Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses IT

How IT Increases Productivity 123

Posted by kdawson from the many-balls-in-the-air dept.
Several readers wrote to tell us about a groundbreaking study reported in Computerworld. Researchers at Boston University and MIT analyzed how IT makes people more productive at an individual level. They gathered more than 125,000 email messages, 5 years of project data, and survey responses to see what factors predicted revenue generation and completed projects. Abstracts for the original articles are available. Among the surprises: IT didn't necessarily make projects faster but it did dramatically increase productivity by facilitating multitasking; and IT-supported social networks predicted productivity better than experience did.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

How IT Increases Productivity More

How IT Increases Productivity

Comments Filter:

  • Funny article to post on slashdot... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 26, 2007 @10:03PM (#18162560)
    ... given that browsing slashdot is most likely a sign of lacking productivity.

  • New Generation of Multitaskers (Score:5, Interesting)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) on Monday February 26, 2007 @10:08PM (#18162592)
    But we found that heavier IT users are much heavier multitaskers, so over time, they're completing more projects and bringing in more money for the firm.

    This was a common question given during interviews I took part in during my endless job hunts (I was employed but there's always something better out there). Anyway, every time it was asked I simply replied, "I would expect that nearly everyone in my generation is able to multitask effectively as we've grown up our entire lives with it."

    Now, while I'm a little bit outside the "Social Networking Generation", I grew up using computers, watching TV, talking with friends and successfully completing written tasks. This, while completely foreign and thus inappropriate according to my parents, has carried into my work life and made me a very effective worker.

    It may be worthwhile studying now only because some of the older individuals in the workforce didn't grow up completely immersed in the same multitasking oriented environment those that are 30 and under have.

    In the future it won't be a question, it will be an expectation -- along with more work.

    • New Generation of Articles. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 26, 2007 @10:20PM (#18162668)
      "In the future it won't be a question, it will be an expectation -- along with more work."

      Like a candle lit on both ends.

      Health Problems Related to the Geek Lifestyle [slashdot.org]

      What Do You Do at Work? [slashdot.org]

      Games As A Multitasking Aid? [slashdot.org]

      Multitasking Harmful To Productivity [slashdot.org]

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      good.. take your expectations and go burn yourself out trying to meet them. when you're 35, you'll find you'll have half the energy you had in your 20s and this crapola you wrote won't hold true anymore. Kids have ALWAYS been good at 'multitasking' while adults are (generally) better at pursuing singular tasks to much greater depth.

      I hope I never run into a boss that thinks this way exclusively. it's bad enough that employers expect more and more out of employees' days while paying less.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        good.. take your expectations and go burn yourself out trying to meet them. when you're 35, you'll find you'll have half the energy you had in your 20s and this crapola you wrote won't hold true anymore. Kids have ALWAYS been good at 'multitasking' while adults are (generally) better at pursuing singular tasks to much greater depth.

        You sound like my unproductive co-workers that complaint there isn't enough time in the day to do their work. When I cover for them while they are out sick or on vacation I find
        • And you sound like all those KIDS around who are YOUNG and ANNOYING. Don't you have something to spraypaint? Why are you hanging around here bothering us? Go fetch me some coffee, ya little pup. Multitask some cream and sugar in there too.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by drsmithy ( 35869 )

        Kids have ALWAYS been good at 'multitasking' while adults are (generally) better at pursuing singular tasks to much greater depth.

        Also expressed as the "oooh ! Shiny !" and "finish the job, even the shitty boring parts" attitudes.

    • Re:New Generation of Multitaskers (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ucklak ( 755284 ) on Monday February 26, 2007 @10:58PM (#18162898)
      Some of us that are 40 and under (and I imagine 45 and under) grew up building this tech and are very effective multitaskers to level of competence that this 25 and under (Generation nexters) aren't able to comprehend.

      I can rewire a home for phone service. I imagine that most ./ers can too. I understood how the telephone worked at around 10 years old and was hacking calls with just a speaker and 2 wires ripped from a taple player to call my friends when I had no phone in my room, only a jack. There was a time when I memorized all the Bell codes (in my area) for redial, dictate phone number, delay dial, etc... all before this caller ID crap.

