The main difference between a project manager and project management is [for those who understand management] the difference between having someone in charge and having everyone in charge.
Projects will get managed, albeit poorly, without a MANAGER.
Some companies don't want to pay for one.
Other companies want someone to assume the responsibility if there are problems.
Nature abhors a vacuum--some individuals manage by default.
Are we talking about Hiring a Project Manager? Project Manager Wanted.... or about assigning someone to manage the project.
"We're putting you in charge of the project. [Oh ,boy!] You don't have any authority over anyone in charge of any aspect of the project, you're just a sort of errand boy. I am putting you in charge because I lack the (real) authority, confidence, and ability to manage those guys, so I am letting them run amok and they need a flunky. You're it."
Real life is not pretty.
If you can't fire anyone, you are not the Project Manager.
Internal promotions negate any authority imputed to the manager of a project.
Or as I like to say....
"Everybody knows what everybody knows." From the Quotations of Slim Fairview (c) 2011
Regards,
Slim
slimfairview@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
Friday, July 29, 2011
Thursday, July 28, 2011
America Fails to Succeed or Succeeds to Fail?
Succeed to Fail
Did we really fail to succeed? Or, did we succeed to fail?
Let me give you an example of what I am talking about. Rather than a metaphor, I will use an analogy.
About 40 years ago, my College Professor gave me a hot tip. It was not a stock tip. It was not a tip on a fast horse. I don’t gamble. It was a tip on a great wine.
I went to the wine shop to buy the wine. Approximately $3. a bottle, or, $3. The Bottle if you read one of the posh glossies, 10% off on the case. I bought a case.
I used to smoke cigars. $2.50 in the cigar store, $1.75 if I bought a box from a supplier. Rough average, $2. a piece.
Then Ronald Reagan became President.
Now, I considered Ronald Reagan a President of Mythic Proportions. He single-handedly tore down the Berlin Wall. But, I digress.
One pundit wrote that Ronald Reagan created too many poor people. That begs the question, “How many poor people did that writer consider to be enough poor people?” I, however, think Ronald Reagan’s biggest sin was that he created too many rich people. It did not take him long.
It wasn’t long before the Cigar Bar Craze. It wasn’t long before the French Wine Fad. It didn’t take long. Soon, people were paying 22 dollars for a 2 dollar cigar and 25 dollars for a 5 dollar glass of wine.
Another observation was made in the media. It was a lament for a time when the Bank President and the Grocery Clerk (his words, not mine) lived in the same town. That, for me, was not a long time ago. That was where I lived while that writer lamented a bygone era.
What does all this have to do with our Economic Failures? What does this have to do with our Diplomatic Failures?
Simple enough to explain.
Read the newspapers. Read where those who know (what they know, I don’t know), criticise China for their policies—foreign and domestic—political and economic.
Read how they deride China for working for the best interests of China.
Read how they deride China for working for the best interests of China.
Pundits are attempting to blame our problems on China. This reminds me of something my wife said to me during a conversation. I can’t remember the problem, but my wife accused me of blaming her.
“I’m not blaming you, I’m blaming myself.” I said.
“No, you’re not,” my wife said. “You’re blaming me. You’re just taking the responsibility.”
Back to wine bars and cigars.
When a country like China invests in the U.S., they enjoy one of two benefits.
1. They reinvest the profits in another U.S. venture.
2. They bring their profits home and invest in China.
When we make a profit, we invest in loud noises, bright colours, and shiny things.
The newly minted rich spending 22 dollars for a 2-dollar cigar. Spending 25 dollars for a 5-dollar glass of wine.
Of course, they have the retort.
Of course, they have the retort.
“Can you afford a 22 dollar cigar, Slim?”
“No.”
“Can you afford a 25 dollar glass of wine, Slim?”
“No.”
However, I have the proper rebuff.
“Neither can you.”
By their economics, a 22-dollar cigar would cost about 50 dollars. A 25-dollar glass of wine would cost about 50 dollars.
The Bank President no longer lives in the same town as the Grocery Clerk. There are no McMansions in my town.
How did we succeed to fail? In two words? Frusen Glädjé.
