Sometimes rules are not made based on common sense.
The rule:
Everyone can do procedure X on machine 1.
Only certain pre-determined seniors are allowed to do procedure Y on machine 1. I am one of them.
The reality:
Worker A uses machine 1 almost everyday and needs someone to do procedure Y frequently.
Worker A is focused, smart and a hard worker.
Worker A is not a senior, but I secretly taught worker A how to do procedure Y. If I hadn't done it either worker A wouldn't be able to work as much, or I would spend my time in machine 1 (or on the way there since it's 6 floors away), not doing my own work.
The situation:
Worker B requests me to do procedure Y at 11 am, mentioning by chance that Worker A is using machine 1 until then.
I agree to do it.
When Worker B leaves my office, I call Worker A and ask to do procedure Y, since Worker A is already at machine 1. I tell worker A to say, if asked, that I passed by and did procedure Y myself. In this way, the three of us save time. Worker A doesn't need to switch off machine 1. Worker B waits less time, since it's faster this way. And I don't have to stop what I am doing.
The conclusions:
This attitude should be rewarded by our superiors (I don't think it is and I don't want to test that).
These kind of rules should be based on skills and not hierarchy.
I spent the time I saved writing this useless post. However, I will be working the next 200 times I will save time again.
One assumes that worker F, a senior, needs to fulfil the small print of his/her contract by devising rules for other workers.
ResponderEliminarBefore retiring I must admit I often wondered why certain things were done a certain way. I loved my work place and work associates but, more times than not, the certain way was not the most logical or efficient way of getting a task done. I used to say to myself(and occasionally to others) that if it made sense it probably would not fly with anyone else in charge. I remember once that one of the company's founders, who seldom had anything to do with customer relations, was getting frustrated while trying to find a file in a system that had been there for as long as anyone could remember. It went like this: Files were alphabetized with file A's being in the top drawer of the first cabinet and B's in the next top drawer of the cabinet standing beside the first cabinet(this is the honest truth), C's in the next cabinet over, etc. When the row of cabinets ended, you started all the way down at the far left end--the second drawer down on the first cabinet and so on and so forth, then back to the left and the first cabinet for the next letter after the second drawer of the last file cabinet. My boss asked "Who came up with this(blankety blank) filing system?" I replied "They told me you did." To which he replied "Well, I must have been drunk when I did it!" I returned "That is exactly what I thought!" After years of running ourselves ragged from one end to the other trying to get the filing done, it was decided that something needed to be changed. And so it was! Of course, with the technology of today, there is not much need to file papers in cabinets. Still, when ideas and procedures become outdated and inefficient, it can become frustrating.
ResponderEliminarIt seems whoever makes the rules hasn't ever worked them out physically, otherwise they would know what works and what doesn't work.
ResponderEliminarFun60: I like your choice of letter to name Worker F. In this kind of situation I do think of the F word a lot of times...
ResponderEliminarLynn: Maybe in 20 years someone will realise just how stupid this rule is, but I hope to not be here working by then.
Sami: I agree, who makes the rules should just experience them first. That would make the world a better place!