      My nephew is 17. I had him accompany me to rewire my mother's condo for 2 lines of phone service. The telco only wired one jack and put a splitter on it.
      I was rather shocked when he stood in amazement watching me remove the plate from the wall and rewire the wires. Up to that point, the phone is simplay just a magic box that communicates to another magic box (phone) to him.
      Something so simple that you can pulse dial with a speaker and 2 wires and get a connection for simple communication was such a mystery to him that I had to rethink what todays youth is into. He can turn on a cell phone, IM, use all the features but if you ask him how many volts his cell phone battery supplies, he's quite lost.

      These Generation Nexters will be able to multitask with the tech presented to them but how many will know how to fix the tech?

      • Re:New Generation of Multitaskers (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Andrew Kismet ( 955764 ) on Monday February 26, 2007 @11:15PM (#18163020)
        Here here. As one of these "Generation Nexters" at 18, I'm completely competent in the use of computers and tech in general. When people need help with computers in my hall, they come to me. However, beyond the basics of "Ethernet cable goes into this port here, that connects to that, etc." and doing some slightly more detailed software stuff (being a compsci undergrad), I'm at a total loss. My current opinion is "If I want to rewire a phone, I'll look it up online." There's so much free information out there that's easily accessible, I think I'd rather be a flexible multitasker who, most importantly, learns fast and can follow even meagre instructions sensibly.

        It's a different way of thinking. If you want to know the voltage of my cellphone battery, I'll take off the cover, flip it out and tell you. If it's not printed on the battery, I'll look it up. If that's no use, I'm sure I've got a voltmeter somewhere around here...

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by kent_eh ( 543303 )
          My current opinion is "If I want to rewire a phone, I'll look it up online."

          Not trying to bust your chops, but what if the question is "how do I rewire this Ethernet jack"?
          If you need said Ethernet connection to get online and look up the instructions...

          I'm in a similar position as the GP (although maybe a few hairs greyer). When I was a kid, my dad helped the local TV repair guy clean up his shop, and he brought home a few "not worth the effort to repair" TVs for me to tinker with. After a few months, I

          • New Generation of Land Mine Testers. (Score:2, Funny)

            by Anonymous Coward
            "After a few months, I had stripped parts out of most of them, and had 2 of them working. How many teenagers had a pair of 26" TVs in their room? In the late 70's?"

            Considering the high voltages used. Maybe the question should have been. How do children survive childhood?
          • Yes, I agree with you on the Ethernet jack problem. The number of times I've been unable to get online because I needed the instructions.... online.... or can't even boot my computer, etc.
            This is why libraries exist. There are always ways to get more information, beyond the fastest and most convenient one! And hell, if my computer is outright broken beyond my skills, I'll call a friend or pay someone who knows what they're doing.
            Being able to multitask and adapt are damn good skills, but often at the sacrif
          • The position of having to know everything from ethernet wiring to set up websites using LAMP and anything in between is completely ludicrous.

            If I don't know how to wire something I will look it up online, even if it is an ehternet connection, it is not like it is hte only one in the universe.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dpilot ( 134227 )
            > Not trying to bust your chops, but what if the question is "how do I rewire this Ethernet jack"?
            > If you need said Ethernet connection to get online and look up the instructions...

            Down in my basement workshop, half of one wall is pegboard. On one hanger is my crimp tool, RJ45 cable checker, and blister pack of RJ45 connectors. On the same hanger, under all of those, is the sheet of dead tree I printed off the web, with the color codes and sequence for the wires.

          • Part of the problem here is that products are getting more complicated, and users are finding themselves needing to do less to get more. Those sound like good things, and they probably are, but not for creating a society of Mr. Fixits.

