Why do I believe that my career will always be a place to try out new ideas?
In very large part due to 2U. I’m not sure if I thought about it or even believed this prior to joining 2U. I think I believed that ideas would have to be fully flushed out and formally presented to get any sort of buy in. But maybe the best way to get buy in from others is not through a presentation, but through a demonstration. Don’t tell, show.
I think I believed ideas had to be some crazy big thing. But everyone has “small” ideas all the time. And when we look back, it’s those small things that had the biggest impact. I believe this simply because I’ve lived and experienced it. That if I have an idea, I can execute it.
hmm, is that the definition of autonomy? The path of least resistance from ideation to implementation. The less the time and fewer the quantity and magnitude of the blocks from those 2 endpoints, the greater the autonomy.
Autonomy = () / t(implementation - ideation)*(Blocks quantity * magnitude)
Hmm what’s on the top of this equation?
What do I have to do more of that gives me more autonomy? Decision-making power. Responsibility. Authority. I think similar concepts.
So Decision-making power / t(implementation - ideation) (sum of block’s magnitude of i from i=1 to n).
[I was using summation notation here so hence the awkward description]
The thing is to increase autonomy as a whole, you can only increase decision making power of someone only so much. You have to spend more time reducing the time it takes from ideation to implementation or reducing the magnitude of the blocks. The summation notation makes more sense here compared to purely a product.
What are all the potential blocks that may be there?
$
People
Systems / processes
Current feasibility
Execution process steps
Bandwidth
Intentions
Hmm, well actually, most of these things could actually enable more autonomy as well if you have the right amount of them. Because decision making power is a function of the organizational structure, and approval process.
How do I quantify both the value added and lost with one of these factors? What’s the proper scale?
The end number should be [-1,1] or -100% to 100% autonomy.
($) (Org structure) (Approval process) (Current feasibility) (Execution steps) (Bandwidth) (Intentions)
(0,1)? (-1,1)?
So let’s say for those factors, I did this. Then the maximum would be 7, the min -7.
So Autonomy = (sum of autonomy factors net score from i=1 to n) / n. [see equation utilizing summation notation in picture for clearer understanding]
Where the net score = how much on a scale of -1 to 1 that the factor is contributing to autonomy.
Actually to make it simpler, because what does it mean to be -100% autonomous, the scale has to be adjusted from [-1,1] to [0,1]. So the maximum would be 7 and the minimum 0. So then let’s say when you run the equation, you get 4/7, or .57, let’s say. Then you multiply that by 100% to get your Autonomy percentage from 0 to 100%, which would be 57% autonomous.
Lol, always bringing math into this.
How far can I go with this? Create quantifiable definitions for common words? That’d be pretty fun tbh.
ความคิดเห็น