Learning Experience…Effective vs Efficient.

– from 2014 article on the topic:  Author unknown – 

“I recently had a profound learning experience.
It turned my thinking upside down on asubject I have dedicated myself to for years.
It also made me throw out much of what tookme years to acquire. I’ve even questionedmany things I held to be true.
It was so challenging and confronting that onegirl cried nearly all of the first day.
The class was on self-protection and some ofthe moves were brutal. For example, groinstrikes and eye gouges.
Horrible stuff, but highly effective if used in alife-and-death situation.
The instructor made a distinction that rangtrue.  

He talked about how effectiveness beats efficiency.

It reminded me of a humorous scene inIndiana Jones.

Indiana finds himself facing a guy with asword. The guy swishes it around in animpressive display of swordsmanship.
Surely Indiana is gone here.
But Indiana just rolls his eyes, pulls out apistol and shoots the guy.
The guy with the sword was efficient, butIndiana was effective.
Effectiveness trumps efficiency. ” 

-from Diffen.com

While efficiency refers to how well something is done, effectiveness refers to how useful something is. For example, a car is a very effective form of transportation, able to move people across long distances, to specific places, but a car may not transport people efficiently because of how it uses fuel.

Comparison chart

Differences  Similarities 
Edit this comparison chart



Meaning Effectiveness is about doing the right task, completing activities and achieving goals. Efficiency is about doing things in an optimal way, for example doing it the fastest or in the least expensive way. It could be the wrong thing, but it was done optimally.
Effort oriented No Yes
Process Oriented No Yes
Goal oriented Yes Yes
Time oriented No Yes

In Div. 1 college hoops Creighton had a run of 3-4 years as 
one of the most highly efficient offensive teams.  Because the
team had great shooters the Jays routinely launched only 50-60
shots per game.  This past season we had fewer shooters and the
guys were not nearly as efficient as EW or DMD, but as a team we
persisted in playing with a efficiency mindset, putting up 50-60
shots per game.

As a team CU dropped from 50-51% down to 41% in field goal
efficiency.  I had envisioned a dropoff of 5-6%, not 10% in my
preseason predictions – surprise.  The team passed up many good
shots, looking for a great shot. As a result of hunting the great shot,
the pace slowed and often we were looking for a score as the shot
clock was running out.  The Jays also hunted the 3 pt shot.  Alas, it
also took a leave of absence.

Without a “go to” player, coupled with injuries to a couple of others,
the offense stagnated.  As the season progressed some of our shooters
shot less, while some stopped shooting altogether.  Instead of increasing
the teams shot rate, we had a couple of games where less than 50 shots
were attempted.

Nobody shooting at “Shooter U”?  A sad state of affairs!

To offset a lack in offensive efficiency while maintaining a high
tempo, a team needs to improve its effectiveness, by increasing its’ frequency
of shooting, score in transition, not pass up early good shots, aggressively rebound
for 2nd & 3rd chance opportunities to score, reduce dependence on 3pt
shooting, and not miss (so many damned) lay ups.  Defensively the team should look
to increase blocks, steals, and turnovers.

“Shoot more – not less!”

Keeping offensive tempo up and increased shooting – up to 70-75
shots per game – offsets reduced team efficiency and gives the team
a chance to win, even when shooting poorly.  Cincinnati and Alabama
teams are 2 teams which, while historically average to below average in shooting
percentages, have employed effective offensive strategies in recent years.
They rely heavily on offensive rebounding and 2nd and 3rd chance putbacks.
They also rebound well defensively and use defensive stops and turnovers to
assist their lack of offensive efficiency.

2 point scoring talleys by percentages.

            50 shots    60 shots    70 shots    75 shots
40%     20             24              28             30
            40 pts        48 pts        56pts        60 pts  

45%     50 shots    60 shots    70 shots    75 shots
            22.5           27             31.5          33.8
            45 pts        54 pts        63 pts       67 pts

50%     50 shots    60 shots    70 shots    75 shots
             25             30             35             38.5
             50 pts       60 pts        70 pts       77 pts

On the rare day when an effective team is shooting well, they roll
over opponents.  Generally speaking those teams put up more shots
(whether transition, offensive rebounding and putbacks, and off steals
and turnovers), get fouled more, put up more FT’s,  and in doing so offset
their efficiency deficits, giving themselves an opportunity to win the game.

Creighton no longer has the personnel to be the highly efficient shooting
team they once were.  Therefore it is vital for the coaching staff to shift
to becoming a highly effective offensive team to facilitate a return to winning at
a respectable rate (65-77%).  The staff can re-evaluate the situation when our
current shooters improve and/or other elite shooters are recruited into the program.

Effectiveness beats efficiency.


One thought on “Learning Experience…Effective vs Efficient.

  1. Pingback: gtmo’s Annual Ridiculously Predictable, Preposterous Pre-season Prognostications for 2018-19 – Bluenotes

Comments are closed.