            For example, cars now have computers in them, so it's not necessarily the case that a mechanically-minded person can dig in and figure it out. Sure, you were repairing TVs when you were a kid, but I suspect that, at the time, those CRT TVs were considerably easier to repair

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by cadeon ( 977561 )
          It's no longer about knowing the answers - it's about knowing how to find or figure out the answers. Ability to learn has become more important than being learned.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by bberens ( 965711 )
          I don't think that general amount of knowledge known is changed much at all. The difference is that specialization has increased. Yeah, I could figure out how to rewire my phone but why would I? Unless I'm going to save a bundle of money there's no point beyond my own curiosity. At that point it becomes a cost analysis on money spent vs time and enjoyment/misery. I don't have the foggiest idea how to administer Informix 4 (which is running one of our production servers). Now I could certainly pick up

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by sabinm ( 447146 )
        You're right and you're wrong.

        Your knowledge is essential for different reasons that you think. Think of the past and the next several generations of IT workers as a solid framework upon which we will build our future.

        What do I mean by this?

        The problem is that computing is not pervasive and ubiquitous enough to become an afterthought, although the world is coming around to wondering why in the world do we have hordes of men and women serving as flesh and blood scripts, functions, and system calls. If you re

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Bodrius ( 191265 )
        As "Insightful" as this may be, it seems even more "Offtopic", since it has nothing to do with multitasking.

        You're just complaining about their inability to understand and complete a particular single task in the first place.

        And while part of me agrees that knowledge is becoming dangerously superficial, what you're describing isn't anything new.
        Objectively, it isn't that much different from our grandparents' shock on the common ignorance about proper clothing maintenance, radio repair, etc... which is norma

      • I was rather shocked when he stood in amazement watching me remove the plate from the wall and rewire the wires

        Natural born geeks are rare. They require both nature and nurture. My Nephew (aged 11) is one and I feed him a semi steady supply of old electronics and books on crypto, so that he keeps the habit.

        Your 17 year old nephew is just a member of the socially well adjusted majority. He will be out with girls when the rest of us were at home building model aircraft, etc. Good luck to him.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by iwein ( 561027 )
        I think the 17 year old brat you were speaking about is not a representative sample. I mean, does he even read /.?

        There have always been the builders and the buyers. This will remain. The buyers will always have to work in uninteresting and demanding jobs to earn the money to pay us (the builders) to build cool stuff, called gadgets, that they are addicted too. Then they will nag us until we install it for them, after which they will use it to get spammed after which they buy more gadgets or V 1 4 G R 4 (wh

      • Re:New Generation of Multitaskers (Score:5, Insightful)

        by dr_d_19 ( 206418 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @05:34AM (#18164754)
        These Generation Nexters will be able to multitask with the tech presented to them but how many will know how to fix the tech?.

        I was born in 1982.

        My grandfather knew how build a house (he built his own, my family's summer house, etc). I don't. Will that be a problem for me? No.

        Society is moving forward the same way software development is. Thirty years ago I would probably need a decent understanding of the way a microprocessor works internally in order to complete the most mundane computing task. Today I've got languages and frameworks which abstracts the basic (boring?) stuff so I can focus on business logic.

        In society today, constructing a house involves so much (building laws, energy saving, technology) that would make difficult and unneccessary (if not impossible) for me to learn just to have a house built.

        Leave it to the experts.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by hublan ( 197388 )

          Leave it to the experts.

          Who then proceed to charge you through the nose for a shoddy job because you can't tell the difference.

          I don't let "experts" into my house. I do the jobs that need to be done myself, unless the government mandates otherwise. Any time I've let "experts" come in to "fix" something, I've ended up having to spend twice as much to fix what they left.
          • I don't let "experts" into my house. I do the jobs that need to be done myself, unless the government mandates otherwise. Any time I've let "experts" come in to "fix" something, I've ended up having to spend twice as much to fix what they left.

            If they didn't do it right, they obviously weren't experts. You should be more careful who you hire.

            mg

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by hublan ( 197388 )

              If they didn't do it right, they obviously weren't experts. You should be more careful who you hire.

