If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Study: Average boss is worth 1.75 employees. I'm going to need those TPS reports ASAP   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 66
    More: Interesting, Peter Principle, TPS, Smithsonian magazine, gross domestic products, stomach cancer, Prince Harry, hierarchical organization  
•       •       •

6190 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Aug 2012 at 1:18 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



66 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-22 11:48:22 PM
Good thing CEO's only make 1.75 the salaries of their employees then!
 
2012-08-23 12:01:55 AM
i.dailymail.co.uk

Making sweet pie charts like a boss.
 
2012-08-23 12:50:42 AM

DamnYankees: Good thing CEO's only make 1.75 the salaries of their employees then!


Well, CEOs are bosses of bosses of bosses of bosses of bosses of employees so that's like... at least 3 employees' worth.
 
2012-08-23 01:00:54 AM
From the poorly written article:

"They evaluated about 24,000 workers and 2,000 employees, the Smithsonian magazine reported."

I am a little confused about the difference between an employee and a worker.
 
2012-08-23 01:20:27 AM

Frederick: From the poorly written article:

"They evaluated about 24,000 workers and 2,000 employees, the Smithsonian magazine reported."


Sounds, copy/pasted to me.
 
2012-08-23 01:22:35 AM
I could set the building on fire.
 
2012-08-23 01:24:31 AM
I've had a couple of bosses who worked their asses off. Then I've also had a bunch of bosses that were lazy, ignorant pieces of shiat. It's a tossup, but I'm sticking with the view that most people who get to manager probably curb stomped a few of the more valuable employees to get there.
 
2012-08-23 01:27:26 AM
Also FTFA: The employees were given a repetitive task assessed and timed by a computer and the employees switched managers about every four months.

So for menial repetitive tasks the management has a direct impact on productivity. I wonder how the numbers would change if there were a way to evaluate for fields where the work doesn't involve the same repetitive task over and over again. It also makes a huge difference how much the boss actually knows about what the day to day tasks entail and how recently, if ever, they worked in the position of those they are managing.

Mandating policies and procedures that may have made sense when you worked in a position 10 years ago just slows everyone down if the fundamental nature of business has changed in that time and the employees have already found a better way to do it based on their more current experience.
 
2012-08-23 01:35:38 AM
The reason being; since the majority of managerial positions are salary based; you can work 60 hours a week and still get paid the same if you had only worked for 20. As a consequence of that; most companies heap work on managers; that way, they get the most bang for their buck.

/ the big corperations don't want to pay the hourly workers overtime; who better to pick up the slack than someone who gets paid the same no matter what
 
2012-08-23 01:44:24 AM
Businesscat.jpg
 
2012-08-23 01:52:30 AM
Some bosses are good. Some bosses are bad.

But the truth of the matter is that at some point, no matter who your boss is, you're going to think he's one of the bad ones. It comes with the territory.

It's a shame that it has to be so adversarial, but bosses are focused on goals and workers are focused on tasks. Good bosses can help guide workers along a schedule. Bad bosses either get too involved in the day to day tasks of workers or they don't give enough attention to the day to day tasks of workers. It's a balancing act that is very difficult, and very few bosses do it well.

But without bosses, most workers would be lost. Even bad bosses are better than no bosses. It's really too bad most workers can't get over the adversarial structure of the corporation to see what is best for themselves as well as the company. Worst of all, those who are the most vocal of the adversarial structure are the ones who need the most management. Best to cut them off before they become a cancer in the company.
 
2012-08-23 02:09:09 AM
The NBER said: 'Replacing a boss who is in the lower 10 per cent of boss quality with one who is in the upper 10 per cent of boss quality increases a team's total output by about the same amount as would adding one worker to a nine member team.

'Using a normalization, this implies that the average boss is about 1.75 times as productive as the average worker.'


Huh? So the bad boss gets the same work out of 10 people, as the good boss gets out of 9, and that translates to 1.75 times more productive? I'm going to have to see the math on that.

Why not hire a bad boss at the same pay as the other 9, and make him do the same work?

Viola! The same amount of work as the good manager, and cheaper to boot.
 
2012-08-23 02:15:39 AM
sherifredricks.webs.com

My last boss was worth only 1.25 employees.
 
