 |
|||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||
Friday, January 30, 2004
360-degrees of mediocrity
Found this piece, entitled, Playing to our strengths in this morning's Globe and Mail. The author is an executive coach -- not the high-priced kind that calls some of the money shots from an expensive box overlooking the game, but the wayward "orgy-b" type trying to convince organizations and their employees that they can be all they can be, but I digress -- who has prepared a little item that probably hits home for a few of my loyal readers. Here's an example from the text
If you managed a hockey team, would you put the goalie on left wing? Would you ask Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong to go back from the front to fetch water for his cycling team? Would you fix Tiger Woods' swing because it's not what other golfers have used?The article's a nice little warm pick-me-up for those of you churning your way through and fretting about the annual review process.
Of course not. You're going to put your best team members in the place where you can use their particular skills and let each apply their style and strengths to your advantage.
But if it's so darn obvious, why try to force employees into positions they can't play or change their style to conform with what you've always used? Why look at what's wrong with them instead of what's right with them?
It's managing for mediocrity and the results speak for themselves: stress and burnout, boring and bland corporate people who look over their shoulders as they speak.
Wednesday, January 28, 2004
"Bosses prefer satisfaction to money or power "-- really . . .
This, from The Globe and Mail, is worth a thought for a few minutes on at least three levels. Here's one quotation from the very short item:Are we asking people with more than "satisfactory levels of money and power" whether they want "money and power" or "satisfaction." Maslow had a theory about this. Duh! In the second bit of statistics it notes that 34% of those polled found their senior management "competent" and a further found them "fairly competent." Now, I'm no statistician, but this says to me that one in three CEOs thinks his/her senior management are sub-par, and fully two-thirds are admitting that they think their people are MEDIOCRE. [That's gotta hurt! ed.] So, only 1 in 3 senior managers is better than "competent." At least it's not the Lake Wobegon Corporation where "90% of the people are above average." Finally, only(!) 48% of these CEOs believe advancement at their company is fair and based on merit. [At least they're not hypocrites -- when they're anonymous. ed.] Even better: 41% "still believe it is based on favouritism and posturing."
I'm sure if you give it a minute or two, you can come up with even more questions or observations.
What exactly is the point of the MBA HR courses (and the resultant corporate people)?
Three-fourths (76 per cent) of global executives would prefer more satisfaction from their job over money (18 per cent) or power (6 per cent), according to research today by executive recruitment firm, Korn/Ferry International.
I'm sure if you give it a minute or two, you can come up with even more questions or observations.
What exactly is the point of the MBA HR courses (and the resultant corporate people)?
Tuesday, January 27, 2004
Microsoft: the 21st-century post office?
In a post yesterday, I noted that Bill G had made a statement in Davos to the effect that spam would be eradicated by a post-office like mechanism. Naturally, I thought the world's most forward-looking rich guy was thinking of the actual post offices as the mechanism for doing so.
Maybe he was. However, with a tip from Dean, I found out that Microsoft has been working on solving this issue for some time in a project called Penny Black. In short, Penny Black (name taken from the first British postal stamp) is research into how to make spam infeasible through mostly technological means that include an economic cost to the issuer rather than on the recipient of the emailings. Good idea. It is, however, quite possible based on what they're doing that MS thinks it can be the post office of the 21st (electronic)-century.
Of course there's that whole independent, disinterested, regulated, socially-benefitting aspect of the post office in the communications paradigm that Microsoft doesn't actually fit . . . Keep at it Bill
Maybe he was. However, with a tip from Dean, I found out that Microsoft has been working on solving this issue for some time in a project called Penny Black. In short, Penny Black (name taken from the first British postal stamp) is research into how to make spam infeasible through mostly technological means that include an economic cost to the issuer rather than on the recipient of the emailings. Good idea. It is, however, quite possible based on what they're doing that MS thinks it can be the post office of the 21st (electronic)-century.
Of course there's that whole independent, disinterested, regulated, socially-benefitting aspect of the post office in the communications paradigm that Microsoft doesn't actually fit . . . Keep at it Bill
Monday, January 26, 2004
E-Commerce Report: Fewer Online Shoppers in Canada
Oops. For those of us "in the business," this may come as something of a shock -- especially if we're using the 10:1 rule with US data aas our guidepost. Of course, the article (and maybe even the Ipsos-Reid study that spawned it) doesn't make as plain the following information and questions:
Spending was down by $18-million on $990-million year over year (which was already ($110-million down from 2001). Question: what about overall spending during the seasonal period: up or down? (i.e., does the online buying reduction reflect or contract the overall economy? Users who have bought online was way up from previous years, but during the holidays only about half of those who had EVER bought online did so. Question: So what? Just because I've bought online once, I'm expected to do it all the time? The biggest electronic purchase this year for the holidays was digital cameras. For my several hundred bucks, I'm going to go touch and feel it (and probably buy it -- so I'm sure it'll be there Christmas/ Hannukah/ Eid morning). Some things just aren't really suitable for purchase online -- for others, to boot -- such as things that cost way too much to ship, things that require fitting (and therefore going back to the STORE!), etc. Did the study find out what was purchased during the holiday season to check for correlation?
Whatever.
Whatever.
Another "Privacy" Red Herring
Lot's of "privacy stuff" today. [Duh! It's Monday . . . slow business news day, remember? ed.] This item in the NYTimes, entitled, Plans for Wireless Directory Raise Concerns About Privacy is interesting. Background: telecomm carriers considering publishing of a white pages for cellular phones; law put before both the House and the Senate (US) to require user "opt-in" to protect privacy; privacy advocacy groups insisting that it is a privacy imposition and should not be done.
