and relaxed atmosphere.Only in this way, everyone will feel that "we have enough time to exchange views calmly".This actually means doing a lot of things at a high speed, but it also means that you have to set aside enough blocks of time to do it, and there should be as few breaks as possible in between. It takes a lot of time to coordinate interpersonal and work relationships. If you do it too hastily, it will easily cause friction.Such coordination is indispensable in institutions.The more people in an organization, the longer it takes to coordinate relationships, and the less time is available to work, complete tasks, and produce results. In the literature on management, I have long heard of a theory called "management span", which means that a manager can only effectively manage a few subordinates who are related to each other at work. (For example, an accountant, a sales manager, and a production manager, these three can only make their work effective through coordinated work.) However, there is no need to invite such managers between chain store managers located in different cities. Coordinate the work.So a regional vice president can manage an infinite number of chain store managers, and don't worry about violating the principle of "management span".Regardless of whether this theory is tenable.One thing is for sure: the more people working together, the more time will be spent coordinating relationships and the less time will be spent working and completing tasks.Large institutions become strong and powerful only when they consume so much of the time of their managers. So the larger the institution, the less time its managers actually have at their disposal.Under such circumstances, it has become a very important job for the managers of the organization to figure out how to spend their time and how to make good use of the sporadic time that they can control. The more people in an organization, the more there will be the need to make personnel decisions.However, the more decisions you make, the more likely you are to make mistakes.It often takes a lot of time to make a correct personnel decision, because some issues involved in the decision can only be seen more clearly after going through several processes. I have had the privilege of observing some highly effective management exams, some of which make decisions quickly and others of which are slower.But when they make decisions about personnel, they are all, without exception, very careful.They often need to make several decisions before they can really make up their minds. General Motors is the largest manufacturer in the world, and its former head, Alfred, P.Sloan was said to have a habit of not adjudicating the first time any appointment came up.He makes only a preliminary judgment, and even that often takes hours.After a few days or weeks, he will come back to reconsider the problem, and he will not be affected by the first judgment.Only after he had seen the name several times did he consider the appointment of this person.Mr. Sloan has a reputation for "knowing people and doing good jobs", but when he was asked what his secret is in selecting talents, he is said to have replied, "There is no secret at all, I just have this feeling: the first person I see That name is often not a suitable candidate. Therefore, I always have to think twice and deliberate before making a decision." However, Sloan is not a very patient person. Not too many people