Well, actually, there were two main reasons.
1. Conspicuous Consumption
2. Disposable Stuff
When I was a youngster, my parents had an ice-cream scoop. My sister has that scoop now—over 50 years later. Good as new.
The old canard, no one is going to buy more scoops if the old scoops last 50 years, left us with disposable scoops. You won’t miss the dollar you spend on the scoop. When it breaks, 3 or 6 months later, you won’t care. It’s only a dollar.
The other problem is Conspicuous Consumption.
As a nation, we think nothing of it when someone spends $300 on a pair of sneakers or $600 on a blazer. We are not concerned that the sneakers were made in a Third World country by a child making 3 cents an hour. Nor do we care that that blazer was made in a country by a child earning 25 cents a day.
We rationalise that the child needs that $1.75 a week so his family can buy food.
Of course, the problem isn’t a $300 pair of sneakers, if the sneakers were worth $300. The $600 blazer wouldn’t be the problem if the blazer were worth $600. However, we are right back to wine bars and cigars.
It was a few short decades ago that the members of the ILGWU (International Ladies Garment Worker’s Union) ran a commercial with the song: “Look for the union label, whenever you buy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QO7VUklDlQw
The rebuff was that buying products made in America would cost more. I am supposed to believe that the $600 blazer would cost too much for someone who buys a $600 blazer. I don’t.
Figures don’t lie but liars figure. I don’t need to see figures on the cost of producing that unaffordable blazer. Or, for that matter, how much the unaffordable sneakers would cost if they were made in America.
Figures don’t lie but liars figure. I don’t need to see figures on the cost of producing that unaffordable blazer. Or, for that matter, how much the unaffordable sneakers would cost if they were made in America.
Figures on the Auto Industry are even more confusing. Direct employment, lost wages, negative percents. You Google it.
In the past several decades, we lost many industry jobs. We are getting many of these jobs back. What we lost in the interim was the benefits of the multiplier effect. [Trickle down economics is a myth. The multiplier effect is a counting of the number of dollars being spent in America.]
Here are two essentials.
The Multiplier Effect
Economic Stimulus
Each is essential to understand a healthy economy. Why an economy is healthy.
To explain why things go wrong with the way we invest our money, I will copy-paste the monograph here rather than send you to another site.
For those who still have no grasp on how to fix the economy, another metaphor.
Wolf Blitzer wants to buy a new suit. This, he figures, will attract more viewers [customers]. He borrows the money from John King—a CNN colleague.
Mr. Blitzer’s ratings [revenue] go up. He repays Mr. King.
Mr. King, seeing Mr. Blitzer’s success, uses the profits from his lending venture to buy a new suit. His ratings [customers] go up.
Upstairs, Mr. Turner is looking over the balance sheets. He sees this uptick in [revenue]. He asks his accountant what happened. His accountant tells him. Mr. Turner gets an idea. He issues a memo to his on air people.
CNN will make low interest loans to those who want to go out and buy a new outfit to wear on the air.
Ratings go up. Revenue goes up. Mr. Turner issues another memo.
Up until now, employees could buy a meal in the cafeteria [breakfast, lunch, or dinner] for $10. Due to the increased revenue, we are going to charge you [tax you] only $5.
As a result, the employees have more money to spend.
John King buys a new tie.
Gloria Borger buys a new scarf.
Candy Crowley buys a necklace.
Don Lemon buys a new shirt.
This upgrade in the “metaphorical image” generates more viewers [customers]. Revenues go up. Salaries are increased. All is well in CNNtopia.
However, what if all were not so enlightened.
What if Wolf Blitzer had borrowed the money for his new suit from Bret Baier?
Well, Mr. Blitzer would still have a new suit. However, the profits would have gone to Mr. Baier who would have used his profits to buy a new suit.
Mr. King, not having the profits from his loan to Mr. Blitzer, would have had to go to Shepard Smith for a loan to buy his new suit.
Now, Bret Baier and Shepard Smith could use their profits to invest in a business partnership to lend money to fellow Fox News Anchors.
They would have a spiffed up image and more viewers [customers] generating more revenue.
