"There is No Substitute For Hard Work"
Thomas A. Edison
There is still a confusion, about whether this quote is more famous or the person who said it is more famous. Well, lets not get bogged down further by this confusion. When we read this quote about hard work, we are immediately convinced. But, our conviction lies in the direction of the quote.We hardly bother to think Normal (Yes, the one from Geometry) to the quote's direction.
In today's Smart World, everything and everyone is getting Smart and Smarter day by day. So, we have conveniently replaced the Hard Work with Smart Work (or rather started to do so). I remember an example, which my mentor told me once. He asked me that 'Who will reach the destination first in a race of running, if both an Elephant and a horse start running at the same time ?' I immediately answered, 'Horse' (As most of you must have already, how obvious !!). But I was surprised to know that my answer was wrong. The answer was in fact, 'The one who starts running towards the destination'. It is our unnecessary assumption that whenever we take part in any race, we are running towards the destination only. We are working really hard to reach the destination, but yes, it might also happen that we were actually heading somewhere else. So likewise, a Hard Task can be handled intelligently by planning and strategizing. Such a smart work would prove beneficial and would reduce the efforts in Hard Work Approach.
But as any good thing comes with its bad counterpart, Smart Work will also have one. Smart Work is always insisting on (Less) Time duration for the work. The lesser the time taken to complete a task, the Smarter the way of work. But in this race with time, it overlooks some very important aspects of the final outcome of the work. Smart work may hamper the Quality and/or Quantity of the work. It may appear that the work is actually error free but will have some nuanced loopholes. It may go very fast in the beginning but may face difficulties when the odds are against.
To elaborate this more, I am comparing it with a real life example. Let's say that there is a Cube (Yes, again the One from Geometry) which is to be carried over a certain distance. The efforts that one needs to make for this displacement of cube is the Work under consideration. Let's look at some ways of doing these,
The Hard Work Way - Push the Cube as it is
The very straightforward way of doing this would be , start pushing (or pulling) the cube towards its destination. This can be considered as Hard Work way. Without a second thought, as time starts, one will start pushing the cube. Important consideration here is that the entire weight of cube is being pushed. Naturally, the surface area of cube which is in contact with the ground (and hence facing friction) is one face of the cube, which is (1/6)th of the total surface area. May be this will take a considerable amount of force that needs to be applied, that too consistently, so as to reach the destination. Given this, it is quite a tiresome work. But no doubt, entire weight of the cube is reaching destination without any compromise in Quantity. Yes, we can expect some compromise in the Quality, due to wear and tear.
The Smart Work Way - Modify the Situation
Here, we will take a moment to think about the situation first, and see if there is something which can be done so to ameliorate the situation and reduce the efforts.
With the given situation, we have a road and cube. We cannot modify the road. So we will better modify the Cube. Taking one of the important consideration of earlier case into account, we need to Reduce the Friction. To do so we have to reduce the surface area in contact with ground.
Best solution in this case would be to cut out a Sphere (of maximum possible volume) from the Cube. This is exactly the mistake 'Smart Work' forces us to do. It forces us to go directly to the opposite end of Hard Work - Smart Work Spectrum and overlook the losses.
When we cut out the Sphere from the Cube, we are reducing the surface area in contact with ground from an entire face of cube to merely a point, but the cube is also losing its weight. Without getting into much calculation, the cube is losing about 48% of its volume. So, even if the combined effect of reduced weight and almost negligible friction in this case will lead to much much faster delivery as compared the earlier case, practically, we are delivering just half of the target. Plus conversion of the Cube to Sphere is an additional overhead, which itself will take more efforts and some time of its own. Also, one needs to have tools, using which that conversion can be done. So, even if it appears a Quicker Delivery and better response time, the overall loss is in fact more than the time saving achieved.
This is where one has to come one step behind, from Smart Approach to Quasi Smart Approach.
The Quasi Smart Work Way - Mediate the Situation
Here also, we will take a moment before actually starting the work and see if there is something which can be done. Again, road manipulations are not in our hand and hence we need to play with the Cube only.
This time, instead of cutting it into a sphere, we will cut it into a solid called - Truncated Cube. (To be more specific, we will cut out Eight Pyramids from the eight vertices. It then becomes a solid with 14 Faces (6 Octagonal and 8 Triangular) and 36 Edges and 24 Vertices. Please refer figure above for better Imagination)
Now considering the factors discussed earlier, in order to reduce Friction, now there are two possible solutions. We can either push/pull the solid on its octagonal face or on its Triangular face. It will be a trade of based on the surface areas of Respective Solids. In fact, here we have one more alternative, instead of pushing/pulling the solid, we can topple the solid, on any of its surface. Again, it would be a trade of between the efforts required for toppling and pushing.