make such important decisions.However, from what I've seen of some of the most effective managers, they've learned this: If you want to make a good decision about people, you have to spend hours on it. Uninterrupted consideration. The director of a small government research institute also encountered the same problem when he needed to dismiss a senior administrative staff.The man was over 50 and had been working at the institute in the past.Worked brilliantly for a few years, then suddenly failed and could no longer do his job well.According to the relevant regulations of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, he could be dismissed, but the Institute did not do so.Of course, he can also be demoted to use, but the director feels that doing so will ruin his life. After all, he has worked diligently in the institute for many years and made useful contributions to the institute.Of course, he can no longer stay in the administrative position; his shortcomings are obvious, and keeping him is very detrimental to the work of the whole institute. The director and the deputy director have considered this issue together several times, but they can't find a solution.However, one night when they cleared all distractions.After three or four hours of sitting together and poring over this question, a "very obvious" answer finally emerged.It was such a logical solution that they both wondered why it hadn't occurred to them before.The solution is to remove the person from the position for which he is not well suited and reassign him to another task that does not require administrative performance, but is equally important. It is best to have large chunks of uninterrupted time when considering major decisions such as who should be included in a task force to study a specific issue; What are the responsibilities; should someone with strong sales knowledge (necessary to do the job) but lack technical training be promoted into the vacant position, or should someone with first-rate technical experience but lack sales be promoted to the vacant position? People from the background ascend up, and so on. Making personnel decisions is time-consuming for a simple reason: God did not create people with the thought that they would run institutions.There is, therefore, a dearth of human beings, both quantitative and qualitative, for the fulfillment of the tasks of the governing bodies, and we cannot manufacture them with machines or moulds.Talent is always like this, and at best it is just "generally in line with the requirements".To carry out work, you have to employ people, and people cannot be replaced by any other resources, so when making decisions in this area, you must spend a lot of time thinking and making judgments. There is a proverb among the Slavic peasants in Eastern Europe: "If you have something less than others in physical strength, then you must have something more than others in intelligence." This may be regarded as a kind of "law of conservation of energy" Quite a novel explanation, but it is more like a "law of conservation of time".If we can spend more time on physical labor, we can spend more time on mental labor.If we want ordinary workers, machine operators, and ordinary workers to work smoothly, then knowledge workers will have to work harder.Our work is inseparable from mental work, and we must put mental work back into our work, and we must allow mental work to occupy a greater weight. Nor will