Mogic considers

The experience of "three years for peaches and chestnuts, eight years for persimmons

As the saying goes, it takes a long time for a small seed to sprout, take root, bloom, and bear fruit.

Yes, three years must seem like an "old-fashioned unit" that is hard to imagine in these speedy times.

You may have the image of an IT company that follows a PDCA (Plan/Do/Check/Action) cycle in three-month or one-month increments, but at Mogic, we often use this three-year unit without even looking at it.

They start something new with a flurry of vigor, but don't look back in the slightest after six months or a year or so.

But even those three years are only seen as the first step.

I ponder from various angles whether we are properly connected toward the 15th year, which is about five turns of three years.

As I write this, it seems too long-winded to be okay, but there is some numerical support for this pacing.

Please bear with me as I go on for a bit longer than I would like.

First, estimate the amount that should be built up per day, assuming we evaluate three years from now.

To simplify the story, we assume a linear summation.

365 days x 3 years = 1095 days, and if 1095 days is 100 points, we can add about 0.09 points per day.

If we were to evaluate at six months, then half 182 days of 365 days per year would be 100 points, adding 0.5 points per day.

If the project goes well, the difference in points accumulated does not appear to be that great.

But what if many projects don't get off the ground until the first 60 days?

If progress is slow in the beginning, how much intensity do we need to chase behinds in the remaining days?

If only half of the daily results can be achieved in the first 60 days, a six-month project would make progress of (0.5 ÷ 2) × 60 days = 15 points, and the remaining 85 points must be done in 182 days - 60 days = 122 days, which rises to 0.7 points per day.

For a 3-year project, if you do the remaining 97.3 in 1095 days - 60 days = 1035 days with a progress of (0.09/2) x 60 days = 2.7 points, you will remain at 0.09 points, almost unchanged.

I've put together a rather cumbersome list of numbers, but the bottom line is that I believe that looking at a project in three-year increments eliminates the "stagnation bias that tends to occur at the beginning of a project" and allows us to more genuinely assess the social value of the business or work.

If you have a project with several people, communication is fumbling at the beginning, their understanding of the issues is mixed, their previous experience is varied, and they may or may not be motivated.

It's similar for individuals: they don't enjoy it as much as they first thought they would, they hit a wall and stop, and then they end up procrastinating and trying something different because they don't have any constraints.

If we can continue for three years, minus those things, one meaning should be established.

And here is a concrete example.

Mogic released three years ago, and the following is an excerpt from the history of the company

Apr. 2022 Release of the class support system, Pholly, at the lowest price range in the industry
April 2022 Introduction of flexible working hours system
Sep. 2022 ISMS certification, an international standard for information security, is acquired and released.
November 2022 E-learning system LearnO rebrands and releases management screen in commemoration of its 10th anniversary.

If you think back to how these have evolved to date, yes, 70% are good and 30% need improvement.

Therefore, "these directions make sense socially.

What a thought!

Well, even so, it is not always a good thing to introduce such an uncommon measure.

That is why we have to be careful about negative impact.

One of these is the resource issue of the amount of cognition that can be allocated per day.

Let me try to express this with a few simple calculations.

The amount of cognition available to one person is assumed to be 100%.

When this cognitive amount is exceeded, the threshold at which the person begins to say "I'm tired~" and performance on the following day and beyond declines.

If, in working on a project that will be evaluated in six months, the amount of cognition used per person per day is 20%.

This is because we invest more resources when it comes to producing results in six months.

Then, the maximum number of projects that one person can run out of is 100% / 20% = 5 parallel operations.

If this is a project that will be evaluated after 3 years, the amount of recognition to be spent per day is about (20% per project) x 0.09 points / 0.5 points = 3.6%, discounted back from the comparison with the amount of results of the project after 6 months.

So, 100% ÷ 3.6% = maximum of 28 projects can be run in parallel.

However, it is not possible to parallel that many projects because additional cognitive capacity is required to switch quickly in proportion to the number of projects running simultaneously, and rather a high level of management structure and skill is required.

Yes, it ultimately translates into the question of "whether to fill a large amount of cognition in a small number of projects or to distribute a small amount of cognition well in a huge number of projects".

Which is the best choice?

If you ask that question, the axis of judgment should be what the workers want.

If they want to live at a leisurely pace for a long time, the best way to do so is to predict the overall load and its range over a long period of time, and to level it out well.

So you are running many thin projects simultaneously in a minimum unit of three years, while understanding the load risk of multiple switching with a small amount of cognizance.

It is difficult to explain such a background because it is complicated and hard to talk about, so when people say, "When I am at Mogic, I feel something different and my head spins so much that I get caught up in it.

Not because of that, but as an easy-to-understand motif, I ordered "fruits that require a lot of time and effort" and we all enjoyed them together, but, you know, that's just too much to say 100%.