This is interesting because I very deliberately try the opposite. My top priority is always making time for helping colleagues. Most of my industry is super green and the young staff require a lot of training/attention if you want them to develop well/quickly. It means when I first started my team things were a bit hectic, but years later it basically runs itself. I always prioritize investing in individuals so that when things pile up I’ve got 20 people I can delegate to. What’s more, this is cultural at this point so they all do the same. It’s basically a positive feedback loop at this point where things just sort of work cause everyone knows what they’re doing.
There is another team next to mine that is run a lot like how you’re describing and they are constantly missing schedules/going over budget/having quality issues cause the lead ‘doesnt have time right now’. Except right now is all the time and none of the staff seem to know what they’re doing and are all super frustrated.
Anyway, all that to say I think how you structure these kinds of things depends a lot on what kind of work you do, what kind of team environment you have, and what your overall goals are. Could I be individually more productive if I told everyone else to go away? Absolutely yes, I’d get 3 times as much done, but the team overall would be less efficient.
I also don’t work outside work hours, and neither does anyone else on my team because we’re efficient enough at work to plan out and execute 40 hours of work per person per week. The same can’t be said for that other team where the lead goes home and everyone else is left confused working crazy OT.
Your way seems to work for you, but I think it is important to note that there is no ‘right’ approach for all situations. One needs to define the objectives and then determine what the best approach for accomplishing those might be for that particular role. In short, it’s complicated. And anyone who says it’s not is generally trying to sell something
This is interesting because I very deliberately try the opposite. My top priority is always making time for helping colleagues. Most of my industry is super green and the young staff require a lot of training/attention if you want them to develop well/quickly. It means when I first started my team things were a bit hectic, but years later it basically runs itself. I always prioritize investing in individuals so that when things pile up I’ve got 20 people I can delegate to. What’s more, this is cultural at this point so they all do the same. It’s basically a positive feedback loop at this point where things just sort of work cause everyone knows what they’re doing.
There is another team next to mine that is run a lot like how you’re describing and they are constantly missing schedules/going over budget/having quality issues cause the lead ‘doesnt have time right now’. Except right now is all the time and none of the staff seem to know what they’re doing and are all super frustrated.
Anyway, all that to say I think how you structure these kinds of things depends a lot on what kind of work you do, what kind of team environment you have, and what your overall goals are. Could I be individually more productive if I told everyone else to go away? Absolutely yes, I’d get 3 times as much done, but the team overall would be less efficient.
I also don’t work outside work hours, and neither does anyone else on my team because we’re efficient enough at work to plan out and execute 40 hours of work per person per week. The same can’t be said for that other team where the lead goes home and everyone else is left confused working crazy OT.
Your way seems to work for you, but I think it is important to note that there is no ‘right’ approach for all situations. One needs to define the objectives and then determine what the best approach for accomplishing those might be for that particular role. In short, it’s complicated. And anyone who says it’s not is generally trying to sell something