we can help IT

  • Home
  • IT Leadership
  • IT Management
  • IT Services
  • Retail Community
  • Contact

View Mike Bohlmann's profile on LinkedIn

Tags in Tags

business-IT alignment career Drupal game higher education innovation IT@Illinois leadership operational IT professional development relationship management strategic IT
more tags

User login

8
U
c
H
Q
d
Enter the code without spaces and pay attention to upper/lower case.
  • Request new password

Older articles

My Thoughts: Resignation of Sally Jackson - May 20, 2011
Carr's "IT Doesn't Matter" - May 16, 2011
DIY professional development - May 12, 2011
IT@Illinois - Organizing without Organizations - Apr 28, 2011
Uncertainty: The momentum killer - Feb 21, 2011
Rationally diffuse: Aggregating from the right perspective - Jan 24, 2011
Rationally diffuse: Centralization doesn't matter - Jan 10, 2011
Anyone can be replaced, but how do you make yourself less so? - Dec 13, 2010
Leading - Managing - Doing: The Other Balancing Act - Nov 22, 2010
What would you call this job? - Nov 15, 2010
Home

priorities

Monkey business

Submitted by mikeb on Wed, 04/30/2008 - 19:40

William Oncken, Jr. and Donald Wass wrote an article several years ago for Harvard Business Review about time management called "Management Time: Who's Got the Monkey." As you can imagine, Oncken and Wass use a metaphor of monkeys to approach the issue of time management. Before getting into the specifics, everyone realizes that you can not really manage time. We can manage how we use our time, but there are not any ways to increase the amount of time, move time around, or buy more of it (though we'd certainly like to buy some once in a while). Time management though is really more about priority management and delegation.

Monkeys are a metaphor for the initiative on tasks and responsibilities. A user's printer problem is a monkey. Setting up new user accounts for the staff members is a monkey. Taking a look at the server logs to troubleshoot the backup software is a monkey. Monkeys live on people's back like you would normally expect, and they can be exchanged and moved around from person to person. So how do you manage the monkeys to be sure things are getting done? Oncken and Wass proposed five rules for managing monkeys.

Rule #1: Monkeys should be fed or shot.
While you should absolutely not micromanage, it's important to check in with your people to make sure they are feeding their monkeys with the appropriate attention. If a monkey is not getting attention, it will eventually get angry and demand more attention than if it were addressed immediately. At the same time, it occasionally becomes necessary to shoot a monkey because it is no longer important or required. If you have a monkey that's been sitting around for weeks, maybe it would be better to just remove it as a to-do and move on.

Rule #2: The monkey population should be kept below the maximum number that the manager has time to feed.
Your people will only work on the number of monkeys that they have time to do. A monkey that has been well-maintained should only take five to fifteen minutes of care to continue good maintenance. If your people have too many monkeys, that means you are going to have too many monkeys to care for and feed, too. It is important to know the team and yourself so that no one becomes overloaded. Otherwise, the monkeys will get to be overwhelming. You have seen those Career Builder ads, right?

Rule #3: Monkeys should be fed by appointment only.
If one of your reports walks into your office with a monkey, it is sometimes a good idea to send them away to schedule a time to come back. With the intellectual style of IT work, sometimes we just need a little more time on our own to figure out a problem. It might be a good idea though to feed the monkey a treat by giving the person a thought that might get them approaching the problem from a different angle by which they take care of the monkey themselves.

Rule #4: Monkeys should be fed face to face or by telephone, but not in writing.
If someone sends you an email about a monkey they are carrying that requires a response, who now has the monkey? That's right - you do! The monkey is on the back of the person who has to take the next step. If you are asked a question about someone else's monkey, you want to be careful that they don't get you to take the monkey for them. Even some phone calls can move a monkey to you so be careful how you talk. You want to help the person take care of their own monkey, not let them give the monkey to you.

Rule #5: Every monkey should be assigned next feeding time and a degree of initiative.
While not every monkey is going to be long term or require weeks of work, it is possible that a monkey is not a task that can be completed short term. In that case, you want to check in and feed the monkey once in a while on a regular basis. By assigning how much initiative is needed, you can also set the expectation for how much progress should be made before the next feeding. If you just check in to see how things are going, then maybe nothing will happen. If nothing happens, that could allow the monkey to jump onto the manager's back.

While these rules are a bit extreme when taken strictly, I think it is definitely important to think about who has the monkey on a task. It can become easy to just say you'll take care of something because you know exactly what needs to be done. But what's the impact of that new monkey on the rest of the monkeys you already have?

Tags:
  • delegation
  • IT Leadership
  • IT Management
  • priorities
  • time
  • Web
Syndicate content

Twitter

Oldies but Goodies

  • Carr's "IT Doesn't Matter"
    4 years 31 weeks ago
  • Prototyping in expert systems development
    5 years 3 weeks ago
  • Competitive advantage from IT
    3 years 43 weeks ago
  • State of the IT@Illinois
    3 years 2 weeks ago
  • This Week in Startups Episode #13
    2 years 37 weeks ago
I love Smashing Magazine!

© 2009-2011 Michael Bohlmann

Fervens Drupal theme by Leow Kah Thong. Designed by Design Disease and brought to you by Smashing Magazine.