Back to CNN.
With Mr. Blitzer and Mr. King having to pay interest on the loans to people at Fox, they have to cut back on expenditures.
Now, instead of buying lunch or dinner in the cafeteria, they brown-bag it.
Revenues in the cafeteria fall.
CNN issues a memo.
Due to lost revenues, the cafeteria will have to raise prices [taxes] on lunches and dinners.
This affects the other employees. No shirts, no scarves, no ties, no necklaces, declining image, lost customers, decreased revenues—CNNistant.
What is the crucial difference between CNNtopia and CNNistan?
That is the difference between solving the US economic crisis and not solving the US economic crisis.
Now, on to Economic Experts.
In another monograph, I referred to selling blue paint. I chose blue because blue is my favourite colour. However, as Freud said, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”
However, there is an opportunity to create a metaphor as well.
You watch CNN. You watch as experts explain the economy.
One economist works for a company that makes red paint. He says, “If you want to sell more widgets, paint the walls of your company red.”
Another economist works for a company that makes blue paint. He says, “If you want to sell more widgets, paint the walls of your company blue.”
Well, the bias is obvious. Less so, the supporting facts.
Red: “We have a study that says employees in companies with red walls are more pumped up and make more widgets—increased productivity.
Blue: We have a study that says employees in companies with blue walls are more serene and make fewer mistakes—higher quality.
What both sides don’t say:
Employees in companies with red walls make more widgets but make more mistakes resulting in many widgets rejected for poor quality.
Employees in companies with blue walls make higher quality widgets with fewer mistakes, but make fewer widgets which results in lower productivity.
You can say both the Red Economist and The Blue Economist told the truth, half the truth, or half a lie [by omission].
Both sides misled the customers of the benefits of the paint they sell.
How do you fix an economy?
Here is another easy to understand monographs on the topic.
Will this help you fix the economy? Well, is fixing the economy your job?
What it will do is protect you from the politicians trying to sell you paint you don’t need to fix a problem that can’t be fixed with a can of paint.
Will $1 Billion Dollars create 7,000 jobs? Yes and No.
http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2011/07/will-1-billion-create-7000-jobs-yes-and.html
The Politicians are shifting blame by accepting responsibility. We are destroying our nation with a disposable mentality and with conspicuous consumption. [Also, we are hurting the environment and our health.]
However, now you have a better picture of what has happened, what is happening, and what will happen. In addition: I don't sell paint.
Regards,
Slim
PS. I am not Paul Harvey. However, I am open to becoming a commentator, columnist, or paid blogger.
If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with the thank you note.
Sincerest regards,
Slim
slimfairview@yahoo.com
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Global Affairs: Everyone's Challenge
America has a problem. A domestic problem. A foreign problem. However, so does almost every other country in the world.
By now, many of you will have read some of what I’ve been writing on American Domestic Policy and American Foreign Policy. I will now explain the results of some of the fallacies we embrace to explain why we have problems. Then, how to solve them.
Foreign Affairs--The Middle East.
Libya
For the purposes of analysis, we shall assume that the Libyan forces succeed in assuming control of Libya.
When the rebel forces become the government of Libya, (the same forces that were recognised by European countries and ultimately recognised by American government), we in the US assume that there will be a Western Style Government.
What happens, however, when Libya is ruled by a Governing Council? A Council comprising the Tribal Leaders in different regions of Libya? There is every indication that the Libyan people want American Style Freedom. None that indicates that the Libyan people want American Style Government.
On to Syria.
Assume for the purposes of analysis that President Bashar al-Assad decides to retire from politics.
He files to collect his pension, sells his home, and buys something on the Mediterranean.
Further, assume, for analysis that the Syrian people eschew the Prime Minister/Parliament style government and embrace a Congress and President.
Tribal Leaders will fill the Senate. People will elect Representatives to The House. The people will elect a President. Now, what happens when the Government, in response to a referendum on foreign policy, rejects the US as a Syrian ally?
He files to collect his pension, sells his home, and buys something on the Mediterranean.
Further, assume, for analysis that the Syrian people eschew the Prime Minister/Parliament style government and embrace a Congress and President.
