In the HBR article, “The Making of an Expert”, referred to in my last post, the author makes the case that “real expertise must pass three tests“, and I think that these three tests must also be applied to the 2Time system in a variety of ways.
“First, it must lead to performance that is consistently superior to that of the expert’s peers. Second, real expertise produces concrete results. Brain surgeons, for example, not only must be skillful with their scalpels but must also have successful outcomes with their patients. A chess player must be able to win matches at tournaments. Finally, true expertise can be replicated and measured in the lab.”
This has made me wonder. What are the measurable outcomes that expertise in time management should produce? In other words, what is the overall cost of not having a robust time management system?
My initial thoughts are that some combination of the following are useful places to start:
- The number of missed appointments each day
- The amount of time that is spent in the “flow state”
- The number of time demands that slip through the cracks
- The degree to which a day fulfills on a professional’s intentions
- The number of tasks that are started and taken through to completion
- The number and size of promises that are broken each day
- The number of times per week that a time demand is suddenly remembered and does not already reside in the time management system
I am sure to add to this list as time goes on, and welcome any comments that may apply.
What is interesting to me is the fact that this very basic skill used by ALL professionals has been so under-researched that there exists no standard way of measuring success. I keep hoping that I cannot be the first to think of these things… is 2Time that new?