• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Elon Musk's 6 Rules of Productivity Show a Divide Between Military and Civilian Workplaces

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
32,831
Points
1,160
But if I don't use acronyms, how will I know what I'm saying? :)


Elon Musk's 6 Rules of Productivity Show a Divide Between Military and Civilian Workplaces


In a 2018 email that leaked to the public, the Tesla CEO outlined six recommendations for his employees to make the best use of their time.

Members of the military will quickly realize their units take few, if any of his recommendations.

While that's not the end of the world (and probably no surprise), due to the fact that the U.S. still has the world's most powerful military, those who have spent their whole lives in the service may want to take pause -- especially if they're transitioning out.

Judging by Musk's email, the military and civilian worlds are light years apart, and it's something for which veterans entering the civilian workforce should be prepared. Even Musk's other company SpaceX is unlikely to bridge this divide anytime soon.

1. No Large Meetings

Sometimes, the military requires an all-hands meeting or some other kind of all-call. Unlike many large companies, military units deal with life or death situations, which is actually a good reason to have a large meeting. If it's not that serious, Musk says, don't have it.

"Excessive meetings are the blight of big companies and almost always get worse over time," he wrote. "Please get [rid] of all large meetings, unless you're certain they are providing value to the whole audience."

2. No Long Meetings

The military also has well-intended short meetings. If Musk learned what a stand-up meeting is, he'd probably implement the practice of not being able to sit down all over his companies. In the case of large meetings with an important message, he believes they should be very short. And they definitely shouldn't be regular, writing:

"Also get rid of frequent meetings, unless you are dealing with an extremely urgent matter. Meeting frequency should drop rapidly once the urgent matter is resolved."

3. Don't Be Afraid to Leave

The idea of leaving a meeting called by a superior officer or noncommissioned officer is anathema to everything we know about the military. Try leaving when your squadron commander is speaking to the unit and tell me how that goes (please don't actually do that). But Musk is just fine with it, especially if the remainder of that meeting doesn't pertain to you.

"Walk out of a meeting or drop off a call as soon as it is obvious you aren't adding value," he wrote. "It is not rude to leave; it is rude to make someone stay and waste their time."

4. Don't Use Acronyms

If the military implemented this policy, its entire world might come to a screeching halt. Acronyms in the military aren't just part of a long-standing cultural tradition, they really do help ease communication. Would you rather say "Heavy Equipment Recovery Combat Utility Lift and Evacuation System" or "HERCULES." My guess is Musk might give the military a pass -- but not Tesla.

For his company, he believes buzzwords and acronyms are a hindrance.

"Don't use acronyms or nonsense words for objects, software or processes at Tesla," the email states. "In general, anything that requires an explanation inhibits communication. We don't want people to have to memorize a glossary just to function at Tesla."

5. Communication Is Not Subject to Chain of Command

Somewhere, an O-4's head just exploded reading this. Unlike some companies, part of the U.S. military's functionality depends on handling situations at the lowest level of the chain of command, so the general doesn't have to sweat battlefield tactics or get tempted to override field officers closer to the action. It works for the military, but Musk doesn't believe it works for Tesla.

To him, communicating through a chain of command is just one giant game of "Telephone."

"Communication should travel via the shortest path necessary to get the job done, not through the chain of command," Musk writes. "Any manager who attempts to enforce chain of command communication will soon find themselves working elsewhere."

6. Use Common Sense.

In the military, we like to think that everything we do or did was designed using common sense. But any veteran will tell you that common sense isn't common and the phrase "Charlie Foxtrot" exists for a reason. Musk agrees.

"If following a "company rule" is obviously ridiculous in a particular situation, such that it would make for a great Dilbert cartoon, then the rule should change," he wrote.

 
That's interesting thanks. Really like the author's note that it may be really relevant for people transitioning out of the military. Staying within the govt is likely pretty straightforward, but heading to somewhere like Tesla would be a huge culture shock. Some things we do really well, but only makes sense in context.

For 5, I'm assuming that means the CoC is kept in the cc?
 
That's interesting thanks. Really like the author's note that it may be really relevant for people transitioning out of the military. Staying within the govt is likely pretty straightforward, but heading to somewhere like Tesla would be a huge culture shock. Some things we do really well, but only makes sense in context.

For 5, I'm assuming that means the CoC is kept in the cc?

Joking Just Kidding GIF


Sorry, I don't understand your acronyms ;)
 
But if I don't use acronyms, how will I know what I'm saying? :)


Elon Musk's 6 Rules of Productivity Show a Divide Between Military and Civilian Workplaces


In a 2018 email that leaked to the public, the Tesla CEO outlined six recommendations for his employees to make the best use of their time.

Members of the military will quickly realize their units take few, if any of his recommendations.

While that's not the end of the world (and probably no surprise), due to the fact that the U.S. still has the world's most powerful military, those who have spent their whole lives in the service may want to take pause -- especially if they're transitioning out.

Judging by Musk's email, the military and civilian worlds are light years apart, and it's something for which veterans entering the civilian workforce should be prepared. Even Musk's other company SpaceX is unlikely to bridge this divide anytime soon.

