Hi, ladies. (for the most part, I presume)
Can any of you do this test for me? (the more participants the better)
I'm trying to figure out if you can increase the efficiency of doing certain household chores (decreasing the actual quantity of total work that has to be done) by doing certain chores with another person or not. If so, this could mean more free-time for lots of women.
I was watching someone make up a bed, and noticed that a significant portion of the time was spent traveling in circles around the end of the bed, to go straighten out wrinkles on the other side. [bypasses snooty comments about why I wasn't helping. The person was on YouTube, you see] If someone else was there, they could remove the entire "traveling around the bed" factor from the workload, and theoretically increase the work efficiency. (that is, not only get the job done in half the normal time, but cut down the number of steps it takes, as well... = cutting down by MORE than half the time)
The theory is that working with another person (at least for bed-making, to start) might simply change the WAY you work, equaling some efficiency-win. Now, at the same time, other factors that SLOW the process could be introduced (doubtful, but possible, and especially for other housekeeping jobs. See, for instance, certain people who like to talk while working with others might work slower if the talking also involves STOPPING... whereas others might speed up with others, because they don't stop to scratch/daydream anymore)... and that's why this has to be tested (to at least get a hint). There are variables floating around.
---
The Test:
- Just strip a bed down to the mattress, then start timing how long it takes to reconstruct it, by yourself.
- Strip it down one more time, then try again, with a helper.
(preferably a helper who knows how to make beds, and won't slow you down. Remember, we're trying to figure out if working together with frequent bed-makers increases efficiency, as opposed to working together with people who never make beds, and never will. There's no use in knowing how fast working with THEM will be).
Jot down:
- The times
- The bed-size
- Whether or not a long side of the bed was pressed against a wall (so that one of the people couldn't be on "the other side")
- Your opinion on tacos
(you can only participate if you like tacos
)
---
What the times mean:
- If it takes exactly half the time to finish a task with 2 people, then that's just "normal/expected". Such a task doesn't actually qualify as "more efficient" by this definition (unless you're only looking to make your daily chores get done faster, in which, yes, more people obviously helps). In order to be "more efficient", it has to get done in LESS than half the time. Which brings us to the next one:
- If it takes LESS than half the time, that means it's more efficient. In other words, you've either removed some of the steps that are normally required to finish the task, or were prodded into using a faster work-style (perhaps less lazy/distracted, or just going faster, for whatever reason).
- If it takes MORE than half the time, that means adding a person makes things LESS efficient (adding work, or wasting some of the extra man-power that you're using, by not allowing both people to work at their normal speed), maybe because you're prone to talk more (and stop when you do), or the task just isn't good for 2 people (like mopping a floor). Or etc.
---
Try to work at a normal pace (just whatever speed feels natural, even if that means going faster/slower, because the other person makes you feel like it).
If you like the test, and find it fun, you might also like the idea of just doing a whole day's housework with a notepad, and logging all your finishing-times (and taco opinions
), with and without a helper. That way, you can see if any other tasks increase in efficiency with a helper.
For example, I'm very uncertain what the verdict would be for dishes, and I'm also curious about setting a table "relay-style" (with a spot between the kitchen and table where the "stuff-getter" can set things down for the "table-putter". In many smaller kitchen/dining-room setups, that might remove the entire "walking back and forth" task, which could increase the table-setting efficiency by somewhere around 50%).
I just feel so bad for women, and want to get them out of the darn kitchen more.
(well, I say that while being the biggest proponent of family-women not working that you'll find on this forum... but you know what I mean)
Well, this should all really be easy as cheese, I hope. Especially since I'm not doing any of the work. (I'm loaded down with my own stuff)
Can any of you do this test for me? (the more participants the better)
I'm trying to figure out if you can increase the efficiency of doing certain household chores (decreasing the actual quantity of total work that has to be done) by doing certain chores with another person or not. If so, this could mean more free-time for lots of women.
I was watching someone make up a bed, and noticed that a significant portion of the time was spent traveling in circles around the end of the bed, to go straighten out wrinkles on the other side. [bypasses snooty comments about why I wasn't helping. The person was on YouTube, you see] If someone else was there, they could remove the entire "traveling around the bed" factor from the workload, and theoretically increase the work efficiency. (that is, not only get the job done in half the normal time, but cut down the number of steps it takes, as well... = cutting down by MORE than half the time)
The theory is that working with another person (at least for bed-making, to start) might simply change the WAY you work, equaling some efficiency-win. Now, at the same time, other factors that SLOW the process could be introduced (doubtful, but possible, and especially for other housekeeping jobs. See, for instance, certain people who like to talk while working with others might work slower if the talking also involves STOPPING... whereas others might speed up with others, because they don't stop to scratch/daydream anymore)... and that's why this has to be tested (to at least get a hint). There are variables floating around.
---
The Test:
- Just strip a bed down to the mattress, then start timing how long it takes to reconstruct it, by yourself.
- Strip it down one more time, then try again, with a helper.
(preferably a helper who knows how to make beds, and won't slow you down. Remember, we're trying to figure out if working together with frequent bed-makers increases efficiency, as opposed to working together with people who never make beds, and never will. There's no use in knowing how fast working with THEM will be).
Jot down:
- The times
- The bed-size
- Whether or not a long side of the bed was pressed against a wall (so that one of the people couldn't be on "the other side")
- Your opinion on tacos
---
What the times mean:
- If it takes exactly half the time to finish a task with 2 people, then that's just "normal/expected". Such a task doesn't actually qualify as "more efficient" by this definition (unless you're only looking to make your daily chores get done faster, in which, yes, more people obviously helps). In order to be "more efficient", it has to get done in LESS than half the time. Which brings us to the next one:
- If it takes LESS than half the time, that means it's more efficient. In other words, you've either removed some of the steps that are normally required to finish the task, or were prodded into using a faster work-style (perhaps less lazy/distracted, or just going faster, for whatever reason).
- If it takes MORE than half the time, that means adding a person makes things LESS efficient (adding work, or wasting some of the extra man-power that you're using, by not allowing both people to work at their normal speed), maybe because you're prone to talk more (and stop when you do), or the task just isn't good for 2 people (like mopping a floor). Or etc.
---
Try to work at a normal pace (just whatever speed feels natural, even if that means going faster/slower, because the other person makes you feel like it).
If you like the test, and find it fun, you might also like the idea of just doing a whole day's housework with a notepad, and logging all your finishing-times (and taco opinions
For example, I'm very uncertain what the verdict would be for dishes, and I'm also curious about setting a table "relay-style" (with a spot between the kitchen and table where the "stuff-getter" can set things down for the "table-putter". In many smaller kitchen/dining-room setups, that might remove the entire "walking back and forth" task, which could increase the table-setting efficiency by somewhere around 50%).
I just feel so bad for women, and want to get them out of the darn kitchen more.
(well, I say that while being the biggest proponent of family-women not working that you'll find on this forum... but you know what I mean)Well, this should all really be easy as cheese, I hope.
Especially since I'm not doing any of the work. (I'm loaded down with my own stuff)
Last edited:
