Accessibility and Responsiveness

Skills, Knowledge and Characteristics

Personnel Policies

Environment, Infrastructure and Policies

Secretarial Duties

Leveraging_the_Executives_Time

Kensington's Approach to Secretaries

Cost-Benefit Analysis

Key Assumptions

Time and Task Audit

Conclusion

Comments

Corporate America and professional service firms are using fewer and fewer secretaries. There are some advantages to this trend:

Overall, however, this trend has gone way too far, at least for highly paid managers and professionals. Companies that pride themselves on becoming "lean and mean" have simply become lean and stupid. The scarce and valuable time of highly paid executives and professionals is being spent on things they don't have the time for, they are not particularly good at, and that don't add value to the organization. This is particularly true of CEOs, since the scarcest resource of any organization is the CEO's time.

Accessibility and Responsiveness

A good secretary — one who knows what is going on and can handle routine questions — can dramatically increase her bosses' accessibility and responsiveness. (In this essay, the feminine pronoun is used for secretaries simply because when we recruit for secretaries, more than 95 percent of those who apply are female.) For example:

Accessibility can also be increased tremendously if a secretary keeps her bosses' calendar and can independently schedule appointments. Rather than playing telephone tag, it's more expedient to call that person's secretary to schedule a 1 hour meeting.

A few executives have such a relationship with their secretary. Such a relationship is unusual, however, because it requires an extremely competent and trustworthy secretary, as well as necessitating that the executive delegates to his secretary. Moreover, this kind of working relationship can only exist if it is long-standing (i.e., the executive does not have a new secretary every other year).

This assumes, of course, that she is accessible. If she is always on the telephone or in a meeting when you call, and she takes 5 hours to get back to you, then her value to the outside world is reduced.

Skills, Knowledge and Characteristics

The ideal secretary will most likely have most of these skills, knowledge and characteristics:

Personnel Policies

The firm should have intelligent hiring and personnel policies for its secretaries:

Environment, Infrastructure and Policies

To attract quality secretaries and maximize their effectiveness, the firm should provide good infrastructure for its secretaries:

Secretarial Duties

The duties and responsibilities of a good secretary will most likely include:

Leveraging the Executive's Time

If an executive uses his secretary efficiently and maximizes her effectiveness, he is leveraging his time and maximizing his contribution to the organization. Here are some of the ways an executive can use his secretary to leverage his time:

Movie producer Scott Rudin has six assistants ("Boss-Zilla" by Kate Kelley and Merissa Marr, The Wall Street Journal, September 24-25, 2005, p. A6):

In Rudin Productions' New York office near Times Square, his time is surgically managed by five assistants, who are classified by duty. The executive assistant, or "No. 1" in Rudin shorthand, manages the schedule and travels with the boss. ... The second-ranking assistant occupies the "hot seat," manning phones and helping Mr. Rudin hunt down people he wants to speak with and dodge the ones he doesn't. The third-ranking assistant handles "documents," including faxes and emails. No. 4 keeps an eye on Mr. Rudin's personal business and three homes, in New York City, Quogue, Long Island, and Washington, Conn. A fifth keeps tabs on the theatre and art worlds, informing him of new shows and upcoming exhibitions... . Yet another assistant handles telephones and errands in L.A.

A good secretary can reduce the annoyance factor of interacting with someone else. She can make things go so smoothly that _____. We've learned the hard way that in choosing who to do business with, and which professionals to hire, the quality of their secretary — as well as the quality of other support staff and his infrastructure — as an important consideration. We even dumped a lawyer we were using because her secretary was such a ditz (in this case, he was her son).

Kensington's Approach to Secretaries

Many disagree with our analysis. One friend of ours dismisses most secretarial assistance as "pillow fluffing." (This friend is equally foolish in other areas.) In some cases this resistance is Puritanism, particularly about secretaries doing personal errands for her boss. Moreover, many let the fact that secretaries do cost money overly influence their decisions on secretarial functions. For example, many law firms have sought to reduce their overhead in order to lower their hourly rates. The usual result, however, is lawyers doing things that a secretary should do, and the total bill is now higher, not lower. (Speaking of attorneys, we have noticed that every one of the premier buyout attorneys we know has a superstar executive secretary. It almost seems as if you cannot be an outstanding buyout lawyer without such assistance.)

Cost-Benefit Analysis

In determining the appropriate level of secretarial support to provide to an executive, it often helps to quantify relationships. Assuming that the quality of the work done by the secretary is equal to the executive's, the ratio to consider for a given task or responsibility is:

          CE x TE
          _______
          CS x TS

CE is the opportunity cost (i.e., value) of the executive's time, TE is the time required for the executive to perform the task, CE is the fully loaded cost of the secretary's time, and TS is the time required for the secretary to perform the task. The numerator is the cost to the organization to have the executive perform the task, while the denominator is the cost to the organization to have the secretary do it. If this ratio is greater than 1, it is preferable to delegate the task to the secretary.

One should use the value of the executive's time to the organization (as opposed to the cost of his time). By definition, the value of this time should be greater than the cost (otherwise, you should get rid of him). If you have a hot shot software developer that you're paying $100,000 a year, for example, and he works 2,000 hours a year, the value of his time to your company is a lot more than $50 an hour.

