There is a very famous managerial piece that was published in December 1974 issue of Harvard Business Review(HBR), which explores inefficiencies in workplace interactions.
Let us imagine that a manager is walking down the hall and that he notices one of his subordinates, Jones, coming his way. When the two meet, Jones greets the manager with, “Good morning. By the way, we’ve got a problem. You see….” As Jones continues, the manager recognizes in this problem the two characteristics common to all the problems his subordinates gratuitously bring to his attention. Namely, the manager knows (a) enough to get involved, but (b) not enough to make the on-the-spot decision expected of him. Eventually, the manager says, “So glad you brought this up. I’m in a rush right now. Meanwhile, let me think about it, and I’ll let you know.” Then he and Jones part company.
Let us analyze what just happened. Before the two of them met, on whose back was the “monkey”? The subordinate’s. After they parted, on whose back was it? The manager’s. Subordinate-imposed time begins the moment a monkey successfully leaps from the back of a subordinate to the back of his or her superior and does not end until the monkey is returned to its proper owner for care and feeding. In accepting the monkey, the manager has voluntarily assumed a position subordinate to his subordinate. That is, he has allowed Jones to make him her subordinate by doing two things a subordinate is generally expected to do for a boss—the manager has accepted a responsibility from his subordinate, and the manager has promised her a progress report.
The "monkey" in our scenario refers to the next step in any task or problem. There are some rules to care and feed our monkeys(rules that preserve discretionary time):
All these rules increase manager leverage in addition to accelerating operational activities. Less time wasted in limbo = more action being taken.
Our monkey analogy does not have to reside strictly in the business world.
Friend and family relationships involve monkeys being thrown around too.
Controlling the flow of tasks with clear definitions of who is accountable for doing what by when is a more efficient way to interact.
Ambiguity leads to misunderstandings. Misunderstandings lead to conflict.
Conflicted monkeys go to war with humans