2012-08-23 02:27:08 AM
That's funny because most bosses show up 1.75 hours after everyone else.
 
2012-08-23 02:33:41 AM
Yeah. I got the memo. And I understand the policy. And the problem is just that I forgot the one time. And I've already taken care of it so it's not even really a problem anymore.
 
2012-08-23 02:37:11 AM
Yeah, I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there.
 
2012-08-23 02:37:34 AM
As a manager of a call center I would agree with this. I can take about 1.75 calls for every call my average employee takes.

Thankfully I only have to hop on the phones when I see it back up and I am trying to mitigate our abandonment. I have been promoting my best agents to be supervisors. Which sounds good in theory but it leaves the slow stupid agents answering the most phone calls. On the other hand I would never have made manager if my boss had gone down that road.
 
2012-08-23 02:39:55 AM

Surool: Yeah. I got the memo. And I understand the policy. And the problem is just that I forgot the one time. And I've already taken care of it so it's not even really a problem anymore.


One of your eight bosses will make sure you get another copy of that memo.
 
2012-08-23 02:41:27 AM

Alunan: As a manager of a call center I would agree with this. I can take about 1.75 calls for every call my average employee takes.

Thankfully I only have to hop on the phones when I see it back up and I am trying to mitigate our abandonment. I have been promoting my best agents to be supervisors. Which sounds good in theory but it leaves the slow stupid agents answering the most phone calls. On the other hand I would never have made manager if my boss had gone down that road.


So, who is responsible for hiring "slow stupid agents"?
 
2012-08-23 02:48:35 AM
What, as ransom?
 
2012-08-23 03:03:29 AM

Alunan: As a manager of a call center I would agree with this. I can take about 1.75 calls for every call my average employee takes.

Thankfully I only have to hop on the phones when I see it back up and I am trying to mitigate our abandonment. I have been promoting my best agents to be supervisors. Which sounds good in theory but it leaves the slow stupid agents answering the most phone calls. On the other hand I would never have made manager if my boss had gone down that road.


Also, you probably save a little bit of time since you don't have to go through all the "let me ask my supervisor about doing that" that the lower ranked employees have to do every time somebody needs something done that's above their position.
 
2012-08-23 03:12:25 AM

Arumat: Also, you probably save a little bit of time since you don't have to go through all the "let me ask my supervisor about doing that" that the lower ranked employees have to do every time somebody needs something done that's above their position.


Also, he's a manager at a call center. A place where the base work doesn't require skill.

Let's try this at an engineering firm.
 
2012-08-23 03:26:39 AM

impaler: Arumat: Also, you probably save a little bit of time since you don't have to go through all the "let me ask my supervisor about doing that" that the lower ranked employees have to do every time somebody needs something done that's above their position.

Also, he's a manager at a call center. A place where the base work doesn't require skill.

Let's try this at an engineering firm.


Nah, there's skill involved. You'd be amazed how hard it is to not scream out your rage at a retarded customer.
 
2012-08-23 03:42:24 AM
That has to be the dumbest bag of shiat ever.

What did they compare this to? a similiar company with no managers?

also "the research suggests the average boss motivates and teaches employees skills that last." is outright hilarious.
 
2012-08-23 03:54:27 AM
www.immortalmusic.net

In my workplace, my bosses can't think out of a paper bag. The employees run the show.
 
2012-08-23 04:02:08 AM
My boss:

Memo following Monday morning meeting: Please do not look at your watches or check the time on your cell phone during the meeting.

Memo following the next Monday morning meeting: Please do not check the time on the clock posted on the wall (above his chair) during the meeting as it is cause for distraction.

The next meeting? Clock was down.

He also does not know how to use spellcheck on his memos before he emails them. He had someone from IT show him and he still can't remember. Not kidding.

Totally farking worthless. How the f#%k does this guy keep his job?
 
2012-08-23 04:03:48 AM

gaspode: That has to be the dumbest bag of shiat ever.

What did they compare this to? a similiar company with no managers?

also "the research suggests the average boss motivates and teaches employees skills that last." is outright hilarious.