Tribal Leaders will fill the Senate. People will elect Representatives to The House. The people will elect a President. Now, what happens when the Government, in response to a referendum on foreign policy, rejects the US as a Syrian ally?
The above two examples are very likely outcomes of the changes in the Middle East.
In the first example, the people choose freedom, but not our style of government.
In the second example, the people choose freedom and our style of government, but reject us (US) as allies.
In the first example, the people choose freedom, but not our style of government.
In the second example, the people choose freedom and our style of government, but reject us (US) as allies.
The United States is not prepared to deal with these eventualities.
As it relates to my discussion on Pakistan:
“Diplomacy: if you have to explain it, it isn’t diplomacy.” The Quotations of Slim Fairview.
In our country, we have the need to talk about it. Whatever it is, we feel it is best to talk about it.
I covered this problem in my monograph: “Why I read newspapers.”
Why do I prefer getting my news from newspapers? That is analogous to why I prefer writing to talking. When I write, you can’t interrupt me. You can disagree with me. You simply cannot interrupt me.
“No one agrees with someone else’s opinion, only his own opinion expressed by someone else.” – My Dad.
You can stop reading what I wrote. You can tear up the paper, you can scream at the screen, you can even make a peanut butter and banana sandwich and shoot the computer, but you can’t interrupt me.
In addition to your disagreeing with me, and the aforementioned options for reacting to what I wrote, you can rise up in opposition. You can write an opposing piece or speak out in forums that offer the option.
Now, you have two options.
1. You can express an opposing view.
2. You can express your opposition to my view.
The latter, however, leaves your audience at a bit of a loss without their being able to read what I wrote.
You must, to make your position clear, reference what I said.
If you are preaching to the choir, it doesn’t matter. However, if you are addressing people with a sincere interest in the topic, they will read what I wrote. At this point, you lose dominance over the audience.
Your audience can read my monograph without interruption, form their own opinions, and draw their own conclusions.
They may agree with you, they may agree with me. (Put your stick down. They can’t see you and they can’t hear you.)
Such is the way it is when I read the newspaper. I can read a columnist. I can read another. I can read two newspapers for opposing views. I can read the editorial, I can read an op-ed, and I can read the letters to the editor. I can form my own opinions. I can form my own opinions in quiet contemplation.
This option is seldom available when TV News becomes entertainment.
When those with opposing views appear on television, they can express their opinions in turn, express them simultaneously, tell half-truths, or engage in evasions or misrepresentations. That is not news. That is not debate. That is pure theatre. The theatre of the perturbed.
Any questions? Well: “Don’t bother asking me. You don’t want to hear my opinion; you want to hear your opinion.” From The Quotations of Slim Fairview.
I’ve included the following to help to explain the problems the US is facing today.
Expert Opinions.
Here is an example on why we cannot and probably will not fix our economy.
You watch as experts explain the economy:
One economist works for a company that makes red paint. He says, “If you want to sell more widgets, paint the walls of your company red.”
Another economist works for a company that makes blue paint. He says, “If you want to sell more widgets, paint the walls of your company blue.”
Well, the bias is obvious. Less so, the supporting facts.
Red: “We have a study that says employees in companies with red walls are more pumped up and make more widgets—increased productivity.
Blue: We have a study that says employees in companies with blue walls are more serene and make fewer mistakes—higher quality.
What both sides don’t say:
Employees in companies with red walls make more widgets but make more mistakes resulting in many widgets being rejected for poor quality.
Employees in companies with blue walls make higher quality widgets with fewer mistakes, but make fewer widgets which results in lower productivity.
You can say both the Red Economist and The Blue Economist told the truth, half the truth, or half a lie [by omission].
Both sides misled the viewers about the benefits of the paint they sell.
This is the same problem we have with running companies, with foreign relations, and with our personal relationships.
The problems we have in Foreign Affairs and the problems we have in Domestic Affairs have the same root cause.
Much of our problems arise from various striations of within our culture.
It has become fashionable, (periodically) to discuss groupthink. Groupthink, however, is the consequence of consensus building. Consensus building is a product created by people to market themselves to companies looking to hire people, looking to promote people, or looking to solve problems with minimal opposition.