What nonsense! What a red herring! What . . . [insert something else displaying proper level of indignance here]!
First, the telcos need to publish a wireless directory to re-generate revenues that have been lost to the waning land-line publishing operation. So, they want to make money off the listing as they've done FOREVER.
Second, those opposed to it are less concerned about privacy in the "you shouldn't know that about me" variety than about privacy in the "do not disturb me" variation. [Sadly there doesn't appear to be a set of different words for these two meanings -- at least not in English. Maybe, given the debate that is developing, there should be. But, I digress. ed.] Regardless, neither is or has been a RIGHT of holders of a telecommunications address, EVER. Nor, probably, should it be. So, despite the fact that I completely agree with this side's desires -- who wants telemarketers to have the cell phone number too? -- the argument and action is cloudy nonsense.
Third, who's heard of the philosophical paradox of the immovable object and the irresistible force? That's what we have here: social desire facing off against the profit motive. Hoo-wah!
Finally, if/when the wireless connection becomes more pervasive than the land line connection, what happens? What's the logic behind it.
It's not exactly bread and circuses, but it does keep one amuse while the City burns.
What nonsense! What a red herring! What . . . [insert something else displaying proper level of indignance here]!
First, the telcos need to publish a wireless directory to re-generate revenues that have been lost to the waning land-line publishing operation. So, they want to make money off the listing as they've done FOREVER.
Second, those opposed to it are less concerned about privacy in the "you shouldn't know that about me" variety than about privacy in the "do not disturb me" variation. [Sadly there doesn't appear to be a set of different words for these two meanings -- at least not in English. Maybe, given the debate that is developing, there should be. But, I digress. ed.] Regardless, neither is or has been a RIGHT of holders of a telecommunications address, EVER. Nor, probably, should it be. So, despite the fact that I completely agree with this side's desires -- who wants telemarketers to have the cell phone number too? -- the argument and action is cloudy nonsense.
Third, who's heard of the philosophical paradox of the immovable object and the irresistible force? That's what we have here: social desire facing off against the profit motive. Hoo-wah!
Finally, if/when the wireless connection becomes more pervasive than the land line connection, what happens? What's the logic behind it.
It's not exactly bread and circuses, but it does keep one amuse while the City burns.
Our global Gate-ed community
A couple tenuously related Bill Gates news items today that hit close to home.
First, Bill is in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum [What, again my invite was lost? That's nine years running!! ed.] and is, naturally, on the podium at least once. This year he's promising the elimination of spam (email not the fake meat kind, although both are interesting propositions). OK, whatever. Another plug for some Microsoft upgrade or another. Yes, but no. Soothsaying Bill points to . . . the post office for the solution. Well, not exactly, but close enough. Here's a couple grafs from the NYTimes:
Second, the British Foreign office ["Whitehall says . . ."] announced that:
So, let's be historically clear: the French Empire, the British Empire, the American (we're not an. . .) Empire, and the Microsoft Empire. Yup.
First, Bill is in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum [What, again my invite was lost? That's nine years running!! ed.] and is, naturally, on the podium at least once. This year he's promising the elimination of spam (email not the fake meat kind, although both are interesting propositions). OK, whatever. Another plug for some Microsoft upgrade or another. Yes, but no. Soothsaying Bill points to . . . the post office for the solution. Well, not exactly, but close enough. Here's a couple grafs from the NYTimes:
The third way [spam will be elminated], which Mr. Gates said was likely to arrive later but be the long-term solution, would require that e-mail messages sent by strangers come with postage attached, the equivalent of a postage stamp.Given my employ: You Rock Bill!.
"If the sender is your long-lost brother," he said, the payment can be declined, costing the sender nothing.
But recipients who want to fight spam would always accept the payment if the incoming mail appeared to be spam, making the sending of such messages uneconomic.
Second, the British Foreign office ["Whitehall says . . ."] announced that:
Britain will give an honorary knighthood to Microsoft Corp. chairman Bill Gates in recognition of his contribution to enterprise in Britain, the government said Monday.Now, he can't be called "Sir Bill," because he's not British -- or a citizen of the Commonwealth -- but he'll officially be aristocracy of a sort.
So, let's be historically clear: the French Empire, the British Empire, the American (we're not an. . .) Empire, and the Microsoft Empire. Yup.
Lawyers stumped by privacy act
The murky depths of the privacy issue (or non-issue, depending on how you view it) created by the effect of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) seems pretty opaque right now. But, as this item in The Globe and Mail shows with regard to the law's impact on law firms, "you ain't seen nothing yet."
The law has wrinkles that need to be worked out which probably nobody foresaw in the good intent of four years ago. One of two things is going to happen: (a) we're going to have a significant shift in information transmission and holding -- short term very likely; or (b) the Court will start changing the law through a number of challenges, and the whole world of privacy and information, etc. is going to be (d)evolving for the next decade.
Should create "privacy" job opportunities though . . . for those who care and get on board early.
The law has wrinkles that need to be worked out which probably nobody foresaw in the good intent of four years ago. One of two things is going to happen: (a) we're going to have a significant shift in information transmission and holding -- short term very likely; or (b) the Court will start changing the law through a number of challenges, and the whole world of privacy and information, etc. is going to be (d)evolving for the next decade.
Should create "privacy" job opportunities though . . . for those who care and get on board early.
