Efficient vs Effective

We're a nation that's become enamored with efficiency and lost our way on being effective. Because head count at an organization is an all-important corporate metric, we come up with new and innovative ways to get by with fewer people. We assume that by buying the latest computer program, hardware gadget, or by honing some process that we can further reduce our reliance on others to get the job done. In so doing, we're hero's to the corporate politic and justify our own existences. I'd say we've made our bed and it's an ill place to sleep.

Our organization is largely made up of technical people, mainly engineers and technicians. It's always been that way, but there's an important difference between today and days from the past. In the past there were a larger number of technicians that helped with implementation details and there were support people that dealt with non-technical issues. Today there are many fewer technicians and no support people. In our zeal to become efficient, we've decided to outsource many of our past technician tasks and we now have much better computer systems that can help us with our non-technical support issues. Now, instead of engineers doing engineering, we're writing documents and dealing with vendors that are doing the technical work.

We've become so efficient that we can even sort our own incoming mail and order our own pencils. In fact, that's what engineers, managers, and even directors are doing. Since we still need to do budgets, still need to presentations, still get mail, and still need pencils, we do it all. Now there's a rational nation. We're so efficient that we can sort our own mail ... at the fully burdened rate of someone making $200,000 per year. Now there's a mail man to be proud of!

Since we still have to accomplish all of the burdensome tasks of the business and there's only a certain number of hours in the day, somethings gotta give. Usually, that's actual engineering work. Over the past months I've had innumerable conversations about important work that had to be delayed because we just didn't have anyone to put on it. Another sadly humorous conversation was about hiring someone in to do clerical work and paying for it out of our own salaries. It was pointed out that we can't do that because that would add a head count. The silliness is getting worse by declaring people as student interns, because this position isn't considered to be an added head count. Unfortunately, student interns can only be on staff for a maximum of 4 months per year.

Speaking of interns, I had one of those last year. He was very bright and a great help to our department. I had him working on new technologies that I wasn't sure would pan out. The cost was minimal and the results turned out better than expected. You'd think that the company would want to encourage this by having a year-round student intern program. No, we can only have the students for the allowable time and then we lose the expertise on whatever they developed. That's a rational nation.

So, where does this leave us? I'd love to tell you but I've got some documents to get out, a presentation to work on, and maybe I'll see if I can't get some office supplies that we're running low on ordered.

Refurbing Houses in Minneapolit

I've been looking into refurbing some foreclosed properties in Minneapolis. The city has a shortage of good, affordable housing but not a shortage houses. There are a large number of foreclosed properties that are quite inexpensive but need some TLC and they need the city to recognize that the current housing market isn't the same as years past. The TLC comes in the form of investment, which generally requires upgrades to roofs, windows, and furnaces. Even after this investment, there's financial gains that can be made from either resale of the homes or if investors want to rent the properties until market prices firm up.

Minneapolis has a couple of things working against it in getting properties back in use. The first one is the Truth in Lending process. This process is good in that it protects buyers from getting into a home that has some obvious structural flaws or code violations. This is accomplished by having inspections that detail the work that's required to get the house up to snuff. Those are all good. The problem is that it's supposed to be the seller can't sell the house that doesn't meet code. Now, take a look at a foreclose house that has a bank as an owner. They aren't going to make repairs and clearly state that the house is being sold "as-is". To get around this item, the city has a clause that states that the new owner recognizes the deficiencies in the property and will take to financial responsibility to do so. That's OK too except for they require that these repairs must be made within 90 days, after which the property must pass inspection. It also states what repairs must be made under permit, even though some of those home features may not be used. An example of this is the connection for hooking up a gas dryer in the basement is not up to code. It also applies new rules to existing structures. For instance, the house that I'm looking at has a certain size bedroom window and that window no longer meets the requirement of opening with >5 square feet of room to crawl out. I see the reason for requirement, but this is a 1920's house that had small windows and stucco exterior. Maybe a different style of window that opens fully can meet the requirement, but it would be prohibitively expensive to widen a stucco'd opening. In general, I'm not looking for a free pass to turn a quick buck, nor am I looking to become a deadbeat landlord. I'm just looking for a way to wisely invest in the real estate market.