              Hence the quotes around "expert". You let me know when there's an on-line rating board for electricians, home appliance repair dudes, carpenters, painters, plasterers, plumbers, etc. and we'll talk. Until then, it's still a complete minefield finding competent people for just about anything. Especially in a non-regulated environment like the US and Canada.
              • Hence the quotes around "expert". You let me know when there's an on-line rating board for electricians, home appliance repair dudes, carpenters, painters, plasterers, plumbers, etc. and we'll talk.,/i>

                That sounds like your billion dollar idea.. Get your self some venture capital. Oh wait that bubble already burst.

                Even the regulated trades like plumbers and electricians are hit and miss. That's why you have to check references and go see their work.

                MG

              • You let me know when there's an on-line rating board for electricians, home appliance repair dudes, carpenters, painters, plasterers, plumbers, etc. and we'll talk.

                We have one here in Atlanta called kudzu.com. Other areas may have similar services.

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by miach ( 32249 )
                Already done: http://www.angieslist.com/ [angieslist.com]

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by eison ( 56778 )
            Problem is, this perspective doesn't scale. Maybe you can do it in one particular area, but there is too much to learn about too many areas for one man to cover it all. You can't be your own carpenter, electrician, glazier, doctor, lawyer, mechanic, fitness instructor, nutritionist, cook, maid, appliance repairman, and plumber all at once - there isn't enough time in your life to learn everything required about every field, and even if there was, sometimes there are better uses for your time. So why thin

            • You can't be your own carpenter, electrician, glazier, doctor, lawyer, mechanic, fitness instructor, nutritionist, cook, maid, appliance repairman, and plumber all at once - there isn't enough time in your life to learn everything required about every field,

              Let's see...I've been my own carpenter, electrician, lawyer, mechanic, fitness instructor, cook, maid (although you wouldn't know it to look at my basement...), appliance repairman, and plumber.

              What's that leave out? Glazier, doctor, and nutritionis

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by drsmithy ( 35869 )

            I don't let "experts" into my house. I do the jobs that need to be done myself, unless the government mandates otherwise. Any time I've let "experts" come in to "fix" something, I've ended up having to spend twice as much to fix what they left.

            I bet you buy off the shelf hardware designed by "experts" instead of making it yourself, however.

        • Today I've got languages and frameworks which abstracts the basic (boring?) stuff so I can focus on business logic.


          Oh wow. Just wow. The basic operations are the interesting things. Business logic is about as mundane as you can get. I truly pity the person stuck in this field that thinks that knowing how a computer works is boring.

          --Jeremy

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mgblst ( 80109 )
        Look mate, even when you were young, even thought it may be difficult to remember, most people were not interested in rewiring the telephone. So you comparing yourself to your nephew, does not really make an interesting statistic. How you can draw any information about the current generation from that is beyond me. Maybe you are too old to remember any statistics you studied at school.

        Let me reassure, there are still tinkers in this generation, as they has been in the last 2 or 3.
      • I completely agree with and understand you. I'm 22 and one of the generation nexters, however I grew up poor as hell and had to learn how to fix everything and anything I owned if I wanted it to work. So being atypical in your frame of reference I really see what you mean.
      • Can you also shoe a horse? Can you build a car? Can you build a house for your family? Can you build a tube amplifier? And for the record, what is this "rewiring a home for a phone service"? Every person I know has a cell phone, so that would make your "fixing the tech" rather obsolete.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Ucklak ( 755284 )
          Believe it or not, I had a farrier teach me how to shoe a horse.
          Summer camp taught me how to provide basic care for a horse, a girlfriend that owned a horse really taught me how care for a horse.
          I have done my time at 2AM with a colicky horse and had to have the displeasure of being present of putting a horse down that had navicular. That was an experience that will never leave me.

