If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#256
|
|||
|
|||
MS's support logic
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:04:08 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote: On 8/27/14 3:06 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:33:46 -0600, Ken Springer wrote: On 8/26/14 11:59 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: [snip] Or Dick may be the real expert and gets all of the really tough jobs. That's always possible, but I was thinking more along the lines they were both doing the same thing when I wrote the post. But that could be an unwarranted assumption. Tom and Dick may even have arranged such a job split without anyone else knowing. Only if they knowingly cheat the system. You would have a work order, No cheating required. Tom may be very good at handling the usual run-of-the-mill jobs; Dick may find such boring. So they split them up as I described. If someone assumes that the job split is otherwise, he is going to get odd results. and it would probably be assigned to one or the other. In fact, Tom and Or just picked up by Tom or Dick as others are finished. Dick could be working at different facilities, a couple hundred miles apart. That makes no difference with E-mail, etc. unless the work requires physical presence. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko |
Ads |
#257
|
|||
|
|||
MS's support logic
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:12:41 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote: In message , Gene Wirchenko writes: [] Or Dick may be the real expert and gets all of the really tough jobs. [] Yes; that's why comparing hospitals (or doctors) on survival rates is such a silly thing to do. (But sadly plenty of people seem to do it.) No, but one has to do the next step and find out why the difference. Knowing that there is a difference is not enough. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko |
#258
|
|||
|
|||
MS's support logic
On 8/28/14 11:21 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:04:08 -0600, Ken Springer wrote: On 8/27/14 3:06 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:33:46 -0600, Ken Springer wrote: On 8/26/14 11:59 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: [snip] Or Dick may be the real expert and gets all of the really tough jobs. That's always possible, but I was thinking more along the lines they were both doing the same thing when I wrote the post. But that could be an unwarranted assumption. Tom and Dick may even have arranged such a job split without anyone else knowing. Only if they knowingly cheat the system. You would have a work order, No cheating required. Tom may be very good at handling the usual run-of-the-mill jobs; Dick may find such boring. So they split them up as I described. If someone assumes that the job split is otherwise, he is going to get odd results. This all depends on how you choose to manage your operations. If the employees are not supposed to be splitting work without permission, they need more supervision. If a particular job is assigned to Tom, then Tom is supposed to do the work. Dick should be doing the work he's been assigned. You do not give the employees the option of deciding for themselves what each will do if you want to know the true cost. And if they are splitting a single job for whatever reason, both should have hours entered on the same work order. In the latter case, no conclusion can be drawn as to who is better. Never make assumptions! LOL and it would probably be assigned to one or the other. In fact, Tom and Or just picked up by Tom or Dick as others are finished. Dick could be working at different facilities, a couple hundred miles apart. That makes no difference with E-mail, etc. unless the work requires physical presence. AFAIK, maintenance management software primarily involves physical work for the most part, although office work can also be tracked since it's also part of the cost of operating a maintenance program. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 25.0 Thunderbird 24.6.0 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#259
|
|||
|
|||
MS's support logic
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 14:37:11 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote: On 8/28/14 11:21 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: [snip] No cheating required. Tom may be very good at handling the usual run-of-the-mill jobs; Dick may find such boring. So they split them up as I described. If someone assumes that the job split is otherwise, he is going to get odd results. This all depends on how you choose to manage your operations. If the employees are not supposed to be splitting work without permission, they need more supervision. If a particular job is assigned to Tom, then Tom is supposed to do the work. Dick should be doing the work he's been assigned. You do not give the employees the option of deciding for themselves what each will do if you want to know the true cost. And if You are assuming knowledge/wisdom that the manager might not have. What is the true cost of having the wrong person do a job? The people who do the jobs -- assuming comptenecy -- are more likely to know the best allocation since they understand the details of the job; the manager might not know how to do the job (in detail). There is a problem of making sure that what the employees do is in concordance with company goals, but that is something else. they are splitting a single job for whatever reason, both should have hours entered on the same work order. In the latter case, no conclusion can be drawn as to who is better. [snip] Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko |
#260
|
|||
|
|||
MS's support logic
On 8/29/14 12:27 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 14:37:11 -0600, Ken Springer wrote: On 8/28/14 11:21 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: [snip] No cheating required. Tom may be very good at handling the usual run-of-the-mill jobs; Dick may find such boring. So they split them up as I described. If someone assumes that the job split is otherwise, he is going to get odd results. This all depends on how you choose to manage your operations. If the employees are not supposed to be splitting work without permission, they need more supervision. If a particular job is assigned to Tom, then Tom is supposed to do the work. Dick should be doing the work he's been assigned. You do not give the employees the option of deciding for themselves what each will do if you want to know the true cost. And if You are assuming knowledge/wisdom that the manager might not have. What is the true cost of having the wrong person do a job? That's another problem. The manager also needs to be familiar with the jobs. But the better pieces of software provide reference materials for this. The same reference materials generally used for large bid proposals. And when customized, location cost differentials can be built in. The people who do the jobs -- assuming comptenecy -- are more likely to know the best allocation since they understand the details of the job; the manager might not know how to do the job (in detail). There is a problem of making sure that what the employees do is in concordance with company goals, but that is something else. Exactly. Which is why, at the local level, you should consult with those workers, to see how things mesh/match with the above reference materials. But... if you know you've got someone who doesn't put out much effort, don't place a lot of faith in his answers, unless there a reason or reasons for keeping him. Such as knowledge of the same mistakes being made over and over and over and over and... G they are splitting a single job for whatever reason, both should have hours entered on the same work order. In the latter case, no conclusion can be drawn as to who is better. [snip] Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 25.0 Thunderbird 24.6.0 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|