Laziness breeds success? The rule of three!

I used to have a rule of three at a previous company. If my director mentioned something new I noted it, but unless instructed otherwise, did little more. If it was mentioned a second time I started thinking about what I would say about it. The third time it appeared I would mark it as important and make sure I responded quickly to it.

That way I avoided much wasted effort chasing fleeting ideas that never caught hold.

Recently the concept of laziness as a skill (?) that contributes to success has crossed my path three times. In this concept laziness is not about idleness or a negative approach, but more about how to realize the desired outcome at minimum personal effort.


One time.....

The first time was a colleague I respect referring a book to me - The Lazy Project Manager. It is subtitled "How to achieve twice as much and still leave the office early." My colleague was saying how much sense it spoke, but then like me has been around change for a while and has a lot of experience to gauge it against. In general it is about achieving through others rather than running around frantically trying to do it all oneself. It also has an element of being focussed on the right things.

An old friend used to ask students why projects fail? After all the usual suggestions of poor sponsorship, scope creep, poor delivery by others, etc.. his answer was "risks happen!" His argument was that estimating, planning, managing, etc were skills that could be learned and were essentially mechanical, but the killer was the unknowns, the uncertainties and it was here that project manager should be focussing. I can see the link to the "lazy" concept here.


It does not seem to be available as an ebook yet, but will soon be on my reading pile.

Two times......

Readers may be aware that a little while ago I asked around for examples of inspirational leaders of cultural change. The most interesting aspect of that was the dearth of suggestions (instead people offered themselves and their services or suggested tools, but did not identify an individual). When I raised that again recently someone immediately said they could think if at least two who they would cite. As he then mused he commented that he could describe them both easily in that they were lazy!

My ears pricked up at this second mention of lazy being a good characteristic. Indeed it then that the quality was coined as aiming to achieve the most with the least personal effort.

Three times.......

Soon after that I found myself in a natur e vs nurture debate about leadership skills, in particular the ability to evoke loyalty. We didn't agree, but we are still friends and that is the important bit. In this debate it turned out that my friend had worked for Richard Branson and he described him as "actively lazy". The context was that as a serial entrepreneur Richard Branson learnt how to win the support of others that allowed him to take his time learning about an opportunity, but then when he judged it worthwhile was able to focus, both his and his supporters efforts on it.


So....that was three times and here we are;

Laziness is good!

Well, it is when it manifests in working and achieving through others (could that be delegation?) AND focussing on the important things and not getting caught up in the morass of everyday life. When expressed that way it is not surprising it can be linked with inspirational leaders too!

Sounds easy, eh? But in much of work life it seems managers feel safer and indeed get rewarded for being busy, not lazy. They never want to appear lazy. Instead they control so much themselves, limiting the ability of their staff to develop under them. They get so caught up in the daily machinery of meetings and paperwork that they barely have time to think, often catching up with work and emails at 2am Sunday morning.

On balance, and with the caveat that it is the active laziness described here, I have decided that I can happily aspire to being "lazy".


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad