End Teaching People to “Prioritize” When Your Company Has Zero Clue What Actually Is Important: How Time Management Training Doesn’t Work in Dysfunctional Organizations

I’ll ready to destroy one of the greatest common myths in corporate training: the idea that training employees better “time organization” techniques will fix productivity challenges in workplaces that have absolutely no coherent priorities themselves.

After nearly two decades of consulting with companies on time management challenges, I can tell you that time management training in a chaotic company is like showing someone to arrange their items while their building is literally collapsing around them.

Let me share the core issue: most businesses suffering from time management problems cannot have productivity issues – they have leadership problems.

Standard task management training presupposes that organizations have consistent, stable objectives that employees can learn to recognize and concentrate on. This assumption is totally disconnected from actual workplace conditions in most current companies.

The team worked with a significant advertising agency where workers were continuously expressing frustration about being “struggling to prioritize their work properly.” Leadership had poured enormous amounts on task planning training for every workers.

The training covered all the usual approaches: urgency-importance grids, priority classification approaches, schedule management techniques, and detailed task management systems.

Yet productivity continued to decline, worker stress levels rose, and project completion times got worse, not better.

When I analyzed what was really going on, I learned the underlying cause: the organization at the leadership level had zero stable direction.

Here’s what the typical situation looked like for workers:

Monday: Senior executives would announce that Initiative A was the “top objective” and each employee needed to work on it immediately

The next day: A separate top executive would announce an “urgent” communication insisting that Client B was actually the “highest important” priority

Day three: A third team head would call an “urgent” conference to communicate that Project C was a “critical” deliverable that needed to be completed by Friday

The following day: The first senior leader would express disappointment that Project A hadn’t progressed as expected and insist to know why staff weren’t “working on” it as instructed

By week’s end: All three clients would be delayed, several commitments would be failed, and employees would be blamed for “poor task organization skills”

This cycle was repeated week after week, month after month. Zero degree of “priority planning” training was going to enable staff manage this systemic dysfunction.

The core challenge wasn’t that staff didn’t understand how to manage tasks – it was that the company at every level was completely unable of establishing consistent direction for more than 48 hours at a time.

The team convinced executives to eliminate their emphasis on “personal task organization” training and alternatively establish what I call “Leadership Focus Clarity.”

In place of working to teach employees to manage within a chaotic system, we concentrated on building genuine organizational direction:

Implemented a unified executive decision-making team with specific power for establishing and enforcing organizational focus

Created a systematic priority evaluation process that occurred on schedule rather than whenever someone felt like it

Created clear criteria for when projects could be changed and what type of sign-off was needed for such modifications

Established required notification protocols to make certain that all project modifications were shared clearly and to everyone across each departments

Created buffer phases where zero project disruptions were acceptable without exceptional circumstances

This improvement was instant and outstanding:

Staff frustration rates decreased dramatically as employees at last knew what they were expected to be focusing on

Efficiency rose by more than 50% within a month and a half as staff could actually concentrate on delivering work rather than continuously changing between competing priorities

Client quality schedules improved significantly as departments could organize and deliver tasks without constant disruptions and redirection

Customer happiness improved substantially as projects were genuinely delivered on time and to standards

That lesson: prior to you train people to organize, make sure your company actually possesses clear priorities that are worth working toward.

Let me share another method that task management training fails in poorly-run organizations: by presupposing that employees have genuine authority over their work and tasks.

We consulted with a public sector organization where staff were constantly being blamed for “poor task planning” and required to “time management” training workshops.

The truth was that these employees had almost no control over their work time. Here’s what their normal workday looked like:

About three-fifths of their workday was occupied by required sessions that they had no option to skip, regardless of whether these conferences were relevant to their actual responsibilities

A further one-fifth of their schedule was dedicated to filling out mandatory documentation and paperwork requirements that provided no usefulness to their primary job or to the citizens they were supposed to help

The final one-fifth of their workday was supposed to be allocated for their core responsibilities – the work they were paid to do and that genuinely made a difference to the public

However even this small fraction of availability was continuously disrupted by “immediate” requirements, unexpected calls, and administrative obligations that were not allowed to be delayed

Given these circumstances, no amount of “time planning” training was able to assist these staff become more effective. This problem wasn’t their employee priority planning techniques – it was an institutional framework that ensured efficient activity almost unattainable.

I worked with them establish structural improvements to fix the actual barriers to productivity:

Removed unnecessary meetings and implemented strict requirements for when gatherings were genuinely necessary

Simplified administrative tasks and got rid of unnecessary reporting processes

Established reserved blocks for core job activities that were not allowed to be disrupted by meetings

Created clear systems for evaluating what qualified as a real “urgent situation” versus routine requests that could be planned for appropriate times

Implemented delegation systems to guarantee that responsibilities was shared appropriately and that zero employee was overburdened with unrealistic demands

Staff productivity increased dramatically, job satisfaction got better substantially, and the agency genuinely started offering improved services to the public they were supposed to serve.

The crucial insight: you won’t be able to solve time management problems by training individuals to work more successfully within chaotic structures. You need to fix the organizations first.

At this point let’s address perhaps the biggest absurd component of priority management training in chaotic organizations: the assumption that staff can somehow manage work when the company as a whole modifies its focus several times per day.

We worked with a IT company where the executive leadership was notorious for experiencing “game-changing” insights several times per day and demanding the entire organization to instantly shift to implement each new priority.

