10.17.2007

On number crunching

This is in response to Jason Della Rocca's post on Acronym about crunching the numbers, where he shows how he was asked to break down his work time into cateogries, which he did by using TimePanic. I don't know that program and will check it out, but I did want to post something about this issue.

I was asked to do this a couple of years ago by my association board in relation to allocating admin time for every program we run (we have about ten programs, big to small, mostly continuing-education programs, plus a bunch of committees, plus governance work). But attempting to allocate my time was a heinous nightmare, because I continuously multitask and it was basically impossible to make anything add up to 100%. I was asked to do a spreadsheet listing all activities and tasks within programs, plus any General & Administrative activities, basically listing everything I did at the time. Each column listed the month, and each horizontal line was the activity over 12 months. So horizontally, there was a percentage of time worked which tended to peak for most activities in August/Sept (start of classes), in the Spring (printing of program brochures, promotion) and early summer (admissions). But vertically, the columns all added up to something like 367% - because I work on things at the same time, not one by one. This proved impossible to explain to anyone logically, although I suppose I should have just said that there were more than 100 individual activities so I would have had to break everything down into fractions of percents... you get my drift (or not, but that's the point!)

So now, two years later, I have just been asked to do this again, for the same reason, to allocate the administrative costs of running programs to those programs for budgeting reasons. (There's another negative issue to this, which is that if you really do this, you put a bunch of programs "in the red" which are otherwise breaking even with their tuition income, so there has historically been reluctance to do it, even though we know we're supposed to for audits etc.). So anyway I said, I did this already and am not touching that original spreadsheet with a ten foot pole, because I can still find grey hairs that sprouted on my head as a direct result of having to do it the first time! We then decided that since this is just for budgeting purposes, then we may just need to basically make it up in terms of allocating a percentage of time for each program.

So my semi-rhetorical question is, if stating time allocation for real does not create the result you need, and making it up does, but is making it up, then what's the point?

1 comments:

  1. Maddie, this is a good and classic sort of post for CEOs--regardless of size of the association. Your post highlights the classic difference in early, mid and senior executive types of leadership.

    Although there are exceptions to the rule, early and some mid level managers typically spend their time in more narrowly defined, task-specific roles. Keeping time for these activities is relatively easy.

    At some point, more mature mid-level and most senior executive association execs move from narrowly defined, task-specific responsibilities to much more global, enterprise-wide and even externally focused responsibilities. Multi-tasking, AKA juggling lots of simultaneous balls is the order of the day. It's at this point that time cards are become pointless.

    Do you suppose that Jack Welch, when he was CEO of GE, kept hourly time cards? You and I may not be Jack Welch (thankfully), but a CEO is a CEO, and the roles are the same, even if your association isn't a General Electric.

    I get so tired of volunteers and others advocating that association staff keep time cards and that executives manage and report their time on a 10 minute basis, as if we were billing, like attorneys, by the second. If we were, do you think these same volunteers would pay for the all the evening and week-end time that we and staffs put in (like when I am writing this)?

    There's nothing wrong with approximating the time spend here and there, but let's not get anal about it. Particularly for senior executives who have more balls in the air than can be counted.

    ReplyDelete

Have a comment? Sweet! Thanks!