-4

It isn't unusual for some to finish their work well and early.

That poses a conundrum - should they take the remaining estimated time for themselves or should they take on more work lined up, sometimes for others?

Finishing up early can also be a problem if there is no more work immediately and give the impression that their position is not necessary.

enderland
  • 110,742
  • 49
  • 328
  • 478
user1220
  • 6,219
  • 3
  • 35
  • 46

3 Answers3

5

Allowing people on your team to leave early when their core work is complete is problematic for a lot of reasons. This promotes speed over quality for example "It's a nice day, I'll rush and wrap this project up so I can go to the beach", reduces the likelihood of engagement in non-core work since any additional task like documentation or mentoring means they will have to stay later than they otherwise would, and discourages skill diversification as this would lead to a wider variety of tasks that could be assigned and therefor eat into early leave.

As an occasional reward it makes sense and doesn't hurt. As a general policy it can be poisonous.

Myles
  • 34,766
  • 9
  • 81
  • 132
1

This can be a sticky situation. If you are using some sort of system to track time versus tasks, usually a roll up will occur and its easy for a manager to see who the top producers are. Hopefully your company is doing so.

My general rule is if I am done an hour early or so, I will take that time to research something fun to me but work related -- like a new technology.

If I finish way early, then I will let my boss know and get the next task. Finishing ahead of schedule will almost always work in your favor.

Neo
  • 84,783
  • 53
  • 276
  • 322
0

When a report comes to me and says they finished early, I quiz them on what they have done. If it's too good to be true, it usually is.

  1. Did the report get their task straight? I want to make sure that they did not misunderstand their task.

  2. Did they execute the task on the basis of unwarranted, short-cut assumptions?

  3. What methodology did they use, and does this methodology makes sense? if they use a method that no one thought of and it is effective and efficient, I want the repo to write me about it and cc the rest of the team.

  4. Did they adequately QA their work?

Assuming that they passed my review with flying colors, I'll have them back up other members of my team who could use some assistance. Or do some self-study to prep for an upcoming project, do some documentation work, investigate a new technology, etc. There is always something to do.

Vietnhi Phuvan
  • 72,342
  • 8
  • 133
  • 268
  • 1
    So to avoid being quizzed one can assume safer to fudge and use the total estimated time. – user1220 Jan 09 '17 at 21:28
  • @user1220 - I manage by exception. If you finish unusually early, that's an exception and I certainly want to understand how that exception came about. Nothing personal about it, I am all business. As Reagan said "trust and verify". If you take being quizzed as some kind of punishment or as doubt being cast on you as a professional, you're taking it wrong. It's all about me exercising due diligence and me making sure that miracles have a rational explanation. No, I don't believe in miracles - not when it comes to the tasks I assign :) – Vietnhi Phuvan Jan 09 '17 at 21:39
  • @user1229 - When it comes to review and verification, anything that's unusual takes priority over anything that's expected. Although everything will be reviewed and checked out eventually. I expect my reports to tell me how to validate their work quickly and efficiently. In other words, I want them to do the work in a way that's quickly and efficiently verifiable. When I put on my management hat, I don't like surprises. – Vietnhi Phuvan Jan 09 '17 at 21:46
  • Very enlightening indeed. So the bottom line is - don't surprise, one way or the other. It seems to me that a fast developer can be disruptive to the overall management so the best one can do after finishing the work is to do pretty much pretend work or take care of one's private affairs under the auspices of the employer. – user1220 Jan 09 '17 at 21:50
  • 1
    @user1220 - If you don't want to be challenged and have more responsibilities being put on your plate, that's a good way to go about it. I usually choose the other way. – Vietnhi Phuvan Jan 09 '17 at 21:54
  • without proper title or compensation review I see no reason to take on more responsibilities but I respect your willingness to do it for the same title/pay. It probably makes an employer very happy. – user1220 Jan 09 '17 at 21:56
  • 1
    @user1220 - That's how I become promotable. By offering excellent value for the money, and by offering an implied promise that I will excel in the new position if offered it. If you want anything from your employer, you have to take the first step and give them something to work with. Management won't give you anything, unless they can see how giving it to you will benefit the firm. – Vietnhi Phuvan Jan 09 '17 at 22:01
  • 1
    I understand your point of view, and I have to agree. Hopefully "promotable" becomes (or became) "promoted"! – user1220 Jan 09 '17 at 22:05
  • 1
    @user1220 - Hopefully - Past performance is no guarantee of future results :) – Vietnhi Phuvan Jan 09 '17 at 22:06