          I can repair a car and if I had the parts and tools, I could probably build a car. I chose not to do major repairs mainly beca

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by L0rdJedi ( 65690 )
            Rewiring a home for service depends on the market. Telcos usually only provide service to the box outside, everything inside is up to you or you can pay installation or pay some $100/year extortion for inside wiring protection.
            When I used to have BellSouth, they would never come inside unless you had the $100/year extortion fee or paid $200 for inside installation.
            In the case of my mother, she wanted 2 lines, they wired the box for 2 lines, the installer only tested one jack and put a splitter on it.
            I came

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by pavera ( 320634 )
        I'm a bit younger than you, however I quite agree with your post. I wired my fathers coax network ~92 (when I was 13 years old), upgraded it to utp in 95, and wrote a client management application for his business in 96. I do everything from wire phone and ethernet jacks to write applications. I also throw in a bit of system admin stuff (email, DNS, DHCP, DBA, etc). I have my own company now and finding people who are able to think rationally about anything is extremely difficult. I'm mostly looking t

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Kelbear ( 870538 )
        That's what technicians are for.

        A person only needs technical ability as far as it is useful to the person. The person in accounting doesn't need to know how to fix factory machinery.

        The cost of learning how to fix something yourself vs. the cost of getting someone else to do it. Take whichever is lower.

      • Some of us that are 40 and under (and I imagine 45 and under) grew up building this tech and are very effective multitaskers to level of competence that this 25 and under (Generation nexters) aren't able to comprehend. I can rewire a home for phone service. I imagine that most ./ers can too. I understood how the telephone worked at around 10 years old and was hacking calls with just a speaker and 2 wires ripped from a taple player to call my friends when I had no phone in my room, only a jack. There was a

        • If it's something anyone can do, why did your parents call you? He's saying that it's becoming more normal to just pay to fix your problems, rather than to figure out what's causing them and do it yourself.
          • He's saying everyone under 25 (including me) can't comprehend the level at which he can multitask... because he can fix a phone line. Who does this guy think he is?
      • You are an idiot. You seem to think that because YOU understood DC circuits when you were young, and your nephew is young and does not understand DC circuits, that EVERYONE in your generation has this knowledge and NOBODY in his does.

        That's just retarded. Back then, as is the case today, a motivated person will teach himself stuff like that and the rest will not. In fact, today, there are many many MORE ways for motivated kids to learn, thanks to the Internet.

        Also, it wouldn't surprise me if fewer kids choo
    • Oh you kids. You think you're effective multitaskers, but you're actually just highly distracted, shallow, and completely unaware of the competence that singular intense concentration can bring. I oughta walk YOU up a hill both ways in the snow.

    • Re:New Generation of Multitaskers (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pnuema ( 523776 ) on Monday February 26, 2007 @11:17PM (#18163042)
      It may be worthwhile studying now only because some of the older individuals in the workforce didn't grow up completely immersed in the same multitasking oriented environment those that are 30 and under have.

      I have to echo one of my fellow responders...you don't multi-task better because you grew up around computers, you multi-task better because you are young. I graduated high school in 91, and so my early computer/tv/phone/gf sessions were occurring right at that magic age around 25, when we tend to loose that elasticity of brain that allows us to hold more complex logic structures in our heads - a task which happens to require lots of task switching. It is a very strange sensation to feel yourself...get dumber.

      I don't see myself as less capable now than I was then, larger because experience more than makes up for the lost skill. However, I'm not nearly as capable of switching between disparate tasks as I was back then. Perhaps it is not worth studying yet - the first internet generation is in their 20's. In ten years, we may know a whole lot more.

      • Disagree.... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by StressGuy ( 472374 )
        were occurring right at that magic age around 25, when we tend to loose that elasticity of brain that allows us to hold more complex logic structures in our heads

        No, the brain remains compliant as long as you keep it challenged. Case in point, Chess "Super" GrandMaster Anatoly Karpov recently returned from retirement to participate in a major tournament and actually went un-defeated...besting other "Super" Grandmaster's including Kasparov....Based on that tournament, his estimated ELO would have been over

