06Jun

Productivity is about systems, not people, says the Harvard Business Review.

Sure, there are hacks and techniques each of us can use to filter out the noise, but in the end, writes Daniel Markovitz, “The most effective antidote to low productivity and inefficiency must be implemented at the system level, not the individual level.”

productivity workers stopwatch efficiency - blog.jpg

“94% of most problems and possibilities for improvement belong to the system, not the individual,” he says, citing the case made by W. Edwards Deming in his book Out of the Crisis. “I would argue that most productivity improvements belong there as well.”

This is a particularly telling point for human resources professionals who are often tasked with providing training on time management. Markovitz says there’s nothing wrong with teaching techniques like Pomodoro, Inbox Zero or one of the many others. What’s necessary is to also address system inefficiencies.

That’s where he focuses his article, offering what he calls “four countermeasures.”

Tier your huddles

Whether you call them stand-ups, check-ins or huddles, Markovitz shows us how to use these meetings to avoid the inefficiency of “scattershot emails about a variety of problems.” Instead of kicking problems up the hierarchy, address problems at the lowest possible level. Problems that can’t be resolved at the staff huddle are the ones, and the only ones, to escalate to the next level huddle.

Make work visible

Because so much of office work is done by individuals working alone, it becomes invisible. Implementing a physical or virtual task board where every task is represented along with who is handling it not only makes a more equitable distribution of work, it also eliminates status check emails and the need to cover that topic in meetings.

Markovitz suggests making downtime equally as visible. Instituting “predictable time off” allows workers to know when someone is unavailable and react accordingly.

Define the “bat signal”

Pointing out that Batman knew flashing the symbol of a bat in the sky meant a crisis, Markovitz suggests companies adopt something similar to indicate when an issue is a real emergency.

“With no agreement on what communication channel to use, workers are forced to check all digital messaging platforms to ensure that nothing slips through the cracks. That’s toxic to productivity. Companies can make work easier for people if they specified channels for urgent and non-urgent issues.”

Align responsibility with authority

“If an employee is responsible for an outcome, they should have the authority to make the necessary decisions without being forced into an endless string of emails, meetings, or presentations,” writes Markovitz.

“The pursuit of individual productivity is healthy and worthwhile,” he agrees, though the value is limited because of all the pulls and tugs by others.

“To make a real impact on performance, you have to work at the system level.”

Photo by Carl Heyerdahl | Image by Gerd Altmann

[bdp_post_carousel]

Why Is the Cybersecurity Gap Growing?

In 2016 Cisco estimated there were a million unfilled cybersecurity jobs worldwide. Last November, (ISC)2, the International Information System Security Certification Consortium, said the world was short 4 million cybersecurity professionals.

Why has the gap widened?

Dice.com, the tech careers site, says the reasons are numerous. Two, though, stand out, Dice says in a recent post:

  1. “Many cybersecurity workers feel constrained by a lack of career development and training offered to them.”
  2. “Enterprises that need highly-skilled and motivated employees to ensure the business is secure are not taking the right steps to nurture the talent needed to make that happen.”

To explain that, Dice cited a survey by Enterprise Strategy Group (ESG) and the Information Systems Security Association (ISSA), which revealed that 68% of the cybersecurity professionals feel they have no well-defined career path. Most moved into security because of a personal interest after first working in different IT areas.

Steve Durbin, managing director of the Information Security Forum, told Dice there’s a disconnect between human resources and security teams. HR doesn’t understand what skills are important, nor does it recognize the mental and physical toll cybersecurity takes.

“This hinders the organization’s ability to identify relevant talent and provide adequate support for the professional development of the security workforce,” Durbin said.

It’s easy to get “pigeonholed,” Morgan Mango, a cybersecurity researcher, says. As an example, she says someone working in PKI early in their career might get tagged as a specialist, limiting their options.

“I would always suggest people to find a job in cybersecurity that’s very flexible and very broad in terms of job description and tasks,” Mango told Dice.

Organizations have a responsibility to encourage development of their security professionals.

“To build a sustainable security workforce,” Durbin said, “Organizations should adapt to market demands by seeking candidates with diverse competencies and skill sets coupled with providing competitive benefits and structured career development. For some these changes are already underway but for the majority, the approach is still new and untried.”

Photo by Adi Goldstein on Unsplash

[bdp_post_carousel]

The Allure of the Freelance Quant

Robert Carver, author and retired executive at quantitative hedge fund AHL, poses this seductive question to quants: “What if you could work for yourself, and still build hedge fund trading systems?”

Imagine developing a trading strategy and then selling it or licensing it to a fund for big dollars or a share of the profits. “For the quant,” writes Carver in an article for eFinancialCareers, “This is a pretty good deal, as they can now go and live on a beach somewhere after doing a few years of hard work.”

“This is the world of freelance signal generation,” explains Carver.

Freelance quants are not new, if not yet common. However, there are signs that interest in the concept is growing. Another eFinancialCareers article last month said quant fund QRT was recruiting “external alpha generators” and already had three on board with plans to hire 20 in the next few years.

Being a freelancer, Carver says, “Sounds like a fantastic opportunity for both quants and hedge funds.”

“But is this really true?”

Carver goes on to point out the pros and cons, which are not so much cons as potential pitfalls of such arrangements.

Selling the strategy to a fund sounds like a good deal, Carver agrees, unless the fund doesn’t pay or swipes the basic strategy. There are risks for the fund, too, he says, including the potential for the model to stop working or not work on data it hadn’t previously encountered.

Instead, Carver says a licensing arrangement is often preferred by both sides. The freelancer shares in the profits the model generates and the fund continues to get the quants continued involvement.

The downside is the potential for being underpaid, as well as the difficulty in even knowing whether the fee is correct, he says. “This is especially true for models providing signals rather than explicit trades, since there are no specific positions which can be directly attributable to a specific signal.”

Carver goes on to discuss code hosting arrangements, noting that “A truly paranoid freelancer trader may wish to host their systems on their own computers, or more likely on a secure cloud.”

Ironically, instead of becoming free of the daily grind, running such a hosting operation means hiring IT support and even junior traders. In essence, says Carver, The quant is effectively running their own mini hedge fund.”

“We’re going to need a bigger beach house.”

Photo by Mohamed Ali

[bdp_post_carousel]