Thu 23 Mar 2006
The first time I came across this was when I was asked what my top, unmissable priorities were. I reeled off about ten - they all seemed equally important. The reply came back very quickly: “I don’t care about that - what’s your top three. You can’t do all those. What are the three things that could get you sacked if you don’t do them” .. or something like that. It was great advice, if you concentrate hard on too many things you won’t get any of them done. Three seems about right - maybe you can cope with a few more.
Seven came up more recently when we re-organised - JP mandated in each part of the management organisation there should be no more than seven people. He may have worn six and possibly eight but no way nine. It works - too few people and there is not enough knowledge and experience to get the right things worked out. Too many people and everyone starts playing for position, talking up their own book, nobody gets heard, nothing gets done. Seven is about right. It works. Honest. If you have more than seven people on the management team re-organise, divide, split, re-think. Whatever. ‘Cos it won’t work with more.
At college we were taught that the human brain cannot manage more than six (was it, or seven) concurrent things. Very useful to know when designing GUIs or constructing management teams.
On a related point, even if you are organised around the magic of seven the organisation itself and as a whole will be very much larger. If you need this organisation to act somewhat like a single organism (and you should) the communication needs to be extremely simple and repeated often. Say … oh .. about three themes .That seems to work. It sounds very patronising and Janet & John but the organisation as a whole doesn’t care about you and generally doesn’t listen - it is far too busy working. Far too many things going on in its head. Far more important things to do.
So pick three themes. Express them in as simple a manner as the theme allows and repeat at every opportunity.
March 24th, 2006 at 8:07 am
Here, for the record, is the paper that JP cites: The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information, George A. Miller (1956), Harvard University.
March 24th, 2006 at 8:17 am
Every now and then I read George A Miller’s work on this subject, which someone has thoughtfully posted on the web. You can find it at:
http://www.well.com/~smalin/miller.html
March 24th, 2006 at 10:27 am
Thx for the links.
March 24th, 2006 at 1:14 pm
[...] Reading The Man In the Doorway’s recent post, and reading Steven Johnson’s article in Time (see previous post), got me thinking again. [...]