What's Best Next

You are here: Home / Archives for 1 - Productivity

Resources on Productivity

God Sets and Keeps the Agenda

by

This is a great post by Ben Stafford, director of short-term ministries at Training Leaders International.

It is so good I’m copying the whole thing here (but don’t forget to check out his blog):

In a recent post I wrote: There are definitely upsides to [being a planner by nature] but the temptation to think of myself as captain of my own destiny, my protector, and my safe-keeper is not one of them.”

On rereading it today, I thought of Psalm 121 and Derek Kidner’s comments on it.  Clearly the emphasis of this Psalm is on God’s keeping of his people. So of course, it would be idolatras for me to think of myself as my own safe-keeper.

He will not let your foot be moved;
he who keeps you will not slumber.
Behold, he who keeps Israel
will neither slumber nor sleep.
The LORD is your keeper;
the LORD is your shade on your right hand.
The sun shall not strike you by day,
nor the moon by night.
The LORD will keep you from all evil;
he will keep your life.
The LORD will keep
your going out and your coming in
from this time forth and forevermore.
(Psalm 121:3-8 ESV)

On verses 7 & 8 Kidner says:

     The promise moves on from the pilgrim’s immediate preoccupations to cover the whole of existence.  In the light of other scriptures, to be kept from all evil does not imply a cushioned life, but a well-armed one.  Cf. Psalm 23:4, which expects the dark valley but can face it.  The two halves of verse 7 can be compared with Luke 21:18f., where God’s minutest care (‘not a hair of your head will perish’) and His servants’ deepest fulfillment (‘you will win true life’) are promised in the same breath as the prospect of hounding and martyrdom (Lk. 21:16f.). Your life, in the present passage (7), is as many-sided a word as in Luke; it means the whole living person. Our Lord enriched the concept of keeping or losing this by His teaching on self-giving and self-love (e.g. Jn. 12:24f).

The Psalm ends with a pledge which could hardly be stronger or more sweeping.  Your going out and your coming in is not only a way of saying ‘everything’: in closer detail it draws attention to one’s ventures and enterprises (cf. Ps 126:6), and to the home which remains one’s base; again, to pilgrimage and return; perhaps even (by another association of this pair of verbs) to the dawn and sunset of one’s days. But the last line takes good care of this journey; and it would be hard to decide which half of it is the more encouraging: the fact that it starts ‘from now‘, or that it runs on, not to the end of time but without end; like God Himself who is (cf. Ps 73:26) ‘my portion for ever’.

Don't Waste Your Employee Training: Build on Strengths, Not Weaknesses

by

The latest Gallup Management Journal has a good article on Why Strengths Matter in Training.

Here’s the summary:

Too many training and development efforts fall short because they don’t factor in employees’ talents.

And is some important data, for any who somehow think organizations can ignore the importance of focusing on their employee’s strengths:

Gallup research shows that people who know and use their strengths — and the companies they work for — tend to be better performers. In a study of 65,672 employees, Gallup found that workers who received strengths feedback had turnover rates that were 14.9% lower than for employees who received no feedback (controlling for job type and tenure).

Moreover, a study of 530 work units with productivity data found that teams with managers who received strengths feedback showed 12.5% greater productivity post-intervention than teams with managers who received no feedback. And a Gallup study of 469 business units ranging from retail stores to large manufacturing facilities found that units with managers who received strengths feedback showed 8.9% greater profitability post-intervention relative to units in which the manager received no feedback.

Companies that want to boost productivity and innovation must help employees apply their natural abilities to the day-to-day requirements of their role. Implementing a strengths-based approach often demands a fresh mindset; the old ways won’t do. The questions below can help employees figure out how they can best apply their talents in their role — and can help managers and leaders learn how to use a strengths-based approach to boost company performance.

Don't Forget!

by

Jesus:

When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just. (Luke 14:12-14).

This applies to more than just dinners and banquets. In all that you do, in all areas of life, we are to give special attention to helping those who cannot do anything for us in return.

