User talk:Knocte

Innovation time off (ITO) is a motivation technique employed by certain companies that consists of encouraging employees to spend their work time in projects that interest them.

Over the years, this technique has been used by many companies but the one which has popularized the most has been Google, Inc., because they highly publicitize the fact that many of their services and products were born thanks to this policy (such as GMail).

Another way of calling the kind of products that can be created within this initiative is Side Projects. In the same way time spent in training by your employees does not contribute directly to the company's bottom line, side projects may (or may not, ever) just contribute in an indirect way. And that's the point, as one of the requirements of Innovation is to make mistakes, create and implements lots of ideas, and later throw away most of them, kind of like brainstorming.

This idea has served to other companies as a foundational concept to base their entire managerial structure: flat hierarchies, bottom-up idea flow. Some examples are Valve Corporation which in their employee handbook explain a company structure with no bosses, or Github which doesn't have managers and openly lets people work on what they want to work on. In these cases, Innovation Time Off may not really be the appropiate term to refer to them, because it applies to 100% of the time, thus it may be better to apply the Flat Company adjective to these, like Jason Fried refers to his small company 37signals.

Author Daniel H. Pink also cites this technique in speeches while talking about his book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, as an example of the first of the three principles explained: autonomy, mastery and purpose. The second principle, mastery, could be also related to this technique in the cases in which it also allows autodidacticism as training.

Following is a relation of companies that follow this technique and the percentage of working hours of allotted time targetted to it.

Opposing point of views
This technique or policy has not convinced everybody an the best proof of it is the small amount of companies that apply it.

There have been even companies that applied it in the past but stopped doing it at some point. The best example here is LindenLab, which changed their "Tao" (company culture values) on December 2008 to remove the section "Your Choice is Your Responsibility", which explained:

There's a dual meaning here. Most companies tell you what to do. Then they make you accountable to the person who told you what to do, not to yourself. We don't think this gets the best long-term results with a truly ambitious project like Second Life. At Linden Lab, you are expected to choose your own work, you have to decide how you can best move the company forward. This isn't always easy, but it can be very rewarding for you and it is a huge win for the company. This doesn't mean that you can't ask someone else what to do - it means that you are responsible for choosing who to listen to! You are responsible for listening well and broadly enough to choose wisely. And once you have chosen, you are responsible for executing well to making your choices work. You must understand that other people now rely on you for single-minded execution, and it is time to shut out the noise and work without distraction. Sometimes you will fail, and in those cases it is very important to fail fast and fail publicly - that is how we learn and iterate and ultimately win.

In LindenLab's case, this technique was placed as a core value of their culture (like Valve Corporation) so it alloted for 100% of the time.

Xdg-app
Please do not "copy/paste move" an article. See wp:moving a page on how to do it. Copy/paste moves lose the wp:page history. Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 02:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Maverick.NET


The article Maverick.NET has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (software) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of 'This article meets criteria A and B because...' and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:13, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about ReVanced
Hello, Knocte, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Yeeno, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, ReVanced, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/ReVanced.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Yee no  (talk) 03:29, 25 August 2023 (UTC)