Unfortunately, the more people you add to the group, the more people are likely to line up with those who think like themselves or move to the centre to facilitate a solution and to look like team players. More people will not bring about solutions whether you call it groupthink or consensus building or team building.
Team building.
I do not like sports analogies. However, the image lends itself to pointing to the direction we need to go to solve problems.
The theory is, “There is no “I” in team. The meaning? We must all work together. Good thought. Poorly understood.
Take a football team. Here are some of the positions. Centre. Quarterback. End. Halfback.
Each member has a job to do. The Centre “snaps” the ball to the Quarterback and attempts to stop members of the opposing team who want to tackle the Quarterback.
The Quarterback, receiving the ball, has the job of deciding whether to run toward the goal, of giving the ball to a “Back Fielder” to run with the ball, or of passing the ball to one of the Ends. This is determined by conditions on the ground. Here are two considerations”
What are the competitors doing?
What are my teammates doing based on what our competitors are doing?
One of the Ends runs forward a few yards, turns, and runs to the centre of the field. The other End runs far down the field.
The Quarterback decides which End to throw the ball to based on conditions. Not on his opinions of the End’s skills and abilities to catch the ball, but on each End’s ability to catch the ball based on ground conditions. He is not concerned with whose turn it is to catch the ball. He is not concerned with the opinions of his teammates.
Teams. The team has a leader, The Quarterback, who makes decisions based on conditions.
Each member of the team has a job to do. His own job, not someone else’s job. We’ve lost that ability in our country.
We seek consensus, we seek opinions, we share responsibilities, and we make decisions based on input that is not related to achieving the goal.
In addition, we make decisions without regard to what the other team is doing.
Each member of the team has a job to do. His own job, not someone else’s job. We’ve lost that ability in our country.
We seek consensus, we seek opinions, we share responsibilities, and we make decisions based on input that is not related to achieving the goal.
In addition, we make decisions without regard to what the other team is doing.
Groups
I've studied groups. I’ve been a member of groups. I was in a group that studied itself. I worked in groups. I worked on committees. I worked on a committee to form a committee to set up a programme to form committees (you read that correctly). I dissected the different structures used to manage projects and explained why each does not work. (My emphasis on that which is prescriptive and not descriptive.)
This relates to the execution of strategy.
Impediments to Executing Strategy
I. The first impediment to executing strategy will be others who do not share your vision.
a. Your vision competes with their vision.
a. Your vision competes with their vision.
b. Your vision contravenes their assumptions.
1. If their strategy is based on their vision, your vision will threaten their position.
2. If their assumptions are repudiated, their reputation will suffer.
II. There will be challenges to the data you use to substantiate your strategy.
a. If you use the methods they use, your results will challenge their competency.
b. If you use different methods to arrive at your conclusions, their methods will be challenged.
c. Either a. and or b. will diminish either their self-image or their image within the company.
1. If you challenge their self-image, they will become hostile.
2. If you threaten their image in the company, they will become devious.
All of the above assumes that the people you work with and work for like you.
If they do not, the job of executing your strategy will be even more difficult.
However, as I am adamant in my opposition to articles that are descriptive and not prescriptive, I included organisational charts in one of my PowerPoint Presentations to show which structures that won’t work and which structures that will work and why. “Global Management: A shift in the paradigm of corporate America” located at Slideshare.net [This presentation also contains a section explaining group norms. A serious matter in business as well as Global Affairs.]
The reason all this is so pressing is that the world can no longer afford to play a zero-sum game. We lack the capacity to follow the path of the trajectory.
“The fact that you cannot predict the future is not the proper rebuff to someone who tells you to get off the tracks, the train is coming.” Slim Fairview
The Path of the Trajectory
As we plan into the future, are we considering the path of the trajectory?
Case in point. The pendulum swings both ways. The farther it swings one way, the farther it swings back.
Globalisation: Will the path of globalisation eventually lead to a path of isolationism.
Information: Will the information that we are relying upon so heavily, eventually become a curse that will lead people to retrench? An information overload can make the information virtually worthless if too much information cannot be accepted as reliable, or information is exposed to too many people.