    • Whoa there, buddy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by melted ( 227442 ) on Monday February 26, 2007 @11:48PM (#18163230) Homepage
      You do know you can't really multitask, right? Any multitasking requires context switching. Any additional task makes you 20% slower and dumber than you'd be if you concentrated at just one task. So I'd rather live in a future that took this into account and at least tried to serialize tasks for individuals somewhat. That's where the next productivity boost will come from.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dpilot ( 134227 )
        An essential part of multitasking is to understand your own context switch penalty and adjust things appropriately. At the low extreme of multitasking is reading Slashdot while waiting for a run (compile, simulation, whatever) to complete. Well, come to think of it, even lower would be staring into space while waiting for the run. At the high extreme of multitasking, you spend all your time switching and no time working. The sweet spot is most likely different for everyone - know your own and how to work in

      • You do know you can't really multitask, right? Any multitasking requires context switching. Any additional task makes you 20% slower and dumber than you'd be if you concentrated at just one task. So I'd rather live in a future that took this into account and at least tried to serialize tasks for individuals somewhat. That's where the next productivity boost will come from.

        I'd like to add something to this:
        - The most efficient mental state to execute a task is called "Flow". Being in "Flow" can more or less

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by shalla ( 642644 )
      Anyway, every time it was asked I simply replied, "I would expect that nearly everyone in my generation is able to multitask effectively as we've grown up our entire lives with it."

      And most people who believe this don't multitask nearly as effectively as they think they do. Sure, things get done, but the quality of each individual item is much lower than if it had had your full attention for part of the time. I certainly know that my bosses have always considered me to be excellent at multitasking, but I
    • Dont know about you but there are a lot of studies out there that say otherwise about multitasking, saying that spending less time on multiple projects in the long run is not beneficial, you end up doing less on all the job and maybe forgetting about some stuff while some people do the same thing better while giving a 100% percent on a task, sure there will always be side jobs.

      And what are we talking about when you say multitasking? i'm thinking that it means that at the same time you are handling several p

  • What, exactly, is productivty? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 26, 2007 @10:18PM (#18162658)
    The article doesn't mention what productivity is, or how the study meaured it. Without this, it's difficult to put their findings into context. Is productivity simply getting assigned tasks done? Does it take into account the quality of the output? Does it consider whether people were able to make great leaps in productivity through innovation?

  • It's the people, stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mnmlst ( 599134 ) on Monday February 26, 2007 @10:23PM (#18162690) Homepage Journal

    My boss and I are a severe contrast as far as the "social networks" part of this article goes. We are both SysAdmins, but he avoids everyone outside IT while I intentionally network all over the place. Naturally, I think my way is better and now there is a study that confirms it!

    Seriously, every job I have had has had appallingly poor communications. As a result, I always end up figuring out how to get plugged into the grapevine. If I didn't, I would always be a day late and a dollar short. His logic in avoiding people is that he doesn't like getting called directly when something is broken, as he believes most of the "crises" are minor. I agree with him that we want people to use proper channels (Level 1 support then Level 2 and so on), but very few of them violate protocol more than once in a great while. Frankly, I have found that if they are violating protocol, it's urgent enough that I am glad they are calling me directly. If they fell through the cracks due to an improperly submitted support ticket, things would get really ugly. Guess what, when things are already ugly out there, tickets tend to get submitted improperly.

    "When I'm the Boss"(TM) I want to deliberately set up "irregular" communication channels so the imporatnt things are addressed. How about an anonymous suggestion box? What about using an anonymous brainstorming session like I saw at the Thunderbird School of Business back in 1993? Heck, why not have all hands meetings once or twice each year, more frequently at the department level?

    Speaking of communication, it is a drag on productivity to the extent that you have to formally track so much of what you are doing. It is a necessary evil, to some extent. At the same time, when I'm trying to figure out if a server is a chronic pain, it helps if there is a trail of tickets to be found naming said dog.

    Back to being something of a Social Butterfly at work. Last week, I got invited to an informal luncheon that included the Big Dogs of the corporation. That face time probably didn't hurt me none.

    • Re:It's the people, stupid (Score:5, Funny)

      by ResidntGeek ( 772730 ) on Monday February 26, 2007 @11:03PM (#18162938) Journal
      You remind me of almost every villain the BOFH has ever conquered.

