Discussion Forum > Creativity x Efficiency = Productivity?
Actually, 724 x 2634 = 1907016
How did you get 36%? Show your work.
Why do you define "creativity" as "the number of posts on a blog about creativity"? Doesn't every blog post require creativity?
Are you a troll?
How did you get 36%? Show your work.
Why do you define "creativity" as "the number of posts on a blog about creativity"? Doesn't every blog post require creativity?
Are you a troll?
September 23, 2015 at 20:36 |
Don R
Don R
Sorry but your post just seems extremely hostile, as in "you say one thing but do another." It seems really rude.
September 23, 2015 at 20:44 |
Don R
Don R
Mark's book makes it clear that while you can change efficiency or creativity to see an effect on productivity, he is going to focus on the efficiency part of the equation.
This equation is a great way to think about work, and only one of many gems inside this book.
This equation is a great way to think about work, and only one of many gems inside this book.
September 23, 2015 at 22:55 |
vegheadjones
vegheadjones
michael:
<< My point being that creativity methods are a minority interest. Shame. >>
This blog is about time management and personal organization, not creativity, so you should regard the 724 articles on creativity as a bonus.
There's plenty about creativity in the book.
<< My point being that creativity methods are a minority interest. Shame. >>
This blog is about time management and personal organization, not creativity, so you should regard the 724 articles on creativity as a bonus.
There's plenty about creativity in the book.
September 25, 2015 at 11:02 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Productivity and creativy are the most important things nowadays. I see those two features in every place in uor lifies. Even in legal area. Recently I have heard about “no win no fee” type of work. It is defenitely connetcet with creativity and productivity, without them no money be gained. The are the best example such things: http://www.bonnaraccidentlaw.com/contact/glasgow
November 12, 2015 at 19:59 |
robinbloomer
robinbloomer
Very neat, Michael!
:0)
However, I make efficiency: 2634 / 724 = 3.6 ish
Don R,
Of course this is whimsy. It didn't come across to me as in the least bit rude.
Mark,
Nicely put!
:0)
However, I make efficiency: 2634 / 724 = 3.6 ish
Don R,
Of course this is whimsy. It didn't come across to me as in the least bit rude.
Mark,
Nicely put!
November 14, 2015 at 18:27 |
Will
Will
Applying the Turing test to the posts from michael and robinbloomer above, I judge that michael is definitely human and robinbloomer is definitely a spambot.
This is true even though I can actually understand what robinbloomer is driving at ("click this link because somebody somewhere will benefit by your doing so"), whereas I have no idea what michael is on about.
I find that fascinating.
If robinbloomer is actually a human being, I apologize to him/her. And of course, the converse apology to michael if I'm wrong about him.
This is true even though I can actually understand what robinbloomer is driving at ("click this link because somebody somewhere will benefit by your doing so"), whereas I have no idea what michael is on about.
I find that fascinating.
If robinbloomer is actually a human being, I apologize to him/her. And of course, the converse apology to michael if I'm wrong about him.
November 16, 2015 at 7:48 |
Chris Cooper
Chris Cooper
Chris,
My best guess is that Michael is regretting the small number of posts on creativity, in a lightly whimsical manner.
Cheers,
Will
My best guess is that Michael is regretting the small number of posts on creativity, in a lightly whimsical manner.
Cheers,
Will
November 16, 2015 at 10:31 |
Will
Will
If so, then searching this site for the number of articles for "creativity" (724 articles) and "productivity" (2634) gives an efficiency of about 36%.
My point being that creativity methods are a minority interest. Shame.