Premium Flower And Gift Delivery...
Shopping & Style0 min ago
Averages
At work I complete certain tasks with each task allocated a certain amount of time based upon the mean average of a group of data gathered from several colleagues.
Is gathering mean average to best way to estimate the time take for each task. I only ask this as (as with many collegues also) most of the time it is difficult to fulfill the correct amount of tasks in the given time.
Is gathering mean average to best way to estimate the time take for each task. I only ask this as (as with many collegues also) most of the time it is difficult to fulfill the correct amount of tasks in the given time.
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by MarkyP05. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It depends on the distribution of times. Over a long period the average person should be able to achieve the mean time. But if the mean is distorted because a few take very liitle time then most of teh time you'll struggle to achieve the average.
So if the mean time for a task is 7 minutes based on the following 10 recorded times:
8, 6, 7, 7, 6, 8, 7, 6, 8, 7 (mean=7) then the mean time of 7 seems fair and should be achievable over a reasonable period.
But if the mean time of 7 minutes is based on the following:
2, 8, 9, 2, 8, 8 ,8 ,8 , 9, 8 then on 80% of occasions you do a task you won't meet the target of 7 minutes- but if you are lucky you may do it in 2 minutes. In this example the median time of 8 minutes may be a fairer target.
So if the mean time for a task is 7 minutes based on the following 10 recorded times:
8, 6, 7, 7, 6, 8, 7, 6, 8, 7 (mean=7) then the mean time of 7 seems fair and should be achievable over a reasonable period.
But if the mean time of 7 minutes is based on the following:
2, 8, 9, 2, 8, 8 ,8 ,8 , 9, 8 then on 80% of occasions you do a task you won't meet the target of 7 minutes- but if you are lucky you may do it in 2 minutes. In this example the median time of 8 minutes may be a fairer target.
I think Theland 1 may be out of touch with the economics of business; businesses have to be lean and efficient and need to set targets and measure performance. And it's not just operatives- even highly paid solicitors have to time record in 6 minute units and achieve targets. And employees often like such schemes as it means they don't have to carry passengers because the passengers get found out.
Come on guys! let's have a little ambition!! So this is a paid job you're doing and you think it's acceptable to stay mediocre all your life. That's one way not to have any sort of job satisfaction. Do you criticize Beckham or Wilkinson for practising spot kicks? I think not. You expect them to improve and hone their craft. Why can't we do the same in out day to day lives? If you're in a job that's worth doing, it's worth doing well and efficiently. The fact that someone can do the job faster/ better than you should be a challenge not a threat. If you view your getting better as some sort of "victory" for the bosses you're doomed to be a wage slave all your life. Take a bit of control and pride in what you do.
According to the "Peter Principle" it doesn't matter anyway. Those able to accomplish the tasks more quickly will be promoted to new jobs. Those who can't stay where they are.
Eventually all jobs are filled with those who can't do them well since everyone is promoted until they are proven incompetant and that's where they stay.
Eventually all jobs are filled with those who can't do them well since everyone is promoted until they are proven incompetant and that's where they stay.
1 to 8 of 8