The striking thing is that the worst manager got the work out of 10 people that the best manager got out of 9. In computer programming the top 10% do 90% of the work. It seems anyone can be a manager. Considering the pay that managers leach off a company, companies would be wise to hire the best 10%, and pay them 500% the regular salary, and hire managers at minimum wage.
 
2012-08-23 04:14:35 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Also FTFA: The employees were given a repetitive task assessed and timed by a computer and the employees switched managers about every four months.

So for menial repetitive tasks the management has a direct impact on productivity. I wonder how the numbers would change if there were a way to evaluate for fields where the work doesn't involve the same repetitive task over and over again. It also makes a huge difference how much the boss actually knows about what the day to day tasks entail and how recently, if ever, they worked in the position of those they are managing.

Mandating policies and procedures that may have made sense when you worked in a position 10 years ago just slows everyone down if the fundamental nature of business has changed in that time and the employees have already found a better way to do it based on their more current experience.


I work at a call center. The bosses I respect there actually have done time on the phones in the last year. The bosses whom I have no use for are the morons like or assistant call center manager. This coont muffin claims to be such an awesome sales guy, but the last time he got on the phone to show an agent how it was done, he lost that agent a sale. It's obvious that he has probably never worked in inside sales before.

My absolute favorite is when a client tells me how to do my farking job, after I hustled my ass off to get the customer to spend an extra thousand dollars and to add an extended warranty. My methods work for me, and I am hitting all of your unreasonable quality points. If you don't like how I pitch your extended warranty (saying that it protects against "acts of God" and "World War Three" are what they had a problem with. Oddly, mentioning alien invasions or the Mayan calendar is cool by them), fark off. I make you an assload of money, and not a single customer i have sold to has returned or exchanged their shiat (we do find out if that happens). The least you can do is not nitpick when my approach seems to be successful. You certainly aren't paying me enough incentives (none) to make me more inclined to listen to your suggestions on how to fix shiat that ain't broke.

Another one that sometimes amuses me is when a client gives us a script that they expect is to read verbatim, but the farking thing sounds way too awkward. If someone doesn't have an email address, do you think saying that "we respect your privacy and will not share your email address with any outside parties," and then asking if someone else in the household has an email address makes any sense? The only things that should be verbatim are legal disclosures. Everything else should just be bullet points that we can fit into how we naturally talk.

Some clients are even worse. They advertise a free brochure, but when you call, we try to set up a call back with another representative who knows more than us.

None of the people in charge of outsourced communications at any of the clients I work for, and none of the people in the company who are higher up the food chain than my boss' supervisor, know what the fark they are doing or how to take a goddamned phone call. I could manage our clients' shiat better than they can, and I am a horrible fark up (30 years old, still filling my taxes as single, drowning in medical debt, and I work in a goddamned call center).

/jealous
//how do such morons get jobs that party so much better than mine?
///I think I'll go and have a nice cry now
 
2012-08-23 04:54:11 AM
wtfcontent.com
 
2012-08-23 05:13:24 AM

twat_waffle: TuteTibiImperes: Also FTFA: The employees were given a repetitive task assessed and timed by a computer and the employees switched managers about every four months.

So for menial repetitive tasks the management has a direct impact on productivity. I wonder how the numbers would change if there were a way to evaluate for fields where the work doesn't involve the same repetitive task over and over again. It also makes a huge difference how much the boss actually knows about what the day to day tasks entail and how recently, if ever, they worked in the position of those they are managing.

Mandating policies and procedures that may have made sense when you worked in a position 10 years ago just slows everyone down if the fundamental nature of business has changed in that time and the employees have already found a better way to do it based on their more current experience.

I work at a call center. The bosses I respect there actually have done time on the phones in the last year. The bosses whom I have no use for are the morons like or assistant call center manager. This coont muffin claims to be such an awesome sales guy, but the last time he got on the phone to show an agent how it was done, he lost that agent a sale. It's obvious that he has probably never worked in inside sales before.