The fully loaded cost of your secretary's time should used, including benefits. One does not use her opportunity cost if you assumes that you could hire another secretary at the same cost. However, the less fungible a secretary is, the more you should use her opportunity cost to the organization, rather than her cost. Let's assume the opportunity cost of the executive's time to his organization is $240 an hour. The cost of the secretary's time, fully loaded, is $20 an hour. This would mean that any task in which the secretary takes no more than 12 times as long to complete should be done by the secretary. Using this analysis, you can see that most executives are currently underdelegating to their secretaries. You can also see that is most cases firms should hire higher caliber secretaries, and provide more training, than they are currently doing.

To the extent that the quality is different, then you have to adjust the answer. On clerical and administrative matters, the secretary is better trained, and has a better eye, and thus is more likely to do it right the first time. On other matters, the executive will produce better quality work, and it thus may not make sense for him to delegate it to her, even if the ratio is much greater than 1. (Of course, another way to think about this is to measure how long it will take the each of them to produce work of equal quality.)

In addition to adding value to the organization, our philosophy on utilizing secretaries can also enhance job satisfaction. Let's assume an executive has been working particularly hard. One perk you can give him is additional use of a secretary (or a personal assistant) to do some of his personal errands. Even if there is not a strict economic payoff, the increased job satisfaction may be worth it in the long run.

Key Assumptions

Our analysis is based on two key assumptions:

If executive spends his freed up time golfing with his buddies, then he should pay for the secretary, not the company. In addition, if his freed up time is spent working, but on tasks that don't benefit the company, there is a problem.

Time and Task Audit

Once a year, every executive and manager should do a time and task audit. They (or their secretary) should keep a detailed time diary of what they did and how long it took to do it. Each task should be analyzed to determine:

Conclusion

I am certainly not advocating a return to the "good old days." It's ridiculous for an executive not to be computer literate, or be unable to operate office equipment when his secretary is gone. It's equally dumb when an executive cannot locate a letter because he doesn't know how the files are organized. What we are saying is that the optimum solution is when an executive properly leverages his time through intelligent use of secretaries, while at the same time being self sufficient so that he can function effectively when his secretary is gone. We advocate combining the best of the old methods with the best of the new. We are particularly disdainful of ideological and Puritanical approaches, such as "you should pick up your own dry cleaning, rather than have your secretary do this for you." Rather, such decisions should be based on rational, objective economic analysis, and nothing else.

Some would say that we have described a super secretary, and that such individuals are rare. They are indeed. However, since most firms don't know how to properly utilize their secretaries, and don't seek to hire the few super secretaries, you have a reasonable chance of finding and hiring one.

The analysis in this § 3.16 is applicable not just to secretaries, but also to hiring and managing administrative assistants, office managers, bookkeepers, personal assistants, housekeepers, even a chauffeur — in short, all support staff.

Comments

When I posted this essay on a bulletin board, we received one particularly good comment:

While this section is a salutary exposition of the role of a Secretary, it displays a "one size fits all" aspect that is somewhat misleading.

There is a significant difference among the differing roles of secretaries which are functions of who and what the "boss" is and what kind of organization the boss operates within.

The well organized chief executive or senior partner/rainmaker requires an Executive Secretary, an Administrative Assistant, and one or more secretaries. Rarely does one individual fill all the roles well and it is important to separate the roles as quickly as possible in the organization chart of the enterprise as it grows.

The Executive Secretary is really the office equivalent of valet, butler, major domo and social secretary. An executive secretary does run errands, shop for the boss, and make sure that coffee and lunch or snacks are available and properly served. The executive secretary also runs the secretarial establishment and is the office manager for the immediate administrative family of the boss. The executive secretary has both the power and skill to delegate when appropriate. If shopping for the boss is more important to the boss than keying a report, the executive secretary shops and a lower level secretary types. Executive secretaries have always been with us although they have usually been men.

The Administrative Assistant is a creature of the post-Korean War era. The administrative assistant is just what the name implies — an assistant to the executive and responsible for dealing with the corporate or enterprise bureaucracy. The administrative assistant is the chief of staff who organizes the day to day operations of those reporting to the executive so that the executive receives the information required to make executive decisions in a timely fashion and that the executive decisions are then implemented throughout the organization in a timely fashion.

A Secretary is the person who performs the myriad of daily chores that nibble away at an executive's time much like some kind of corporate piranha. Secretaries work for the Executive Secretary and cooperate with the Administrative Assistant. They must be selected as appropriate representatives of the executive and the enterprise. They must be personable and have impeccable telephone manners. They must also thoroughly understand their role in the enterprise in general and with the executive for whom they work in particular.

Since most executives spend much more time with their executive secretary than their spouse, an invisible and conscious barrier must exist eternally between them. The relationship must always remain an employment relationship sharing a common goal, success of the enterprise and the personal success of the executive. The relationships between and among an executive and his executive secretary/ administrative assistant/secretary are similar to the relationships of a military commander with their executive officer and top NCOs.

Read James' essay Statement of Mission.

August 4, 1997, version 1.5   |    List of other essays written by James Mitchell    |    Copyright notice

Cite as “The Importance of Secretaries” by James Mitchell. August 4, 1997, version 1.5.
www.BostonConvivium.com/jm_essays/importance_of_secretaries.