Slashdot Mirror
Slobs Found To Be More Productive Than Neatniks
writertype writes "Are you a slob? Do you pile papers on top of folders on top of game boxes? Here's the thing that those anal neat people can't even conceive of: you're more productive than they are. That's the conclusion of "A Perfect Mess: The Hidden Benefits of Disorder," by Eric Abrahamson and David Freedman, a new book that argues neatness is overrated, costs money, wastes time and quashes creativity."
In other news: People with Anorexia found to be more productive than normal eaters.
"It's quite ingenious!" exclaimed one researcher, "it seems that because Anorexics do not need to take time to eat, they are far more productive!"
When asked whether health implications or possible mortality ensuing from Anorexia could negatively affect productivity, the researcher seemed angered, and left the interview.
On a serious note. One can get a lot done when they don't have to deal with cleaning shit up. But there is a certain point at which the stench, impossibility of finding important items, and spousal/co-worker nagging will counter any increased productivity.
The article is about clutter not hygiene.
My guess -- this article was written by a slob.
Which is the perfect excuse to ask for a raise!
;-)
"But, boss, you really have to admit that MY desk is much more messier than everyone else in this company! I demand more money! See here? We are talking about a freaking 3 DAYS OLD PIZZA, buried under papers and backup tapes for chrissake!!"
I hasten to say that I already got a raise. I am just rehearsing for the end of the year review...
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
I'm just to busy being productive and I can't remember which stack of papers my keyboard is under.
As usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. In my experience, being a bit messy can improve productivity by shunting unimportant tasks away from your center of attention. For example, if I receive a bunch of fluff memos, they're going in the kill-file pile until I get around to reading them in detail. (Which may never happen.) But I haven't disposed of them yet, so I can still retrieve them if necessary.
:-P
The problem is that if you let the mess grow too large, it *WILL* impact your ability to operate efficiently. So every once in a while you need to do a house cleaning of your different paper stacks, your email, your desktop files, and whatever other info you use on a regular basis.
Which gets me to another point. It's not that the "slobs" aren't organized. In fact, they may have a very good organization system. It's just that they allow the system to be strained to the breaking point before reorganizing. For example, I might start with an email folder called "work". That's going to grow too large in short order. But when it does grow too large, then it becomes clear whether it makes more sense to reorganize around department or by project. So I organize around the most effective order until that order also breaks down.
My point is that order is a good thing. It merely comes in many forms.
On another note, I absolutely love the way GMail handles my email. Rather than moving things to different folders automatically (where I'll never even realize that new messages have arrived), its tagging and filtering system allows me to auto-tag emails from mailing lists, board members, fellow project workers, etc. So I can view it in my inbox, then archive it without having to worry that I'll never find it again. The result is that my GMail account has kept more organized than any other email account that I've ever used. Now if only I could get a time machine to obtain time to respond to the lower-priority stuff.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Slobs are more productive when there's only one person (the slob) working on something, when you start having more than one person working on a job then you'll probably find the tidy people start overtaking the slobs quite quickly.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
FTFA: "When you're disorganized, it's an expense you have no control over, the cost in lost productivity," Izsak said. "You're losing money if you're not organized."
As a veteran "messy" person I see the deep flaw in quotes about productivity losses due to disorganization. Neatness does not imply productive ease of access and mess does not imply disorganization. I know where things are on my mess of a desk. And every single time I waste time "organizing" it, I then waste time trying to find stuff.
For me, and for other messy-deskers, neatness is the antithetical to productivity.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
True personal clutter amounts to a chaotic system based on the mental patterns of the clutterer. There is a pattern in the chaos, but the initial state and the chaos function are in the mind of the creator, so while to any outside observer it just looks like a mess, to the creator it makes perfect sense.
Clutter hint:
Switch to a trackball as your primary pointing device. That way you'll have an extra square foot or so of horizontal desk surface on which to pile things!
-- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
My wife once cleaned a bunch of my papers off my computer desk. It was the last time she ever did that. When I was unable to find some very important papers, we made an agreement that I would be in charge of keeping the computer room clean. Life has been bliss ever since.
I am a visual learner, I can "see" where I left a item and can find it quickly. Thus, my desk looks cluttered. But I know where everything is. So, it isn't messy, it just doesn't look organized according to someone else's definition. We are all individuals and it is a tad unfair to expect all of us to fit one mold for what is considered organized.
Bearded Dragon
It's just an efficient hashing algorithm.
Canthros
No. In our cleanup, we actually found $12000 worth of stuff that we needed for our current project and a missing employee.
Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
I bet I'm not the only one with a significant other that drives them nuts by tidying up all the time. A typical conversation might go something like this:
Me [settling down to watch a movie]: Where is the HMDI lead?
Her Wherever you last left it.
Me I left it on the floor behind the TV.
Her Well I haven't touched it.
Me You must have, it can't have moved itself.
Her I definately haven't moved it. You're always loosing things.
Me Do you even know what it is?
Her What is it?
Me It's a black cable. It was on the floor behind the TV.
Her Oh, I might have put it in one of the boxes in the shed.
Me [angry] So now I've got to put my shoes on and go out into the cold to look through all the boxes in the shed!
Her Don't blame me! You're the untidy one that is always loosing things...
I think the message isn't, "Messy is better!", but rather that what's most productive is if the neat people have neat environs and the messy people messy ones. I am a messy slob and am most productive in my cluttered workspace. If I was told from a boss that I had to clean my desk, that would stifle my productivity. But my coworker may be a guy who needs neat, clean, tidy spaces to be optimal. For him, if the boss told him that he had to have a cluttered desk, he'd be just as unproductive as I would if I had an organized one.
I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.
Sounds sorta like a caching algorithm. As items are used, they are left on top. Temporal locality says that all the important items will be on top of the other items.
But then we get a garbage collection algorithm, too. Every so often, the short-lived objects which are no longer important are removed in your tidying process.
:(){