the time demands on knowledge workers drop.Machine operators working 40 hours a week now, maybe 35 hours a week in the near future, are doing better than anyone else (no matter how hard they worked and how rich they were at the time).But the sluggish days of the machine operator are all a result of the overtime hours of the knowledge worker.It's not that managers in today's industrialized countries don't know how to live comfortably.The reality is that managers everywhere are working overtime, and there is still not enough time.Managers' time crunch is not only not going away, it's going to be exacerbated. An important reason for this situation is that a high standard of living always presupposes economic innovation and change.This kind of innovation and change cannot occur without managers spending a lot of time and energy.If time is short, you can only think about things you are familiar with, or you can only do things you have done before. There has been a lot of discussion lately about why Britain's economy got so bad after the war.Everyone thinks that one of the reasons is that the old British non-entrepreneurs hope that they can live a leisurely and comfortable life like the workers and shorten their working hours like the workers.The only practicable way for their aspirations to be realized is for industry and enterprise to run on the old track.In this way, innovation and change are shut out of the UK. Regardless of the needs of the organization.Whether it is the need for personnel considerations or the need for change and innovation, it has become more and more important for managers to learn how to manage their own time.To manage your time well, you must first understand where your time is spent. For nearly a century.We have already learned that a person must first make a good record of time usage, then he can understand how his time is used, and finally he can manage his time well.That is to say, for manual labor, whether skilled or unskilled, we have realized that we must do this because "scientific management" around 1900 tells us that we must make decisions about how much time is required to do each piece of manual work. Detailed records.Today, hardly any country is so far behind in industrial management that it does not know to keep a systematic time record for the operations of manual laborers. However, so far we have only known to apply this knowledge to those jobs where the time factor is too important; in other words, we have only applied it in those areas where the difference between good time and wasted time is mainly reflected in efficiency and cost. this knowledge.This is not the case in some areas of work that are becoming more and more important, especially those mental tasks that have to deal with time, especially management work.In this field, the difference between good time use and wasted time is mainly manifested in the effectiveness and results of work. To make the management work effective, the first step is to record the situation of his actual use of time. Regarding the specific method of recording time, we will not discuss it here.Some managers may keep records themselves.Others, such as the chairman, may just take care of them, and the secretary will do the recording.The most important thing is to record the time, and it must be real.It is necessary to record the exact time when things happened, and it is absolutely impossible to write them down from memory afterwards. Many