My absolute favorite is when a client tells me how to do my farking job, after I hustled my ass off to get the customer to spend an extra thousand dollars and to add an extended warranty. My methods work for me, and I am hitting all of your unreasonable quality points. If you don't like how I pitch your extended warranty (saying that it protects against "acts of God" and "World War Three" are what they had a problem with. Oddly, mentioning alien invasions or the Mayan calendar is cool by them), fark off. I make you an assload of money, and not a single customer i have sold to has returned or exchanged their shiat (we do find out if that happens). The least you can do is not nitpick when my approach seems to be successful. You certainly aren't paying me enough incentives (none) to make me more inclined to listen to your suggestions on how to fix shiat that ain't broke.

Another one that sometimes amuses me is when a client gives us a script that they expect is to read verbatim, but the farking thing sounds way too awkward. If someone doesn't have an email address, do you think saying that "we respect your privacy and will not share your email address with any outside parties," and then asking if someone else in the household has an email address makes any sense? The only things that should be verbatim are legal disclosures. Everything else should just be bullet points that we can fit into how we naturally talk.

Some clients are even worse. They advertise a free brochure, but when you call, we try to set up a call back with another representative who knows more than us.

None of the people in charge of outsourced communications at any of the clients I work for, and none of the people in the company who are higher up the food chain than my boss' supervisor, know what the fark they are doing or how to take a goddamned phone call. I could manage our clients' shiat better than they can, and I am a horrible fark up (30 years old, still filling my taxes as single, drowning in medical debt, and I work in a goddamned call center).

/jealous
//how do such morons get jobs that party so much better than mine?
///I think I'll go and have a nice cry now


It doesn't matter what kind of sales you're doing; cold call, follow up, walk in, even waiting tables- people can smell a script a mile away, and will tune a salesperson out and label them a useless idiot inside of 3 seconds if they do. It's practically a reflex these days.

Bad sales managers feel the need to be "in control" far too acutely. They know that being able to talk to people is an incredibly hard skill to teach (it's more of a talent, really) so they try to remove it from the equation by standardizing the sales interaction, because their ego gets in the way. It's the obsession with setting policy that limits a lot of supervisors. A good manager would have no trouble making rules that only apply to the people they need to apply to. A productive manager knows how to admit that they don't always know as much as their employees, and uses that to their benefit, rather than dumbing a process down to their own level.

There is literally no reason, outside of a phrase that commits some kind of legal transgression, to mess with the chemistry of a salesperson with high numbers and high customer satisfaction for the sake of some standardized framework.
 
2012-08-23 05:20:27 AM
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention:

No CEO, no matter how clever, is worth hundreds and hundreds of times as much as the average employee.
 
2012-08-23 05:27:44 AM

People_are_Idiots: In my workplace, my bosses can't think out of a paper bag. The employees run the show.


"Do you want to talk to the person in charge, or somebody who knows what's going on?"
 
2012-08-23 05:33:44 AM
www.vh1.com
 
2012-08-23 05:41:50 AM
The report was ghost written for a boss, who signed it without reading it and went on a one month vacation because he had worked so hard on the report.
 
2012-08-23 05:43:43 AM
So either you have all bosses but only 57% of the staff or you get rid of all the bosses and pay everyone 57% of what the boss used to get?

I`d go for the second option, all my previous bosses got much more than twice any salary I ever got.

No more boss bragging about having 6 cars, all the workers get 3 cars!
 
2012-08-23 05:49:36 AM

dready zim: So either you have all bosses but only 57% of the staff or you get rid of all the bosses and pay everyone 57% of what the boss used to get?

I`d go for the second option, all my previous bosses got much more than twice any salary I ever got.

No more boss bragging about having 6 cars, all the workers get 3 cars!


Yeah I had a boss like that once.

He vanished one day along with a recently promoted female employee. Three guesses what happened to them.
 
2012-08-23 05:57:05 AM

Frederick: I am a little confused about the difference between an employee and a worker.


Benefits?
 
2012-08-23 06:02:10 AM
I'm not reading the article, but if you've ever been involved with skilled labor, this makes sense.


A sous chef with 20 years' experience in a restaurant can whip up more and better dishes in 30 minutes than some rookie short order cook could in an hour. This holds true across many professions. Knowing your shiat, aka experience, means you can get a lot more done in less time with less effort.