Technology: Will the technology that enhances our efforts become so "intrusive" that we are paralysed by its intrusiveness?
Politics: Will the politics of globalisation lead to "Superpower Centres" with a detente between i.e. The Asian Center, The African Center, The Middle Eastern Center, The European Center, The Latin American Center, and the North American Center?
Case in point. The pendulum swings both ways. The farther it swings one way, the farther it swings back.
Globalisation: Will the path of globalisation eventually lead to a path of isolationism.
Information: Will the information that we are relying upon so heavily, eventually become a curse that will lead people to retrench? An information overload can make the information virtually worthless if too much information cannot be accepted as reliable, or information is exposed to too many people.
Technology: Will the technology that enhances our efforts become so "intrusive" that we are paralysed by its intrusiveness?
Politics: Will the politics of globalisation lead to "Superpower Centres" with a detente between i.e. The Asian Center, The African Center, The Middle Eastern Center, The European Center, The Latin American Center, and the North American Center?
Other factors must be considered. Especially if you are not from the US and are looking for some insights. To be efficient and to eliminate those who are not interested, I have links to the monographs that will explain various points.
Facts versus Opinions.
However, there is more to be said on the topic of experts than facts v. opinions or the colour of the paint you sell.
Experts
For every ten experts who say, "Do this!", you have ten experts who say, "Do that!"
Then someone else will come up with ten experts who say, "Do something else."
Another ten experts will say, "They're all right".
Another who will say, "They're all wrong".
Then another who will ask, "Who's to say what's right or wrong?"
Then the facilitator of the group will say, " There's no "I" in team! :-)”
If you don't believe me, ask an expert!
For every ten experts who say, "Do this!", you have ten experts who say, "Do that!"
Then someone else will come up with ten experts who say, "Do something else."
Another ten experts will say, "They're all right".
Another who will say, "They're all wrong".
Then another who will ask, "Who's to say what's right or wrong?"
Then the facilitator of the group will say, " There's no "I" in team! :-)”
If you don't believe me, ask an expert!
The problem of American Global Myopia
This is covered in, “More on Global Management.”
A stark look at how graphs are used to misrepresent facts, and how figures are used to misrepresent numbers:
Other Global Considerations that are being ignored.
China
China: The Economy and a Word Beginning with the Letter P.
The above monograph contains links to other monographs on China. As it has become fashionable in the West to discuss the Facebook Revolution, I have explained away the prognostications of the expert guests on News-Like Programmes.
As Molière’s Bourgeois Gentilhomme said, “All this time I thought I was merely reporting the news only to discover I’ve been speaking journalism.
Sincerest regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
For Monographs on The Middle East and The European Union, please visit http://slimviews.blogspot.com
Monday, July 25, 2011
We Can Fix the Economy. This is why we don't.
Am I an optimist? Usually. However, when it comes to fixing the economy, the fact that I keep beating a dead horse is more in indicator of my willingness to embrace hopelessness.
The metaphor I created for experts in economics involves this:
One economist works for a company that sells red paint. He says, "If you want to improve your business, paint the walls red."
Another economist works for a company that sells blue paint. He says, "If you want to improve your business, paint the walls blue."
That much may be obvious. The difficulty arises when they cite the statistics.
The Red Paint economist says, "Our study shows that red paint motivates employees. They produce more widgets. Your productivity will go up."
The Blue Paint economist says, "Our study shows that blue paint creates a greater sense of well-being. Your employees will make fewer mistakes and the quality of your widgets will go up."
What each side does not tell you, is that with red paint, the employees work faster, make more errors, and reduce the quality of the output; and, is that with blue paint, the employees make fewer mistakes and produce higher quality widgets, but make fewer widgets and reduce the quantity of the output.
To further the explanation, as most people don't understand economics, I posted several monographs, using metaphors, to explain the concepts.
1. A Primer in Economics.
2. The Multiplier Effect.
3. Economic Stimulus
4. How to fix the economy.
5. Another monograph on the economy
The Several Monographs on Economics will help non-economist visualise what happens in the economy.
http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2011/07/understanding-economics-introduction-by.html
The metaphor I created for experts in economics involves this:
One economist works for a company that sells red paint. He says, "If you want to improve your business, paint the walls red."
