But then again, how many managers that don’t have a real understanding of how we get things done will use these estimates against us. We all know that it’s great if you meet the estimated time of getting something done, and it’s even better when you beat that time. But what about if it takes longer? Well then managements jumping around like crazy asking “Why is this taking so long?”

Like Matt & I agreed earlier it really would have to be on a per company basis pending your companies architecture.

My argument is that creating a set of values based on the duration of a task is setting up a enviroment that management could use to evaluate a employees performance.

As David stated, there are unique procedures that are required for unique Tasks. Some of those tasks require prerequisites that must be accomplished before the original task can begin.

So, how do you evaluate, or set up a standard value for that task? Define a value based on the task alone, or include the prerequisites?

Assuming we just look at the technical side (i.e. no work done confirming the user is who they claim they are) for resetting a password you have a diverse range of possible OSes, programs with individual auth mechanisms, backend auth modules and unique procedures.

Unique procedures are things like unique glitches I’ve worked with that resulted in me having to clear certain forms of cache on a few servers before the user could login, the amount of time would alter with the number of servers and the fact that this was unique to our system.

More often than not (at least on stuff I’ve worked on), many components are ad hoc and it’s not possible to “simply” reset one password at a time. I have force the password to propagate in to the right systems, this takes time. I also work on client hosted and locally hosted systems, resetting a password on a local cluster can be trivial (using cluster ssh) compared with attempting to do it on client hosted cluster that usually involves some form of RDP + PuTTY hops to get to.

I’m all for measuring how long the task is taking at any given organisation, assuming it’s actually consistent, but don’t try to define some figure like “it takes 2 minutes to reset a password on Windows”. Is that in an environment where I’m required to re-authenticate as a higher privileged user before altering other users? What about in newer/older versions of Windows?

Chuck all the other combinations, and it becomes ridiculous.

Just my 2 cents.

The arguments you guys are giving are akin to those given by the doctors/nurses/hospitals who refuse to use checklists for procedures, on the grounds that they are professionals and well-trained, when in fact even the most professional hospitals now use checklists to make sure everyone gets every step, every time (especially important in fields like infectious disease control).

I’m just saying, if we had some idea about the time estimates for basic tasks, say like resetting a password in {whatever} environment, we could all think about it more clearly and try to understand why it differs in different environments (different o/s, different installation size/type/style). It just might make understanding the tasks at hand a bit easier.

I was not particularly advocating a published list of benchmarks, although I do fully understand how management anywhere might easily wish to jump on something like that and use it to all of our detriments.

Might I propose a secret study? ;->

There are so many variables that can occur I would never want to see someone publish “time estimates for tasks”. The thought of it scares me. There are to many managers/supervisors out there that would use these estimates as a “bible” of how long everything should take and if you don’t meet that time estimate…..well we all know how well that will go.

Besides….how would I be able to keep my rep as a miracle worker? lol

1. Accountability. Who would create these estimates? How many times have we started a task, only to find that we need to insert steps/ perform a prerequisite task to complete the original task?

2. Supervisors/Managers would use the task estimates for performance standards, and attempt to reduce the estimates in house to make themselves/their departments/section/area look better. Employee reviews would soon incorporate these estimates, and eventually our jobs will be reviewed as to how many tasks were completed, as versus how many tasks were performed well.

I have seen this type of process in other industries (the automotive industry uses time based billing, and Dealerships rate their techinicians on how much business (money made from billable hours).

We work in a skills based environment… the better skills we have, the better we can accomplish our tasks, and better our customers/users are served.