effective managers maintain the habit of keeping such records and reviewing them on a monthly basis.Effective managers at least twice a year, each time 3-4 weeks to do their own work records.Managers will have to reconsider and revise their schedules every time they take notes in person.But in less than six months, they will definitely find that they have deviated again, and often waste time on trivial matters.This is a practice, and it is only through repeated practice that one learns to use one's time effectively, and only by repeated efforts to manage one's time well can one avoid such deviations. The second step is to manage time in an orderly manner.To this end, you need to find out which of your activities are time-wasting and ineffective, and try to exclude these activities from the schedule as much as possible.To do this, here are some diagnostic questions to ask yourself. 1.The first thing to do is to find and eliminate those things that don't need to be done and those things that are a waste of time and not productive.For this reason, it is necessary to carefully review all the activities on the record: "What will happen if you don't do this at all?" If the result of the review is "no relationship", then the conclusion is clear: don't do it in the future. Do this again, It's incomprehensible that so many busy people are constantly busy with things they find impossible to let go, such as endless speeches and banquets, asking them to be on various committees and boards, all of which will Let these busy people spend a large part of their time.Although they often don't enjoy these activities themselves, and can't really fulfill these responsibilities, they still have to participate in these activities year after year.In fact, as long as you learn to say "no", the problem will be solved.There is no benefit to my institution, to me, or to the organization that hosts these events by attending such events. The manager who had a banquet every night once told us that after analyzing these dinners, he found that at least one third of the banquets did not require the company's senior management to attend.Sometimes he even felt a little dumbfounded, because the host didn't really expect him to be there.They had sent the invitation out of sheer politeness, when they had hoped that he would decline it, and if he did accept it, they would have been at a loss for what to do. I have never seen a manager (regardless of his position and status) willing to voluntarily forgo some of these invitations. 2.The next question is: "Which activities on the record can be participated by others without affecting the effect?" The chairman who often needs to attend the banquet also found that about one-third of the formal banquets only need to be attended by the company's senior management personnel, and he does not have to attend in person every time.Because the organizers just want to put the company's name on the guest list. For several years people have been talking about - a kind of "delegation" in management ("delegation" in managment).Whether it's a business, a government agency, a university or the military, every administrator in any of these institutions is told to be a qualified "authorized principal" (dclegator).In fact, in some large units, most managers themselves are constantly advocating this approach.I don't know what good it is, it's reasonable to preach that no one wants to hear it, and even in their terms, the delegacy seems pointless.If this delegation means that someone else should do part of the work "for me", then it is wrong.We get paid because we do our part.Isn't the laziest manager the best manager, according to them? This argument is not only absurd, but also unethical. However, I have never met a manager who looked at his own time records and did not change his habits.He will soon learn to defer to others what is not his business.As long as he looks at the time record, he will suddenly realize that he does not have enough time to do the things he thinks are important, the things he wants to do, and the things that are within the scope of his own responsibility.The only way to solve this problem is to give others to do all the things that can be done by others. A manager's official travel is an excellent example.In his satire, Professor Northcote Parkinson argues that the best way to get rid of a troublesome boss is to make him travel.Using modern aircraft as a management tool is indeed an overestimation of its role.Business travel is of course necessary, but most of this task should be undertaken by young people.Business trips are very novel for them, and their physical strength recovers faster after staying overnight in a hotel.They are not afraid of travel fatigue, so they can do their jobs better than their more experienced, better trained, but fatigue-prone bosses. Attending a meeting is another example. Although it does not happen that others cannot host the meeting, managers always have to attend the meeting in person.Managers often spend hours participating in discussions before the first draft of the document comes out.In a research laboratory, a senior physicist spends a lot of time writing reports on his research work in "plain language."And around him, there are many people who have enough scientific knowledge to know what the physicist wants to say, and they can easily write an easy-to-understand job report, while the physicist only knows how to express it. Complex concepts of advanced mathematics.In short, many of the tasks that are currently done by managers are actually very convenient to be done by others, so these tasks should be done by others. The term "delegation" is actually misleading and misleading.Hand over the things that others can do, so that managers don't have to "entrust" others, and they can concentrate on doing the work they should do, so they can greatly improve their work efficiency. 3.Generally speaking, time wasting often occurs within the control of the manager, and he can completely eliminate this waste by himself.The time he wasted was often someone else's time. The symptoms of this disorder are not obvious, but we have a simple way to diagnose this disorder.That is to ask your subordinates.Effective managers have learned to ask strategically, but unabashedly, "What are the things I often do that waste your time and don't produce results?" Dare to ask such questions, and not be afraid to know the truth of the matter. It is a sign of an effective manager. Even if a manager does a productive job, the practice itself is a waste of other people's time. A senior financial executive at a large organization knew that he was wasting a lot of time calling office meetings.No matter what the content of the meeting was, he called all his direct reports to the meeting every time, and every meeting ended up being very long.Those who come to the meeting, in order to show their