I'd mentioned two drawbacks to refurbing foreclosed houses in Minneapolis. The other one is the tax assessment. I'm sorry, a house that I'm buying for $40K should not be taxed at $164K. That's rediculous. Until that house actually can be shown to sell for more money, it should be taxed at no more than 25% over the sale price. As it is, the house is deadbeat. It's vacant and a scourge on the neighborhood until it gets lived in. The city should recognize this and become an active participant in a Rational Nation.

So, if cities (like Minneapolis) are looking for regular people to come in and help with the housing crisis, they should figure out how to make only the necessary red tape and set taxes based on going forward, not looking back.

Twittering

I've decided that twittering is a way to push my more random thoughts out to the world ... as if the world really cares. So, if you do care, look for OutlierTom. The unfortunate thing about both blogs and twitters is that I tend to say more than I should, meaning that there's content that may get me in trouble for writing it. Since my thoughts are dominated by work-related issues and I work on ensuring the highest quality/reliability of pacemakers and defibrillators, I tend to rant about these issues. Now, I see that there are a bunch of medical professionals following my twitters. Ugh!

This doesn't mean that I plan to stop pushing out important concepts on ensuring that cardiac patients get the best possible products and care. It does mean that I need to make the data appear more generic and the opinions reach beyond my own company. Besides, if I get in trouble for what I write with the net result still being better patient outcomes, then I'll just have to deal with that separately. I don't kill myself at work for the money or the job, I do it because I can ensure that the product is significantly better. Case in point, the year before the outlier program was started here, there were as many as 6 product recalls. Yep, in just that year. Since then, we haven't had one. Knock on wood, there may/will be future recalls. The thing is that we've found the future reliability problems in the factory and have fixed the root causes of the issues. We've also made a sea change in employee attitude about statistical signals in manufacturing .

That's the good thing about people here, they listen to reason and will make the changes that are required to improve quality. Don't get me wrong, we still have some employees that are effectively corporate speed bumps, but there are avenues around them so we can get the required results. Also, I like the CEO because he's willing to step in and make things right. I think that most upper management realize that each product that gets returned has a ~$50K price tag but we lose over $1M in customer good will. Since there are three main companies looking to grab the business, customer good will is paramount.

So, back to the twittering. I've decided to still throw random thoughts out there. If people want to know more than that, they'll just need to read it in this blog ... if I get around to updating it.

Last night I watched some on-line vids of John Stuart lambasting CNBC and especially Cramer the so-called expert advice that they give on investing. Besides being quite humorous, it shows just how clueless people are when it comes to economic futures. It also shows how there's such a herd mentality in the economy.To join the members of the truely clueless, I'm going to give my interpretation of the economic future. It's simple, so it must be wrong. My claim is that the economic future will largely be based on what a large portion of the population thinks it is. The stock market has some real deals out there but continues to go down because people of lost their confidence in the stock market. If people had confidence in the markets, they'd go up because there would be demand for the stock. Now there's just the opposite. People not only don't want their stocks, but are willing to take large losses just to get rid of them. This same behavior has extended to the housing markets, banking, and businesses. There's a perception that things are only going to get worse, habits are changed, commerce reduces, so things get worse. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Maybe that's why the government tracks consumer confidence so closely.Now that I've stuck my neck out, I'll go as far as to get it chopped; I'll propose a solution. It's called courage. Have courage to purchase stocks in companies that you admire, even though it's down 50% (or more) from its high. Have courage to say to your employer that there's a need to consider adding people, even though the ROI isn't as clear as it once was. Have courage to spend some money, even though you're afraid that a rainy day might be coming. Finally, have the courage to say that you're optimistic about the future, even outside polite company. Maybe some of this courage will rub off to others.