Making Time for Big Picture Thinking

Adrian Granzella Larssen has written a terrific Fast Company article titled, "How to get out of the weeds and make time for big-picture thinking."  Larssen introduces executive coach Melody Whiting's perspective on why we often overload our schedules.  Whiting argues that a busy schedule reinforces our self-perceptions.  Here's an excerpt:

Source: Wikipedia

Everyone’s busy, and that’s not exactly by accident. Wilding’s take is something that might be uncomfortable to hear: “It makes us feel useful and wanted, and especially for people who are leaders or traditionally high achievers, that’s how they source their self-worth—via accomplishments and what they get done.”

Larssen has some good suggestions for how to rethink the way we manage our time, so that we can have more time for strategic thinking and reflection.   I highly recommend the article.  Among other things, Larssen reminds us of the value of the Eisenhower Matrix, a simple diagnostic tool that the former president and military leader recommended for setting the right priorities.  

How to Start Your Day

Source: Business Insider

Urgent vs. Important Work: The Eisenhower Matrix

Source: http://www.georgeambler.com/

George Ambler has a terrific blog post about the so-called Eisenhower Matrix that is definitely worth reading in full. Ambler quotes the former president and five-star general, "“What is important is seldom urgent and what is urgent is seldom important.” He refers to the Eisenhower Matrix, popularized by Stephen Covey in his best-selling book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. The concept focuses our attention on the notion that what we often deem urgent is not, in fact, that crucial to our success (personal and/or organizational). Effective leaders don't allow busywork and "fighting fires" to crowd their schedule, leaving little time for important work that may be strategic and longer term in nature.

Two Rules: How Should a Leader Spend His or Her Time?

Several weeks ago, Adam Bryant of the New York Times interviewed David Rosenblatt, chief executive of 1stdibs, an online marketplace for high-end goods.  He asked Rosenblatt about some of the key lessons he has learned in his career.   Rosenblatt talked about struggling to determine how he should allocate his time during his early days as a chief executive.  He then explained that he had established some rules that helped him in this area. Here's an excerpt:

I learned Rule No. 1 from Irv Grousbeck, who teaches an entrepreneurship class at Stanford Business School. And that is, very simply, “You can hire people to do everything but hire people.” Rule No. 2 that I think about every day is, “Only do the things that only I can do.” So if it’s someone else’s job to do it, I try not to do it. If I find myself doing too many of those things that are actually someone else’s job, then it relates back to Rule No. 1 — I probably don’t have the right person in that role. But just like anyone in any role, it’s important to understand, where is my comparative advantage? What am I better at than almost anyone else? 

The article contains more on this subject.  I recommend taking a look.  The two rules are a great start though.  I think the second one needs to be an explicit question that each leader poses to himself or herself.  As the leader on a major program here at Bryant University, I know that I need to address this question.  As I launched the program, I was doing many things.  Now, as the program matures, I have to think about the way I'm spending my time.  I'm clearly not playing to my comparative advantage.   Many leaders find themselves doing a bit of everything when an organization is in start-up phase.  Then, as the firm grows, they need to focus on that comparative advantage question.  It's hard to let go, but you can't make the organization successful without addressing this issue. 

Managing Your Time

The Wall Street Journal reports on the findings of a McKinsey study about time management by senior executives.  Not surprisingly, they find that many executives struggle with time management, much like the rest of us.  McKinsey examined those leaders who were not satisfied with how they managed their time, and they compared those leaders to others who were satisfied.  They found that the dissatisfied executives could be clustered into four subgroups.  Here's the description from the Wall Street Journal:

• “Online junkies” spent on average 38% of their time using email or voicemail, leaving little time for personal interaction.
• “Schmoozers,” represented well by CEOs and sales directors, interacted heavily with external stakeholders like clients and customers, at the risk of neglecting their own employees.
• Meanwhile, “cheerleaders,” often C-suite executives, spent a big chunk of their schedules meeting and managing employees, but considerably less time with outsiders.
• “Firefighters,” usually general managers, were often preoccupied with resolving short-term and unexpected issues.

Take a moment, and think about how you manage your time.  Are you inefficient?  Do you fall into one of these categories?

Time Management: Interesting New Finding

Knowledge at Wharton features the research of Wharton Professor Cassie Mogilner and her colleagues, Harvard business professor Michael J. Norton and Yale postdoctoral associate Zoe Chance. Through a series of experimental studies, they find that, "by taking time to help others, we can help ourselves by creating a feeling of expanded time." In other words, perhaps we should reconsider when we feel stressed and reject invitations to help someone else out at work, at church, or in our neighborhood. The scholars found that "although people's objective amount of time cannot be increased (there are only 24 hours in a day) ... spending time on others increases feelings of time affluence. The impact of giving time on feelings of time affluence is driven by a boosted sense of self-efficacy -- such that giving time makes people more willing to commit to future engagements despite their busy schedules."

While I find the work compelling, I think we should take great care acting on the conclusions. We might feel better if we help others, but we also have to remember that trade-offs exist. There is no free lunch. Will our effectiveness at all activities suffer if we take on too many tasks? Many students, for instance, struggle with time management in their early years in college. While taking on extracurriculars has many benefits, I have definitely seen many students become stretched too thin. Not only does schoolwork suffer, but their effectiveness in their social or community service work tails off as well.