Billy West can probably perform a whole cartoon script by himself in one take and give you something better than a roomful of acting school students could record in a day with editing. That's just how it is. So I'd assume that even something undefinable, like "business" actually just boils down to skills that can be learned and perfected. So by the time you make "boss" you're seasoned enough to outshine the noobs.
 
2012-08-23 06:06:24 AM
According to TFA, a top 10% manager only improves productivity 11.1% over the lowest 10% of managers, implying to me that top managers are only better at presenting their "accomplishments" to their superiors, rather than actual spectacular improvements in the business. One missed conclusion is that it may be better in many businesses to hire bottom 40% managers with substantially lower pay which is nearly as effective as hiring a top manager at double the average compensation.
 
2012-08-23 06:30:55 AM

Northern: implying to me that top managers are only better at presenting their "accomplishments" to their superiors, rather than actual spectacular improvements in the business


You just now get that?


You should read this book:

thefuturebuzz.com
 
2012-08-23 06:46:16 AM
Then, companies should hire bosses only.
 
2012-08-23 07:22:09 AM

Z-clipped: Oh yeah, I forgot to mention:

No CEO, no matter how clever, is worth hundreds and hundreds of times as much as the average employee.


I could see exactly ONE exception to that. Generally you'll never see it, because a CEO who was an original designer on an amazing product doesn't really ask for that kind of pay.

/If I design and build a cold fusion reactor, I would be worth hundreds and hundreds of times as much as an average employee.
//Probably only take about 50 times the pay though.
 
2012-08-23 07:41:06 AM
So we can nearly double productivity by replacing workers with bosses? Great, it's about time I had a vacation anyway.
 
2012-08-23 07:43:47 AM

girlygirlmpls: My boss:

Memo following Monday morning meeting: Please do not look at your watches or check the time on your cell phone during the meeting.

Memo following the next Monday morning meeting: Please do not check the time on the clock posted on the wall (above his chair) during the meeting as it is cause for distraction.

The next meeting? Clock was down.

He also does not know how to use spellcheck on his memos before he emails them. He had someone from IT show him and he still can't remember. Not kidding.

Totally farking worthless. How the f#%k does this guy keep his job?


Some people are in big with the executives and so can't just be fired, so you need to promote them to a position where they can't cause any harm.
 
2012-08-23 08:02:51 AM
Two of the guys that work for me make more than I do.

/getting a kick and so forth.
 
2012-08-23 08:17:49 AM

Z-clipped: A good manager would have no trouble making rules that only apply to the people they need to apply to.


QFT, On the other hand, a lot of people deviate from the rules without a full understanding of the impact, and react poorly when management corrects them. "Manager doesn't know what he's doing", "Manager hasn't done the job", etc, etc.

For example, if I'm a sales guy, a reasonable goal might be to close 100% of my contacts. I can do this by building credibility, taking time with the customer, etc, etc. An employee could give a shiat less if cost of sale > profit. But that could run counter to the managers' goal of keeping the cost of sale down.

This is one of the reasons why every good manager communicates his or her own motivations extremely clearly to whomever works for them. Only then do you get everybody pulling in the same direction.
 
2012-08-23 08:34:00 AM
Bosses should be paid less since they don't do jack shiat.
 
2012-08-23 08:40:36 AM
FTFA - 'Every new member in a hierarchical organization climbs the hierarchy until he/she reaches his/her level of maximum incompetence.'

Yeah, that sounds correct; the ones at the top are maximally incompetent.
 
2012-08-23 08:55:55 AM
I like my stupid lazy boss. She has no idea how I do what I do. She makes a lot more many than me when, in effect, she serves as a glorified property manager who spends better than half her time on facebook while the secretary runs the business end and I do my thing. I'm cool with that. They can pay her whatever they want. As long as she leaves me the hell alone and lets me work, that's fine.
 
2012-08-23 09:21:59 AM

doglover: A sous chef with 20 years' experience in a restaurant can whip up more and better dishes in 30 minutes than some rookie short order cook could in an hour. This holds true across many professions. Knowing your shiat, aka experience, means you can get a lot more done in less time with less effort.


Right but you're talking about people actually doing things. When you get into the area of managers who don't do dick all day but make three times what the people under them make, it becomes less clear cut.
 
Displayed 50 of 66 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report