I mean…. Work smart not hard makes good sense- and the image does illustrate that- just maybe not in the way expected.
See how all the workers are pushing blocks? As the joke implies- blocks might be required. So the effort to shape a block into a sphere, roll the sphere where it is going, and then shape it back- not to mention for this to work- you’d need to start with a larger block of material so it would be the correct size at the end. So overall way more work involved with the sphere unless you design for tasks using spheres- which there are reasons spheres aren’t commonly substituted for blocks….
So what is the lesson? Well- rolling it was a good idea- bad implementation. Some simple rods could be placed on the ground and several people could help push each block onto the rods. When all the cubes were on the rods, each cube could get 2 people- one to ouch and one to move rods from behind the cube to in front.
This simple system could be implemented with the materials and tools on hand as evidenced by the creation of the spherical load, and even if they consumed a block for material for the rods, possibly with similar or less material loss than turning all the blocks to spheres. If they have people who otherwise wouldn’t be useful because they aren’t strong enough etc. to push the blocks, those people could be used to move rods. This would allow the same number of blocks to be pushed while using the same number of block pushers. If they do not have surplus unused labor, they will halve the number of people pushing blocks, but the picture implies the efficiency increases will more than quadruple the amount of blocks moved in a given time frame. On level ground it is also theoretical possible for a single block pusher to move the rods themselves- though safety and other factors would suggest against that.
Obviously a wheeled cart or similar, or using animals or powered machinery to move the locks would also decrease work and increase efficiency- probably far more than the rod method- but I suggest the rod method because it is in keeping with what is known or inferred from what is shown- that is that as stated, based on the technology displayed, the most likely use cases for needing to push blocks, and the materials and methods we know they have access to based on the picture; the rod method could be implemented.
In other words: yes. Work smarter, but sometimes we think we are smarter than we are. To work smarter you have to actually… work smarter. Skipping steps for example can increase output and reduce work. You may not ever have an issue or may not encounter an issue for a long time, but skipping steps isn’t an inherently smarter way to work. It can cause more problems or critical problems that offset total work savings etc. If we don’t understand the reasons for a workflow…
.. it’s important to either figure it out, or to fully understand the use case and incidentals before we start “improving” things. In most organizations, the guys pushing the blocks are limited in their view of a project to.. pushing blocks, or perhaps a just a little wider in scope to things connected to pushing blocks. They lack the picture generally to understand things throughly, and often it isn’t explained why something is important, it is just said that it is or expected they will do as told. Of course, the “big picture” folks often have no idea the actual particular of jobs at the “block pushing level,” that is why it is critical to both have executives who ask questions and invest in learning about every level of an operation and it’s challenges or workflows; and to have middle management that thoroughly understands the job and will stand firm and advocate for what is needed “in the trenches” when they get orders or policy passed down from “big picture” people.
One has to wonder. If only they have the chisel, this suddenly takes on a much different meaning that perhaps has more to do with privilege and how that can make life easier.
See how all the workers are pushing blocks? As the joke implies- blocks might be required. So the effort to shape a block into a sphere, roll the sphere where it is going, and then shape it back- not to mention for this to work- you’d need to start with a larger block of material so it would be the correct size at the end. So overall way more work involved with the sphere unless you design for tasks using spheres- which there are reasons spheres aren’t commonly substituted for blocks….
So what is the lesson? Well- rolling it was a good idea- bad implementation. Some simple rods could be placed on the ground and several people could help push each block onto the rods. When all the cubes were on the rods, each cube could get 2 people- one to ouch and one to move rods from behind the cube to in front.
In other words: yes. Work smarter, but sometimes we think we are smarter than we are. To work smarter you have to actually… work smarter. Skipping steps for example can increase output and reduce work. You may not ever have an issue or may not encounter an issue for a long time, but skipping steps isn’t an inherently smarter way to work. It can cause more problems or critical problems that offset total work savings etc. If we don’t understand the reasons for a workflow…