1. No Large Meetings

Sometimes, the military requires an all-hands meeting or some other kind of all-call. Unlike many large companies, military units deal with life or death situations, which is actually a good reason to have a large meeting. If it's not that serious, Musk says, don't have it.

"Excessive meetings are the blight of big companies and almost always get worse over time," he wrote. "Please get [rid] of all large meetings, unless you're certain they are providing value to the whole audience."

2. No Long Meetings

The military also has well-intended short meetings. If Musk learned what a stand-up meeting is, he'd probably implement the practice of not being able to sit down all over his companies. In the case of large meetings with an important message, he believes they should be very short. And they definitely shouldn't be regular, writing:

"Also get rid of frequent meetings, unless you are dealing with an extremely urgent matter. Meeting frequency should drop rapidly once the urgent matter is resolved."

3. Don't Be Afraid to Leave

The idea of leaving a meeting called by a superior officer or noncommissioned officer is anathema to everything we know about the military. Try leaving when your squadron commander is speaking to the unit and tell me how that goes (please don't actually do that). But Musk is just fine with it, especially if the remainder of that meeting doesn't pertain to you.

"Walk out of a meeting or drop off a call as soon as it is obvious you aren't adding value," he wrote. "It is not rude to leave; it is rude to make someone stay and waste their time."

4. Don't Use Acronyms

If the military implemented this policy, its entire world might come to a screeching halt. Acronyms in the military aren't just part of a long-standing cultural tradition, they really do help ease communication. Would you rather say "Heavy Equipment Recovery Combat Utility Lift and Evacuation System" or "HERCULES." My guess is Musk might give the military a pass -- but not Tesla.

For his company, he believes buzzwords and acronyms are a hindrance.

"Don't use acronyms or nonsense words for objects, software or processes at Tesla," the email states. "In general, anything that requires an explanation inhibits communication. We don't want people to have to memorize a glossary just to function at Tesla."

5. Communication Is Not Subject to Chain of Command

Somewhere, an O-4's head just exploded reading this. Unlike some companies, part of the U.S. military's functionality depends on handling situations at the lowest level of the chain of command, so the general doesn't have to sweat battlefield tactics or get tempted to override field officers closer to the action. It works for the military, but Musk doesn't believe it works for Tesla.

To him, communicating through a chain of command is just one giant game of "Telephone."

"Communication should travel via the shortest path necessary to get the job done, not through the chain of command," Musk writes. "Any manager who attempts to enforce chain of command communication will soon find themselves working elsewhere."

6. Use Common Sense.

In the military, we like to think that everything we do or did was designed using common sense. But any veteran will tell you that common sense isn't common and the phrase "Charlie Foxtrot" exists for a reason. Musk agrees.

"If following a "company rule" is obviously ridiculous in a particular situation, such that it would make for a great Dilbert cartoon, then the rule should change," he wrote.


Just saw that re-published.

I love it.
 
I wonder how that's aged?

Anticipation Popcorn GIF

Good question - strangely enough I don't sense that Musk sweats the small stuff - like a few billion here, a few billion there...
 
I love the "please pass onto your troops" emails, just email your message to everyone. What if the supervisors are on leave or TD, the subs will miss info for weeks.
 
Chump change in return for the ego gratification required in most big organizations ;)


Unnecessary meetings can cost big companies $100 million a year, report finds​



Large companies could save as much as $100 million a year by holding fewer unnecessary meetings and cutting down on their invite lists, according to a recent study.

A common refrain among workers who were polled as part of the report — produced for meeting note software maker Otter.ai by Steven G. Rogelberg, a UNC Charlotte professor and expert on meeting strategy — was that they are pulled into too many time-wasting gatherings. That often leads to boredom and frustration, with employees saying the squandered time interfered with their completing more productive work, the survey found.

Overall, companies spend a total of $37 billion per year on meetings, according to Harvard Business Review, underlining the enormous investment in such communications. For example, a previous study by Rogelberg published in Small Group Research, a scholarly journal, cited research that found copy-machine maker Xerox spent more than $100 million a year on meetings in their manufacturing and development unit.

But much of that money appears to be ill-spent, his research suggests. Rogelberg's survey of 632 workers across 20 industries asked how many meetings they attend in a week and whether respondents felt their presence had been critical. The answer? Respondents said they didn't need to be in 30% of the gatherings they attended.

"The most valid account of whether something was necessary is the individual report. They are the best arbiter of whether they felt like their time was actually used well and honored or if it was wasted," Rogelberg told CBS MoneyWatch

 
Chump change in return for the ego gratification required in most big organizations ;)


Unnecessary meetings can cost big companies $100 million a year, report finds​



Large companies could save as much as $100 million a year by holding fewer unnecessary meetings and cutting down on their invite lists, according to a recent study.

A common refrain among workers who were polled as part of the report — produced for meeting note software maker Otter.ai by Steven G. Rogelberg, a UNC Charlotte professor and expert on meeting strategy — was that they are pulled into too many time-wasting gatherings. That often leads to boredom and frustration, with employees saying the squandered time interfered with their completing more productive work, the survey found.

