Skip to content
Menu
Box Thoughts
  • Home
  • About Me
  • LinkedIn
Box Thoughts
February 29, 2012

The Art of Efficiency (let’s not talk about it)

Efficient.  Buzz word.  Through and through there is no word that has less meaning to daily use ratio.  Whenever I hear someone talk about becoming more efficient or improving this or that efficiency I can’t help but stop and ask why they are being willfully inefficient to begin with.  Saying you are going to do better is like saying, “I know I’m doing it wrong now, but I just don’t care.”

Perceived lack of efficiency is a symptom of a problem – not the problem itself.  If a process has too many steps let’s understand the root cause of why – not just reduce the number of steps.  Reduction for reduction’s sake will only eventually lead to the same issue again later but this time it may be worse.

Let’s all agree today that the word efficiency without immediate follow up and clarification should be stricken from our vocabulary.  It may be a great sounding word, but it doesn’t ever aid the conversation.

Share this:

  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email

Related

0 thoughts on “The Art of Efficiency (let’s not talk about it)”

  1. canadienx says:
    February 29, 2012 at 4:05 pm

    I agree with most of your post. Efficiency can be a vague buzzword unless you detail how to make a process more efficient. “Let’s be more efficient!” aren’t some magic words that will make it so.

    But I don’t think your first paragraph is very fair. I don’t know about your industry, but in software for example, one can validly recognize and admit that a process is inefficient without being apathetic about it. In rare it’s the nature of the problem (e.g., it requires a brute-force exhaustive search), but often we can see where improvements can be made but not have had the time yet to implement those changes.

    I think you could say the same thing about inefficiency in other areas. It’s easy to recognize problems; it’s less easy — but still relatively easy — to understand, at least at a high level, what the solutions are. The hardest part is finding the time and will to implement those solutions. It’s more like saying, “I know I’m doing it wrong now, and I know how to fix it, but I just don’t have the time or buy-in.”

    I’m not saying this is the case all the time — I don’t doubt you run into the situation you describe quite often. But I think it’s frequent enough that you can’t make a blanket statement that people are being willfully inefficient.

    Reply
  2. dmusic604 says:
    February 29, 2012 at 5:27 pm

    I guess where I’m going is the “Efficient” is a crutch word. It has too many connotations that are vague and unclear. In your example it sounds more clear and effective to say “the algorithm is slow” or “there are too many lines of code for the effect generated.” You could say “the algorithm is inefficient” but that doesn’t tell you 1) how it is inefficient or 2) why it is inefficient. You learn nothing that you can take away, fix or do better next time from simply knowing it is inefficient.

    Maybe may case of willful inefficiency is inaccurate. What I mean to say is that if a person knows their process of turning around an invoice takes too long but they aren’t speeding up because “the process is inefficient” I have no net visibility to why they can’t speed up. There is no valid reasoning such as “accounting requires these additional documents” or “the copy machine is 20 years old and jams on every second page.” Both cause inefficiencies that may or may not be correctable, but saying “the process is inefficient” does not help in either moving past the problem or fixing the problem.

    Reply
  3. canadienx says:
    February 29, 2012 at 6:55 pm

    Well, it depends who I’m talking to, right? If I’m talking to my project manager, I might just say, “This code is too slow” or even just “The code is inefficient, but it’s only a first pass. We can make it more efficient later”, and I would expect him to take my word for it. If I’m talking to a fellow programmer, I would go into much more detail about what about the code is inefficient and how we can improve it.

    You seem to be talking more about people begging the question. “Invoicing is taking too long.” “Why?” “Because the process is inefficient.” “Yes, you just told me that. Why?” “Because it’s inefficient! QED.” And I completely agree with you there. It’s kind of like how on the old FJM blog they would chide Joe Morgan for saying a team or player wasn’t consistent. Consistency and efficiency are results, not causes.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to dmusic604Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recent Posts

  • The words we use impact how effectively we are communicating.
  • RTO thinking that is SO close to understanding this new world
  • Why I love corporate real estate
  • Battles over encryption matter more than AI over the next decade
  • Considerations for Moments of Spark and Connection in the office.

analysis bias blog change collaboration Communication CRE culture data decision making demand design experience failure fear flex flexibility future growth hybrid idea innovation leadership managing mandate metrics modeling office personal planning portfolio productivity quality relationships risk sales strategy success team technology trust WFH work Workplace writing

©2025 Box Thoughts | Powered by WordPress and Superb Themes!