    • Re:It's the people, stupid (Score:5, Insightful)

      by greg_barton ( 5551 ) * <greg_barton&yahoo,com> on Monday February 26, 2007 @11:22PM (#18163062) Homepage Journal

      Back to being something of a Social Butterfly at work. Last week, I got invited to an informal luncheon that included the Big Dogs of the corporation. That face time probably didn't hurt me none.

      Excellent! Maybe you can get transferred away and your boss can actually get some work done.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by karlto ( 883425 )
      As much as I admire your enthusiasm and even agree with much of your post, it strikes me that you've most likely not been the Boss before...
    • Actually in by slapping the wrists of those which try to bypass the proper channels, your boss is actually the reason why only those that trully have urgent maters contact your directly.

      The behaviour that you observe ("very few of them violate protocol more than once in a great while [...] if they are violating protocol, it's urgent enough") happens because in the past those that did "violate protocol" for "minor crisis" got slapped on the wrist by your boss for it (and thus stopped trying to using that spe

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mnmlst ( 599134 )

      I read the replies as they stand thus far.

      I am 40 years old and have been on both sides of the desk. I went from being a Lone Ranger three time zones from the HQ to being up to my eyeballs in the HQ. I'm not finding communication much better here than it was when I was way, way out. The biggest problem is we only have slow, formal communication channels that come dragging along with them rank and privilege implications that stifle discussion of the things that matter. Additionally, while the managers h

  • Do calculators increase productivity? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Duh.. sure they do. But you don't talk about a "career" in calculators nowadays.

    That's what's happening to IT. You don't need a degree to operate a calculator and the user-friendly microsoft operating systems are doing just that : the computer to calculator conversion. IT is only a commodity.

    just my $0.02

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by pacalis ( 970205 )
      IT is a commodity, but the heavy IT user is not.

      Your OS analogy is off. A better one would be comparing the guy who uses outlook, with the one who uses outlook, word, excel, powerpoint, and access.

  • Horray for job security!!! Finally something to feed those intent on slashing budgets in the name of "fiscal priorities".
    I am happy.

  • Is it just me? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Dunbal ( 464142 ) on Monday February 26, 2007 @11:27PM (#18163102)
    Among the surprises: IT didn't necessarily make projects faster but it did dramatically increase productivity by facilitating multitasking

          So people were able to do more, and yet the projects don't necessarily get completed faster. And this is supposedly an increase in productivity? I don't care if you look busier. I want the job DONE.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Machtyn ( 759119 )
      Sure, they weren't done faster, but they got more done in the same amount of time. So, say you have 10 projects your company is working on. They all have the same deadline. All 10 get done by the deadline. They weren't finished faster, but were all finished at the same time. Without the multitasking, 3 projects may have made the deadline, but the other 7 would have been delayed and had a staggered finish. That's increased productivity.
      • Nice thought, but it doesn't say that anywhere. If that were a result, it certainly would have been highlighted.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Dunbal ( 464142 )
          Nice thought, but it doesn't say that anywhere.

                He was busy multitasking...

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by pacalis ( 970205 )
          From TFA.... "Heavier IT users are taking on more work. This slows down the work they're already doing, but because they're doing so much more, they're more productive."
    • Surely you appreciate the difference between latency and throughput?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Dunbal ( 464142 )
        Surely you appreciate the difference between latency and throughput?

              Surely you appreciate the relationship between packet collisions and latency, how they are independent of bandwidth, and how they affect throughput? :)

    • So people were able to do more, and yet the projects don't necessarily get completed faster. And this is supposedly an increase in productivity? I don't care if you look busier. I want the job DONE.

      It does indicate that the workers involved were more connected and communicated far more. So it is possible that while the end project is completed in the same period of time, the increased communication leads to an end project of far superior quality or an end project that more closely meets the expectations

  • how IT makes people more productive

    You mean is supposed to make people more productive? I thought it was playing games, and reading at work tipping off the boss by having a book /magazine/newspaper visible.

  • I for one... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Cstryon ( 793006 )
    I for one welcome our new following, who are now welcoming their IT overlords, who would be us.
  • Surely the best way to use IT to increase productivity is to encourage employees to spend lots of time on Slashdot.