It is interesting that in Matthew 7, the people who expected to enter the kingdom but were turned away had done many “mighty works” in Jesus’ name (Matthew 7:21-23), whereas in Matthew 25 the righteous who enter the kingdom are described as those who met the concrete  needs of “the least of these” (Matthew 25:35-40).

It is not the way you treat the great that shows the state of your heart before God, though it is of course important to treat everyone with respect. What truly shows the state of your heart before God is how you treat those who are in no place to do anything for you, if you do it for Jesus’ sake.

These are tough words, if you think about it. So don’t forget. Live your life in such a way that it is filled with all sorts of actions and activities and other good works that you will not be and cannot be repaid for here on earth. And, if you do this from faith and by the Spirit, “you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”

Stop Micromanaging: Jethro's Advice to Moses on Delegating Leadership

by

This is a guest post by Loren Pinilis, who blogs on time management from a biblical perspective at Life of a Steward. 

In Exodus 18, Moses’s father-in-law, Jethro, offers sound advice that all leaders should take to heart.

From morning to evening, Moses would judge the disputes of the people. And from morning to evening, they would stand around waiting to have their cases heard. Jethro counseled Moses: “What you are doing is not good. You and the people with you will certainly wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you.”

Moses was essentially micro-managing things by allowing all decisions to be funneled through him.

Note that Moses had good intentions. He wanted the people to know and understand the law, and he took his influence and responsibility over the nation seriously. He judged each case personally because each case mattered to him and to God.

It’s the same for leaders today, particularly in ministry roles. We have a reverence for even the smallest areas under our influence, and we have a healthy respect for our duties as leaders.

But there are very serious consequences when we let our concept of a sacred duty turn into micro-management.

Jethro could see that this pattern of behavior would cause utter exhaustion for Moses, and that’s what most people focus on when they mention this passage. But Jethro also realized that Moses’s leadership style would have a negative effect on the people. The court would get backlogged, the nation would be frustrated, and eventually many would abandon the idea of receiving justice.

When a leader insists on making or approving every decision, an organizational bottleneck is created. The limiting factor for that organization’s effectiveness becomes the time and attention of the leader.

An interesting thing then often happens. The leaders recognize that they can only do so much. But rather than delegate some of their decision making (often out of a well-intentioned respect for their responsibility), they engineer the system to accommodate for their limited time.

Teams prepare proposals and reports to pre-digest the information for those who have the ability to pull the trigger. It seems sensible: you’re minimizing the time the leaders spend on approving decisions and therefore maximizing what your organization can do.

But this is designing the entire organizational structure around the limitations of the leader. It’s the exact opposite of how leadership should work.

Imagine how many hours the team spends preparing reports to save the leader a few minutes. Imagine what else could have been done with that time and energy. This is the price of micro-management.

Jethro’s advice wasn’t to streamline the court. It wasn’t to appoint people who would summarize the information for Moses so he could render quick verdicts.

Instead, Jethro’s wise counsel was to delegate: to train up leaders who could take a portion of Moses’s authority and participate with him in caring for the nation. Moses could lead instead of holding everyone back.

He could handle his workload. The people wouldn’t be frustrated. Leaders would be trained for greater things. And Justice would be administered.

The Relationship Between Vision and Productivity

by

A great podcast by Michael Hyatt on how better productivity practices don’t help unless you are headed in the right direction in the first place.

Here’s his summary:

In this podcast episode I talk about the relationship between vision and productivity. I share the story of becoming a divisional leader at Thomas Nelson. Better productivity would not have improved our operating results. We needed a better vision.

And here’s his outline:

I discuss how any leader can develop vision by following these seven steps:

  1. Get alone with a journal and a pen.
  2. Make sure you won’t be interrupted.
  3. Close your eyes and pray.
  4. Jot down your current reality.
  5. Now write down what you want to see happen.
  6. Share your vision with those who have a stake in the outcome.
  7. Commit to reading your vision daily.