concern for the meeting.Everyone has to ask one or two questions, which are often irrelevant to the meeting agenda.Therefore, there is no side to the meeting.The senior manager didn't realize the problem at first, until one day he asked his subordinates, and the subordinates also thought that this kind of meeting was a waste of everyone's time.He has always felt that everyone attaches great importance to their status in the organization, and often puts a high value on whether they know the situation. Therefore, he always worries that if some people do not receive the meeting invitation, they may feel left out. However, it's all right now, and the manager began to use a new way to meet the psychological needs of his subordinates.He will first circulate a printed notice among his subordinates, which reads: "I have invited Mr. Smith, Jones and Robinson to come to the meeting room on the fourth floor at 3 pm on Wednesday, October 10, to discuss the budget allocation for next year. If anyone feels interested in this area or wants to participate in the discussion, you are welcome to attend the meeting. However, whether you attended the meeting or not, you will soon receive a detailed discussion note introducing the meeting to you decisions made, and your opinion on those decisions will be sought at the same time.” In the past, more than a dozen people spent half a day studying the problem, but now there are three people plus a secretary who takes meeting minutes.It takes less than an hour to get things done, and no one feels left out. Many managers are aware of this unproductive and unnecessary waste of time, but are afraid to remove these activities so easily.They worry that if they don't delete well, they will delete important things too.In fact, this kind of mistake happened, and he would find out immediately.It is not difficult to correct. When every American president first came to power, he always accepted many invitations.But he soon discovers that he has a lot of other things to do and that the flood of invitations will mostly not help him be productive.So he began to decline invitations, so that he finally made the outside world feel that he was not easy to approach.Weeks to months, newspapers and radio stations start reporting, "The President is losing touch with the world." Find a more suitable compromise between jobs. In fact, there is no risk for managers to cut their activities too much.We are usually easy to overestimate (instead of underestimate) the importance of ourselves, and always think that many things can only be done by ourselves.Even very effective managers do many unnecessary things that do not produce any effect. The argument that slashing activities too hard creates risk is pure nonsense.One of the most convincing examples is that some people with serious diseases or disabilities can often achieve extremely high work efficiency. Harry Hopkins is an excellent example.During World War II, Harry was the most trusted adviser to President Roosevelt.哈里几乎是个垂死的人，连走路都觉得十分艰难，阴天才能工作几个小时，这使他不得不将活动减少到最低限度，只做那些最最关键的事情。因此，他不但没有丧失工作效率，而且还被丘吉尔称之为'核心人物”，其战时的贡献是美国政府里其他人所没法比拟的。 这当然算是个极端的例子，但它可以充分说明：如果认真地去努力，我们的确可以管理好自己的时间；如果我们大胆地砍掉那些浪费时间的活动，工作效率绝对不会受损失。 以上三个诊断性的问题旨在说明管理者自己能控制那些耗费时间又不产生效果的活动。每位知识工作者、每位管理者都该用以上子个问题来检查一下自己。但是，经理也要关心因管理不善或机构有缺陷而产生的时间流失现象。管理不善不但会浪费大家的时间，特别会浪费经理自己的时间。 1.首先必须找出那些因缺乏制度或远见卓识而产生的种浪费时间现象。这些现象有一个共同的症状，那就是会反复出现“危急现象”，比如每年都会发生的危机。这种危急现象如果发生了第二次，那就决不能让它再发生第三次。 每年出现的库存危急现象就是个例子。