Love it. A few years ago at a place I was helping out in, one of the devs had built a clock for the conference room that, at the start of a meeting, you punched the number of people in the meeting into. It knew the average company salary (this was a ~15 person software house) and would count up the "money spent" given the number of people in the room and the time on the clock. Very motivating.
Did the clock also total up all the days spent down rabbit-holes resulting in worthless work because there wasn't adequate communication? :)
It does remind me though of a guy I once knew (late 90s) who was a senior manager at the national arm of a large, well-known international investment bank. He'd be in a meeting with the CEO and the rest of the senior managers, and the CEO wouldn't let the meeting commence if there were any computer cords visible, sometimes taking up to 15 minutes to personally clear away cords...
It's true that there's a balance... maybe some kind of amplification based on the # of people. Nothing frustrates me more than a 20-person meeting with three guys talking (actual all-hands meetings to communicate critical info excepted, of course).
Someone I worked with at a previous job tried the average salary clock thing. I mentioned to him that if he really cared, he could just work late to make up for the loss. The clock didn't come to any more meetings.
Comments
Love it. A few years ago at a place I was helping out in, one of the devs had built a clock for the conference room that, at the start of a meeting, you punched the number of people in the meeting into. It knew the average company salary (this was a ~15 person software house) and would count up the "money spent" given the number of people in the room and the time on the clock. Very motivating.
Did the clock also total up all the days spent down rabbit-holes resulting in worthless work because there wasn't adequate communication? :)
It does remind me though of a guy I once knew (late 90s) who was a senior manager at the national arm of a large, well-known international investment bank. He'd be in a meeting with the CEO and the rest of the senior managers, and the CEO wouldn't let the meeting commence if there were any computer cords visible, sometimes taking up to 15 minutes to personally clear away cords...
It's true that there's a balance... maybe some kind of amplification based on the # of people. Nothing frustrates me more than a 20-person meeting with three guys talking (actual all-hands meetings to communicate critical info excepted, of course).
That reminds me of this website: http://www.expensivemeeting.com/
Someone I worked with at a previous job tried the average salary clock thing. I mentioned to him that if he really cared, he could just work late to make up for the loss. The clock didn't come to any more meetings.
Alternatively, your pay could have been docked for not caring about wasting company resources.
I'm not sure I catch your drift.. I hope you weren't serious about your suggestion, or that you honestly think it was a helpful suggestion.