Overall, companies spend a total of $37 billion per year on meetings, according to Harvard Business Review, underlining the enormous investment in such communications. For example, a previous study by Rogelberg published in Small Group Research, a scholarly journal, cited research that found copy-machine maker Xerox spent more than $100 million a year on meetings in their manufacturing and development unit.

But much of that money appears to be ill-spent, his research suggests. Rogelberg's survey of 632 workers across 20 industries asked how many meetings they attend in a week and whether respondents felt their presence had been critical. The answer? Respondents said they didn't need to be in 30% of the gatherings they attended.

"The most valid account of whether something was necessary is the individual report. They are the best arbiter of whether they felt like their time was actually used well and honored or if it was wasted," Rogelberg told CBS MoneyWatch

How do we plan the meeting if we don’t have a pre-meeting meeting???
 
Regarding the OP, not sure why the author believes the military (in this case, the US military) isn't following those principles. Relevant invitees only; mouth shut unless something needs to be said; if you're relevant (see #1), stick around in case discussion develops an action point; use jargon commensurate with audience to balance clarity and brevity; plenty of details resolved by cross-silo chatter; "doctrine exists to jog the mind of the thinking soldier".

One advantage of remote meeting technology is being able to tune out and do other work while the discussion is outside your lane.
 
Regarding the OP, not sure why the author believes the military (in this case, the US military) isn't following those principles. Relevant invitees only; mouth shut unless something needs to be said; if you're relevant (see #1), stick around in case discussion develops an action point; use jargon commensurate with audience to balance clarity and brevity; plenty of details resolved by cross-silo chatter; "doctrine exists to jog the mind of the thinking soldier".

One advantage of remote meeting technology is being able to tune out and do other work while the discussion is outside your lane.
I think we've experienced military meetings differently...

I can't remember the last time I was in a meeting where there weren't acronyms used by someone that attendees didn't understand.
 
I can't remember the last time I was in a meeting where there weren't acronyms used by someone that attendees didn't understand.
I always make it point of using the full phrase unless it's really obvious (like "RCAF"). Even if it's just the acronym on the slide, I'll say it in full first.
 
I always make it point of using the full phrase unless it's really obvious (like "RCAF"). Even if it's just the acronym on the slide, I'll say it in full first.
I'm outside the fence on this forum and drop by out of non-professional interest. I can navigate a lot of acronyms but I gotta admit that there are some posts that might as well be written in Swahili.
 
I think we've experienced military meetings differently...

I can't remember the last time I was in a meeting where there weren't acronyms used by someone that attendees didn't understand.

Eventually, I stopped going to meetings at the unit because they usually dragged on for an hour and half (or more) with one person (the CO) doing most of the speaking.

I can get the same experience from my wife at home, so no need to hang around the regiment ;)
 
Eventually, I stopped going to meetings at the unit because they usually dragged on for an hour and half (or more) with one person (the CO) doing most of the speaking.

I can get the same experience from my wife at home, so no need to hang around the regiment ;)
Sounds like the CO missed their calling to be a Padre...
 
Sounds like the CO missed their calling to be a Padre...

Quite honestly I believe that few leaders have ever been trained how to run a meeting properly, apart from an O Group where the Boss does all the talking, or a Mess Meeting encumbered by the good ol' Robert's Rulles, which are ridiculously antiquated of course.

The more we get away from - literally - the trenches, the less we equip our leaders to be successful in interacting with others, I believe.
 
I instituted small changes to our meeting formats and they were both fun and kept folks on task:

-Meeting agenda was arranged prior to the start of the meeting, including how long each person had to get their points across

-there were no questions allowed during the agenda items presentation, but were allowed during the "questions" portion of the meeting.

-any sidebar conversations/tangents were met with a "tangent toll" in which the offending parties had to pay a buck each towards the coffee fund.

-PowerPoints were only allowed to contain a Title Box and 3 pertinent text points. No graphs, wall of texts, or BLUF Quad slides. Elaborate your points with words.

-if it's something that could have been covered in an email to a specific person, don't bring it up at the meeting.

There was some friction at first, but when our monthly coord went from being an hour and a half to 20 minutes with no loss of information passage, things got better.

Quality of collaboration often is what is needed over quantity of collaboration.
 
I instituted small changes to our meeting formats and they were both fun and kept folks on task:

-Meeting agenda was arranged prior to the start of the meeting, including how long each person had to get their points across

-there were no questions allowed during the agenda items presentation, but were allowed during the "questions" portion of the meeting.

-any sidebar conversations/tangents were met with a "tangent toll" in which the offending parties had to pay a buck each towards the coffee fund.

-PowerPoints were only allowed to contain a Title Box and 3 pertinent text points. No graphs, wall of texts, or BLUF Quad slides. Elaborate your points with words.

-if it's something that could have been covered in an email to a specific person, don't bring it up at the meeting.

There was some friction at first, but when our monthly coord went from being an hour and a half to 20 minutes with no loss of information passage, things got better.

Quality of collaboration often is what is needed over quantity of collaboration.

And there's a good example of a successful approach we could train our people on, but don't ;)
 
Back
Top