现在用上了电脑，于是我们就可以比过去更加容易地去对付这一危机了，但是费用也比以往任何时候都高了，这么看来我们还很难说已经取得了很大改进。 这种反复出现的危急现象是应该可以预测出来的，因此，是可以被预防的，或者可以用一套普通员工都能掌握的常规办法来加以处理。所谓“常规办法”就是指一些缺乏判断能力的新手也能做好的那些本来要很聪明的人才能做成的工作。这套办法实际上就是一些精明强干的人在处理以往出现的危机时积累下来的经验，并将它以常规处理办法的形式表达出来。 这种会反复出现的危急现象并不只局限于—个单位的下层，它还会影响到一个单位里的每一个人。 好多年来．一家颇有规模的公司每年12月初都要陷入一场忙乱之中。由于公司业务的季节性很强．每年的最后—季度业务总是不多，因此，第四季度的销售额和盈利常常难以测定。但是公司的管理层在每年第一季度末发表的中期报行中必须对全年的收入进行预测。三个月后，当进入第四季度时、公司往往忙得要命，往往不得不采取紧急行动，否则就难以达到管理层所提出的预测目标。在三到五个星期里，管理层没法做任何其他事情。其实只要大笔一挥，便可解决这一危机。而现在最高管理部门只预测某个阶段的结果，而不再生硬地预测全年的数字了。这—改进使董事、股东以及金融界人士十分高兴。几年前通常要发生的危机，现在已不再成为问题了。第四季度的销售额比过去也有所提高．这是因为管理者的时间已不再被浪费在搞全公司的突击达标上了。 在麦克纳马拉接任美国防部长前，每当6月30日财政年度即将结束时．五角大楼上下都会产生最后一分钟的危机感。大大小小的管理者，不管是军人还是非军人．在5—6月期间，拼命突击花钱，生伯国会拨给五角大楼当年的经费用不完还要上缴。(这种最后时刻突击花钱的毛病也同样表现在俄罗斯的计划经济中。)然而，这种危机感完全是不必要的，麦克纳马拉一上台就发现了这一问题。法律一直允许把那些必要但却尚未用完的拨款子以保留。 这种反复出现的危机感往往就是人们马虎和懒散的一种症状。 好多年前，当我刚开始做咨询时，由于不懂生产知识，我不得不学习如何区分哪个是经营得好的工厂，哪个是经营得不好的工厂，可是不久我就学会了如何进行鉴别：经营得很好的工厂往往是个静悄悄的地方；一家带有“戏剧色彩”的工厂、一家可向来访者讲述其“生产壮举”的工厂必然是经营得较差的工厂。经营得很好的工厂介 绍起来是很乏味的，没有任何令人激动的事倩，因为各种危机早巳在他们的预料之中，而且早已都被转化成一套套固定的处理程式了。 同样的道理，一个管理得很好的机构介绍起来也是“很乏味的”。在这样的机构里，所渭“引人注目”的事情大概就是为未来做决策，而不是重塑过去的英雄行为。 2.机构臃肿、人浮于书是产生浪费时间的原因。 我读一年级时，算术入门节上问道：“两个挖沟工人2天挖成一条水沟，如果此沟由四个人来挖，需要多久才能挖完?”对—年级的学生来说．正确答案当然是“一天”。如果联系列管邢者的上作上，那么正确答案也许就是“4天”，甚至可能是“没完没了”。 也可能是因为任务繁重，力量不够。在这种情况下、任务也许可以完成，但工作会有所损失。不过，这并非是一条规律。在通常情况下，总是人多了一点，因此缺乏工作效率。他们总要花越来越多的时间来协调人员之间的相互关系，而这些时间本来是应该花在工作上的。 有一个鉴别人浮于事的可靠标准。如果高级管理人员(持别是经理)不得不将他工作时间的十分之一花在处理“人际关系“上，花在处理内部的不和与磨擦上，花在处理内部的权限之争以及相互合作等问题上时，那么这支队伍肯定是人浮于事了。人多了反而会互相妨碍工作，反而会成为实现绩效的障碍。在精干的机构里，人们都有充分的活动余地，不大会发生碰撞与冲突，也不需要到处去做解释才能把工作进行下去。 机构臃肿、人浮了事也总有借口。经常可以听到这样的说法：“我们的班子必须要有—个热力学家(或者个专利律师，或者一个经济学家)。”这类专家平时根本就不太派得上用场，其至完全派不上用场，然而人们还是觉得，“我们得要有这么一个人，一旦需要就可派上用场。再说他也需要熟悉和了解我们的情况，需要从—开始就成为我们中的一员。”其实．做好平时的工作，只要有关的知识相技能就可以了。偶尔我们也会需要专家，需要就某个 问题向他们进行咨询，但他们不应该是单位内部的人。付费向他们咨询要比把他们请到单位内部来便宜得多，更不要说把一个大材小用的人留在单位里会对工作效率产生什么样的影响。他只能起伤害机构的作用。 3.另一个常见的浪费时间的原因是机构功能不健全，其主要症状就是会议过多。 从定义上说，不断开会就是承认机构有缺陷。因为不开会的话，人们就可以把时间花在工作上，人们没法同时干两件事。在设计理想的结构中(在今天这变幻无常的情况下，这种理想结构只是一个梦想)，是不需要开会的。每人对他做好工作需要知道的东西都一清二楚，每人都能得到做好工作所必须的资源。我们开会是因为有—项特定的任务需要不同岗位打夯的人共同合作才能完成，也就是说，完成这项特定的任务所必须的知识和经验个人并不具备，因此必须将好几个人的知识和经验加在一起才行。 然而，问题总是会议开得过多，机构总要搞那么多的合作，简直使行为科学家们希望创造“合作”机会的良好愿望显得多此一举。不过要是机构的管理者也花相当多的时间来开会，那可就是机构功能不健全的表现了。 每次会议必然会产生一大堆小型的后续会议——包括正式的和非正式的，不管是哪类会议，开起来总要好几个小时。因此，会议必须要有明确的目的。没有目的的会议，开起来令人讨厌，而且害处也很大。 更重要的是，我们只能偶尔采用一下开会的办法，决不能将它当成一条规则。倘若一个机构里的人一天到晚都在开会，那就没人干工作了。不管是什么机构，只要时间记录显示会议开得过多，它必然是个消费时间的、功能不健全的机构。 不过也有例外，有些特殊的组织就是为开会而成立的，诸如杜邦公司和新泽四美孚石油公司这样的大公司的董事会，它们是公司重要事务的最高审议和裁决机构，但它们从不开展业务工作。这两家公司都早已明确：董事会的成员不可参与公司其他方面的工作。另外，出于同样的考虑，法官们也不能被允许在业余时间为别人当辩护律师。 通常说来，开会决不能成为管理者日程上的主要内容。会议太多表明机构的分工欠佳、机构的组成有缺陷，表明本来由一个岗位或一个部门所做的工作现在却由几种岗位或者几个部门分着在做了。出现这种情况意味着职责不清，说明有关的信息并未向需要者传达。 有一家大公司成天开会，其根本原因就是因为这家传统能源企业的机构已经老化。早在1900年前就已开始运转的巨大汽轮机组成了该公司的一个传统部门；二战期间，该公司又开始从事飞机发动机的制造，结果又形成了专门从事大型军用喷气发动机制造的另一个部门；最后，在研究实验室的基础之上．又成立了原子能部，该部从建制上与实验室或多或少还保持着一定的联系。 可是时至今日，公司的这三个部门已木再是各占一片市场、互不相关的了。现在三者之间可以相互补充、相互替代，关系越来越密切。在一定的条件厂．各自都能生产出最经济、最优越的发电设备。从这个角度讲，他们都是竞争者。如果能将其中的两项业务结合起来，那肯定可以取得任何一种产品所无法达到的效果。 十分明显，公司现在需要一项能源政策。公司需要一个决策：是同时推进这三种发电设备，让它们相互竞争?还是将其中的某一种作为主要业务，而将其他两项作为辅助性业务?或者只抓其中的两项(到底应该是哪两项)，并将它们作为“能源一揽子计划”结合起来进行开发?关于如何在这三个部门之间分配现有资金一事，也需要有一个决策。然而，最关键的是能源产业需要有一个能反映能源市场实际情况的统一机构，为相同的客户生产相同的成品——电力。实际情况恰恰相反，公司设立了三个部门，每个部门都利用机构这堵“围墙”来保护自己免受其他两方的损害，而在“围墙”之内各有自己的一套行事方式，各打一套规矩和习惯。就近升迁制度也各不相同。每个部门部很乐观自信，都认为在今后十年中自己的产品有可能会在整个能源市场上占据75％的份额。 这样一来，但个部门几年来成天开会。由于各个部门都向最高管理层的不同成员进行汇报，于是整个管理层只忙着参加会议，对公司当前的真实情况并不清楚。后来，公司终于采取措施，结束了这三分天下的局面，将它们合并成一个部门，并由一个经理来统一管理。