Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Effectivity vs Efficiency

 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages Post Reply
17 messages over 3 pages: 1 2 3  Next >>
Franz_but
Newbie
Czech Republic
Joined 3431 days ago

2 posts - 3 votes
Speaks: English

 
 Message 1 of 17
02 January 2015 at 9:14am | IP Logged 
I always thought that effectivity is hardly used nowadays and efficiency is more used as
they (as I believe) mean the same. Could you help me with the usage and possible
differences?

Thanks a lot!
2 persons have voted this message useful



iguanamon
Pentaglot
Senior Member
Virgin Islands
Speaks: Ladino
Joined 5075 days ago

2237 posts - 6731 votes 
Speaks: English*, Spanish, Portuguese, Haitian Creole, Creole (French)

 
 Message 2 of 17
02 January 2015 at 12:17pm | IP Logged 
Effectivity is a word that I have never heard of until today and I am a native English-speaker. Here's what the Urban Dictionary says about it:

UrbanDictionary wrote:
effectivity
An idiotic modern word that has crept out of technical use in game theory to compete in pseudo-intellectual discourse with the real English word satisfying the same part of speech (effectiveness), which should be used instead in almost every case. Not to be confused with efficacy, which actually has a different meaning.

Hmmmm, "an idiotic modern word", that leaves us with effectiveness vs efficiency.

Wikipedia wrote:
...A simple way of distinguishing between efficiency and effectiveness is the saying, "Efficiency is doing things right, while Effectiveness is doing the right things." This is based on the premise that selection of objectives of a process are just as important as the quality of that process.


Here's my understanding: To me, being efficient is doing something in the best way I possibly can while expending my energy to do so with the least amount of wasted energy possible. Being effective is having what I am doing (hopefully in an efficient manner) actually solve the problem.

I would forget about "effectivity" and not use it.



Edited by iguanamon on 02 January 2015 at 12:22pm

5 persons have voted this message useful



blauwevos
Newbie
France
Joined 3508 days ago

7 posts - 12 votes
Speaks: English*
Studies: Russian

 
 Message 3 of 17
02 January 2015 at 12:18pm | IP Logged 
If a solution is effective, it gets the job done.

If a solution is efficient, it gets the job done within a reasonable time frame and with an acceptable benefit-cost ratio.
3 persons have voted this message useful



mrwarper
Diglot
Winner TAC 2012
Senior Member
Spain
forum_posts.asp?TID=Registered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 5039 days ago

1493 posts - 2500 votes 
Speaks: Spanish*, EnglishC2
Studies: German, Russian, Japanese

 
 Message 4 of 17
02 January 2015 at 12:36pm | IP Logged 
"Effectivity" doesn't seem to be a word (or a widely accepted one, outside circles where careless use of language is way too common, f.e. the gaming scene) -- "effectiveness" is what you probably want to say instead.

When comparing effectiveness vs. efficiency, though, the former refers to goal achievement, while the latter refers to the cost involved:

Actions are labelled "effective" if you reach a set goal (they have effect) and they are "ineffective" if you don't, and "effectiveness" measures various degrees of achievement that may lay in between. Now, goals might be equally achieved by different actions or methods at the expense of different amounts of efforts or other kinds of costs. Then they are equally effective (same degree of effectiveness) but the action or method that involves the lesser cost shows a greater degree of efficiency.

Hope this helps.

One last consideration, though -- rather often, these and other pairs of words with closely knit meanings ("exactitude" and "accuracy" come to mind) are mixed up even (especially?) by native speakers. This indicates there's always some degree of impressionism involved in interpretation, besides the fact that difference in meaning of such word pairs may vary across languages, even when direct translations exist and are acceptable.

Edit: others beat me to it while I was writing this. Oh well...

Edited by mrwarper on 02 January 2015 at 12:39pm

3 persons have voted this message useful



Doitsujin
Diglot
Senior Member
Germany
Joined 5133 days ago

1256 posts - 2363 votes 
Speaks: German*, English

 
 Message 5 of 17
02 January 2015 at 1:01pm | IP Logged 
@Franz_but: If you've you heard "effectivity" used by German speakers, it might a false friend, because in Germany, Effektivität = effectiveness, is commonly used, and since many other German internationalisms ending in "-tät" have English counterparts ending in "-ty," for example, Aktivität = activity, many Germans erroneously assume hat all German internationalisms ending in "-tät" have a "-ty" equivalent.
2 persons have voted this message useful



Speakeasy
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 3865 days ago

507 posts - 1098 votes 
Studies: German

 
 Message 6 of 17
02 January 2015 at 5:19pm | IP Logged 
While effectivity is, indeed, a valid English word, most people would use effectiveness. Mrwarper has provided a very good explanation of the current differences of meaning for effectiveness and efficiency. From the English perspective, both of these words have their origins in Old French and Latin. However, the English use of efficiency took on its more modern meaning with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. The record shows that was late 19th century British Engineers and Engineering Technicians who contributed the most to the distinctions, which included the measurements thereof. Interestingly, Le Dictionnaire historique de la langue Française, published by LeRobert, recognizes the current meaning of éfficience as a borrowing in the late 19th century from the English meaning of efficiency. In my experience, unless they have been exposed to these concepts in their studies of the applied sciences, in engineering, or in accounting, many English and French speakers routinely confound these two words.

I would add that a particular operation can be quite efficient in the use of resources, but it might not necessarily be effective in reaching the stated goal.   Thus, the statement "If a solution is efficient, it gets the job done within a reasonable time frame and with an acceptable benefit-cost ratio" does not represent the concept of efficiency.

Edited by Speakeasy on 02 January 2015 at 8:23pm

1 person has voted this message useful



Gomorritis
Tetraglot
Groupie
Netherlands
Joined 4091 days ago

91 posts - 157 votes 
Speaks: Spanish*, English, Catalan, French
Studies: Greek, German, Dutch

 
 Message 7 of 17
02 January 2015 at 9:33pm | IP Logged 
Maybe it's because I am an engineer that I think the word "efficiency" is often used wrongly. In essence it is always the comparison of two parameters, so saying that something is efficient means close to nothing if you don't define what you understand as efficiency for every particular use. It is a very used word in (deceitful) political debates.
2 persons have voted this message useful



tastyonions
Triglot
Senior Member
United States
goo.gl/UIdChYRegistered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 4478 days ago

1044 posts - 1823 votes 
Speaks: English*, French, Spanish
Studies: Italian

 
 Message 8 of 17
02 January 2015 at 10:38pm | IP Logged 
efficiency: ratio of resources expended to useful work accomplished
effectiveness: total useful work accomplished

I have never seen "effectivity" in English, nor "efficience" in French.


1 person has voted this message useful



This discussion contains 17 messages over 3 pages: 2 3  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 0.4570 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.