Workers would come at their jobs on Monday with a defined understanding of their priorities for the period, only to discover that the CEO had concluded over the weekend that all work they had been focusing on was suddenly not important and that they must to right away begin working on a project entirely different.

This pattern would happen several times per week. Projects that had been announced as “essential” would be dropped halfway through, teams would be continuously redirected to alternative initiatives, and massive amounts of resources and investment would be squandered on initiatives that were ultimately not delivered.

This company had invested significantly in “adaptive project planning” training and advanced priority tracking tools to enable workers “adjust efficiently” to evolving priorities.

Yet absolutely no level of training or systems could solve the basic issue: people can’t successfully manage perpetually shifting directions. Perpetual change is the opposite of effective organization.

The team assisted them implement what I call “Strategic Priority Consistency”:

Created quarterly priority assessment sessions where major priority adjustments could be discussed and implemented

Developed clear standards for what represented a genuine basis for changing agreed-upon directions outside the scheduled assessment periods

Created a “priority protection” phase where absolutely no modifications to current priorities were permitted without exceptional approval

Created specific communication systems for when objective adjustments were genuinely required, including thorough impact assessments of what projects would be interrupted

Required formal sign-off from multiple stakeholders before all substantial priority shifts could be enacted

This change was outstanding. In 90 days, real project success statistics increased by over three times. Employee stress rates decreased considerably as staff could finally focus on finishing work rather than continuously starting new ones.

Product development surprisingly improved because groups had sufficient resources to completely implement and test their solutions rather than repeatedly moving to new projects before any work could be adequately developed.

That lesson: good planning requires directions that keep stable long enough for employees to actually work on them and accomplish substantial outcomes.

This is what I’ve concluded after decades in this field: priority management training is only useful in companies that currently have their leadership act together.

If your workplace has consistent strategic priorities, achievable expectations, functional decision-making, and structures that enable rather than prevent productive performance, then time organization training can be useful.

But if your company is defined by continuous chaos, unclear priorities, poor coordination, excessive workloads, and crisis-driven decision-making approaches, then time management training is more harmful than ineffective – it’s systematically destructive because it holds responsible personal behavior for organizational incompetence.

End squandering resources on task planning training until you’ve addressed your leadership priorities initially.

Begin creating workplaces with stable business priorities, functional leadership, and structures that really facilitate efficient accomplishment.

The employees would prioritize perfectly well once you give them direction deserving of focusing on and an environment that really facilitates them in doing their work. overwhelmed with impossible demands

Staff productivity increased dramatically, professional fulfillment got better substantially, and this agency finally began delivering improved outcomes to the community they were intended to serve.

That key point: companies won’t be able to fix time management challenges by training people to operate better efficiently within chaotic organizations. Organizations must improve the systems initially.

Currently let’s examine possibly the biggest laughable element of task organization training in chaotic workplaces: the idea that workers can somehow manage work when the company as a whole shifts its direction several times per day.

The team consulted with a software company where the founder was famous for going through “innovative” insights several times per week and demanding the entire team to immediately shift to accommodate each new idea.

Staff would show up at the office on Monday with a clear knowledge of their priorities for the period, only to learn that the leadership had determined overnight that all work they had been working on was suddenly not relevant and that they should to immediately start working on a project entirely new.

That behavior would repeat multiple times per week. Initiatives that had been stated as “essential” would be forgotten before completion, teams would be continuously moved to different projects, and enormous portions of time and work would be lost on projects that were ultimately not finished.

This organization had invested heavily in “flexible task management” training and sophisticated project tracking software to enable workers “respond quickly” to evolving requirements.

Yet no level of skill development or systems could address the core challenge: people won’t be able to efficiently manage continuously changing objectives. Continuous shifting is the opposite of good organization.

The team worked with them implement what I call “Focused Direction Management”:

Established scheduled strategic review periods where major direction changes could be considered and approved

Developed strict requirements for what represented a legitimate justification for adjusting set objectives apart from the scheduled assessment cycles

Implemented a “priority consistency” period where no changes to set directions were allowed without emergency circumstances

Implemented specific communication procedures for when objective adjustments were really essential, with full consequence evaluations of what projects would be interrupted

Required formal authorization from senior stakeholders before any major strategy changes could be approved

The change was outstanding. In 90 days, measurable work success percentages rose by more than three times. Worker stress instances fell considerably as staff could finally focus on delivering tasks rather than constantly initiating new ones.

Innovation surprisingly improved because departments had adequate resources to thoroughly develop and evaluate their solutions rather than continuously switching to new projects before any work could be adequately finished.

This lesson: good planning requires priorities that stay unchanged long enough for teams to actually concentrate on them and complete significant results.

This is what I’ve discovered after years in this business: task organization training is merely useful in companies that genuinely have their leadership act together.

When your company has stable business direction, reasonable demands, competent management, and structures that enable rather than prevent efficient work, then time management training can be beneficial.

But if your organization is defined by constant dysfunction, unclear directions, poor coordination, excessive demands, and crisis-driven leadership styles, then task organization training is more counterproductive than pointless – it’s actively damaging because it blames employee performance for leadership incompetence.

Stop throwing away money on priority organization training until you’ve fixed your organizational dysfunction first.

Start creating organizations with consistent organizational direction, functional decision-making, and structures that actually support meaningful activity.

Company workers will organize just fine once you give them something deserving of working toward and an workplace that actually enables them in accomplishing their work.

If you have any kind of questions regarding where and how you can utilize Teamwork Training, you can contact us at our own web site.