    Wait, did I say "best"? I meant "worst". My bad.
  • Among the surprises: IT didn't necessarily make projects faster but it did dramatically increase productivity by facilitating multitasking

    So, they did more, but it still took them the same length of time to do stuff...
    *squibble*

    Translation: We were still working at the same pace, but we also chatted on IM and viewed pr0n on the company T1.
    • Is that sentence really so difficult to understand? Increasing productivity means to get more output per employee. This does not necesseraly mean the output goes into a single project. As the article states: ... we found that heavier IT users are much heavier multitaskers, so over time, they're completing more projects and bringing in more money for the firm.

      • Of course we know what the sentence is trying to say, but if we don't make noise over how poorly it says it, there's never any chance of people learning to write properly.

  • Marginal study at best (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bit01 ( 644603 ) on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @05:06AM (#18164604)

    Look at who they're studying:

    We looked at white-collar workers -- executive recruiters.

    Not office workers in general - executive recruiters are in no way shape or form representative of general office workers. Not groundbreaking and quantity does not equal quality if the basis of the study is limited.

    Look at who the sponsors were:

    The National Science Foundation, Cisco Systems Inc. and Intel Corp. sponsored their work.

    Cisco and Intel have a vested interest in encouraging IT use. The NSF will fund anything that follows their science guidelines.

    Look at where it was presented:

    at the International Conference on Information Systems, the largest academic IT conference in the world.

    That sounds impressive to a non-academic. Until you realize that a large conference means lowest common denominator standards. Academic conferences in general are much easier to publish in than academic journals.

    Look at the results:

    IT didn't necessarily make projects faster but it did dramatically increase productivity by facilitating multitasking; and IT-supported social networks predicted productivity better than experience did.

    Lovely piece of spin there. IT use was orthogonal to productivity. Phones were regarded as "IT". Face-to-face meetings were implicitly regarded as "IT".

    They found that executive recruiters, who have the job of recruiting people, had a higher success rate when they communicated with more people.

    Well, duh.

    This study is a great example of the sponsors getting the result they payed for: some astroturf to encourage the use of IT technology.

    Based on the ComputerWorld article the study itself seems reasonable but is narrowly focused and justifies almost none of the comments being made here about IT increasing the productivity of the average office worker.

    ---

    Monopolies = Industrial feudalism

  • Let me see if I can summarize the article: If you spend all your time talking to people, they tend to respond immediately, so you tend to get the job done quicker, but you'll get fewer jobs done because you're spending all your time talking to people. If you spend all your time emailing people, it takes longer for them to respond. You can spend that time emailing other people, so you can get more jobs done but they take longer. Duh.

  • Sounds backwards to me (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 192939495969798999 ( 58312 ) <info AT devinmoore DOT com> on Tuesday February 27, 2007 @08:29AM (#18165758) Homepage Journal
    This isn't a measure of how IT increases productivity, it's a measure of how productive people operate. If someone is a productive person, they will get in touch with whomever is necessary to get the information or services they need. Non-productive people don't talk to others because they aren't trying to get anything done. I don't think the person's "connectedness" is provided by IT, in fact I'd argue that productive people will seek out any channel to get what they need to get done, IT or otherwise. IT may make productive people a bit more efficient, but it won't take a person who's afraid to contact others and empower them to do so.
  • I wonder if this article could help me get a raise? Anyways, I'm glad this study has been done. I have worked at to many companies that look at IT as a necessary evil instead of the highly efficient tool that it can be. Bravo to the researchers!

  • ...IT makes people more productive at an individual level.... Among the surprises: IT didn't necessarily make projects faster but it did dramatically increase productivity by facilitating multitasking; and IT-supported social networks predicted productivity better than experience did.

    "Ginger, get me Purchasing. We need to order every employee a Segway to improve their productivity. Except for that clown, Pennywise. Have him brought to my office so I can fire him."

    "Yes, sir."

    "I'm going to get IT right thi

Slashdot Top Deals

Do molecular biologists wear designer genes?

Close