Prioritising: who takes on the less visible tasks?
Preparing a shared file, welcoming a new colleague or handling administrative follow-up takes time without always counting towards performance evaluations. The management question is specific: how can these contributions be distributed so that they do not systematically reduce the time some people can devote to their recognised objectives?
What the literature establishes
Linda Babcock, Maria P. Recalde, Lise Vesterlund and Laurie Weingart (2017, American Economic Review) examine tasks that support collective functioning but offer limited prospects for promotion. In the situations studied, women volunteer more often, receive more requests and accept these requests more often than men. These findings suggest examining task allocation rather than attributing every difficulty with prioritisation to individual preferences.
The mechanism of differing expectations
Madeline E. Heilman and Julie J. Chen (2005, Journal of Applied Psychology) show, through experimental evaluations, that helping colleagues does not produce the same judgments depending on the person's gender. Men receive greater credit for this behaviour, while women face greater penalties for not displaying it. Simply advising people to decline requests therefore overlooks the possibility that the same refusal may carry a different social cost.
The hasty conclusion
One might conclude that tasks receiving little recognition should be eliminated, or that only those receiving many requests should learn to say no. This would confuse limited career recognition with limited organisational value. The more relevant decisions concern their necessity, recognition and distribution, without assuming that all such tasks are interchangeable. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What the evidence cannot decide
These studies do not directly measure the time savings that task rotation might deliver in a Ticino business. Experimental situations illuminate mechanisms but reproduce neither a bank's regulatory responsibilities nor the relationships within a family SME. Simply counting tasks is also insufficient: their duration, complexity and contribution to objectives need to be distinguished.
A practical check in Lugano
As part of SHR's “Time Management & Prioritisation” programme, a team in banking, fashion, trading or an Italian-speaking family SME in Lugano can begin by recording support tasks for two weeks, defining in Italian which tasks are necessary but receive little weight in evaluations. For each task, record who was asked, who performed it and the time spent, then calculate each person's share of working time absorbed by these contributions. Next, test a rotation for two weeks on transferable tasks only, preserving regulatory responsibilities and required expertise. Comparing the variation in this share across people, the time devoted to recognised objectives and any service delays provides a local check, not causal proof. To go further: explore the Time Management & Prioritisation training in Lugano, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Time Management & Prioritisation in Lugano
- time management & prioritisation
- Lugano
- research
- training lugano