KNOWLEDGE Management, or the advantages of small companies

Formally, the work of a linear producer is to find people, to call them and organize shootings. There is a regulated list of tasks, and it is unbearably bored. If I were shown in advance, I would never go to work in "Progress". Fortunately, we wrote it together with the authorities at the request of the HR service after six months of my work, and it has little to do with reality.

At least he has little to do with my reality-one of my colleagues may adhere to him. Fortunately, I am engaged in administrative and organizational tasks, in the worst case, several hours a day, and the rest of the time I enjoy. “Progress” does not mind, even for.

For example, today I at work painted dinosaurs and played the designer.

Quite seriously, it is for me that they pay me a salary. I painted a cartoon about the origin of diamonds (a dinosaur was there a source of carbon there) and built crystalline gratings of diamond and graphite from the designer. We will remove them tomorrow, and by the time of the release of the TRV they will already be on our website ( www.5-tv.ru , “Progress”). In my opinion, they are beautiful.

Such deviations from the main working tasks, it seems to me, are possible due to the fact that “progress” makes a small and stable team. Nobody scolds me for less than other producers, the number of plots, because everyone knows that my degree of participation in each plot is more. I can spend three working days, buried in Pubmed and Google Scholar - an unacceptable luxury from the point of view of the official list of tasks, but then I will draw an impeccably correct cartoon in twenty seconds, I will explain to her correspondent for ten and write such issues that they will agree to meet with us even despite the fact that we are wearing that we Journalists, i.e. Idiots.

I think that if Progress became a large company - he released, for example, seven issues a week, and not one, it would have destroyed it. To control a large number of people, it would inevitably have to have a classic bosses (name-patronymic, suit, office, subordination, working time control and a clear distribution of tasks), and our plots would become ten times worse. True, fewer people would know about them, because I could not write about them in LJ and the TRV during working hours. And in general, I would have working time, i.e. Separation into work and the rest of the life. Now work and life are about the same thing.

At the same time, I am very pleased that “progress” exists within the fifth channel. In fact, we can use all the advantages of a large corporation (a well -known name and special people to replace light bulbs) and at the same time practically do not face its shortcomings. As a result, we can work effectively.

In principle, the university has a similar structure, but it includes four levels (laboratory - department -fabric -unit) instead of two. It seems to me that this complicates all. Probably, at different universities, the system works differently, but I suspect that most of the useful corporate services, from a press service to computer scientists, are common to the entire university-and as a result, they have countless small and unfamiliar laboratories, and it becomes very difficult to interact with everyone effectively. Laboratory, perhaps, also have to apply for their requests at the department and faculty in order to streamline the process, and this should slow down very much. With such an extensive structure, it is difficult to ensure effective interaction between laboratories, departments and faculties, although it is probably obvious that such interaction is very important for science and education.

It would be interesting to compare the scientific effectiveness of research centers with different organization schemes. It seems to me that the most successful should be the two -level structure - a dozen large laboratories united in the framework of a small institute. The administrative part with such an organization could be puzzled not only by providing paper for the printer, but also to the monitoring of scientific projects in all ten laboratories. It would be very convenient, they could say to the employees: “But two years ago, Vasya from the Laboratory of Cytogenetics made a similar thing, but did not publish, try to attract it too”, could track the conference suitable (and sometimes offer something that did not come across the scientist himself) and even knew where to send journalists. I mean, so that they like it.