6 Characteristics of Knowledge Work

by

Here are 6 great points I recently came across, summarizing Peter Drucker on what makes knowledge work different from (and more challenging than) manual work:

  1. “Knowledge worker productivity demands that we ask the question: “What is the task?”
  2. It demands that we impose the responsibility for their productivity on the individual knowledge workers themselves. Knowledge workers have to manage themselves. They have to have autonomy.
  3. Continuing innovation has to be part of the work, the task and the responsibility of knowledge workers.
  4. Knowledge work requires continuous learning on the part of the knowledge worker, but equally continuous teaching on the part of the knowledge worker.
  5. Productivity of the knowledge worker is not – at least not primarily – a matter of the quantity of output. Quality is at least as important.
  6. Finally, knowledge worker productivity requires that the knowledge worker is both seen and treated as an ‘asset’ rather than a ‘cost’. It requires that knowledge workers want to work for the organization in preference to all other opportunities.”

Here’s the key point, and the key challenge: Knowledge workers must manage themselves. The manager can only be a source of help, not a boss.

This creates an incredible opportunity and challenge for us as knowledge workers. The challenge is that it means that we need to know how to manage ourselves now more than ever, which does not necessarily come naturally (which is one reason I wrote my book). But the opportunity is that knowledge work by definition presents a great opportunity to unleash your creativity and innovation and unique interests.

This also presents a challenge for organizations, however. Many organizations that consist of knowledge workers still manage their people as if they are doing manual work. This is why you still see tightly controlled leadership and management practices.

The news flash is that these approaches kill knowledge work. Organizations cannot take their management cues from how management was done in the industrial era (I’m not saying even manual work should have been managed in that way, but it’s even worse with knowledge work). Every organization needs to be built on the recognition that their people, especially their knowledge workers (which is most of the workforce today), must be given ownership in their tasks and be allowed to manage themselves.

(By the way, if you are reading this blog, you are a knowledge worker; also, even if your “paid” job consists in manual work, we are all knowledge workers in our personal and home lives.)

Delegating to Competent Individuals is Essential to Christian Virtue

by

Acts 6 shows us the legitimacy of delegation, even in the context of the church. Pastors can’t do everything, for example, and it is right to have a team of people that you delegate areas of responsibility to.

But Acts 6 also teaches us that mere delegation is not enough. You have to delegate to competent people that are actually capable of doing good. Note, for example, how the apostles were not careless in who they delegated the food distribution to. They delegated it to capable men, individuals of “good repute and full of the Holy Spirit.”

Now, listen. It’s easy to go wrong here and think that good character is enough. It’s not. The people you delegate to must have character and competence. To delegate to someone who has two hour devotions every day (which is not even, by itself, a mark of true Christian character) but doesn’t know how to serve well (or have the willingness to learn) is not right. It is, in fact, irresponsible.

I would in fact argue that true Christian character actually manifests itself in the desire and quest to become competent. Not everyone is a star right out of the gate, and we need to give people opportunities to learn and grow. But if someone has demonstrated incompetence over a sustained period of time along with the lack of desire, or inability, to learn how to carry out their function well (to those working under them just as much as those who work above them), continuing to delegate to them is irresponsible. It is not the model of Acts 6.

As Christians who care about loving and serving others, we care about truly helping people, and not merely making noble attempts. That means that it’s not enough to delegate to “someone.” We must delegate to able, competent, faithful individuals.

The Christian Ethic

by

Jonathan Edwards:

Let us, to this end [that is, of love], be willing to do, or give, or suffer, that we may do good alike to friends and enemies, to the evil and the good, to the thankful and the unthankful.

Let our benevolence and beneficence be universal, constant, free, habitual, and according to our opportunities and ability, for this is essential to true piety, and required by the commands of God.

This is an incredible statement. Note a few things.

First, we are to do good universally. That is, we are not to show partiality, but are to do good for those who have something to offer us and those that don’t, the “great” and the “small,” in biblical terms.

