Thinking Time

A nature article suggests: 

“Scientists need more time to think”. 

No shit, Sherlock. So obvious, so correct. But not only scientists, though. Performance in most teams (e.g., programming) is abysmal due to distraction.  

“More digital devices equals less time to concentrate and to think.”

Most managers, I encounter, are concerned about the fact that their teams are not performing. When you look at their teams, you find out that this isn't just capitalist talk. The output of most programming teams, for instance, is abysmal. But then the same managers would rather not take any serious measures to improve this performance. The reason is distraction, and they either don't want to believe it or don't want to do anything to fix it. Partly because it is their fault as well. 

Who enters the office multiple times a day and changes direction? Who installed the company messenger that claims to improve communication and performance (when in fact it does the exact opposite)? Who did not manage to isolate teams from customers and all other stakeholders? 

The Nature article suggests that the problem is, that  “thinking time […] is rarely, if ever, quantified in employment practices.” This shows in what madhouse we live. To think that quantifying thinking time would improve the situation shows that we lost our marbles in box ticking activities. Let's put “thinking” into the backlog and assign thinking minutes to every one. Maybe Joe can think from 10:12 to 10:23 and Jane from 14:44 to 15:11.

Naturally, it is imperative that each individual accurately records their thoughts in the time recording, including the precise descriptions of their thoughts. Felicity Mellor from imperial college London is pointing out this nonsensical idea:

“Mellor argues that including yet another box in an evaluation form might not go down well.”

A systemic problem, such as this bureaucratisation, cannot be solved by increasing the bureaucracy, but by removing it.