Talking in terms of Quantity, there is some loss of Weight because of reshaping of the solid, but this loss would be definitely less then that of Sphere. There would be additional overheads of reshaping for solid but again would be less then that of Sphere.
Further Steps in Quasi-Smart Work would to create different versions of Solids, made from the Cube. (I am not an expert in Solid Geometry, but some idea can be imagined here - http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ArchimedeanSolid.html - Credits - WolFram MathWorld) Depending on the Requirements different Solid can be chosen.
So, likewise, Quasi Smart Work is always a better a approach then both the Hard Work and Smart Work Approach. It proves beneficial both in terms of Less Efforts and Less Losses.
To elaborate this more, I am comparing it with a real life example. Let's say that there is a Cube (Yes, again the One from Geometry) which is to be carried over a certain distance. The efforts that one needs to make for this displacement of cube is the Work under consideration. Let's look at some ways of doing these,
The Hard Work Way - Push the Cube as it is
 |
| (Image Credits - Wikipedia) |
The very straightforward way of doing this would be , start pushing (or pulling) the cube towards its destination. This can be considered as Hard Work way. Without a second thought, as time starts, one will start pushing the cube. Important consideration here is that the entire weight of cube is being pushed. Naturally, the surface area of cube which is in contact with the ground (and hence facing friction) is one face of the cube, which is (1/6)th of the total surface area. May be this will take a considerable amount of force that needs to be applied, that too consistently, so as to reach the destination. Given this, it is quite a tiresome work. But no doubt, entire weight of the cube is reaching destination without any compromise in Quantity. Yes, we can expect some compromise in the Quality, due to wear and tear.
The Smart Work Way - Modify the Situation
 |
| (Image Credits - Wikipedia) |
Here, we will take a moment to think about the situation first, and see if there is something which can be done so to ameliorate the situation and reduce the efforts.
With the given situation, we have a road and cube. We cannot modify the road. So we will better modify the Cube. Taking one of the important consideration of earlier case into account, we need to Reduce the Friction. To do so we have to reduce the surface area in contact with ground.
Best solution in this case would be to cut out a Sphere (of maximum possible volume) from the Cube. This is exactly the mistake 'Smart Work' forces us to do. It forces us to go directly to the opposite end of Hard Work - Smart Work Spectrum and overlook the losses.
When we cut out the Sphere from the Cube, we are reducing the surface area in contact with ground from an entire face of cube to merely a point, but the cube is also losing its weight. Without getting into much calculation, the cube is losing about 48% of its volume. So, even if the combined effect of reduced weight and almost negligible friction in this case will lead to much much faster delivery as compared the earlier case, practically, we are delivering just half of the target. Plus conversion of the Cube to Sphere is an additional overhead, which itself will take more efforts and some time of its own. Also, one needs to have tools, using which that conversion can be done. So, even if it appears a Quicker Delivery and better response time, the overall loss is in fact more than the time saving achieved.
This is where one has to come one step behind, from Smart Approach to Quasi Smart Approach.
The Quasi Smart Work Way - Mediate the Situation
 |
| (Image Credits - Wikipedia) |
Here also, we will take a moment before actually starting the work and see if there is something which can be done. Again, road manipulations are not in our hand and hence we need to play with the Cube only.
This time, instead of cutting it into a sphere, we will cut it into a solid called - Truncated Cube. (To be more specific, we will cut out Eight Pyramids from the eight vertices. It then becomes a solid with 14 Faces (6 Octagonal and 8 Triangular) and 36 Edges and 24 Vertices. Please refer figure above for better Imagination)
Now considering the factors discussed earlier, in order to reduce Friction, now there are two possible solutions. We can either push/pull the solid on its octagonal face or on its Triangular face. It will be a trade of based on the surface areas of Respective Solids. In fact, here we have one more alternative, instead of pushing/pulling the solid, we can topple the solid, on any of its surface. Again, it would be a trade of between the efforts required for toppling and pushing.
Talking in terms of Quantity, there is some loss of Weight because of reshaping of the solid, but this loss would be definitely less then that of Sphere. There would be additional overheads of reshaping for solid but again would be less then that of Sphere.
Further Steps in Quasi-Smart Work would to create different versions of Solids, made from the Cube. (I am not an expert in Solid Geometry, but some idea can be imagined here - http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ArchimedeanSolid.html - Credits - WolFram MathWorld) Depending on the Requirements different Solid can be chosen.
So, likewise, Quasi Smart Work is always a better a approach then both the Hard Work and Smart Work Approach. It proves beneficial both in terms of Less Efforts and Less Losses.
Comments
Post a Comment