虽然内部尚有不少争斗，重大政策问题也还有待于制订，但起码对应该制订哪些重大政策已有所了解，最高管理层不必再去主持每次会议，也不必再士充当会议的裁判丁。这样—来，开会的时间比过去大大地缩短了。 4.最后一个浪费时间的原因是信息功能不健全。 一家大医院的院长几年来不断接到医生们打来的电话，想请他为一些需要住院的病人解决床位。据住院部“了解”，已经没有床位，然而院长几乎每次都能找到一些床位。这是因为病人出院后，其信息并不能立即反馈到住院部去。病房的护士当然知道．病房值班室人员也知道，因为他们要为出院病人结账。可是，住院不所得到的“床位统计数”是每天早上5点钟统计的数字，而大部分住院病人都是在上午医生查房后就离了。要修正这种信息错误只是举手之劳。只要将病房护士报给值班室的账单复印一份交给作院部就行了。 常常出现的另一种更为严重的情况是信息不对路。 制造部门常常为一些生产数字而头痛。这些数字往往要经过一番“意译”后才能被操作人员所使用。向操作人员提供的往往都是平均数。那是会计部门所需要的。操作人员并不需要平均数，他们要的是生产幅度、最高数与最低数——诸如产品的组合、产量的高低、作业的时间等等。为了得到这些数据、他们往往不得不每天花上好几个小时分析研究这些个均数，或者就得建立自己的“秘密”会计机构。会计能得到各种信息，但是一般说来不会有人专门想到要去提醒会计制造部门需要什么样的信息。 这些在管理上耗费时间的毛病，诸如人浮于事、功能不灵以及信息不对路等，有时候纠正起来并不难、有时候纠正起来却需要时间和耐心。不过，只要你肯作出努力，收获总是很大的，特别是可以帮你省出许多时间来。 假如管理者对自己的时间使用情况作了详细的记录．对记录进行了分析，并在此基础上努力地去管理好自己的时间．那么他对自己有多少时间可以用来做重要的工作心中是有数的。然而，他到底有多少自己可以以支配的、可用于做重要工作的、能为本单位真正作出贡献的时间? 尽管管理者非常努力地想消除各种浪费时间的因素，用这种方法省出来的时间总是有限的。 在我所见到过的人中，时间管理得最为有效的人就是一家大银行的总裁。我与他曾在高层管理部门共同工作过两年，在此期间，我每月有一次与他会晤的机会。每次会晤他只给我一个半小时，他总是事先作好充分的准备，这使我也学会了事先作好准备。每次会晤只谈一个议题，谈到将近1小时20分钟时，总裁就会对我说：“德鲁克先生，我看你最好把我们所谈的内容归纳一下，并概要地说一说下次会晤的议题是什么。”等会晤满1小时30分钟时，他就回站在门口与我握手告别。 会晤持续了一年后，我终了忍不住问他道：“为什么每次会晤你只给我一个半小时?”他回答说：“道理很简单，我的注意力集中的时限就是一个半小时。如果在某一个议题上超过—个半小时．我的谈话就会没新意了。从另一方面看，如果时间少于一个个小时，那么重要问题就无法淡透，也没法把自己想说的事情说清楚。” 每次会晤都在他的办公室里进行，但我从未发现有什么电话来打扰，也不曾看到他的秘书在会晤期间伸进头来报告说有哪位重要人物因紧急事务需要见他。于是有一天我就问起此事，他回答道：“我已关照过秘书在会晤期间不接任何电话。当然，美国总统和我太大的电话是例外。不过总统不常往这里打电话，而我的太大对我就更了解了。对于其他别的事情，一概都由秘书挡驾了．直到我们的会晤结束后再说。接着．我就用半个小时的时间给会晤期间来电话的人一一回电话，并让自己熟悉每个有关情况。我还尚末遇到过不能等90分钟的紧急情况呢。“ 无须多说，这位总裁每月会晤一次所得的收获往往要比其他同样能赶的管理者开一个月的会议所得的收获更多。 然而，就是这样一位很有条理的管理者也不得不将他一半以上的时间用于那些无关紧要的、不一定会有价值的、但却非干不可的事情上面，比如接待“顺道来访”的重要客户，出席那些没有他参加照样能开的会议，为一些本不该由他来管、但却总是送到他这里来的日常事务做决定。 每当我听到某个高级管理者声称他可以控制一大半的时间，并能按自己的意愿来支配这些时间时，我几乎可以肯定：他对自己的时间到底是怎么花掉的心中并不清楚。实际上，高级管 理者如果有四分之一的时间真正是自己可以支配的话，那就蛮不错了，他可以用这段时间来完成重要的工作，真正作出——些贡献。人家愿意向他支付薪水，就是因为他有这些贡献。在绝大部分机构里几乎都是这么一种情况，恐怕只有政府机关是个例外。在政府机关里，高层人员花在不一定有效果和价值的事情上的时间会更多。 管理者的地位越高，他能够控制的时间就越少，他的大部分时间都花在没什么贡献的事情上了。机构越大，需要花在让机构运转上的时间就会越多，而用于使机构发挥作用并产生效益上的时间就会越少。 因此，卓有成效的管理者明白：必须用好自己可以支配的时间。他知道自己需要的是整块的时间，零答碎碎的时间是派不上用场的。如果能把零星时间合并成大块时间，就是只有四分之个工作日，也可以完成一件重要的事情，假如这些时间都是零打碎敲的，这里15分钟、那里半小时，就是有四分之三个工作日，也干不成什么事情。 so.管理好时间的最后一条措施就是如何把记录和分析所显示的、通常是属于管理者自己可以支配的时间集中起来。 这样做的办法还不少。比如高层人员通常每周可以在家里办一天公，编辑和科研人员通常就是采用这种办法来集中时间的。 还有些人每周专门拨出两天时间(如星期一、星期五)从事日常工作(诸如会议、检查、研究问题等等)，而将其余几天的上午都留出来处理重要事务。 上面提到的那位银行总裁就是这样安排时间的。每周一、五他召开例行会议，让其他高级管理者汇报当前工作情况，会见重要客户等等。周二、周三和周四的下午专门处理临时需要处理的事务，这样的事总少不了，比如一些紧急人事安排问题，一些重要客户或者外国银行代表的突然来访，去华盛顿出差等。而他将这三天的上午专门留着处理重要事务，时间部是整块的，每个问题一个半小时。 另一种采用得较为广泛的办法是每天上午在家里安排出一段时间来。 在卡尔松教授的研究报告中，曾经提到过一位极有工作效率的管理者，他每天去班前总要在自己的书房里工作一个半小时，期间不接任何电话。由于还要按时上班，这一做法意味着每天必须一清早就得起来工作。不过这种处理重要事情的办法显然要比“把工作带回家去，吃过晚饭后再干几小时”的做法更加可取，因为到那么晚时，大多数管理者早已精疲力竭，要想干好上作也很困难。再说，对中年人或者年纪较大者来说，每天早点起床晚上早点休息或许会更好一些。喜欢把工作带回家来开夜车的人这么多，这里恰恰有—个很糟糕的情况：既然可以开夜车，白天何必要工作得那么紧张呢?于是白天的时间往往就管理不好了。 尽管如何集中可以支配的时间的方法是重要的，但更为重要的是时间如何用法。大多数入都采用将不重要的、效果不明显的事挤到一块，用这种办法省出一块时间来。不过这种办法并不能解决什么问题，因为这些不太重要、但却非做不可的事仍然在管理者的思想上和时间安排上占着重要的位置。因此，只要时间一紧张，他们就会以牺牲那些自己可以支配的时间、牺牲应该去做的重要工作来适应新的时间需要。在几天或几个星期之内，新的危机、新的急需处理的事务以及新的琐事就会把管理者本来可以自由支配的时间全部用光。 卓有成效的管理者首先要估计一下他们到底有多少确实可由自己支配的时间，然后再将一段长短合适的时间整块地保留下来。如果后来发现其他事情占用了这部分时间，那么他们就需要重新审查自己的时间记录，并将那些效果不明显、耗时又多的活动砍掉。前面已经说过，不会有砍过头的危险。 —切卓有成效的管理者都懂得：对时间的控制与管理不能—劳水逸。他们要持续不断地做时间记录，定期对这些记录进行分析，还必须根据自己可以支配的时间的多少，给—些重要的活动定下必须完成的期限。 我所了解的一位工作效率极高的人。他身边总带着两张单子——一张是关于紧急事情的单子．另一张上记录必须要做的、但却不是特别重要的事。每件事后都注有必须完成的期限。当他发现期限越来越近时，他就知道自己对以支配的时间越来越少了。 时间是最紧缺的资源，若不将时间管理好，要想管理好其他别的事情那只是空谈。另外，分析自己的时间安排是可取的，它也是系统地分析自己的工作、鉴别出哪些才是最重要的活动的—种方法。 “认识你自己”这句充满智慧的古训对现代的凡人来说实在是太难理解了。不过，如果你希望自己的工作卓有成效、能为别人作出贡献的话，那你还是可以遵照“掌握自己的时间”这一条去做的。