Second, this includes our enemies as well as our friends, those who appreciate what we do and those who don’t, those who are out to wreck the world as well as those who are out to change it.

Third, we are to do good constantly. Doing good is not to be a rare thing we do every few months. It is to be the steady employment of the Christian.

Fourth, we are to do good freely. That is, without thought of return, and from delight and a spirit of joy. We are not to act under constraint, but because we want to.

Fifth, we are to do good according to our opportunities and ability. Which means we are to maximize our opportunities and talents and resources for the good of others. We aren’t called to serve people with what we don’t have, but very often we can do far more than we think. Further, we are to even suffer in the way of doing good for others. In other words, if we construe the need to stay within our abilities and opportunities to mean “don’t sacrifice,” we’ve misunderstood.

Seventh, this is not optional. It is “essential to true piety.” We cannot say that we love God if we are not diligently and proactively and freely and habitually seeking to serve and do good for others. This is the mark of a Christian.

This is worth emphasizing, because it’s easy to fall into the trap of simply praying for others when we see them in need. When you have the ability to help, simply saying that you will pray but not actually helping is akin to saying “be warm and be filled” and then moving on (James 2:14-17). Further, prayer is not by itself a mark of a true relationship with God (Matthew 6:5-8). It is possible to be a person who prays all the time and yet doesn’t lift a finger to concretely, practically help others (Matthew 23:4-7). God is not impressed with such people. Prayer is essential and critical (Matthew 6:9-15), but without an active disposition to do good for others, it is not a mark of a true and living relationship with God.

So, in conclusion: this is not optional! Let us be universal, constant, free, joyful, habitual, proactive, and energetic in doing good for others, without restraint or discrimination, for the glory of God.

The Essence of My Book

by

Here’s one way to state the essence of my book, in the words of Spurgeon:

Be diligent in action. Put all your irons into the fire. Use every faculty for Jesus. Be wide-awake to watch opportunities, and quick to seize upon them.

That’s what I’m trying to help you do, and that’s why I wrote my book.

I spend the first part fleshing out what productivity really is from a Christian perspective and why it matters (namely, so you can maximally steward all your gifts and opportunities and faculties for the glory of Jesus); then in the rest of the book, I lay out practical strategies for actually getting things done in the midst of all the opportunities and distractions that constantly multiply around us.

The biggest influences on my book include, from the old days:

  • William Wilberforce
  • Jonathan Edwards
  • Martin Luther
  • John Calvin
  • Augustine
  • William Carey
  • Charles Spurgeon
  • Martyn Lloyd-Jones
  • Jim Elliot (though I don’t quote him)
  • John Wesley
  • The Macadonian Christians in 2 Corinthians 8
  • The apostle Paul
  • Many others

And from the current days:

  • Jesus
  • Tim Keller
  • John Piper
  • JI Packer
  • Wayne Grudem
  • Peter Drucker
  • Tim Sanders
  • Keith Ferrazzi
  • David Allen
  • Stephen Covey
  • Seth Godin
  • Daniel Pink
  • Scott Belsky
  • Chip and Dan Heath
  • Marcus Buckingham
  • Many of my friends
  • Christians I’ve met around the world, both online and in person
  • Many others

What does someone like the 18th century theologian Jonathan Edwards have to say about productivity in the 21st Century? A lot. You’ll see when you get into the book. I think, perhaps, this conjunction of the old and the new, along with utilizing the best secular thinking within a robust Christian framework, might make it unlike any book you’ve read (in a good sense!). We’ll see.

In terms of the status of the book: we are still finishing revisions, but we do have a publication date which I’ll share with you when I have the time.

I just wanted to write this post up because I came across that Spurgeon quote again during the revisions, and wanted to share it with you.

Have a great weekend!

 

How to Know What's Best Next

by

Here’s one way. It’s not the most important. But following up on our posts from yesterday and the day before, one significant way to know what’s best to do next is to ask this question:

“Which one thing, if I accomplished it, would result in the greatest number of all these other things that I also want to do also getting done as a result?”