honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser
Posted on: Monday, March 26, 2007

March hoop madness not THAT big

By Larry Ballard

At work, we have installed a pair of huge, jumbotronic, plasmatic-silkscreen TV monitors with enough HD-HT-HV-HP capability to be seen clearly from the space shuttle.

Put it this way: You have a big TV at your house; we have a total visual stimulation system.

It's part of our larger strategy to zero in on what you, the reader, thinks, watches, eats, buys, and then usually eats again.

The effort is both complicated and expensive. It deals mainly with what the news industry calls "demographics," which can be defined in layman's terms as "more than one demographic."

It's early in the process, but it is already clear that you (still, the reader) have no interest in presidential politics, energy policy, or the legal battle over Anna Nicole Smith's baby, for that matter.

Right now, you care only about whether your team can defend the 3-point line, penetrate in transition, beat a 1-3-1 zone press and advance to the Sweet 16.

Yes, it's that time of year when every employee in every office throws a few bucks — in our case, an amount less than the threshold allowed by law, in case the feds are reading this — into the ol' March Madness pool.

It's also the time of year when co-workers who wouldn't know a point guard from a prison guard suddenly turn into basketball (excuse us, "hoops") experts. From now until April 2, everyone in your cube farm, except the guy who drew Holy Cross, will be breaking down matchups and scratching teams from their beloved brackets. From now until April 2, no piece of paper will be tossed in the recycling bin without first being wadded up, dribbled, pump-faked and finger-rolled.

And we all know the effect of March Madness on workplace productivity.

We know because a research firm called Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc. did a study last spring that calculated lost work time during the tournament at $889.6 million. The firm predicted that "work performance will plummet as workers remain glued to their monitors, watching the games online for the first time."

The study estimated the typical fan will spend about 13 minutes a day on basketball Web sites and untold minutes with one eye on the TV as they pretend to write sales reports.

John A. Challenger, chairman of the firm, advised companies to take charge (similar to "taking a charge," except your feet don't have to be set).

"Companies may want to expand their Internet blockers to include college basketball sites, and they may want to encourage workers to refrain from watching entire games at their desks," Challenger's press release said. "However, there is no reason a company cannot institute a companywide pool, which employees can enter for free and winners receive some type of gift, such as an extra day off or a restaurant gift certificate."

Not really, but it's a fact that nearly $2 billion in tourney pools are organized at work each March, according to the government. To put the amount into perspective, it would pay for upwards of three more TVs like the ones here.

But before all you big bosses out there decide to go fun-hater on us, we suggest a chat with our new friend, Jeff Lehman.

He's a vice president at WorkPlace Media, an Ohio marketing firm that did its own March Madness survey and determined that Challenger's conclusions are, in research terms, pretty much a crock.

Lehman says only 30 percent of workers plunked down money on office pools last week, and that two-thirds of them risked $10 or less. Among the findings:

  • Thirty-three percent of us will wait until we get home to watch the action.

  • Only one in 10 will go online at work to keep track of their picks.

  • Almost 70 percent said they did not take part in a pool.

    "Millions of Americans will be glued to their TVs to watch college hoops this month. But surprisingly, that includes only half of the work force," Lehman said. "Forty-seven percent said they have no interest in the tournament at all."

    We can only assume that Lehman's survey found everyone who picked Holy Cross.

    We, on the other hand, have Georgetown.

    Let the madness ensue.