by idtm

Created on: August 29, 2008

In an age when workoholism was known as "the work ethic" and before the lunch ethic was known as alcoholism I realised that activity should not be confused with work in much the same manner as urgent should not be confused with immediate. From this I deduced the value of inertia in managing the work life balance.

The theory of management inertia postulates that, in a dynamic system (irony notwithstanding), to perform any task defined as "urgent", upon request, is deeply inefficient. By the time the task is finished, its completion will no longer be needed, in which case the work done was a waste of time because some other event, requirement or capricious whim will have taken precedence. This, in its turn, will be overtaken by new events and priorities, and so on, ad infinitum.

Therefore, if work is a waste of time, and wasting time is better than doing nothing, then doing nothing is more efficient than work.

Extrapolation of this syllogistic logic is countered by the combined curricula of prestigious business schools, which are bulging with meticulously developed management theories dedicated to the deity of profit. Sages, prophets, gurus and sundry luminaries adumbrate theories, which generate considerable revenues from the management lore known as "The Pursuit of Profit". As vast revenues pour in from royalties, lecture tours, seminars and chat shows peddling their latest fashionable panacea, the work of the authors themselves is apparently the exception to the rule. However since the value of their output is in inverse proportion to revenues the authors represent not the exception to prove the rule but prove to be the theory's most successful adherents no work and all pay makes Jack a rich boy.

The theory belongs to that particular species which are born not of Damascene revelation but of empirical research conducted in the crucible of commerce and industry. In short, this is a theory born of experience rather than intellectual endeavour.

This theory is supported by the observation that there is no relationship between excuse and effect. All excuses are designed to avoid modifying existing behaviour under the guise of the justification of past misdemeanours.

Let me illustrate this. Four excuses are invariably given for a train being late on British railways. In winter there is snow on the lines. In spring there is flooding. In summer heat has buckled the rails. In autumn there are leaves on the line. It is worth noting that if none of the foregoing apply then

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page >>