Another economist works for a company that sells blue paint. He says, "If you want to improve your business, paint the walls blue."
That much may be obvious. The difficulty arises when they cite the statistics.
The Red Paint economist says, "Our study shows that red paint motivates employees. They produce more widgets. Your productivity will go up."
The Blue Paint economist says, "Our study shows that blue paint creates a greater sense of well-being. Your employees will make fewer mistakes and the quality of your widgets will go up."
What each side does not tell you, is that with red paint, the employees work faster, make more errors, and reduce the quality of the output; and, is that with blue paint, the employees make fewer mistakes and produce higher quality widgets, but make fewer widgets and reduce the quantity of the output.
To further the explanation, as most people don't understand economics, I posted several monographs, using metaphors, to explain the concepts.
1. A Primer in Economics.
2. The Multiplier Effect.
3. Economic Stimulus
4. How to fix the economy.
5. Another monograph on the economy
The Several Monographs on Economics will help non-economist visualise what happens in the economy.
http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2011/07/understanding-economics-introduction-by.html
Regards,
Slim
PS. I am not Paul Harvey. However, I am open to becoming a commentator, columnist, or paid blogger.
If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with the thank you note.
Sincerest regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Friday, July 22, 2011
Going Postal: How to Revamp the Post Office
1. Reduce delivery to five days a week with a Saturday pickup at the Post Office.
2. One Postmaster for every five Post Offices.
3. Have larger sorting centres (now called lead offices) with smaller retail outlets for stamps, money orders, post office boxes, etc.
4. Realign carrier routes to make them more efficient.
5. Hire an outside, professional, successful Public Relations & Marketing company to improve the parcel post business. [The one the Post Office gave away during the gas crisis 35 years ago.]
6. Remind people that the mail is protected by the Postal Inspectors--Federal Agents--and that unlike with regular shipping, theft of shipped material is treated differently.
7. Provide extensive customer-service training for clerk supervisors. In short, tell them to forget about being irritating and start being accommodating. By direct order, Postal Policy, and a condition of their continued employment.
8. To reduce the expense of the Grievance-Arbitration Procedure, remind each and every Postmaster that the existence of the grievance-arbitration procedure is not a justification for violating provision(s) of the contract.
9. Bring in a Professional Management Team to manage the Post Office as a business.
10. Do not think of the Post Office as a store with the American People as the Customers. Think of the Post Office as a store with the American People as the Owners of the Store.
Sincerest regards,
Slim
slimfairview@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
2. One Postmaster for every five Post Offices.
3. Have larger sorting centres (now called lead offices) with smaller retail outlets for stamps, money orders, post office boxes, etc.
4. Realign carrier routes to make them more efficient.
5. Hire an outside, professional, successful Public Relations & Marketing company to improve the parcel post business. [The one the Post Office gave away during the gas crisis 35 years ago.]
6. Remind people that the mail is protected by the Postal Inspectors--Federal Agents--and that unlike with regular shipping, theft of shipped material is treated differently.
7. Provide extensive customer-service training for clerk supervisors. In short, tell them to forget about being irritating and start being accommodating. By direct order, Postal Policy, and a condition of their continued employment.
8. To reduce the expense of the Grievance-Arbitration Procedure, remind each and every Postmaster that the existence of the grievance-arbitration procedure is not a justification for violating provision(s) of the contract.
9. Bring in a Professional Management Team to manage the Post Office as a business.
10. Do not think of the Post Office as a store with the American People as the Customers. Think of the Post Office as a store with the American People as the Owners of the Store.
Sincerest regards,
Slim
slimfairview@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
Thursday, July 21, 2011
European Union: Less a Fraternity more a Tontine
The problem the EuroCrats are having arises from the fact that they are dealing with problems on a propter hoc basis.
True, Greece needs help with its debt. However, while the EuroCrats have become fixated on Greece, they are ignoring the problems of Ireland, Italy, Spain, et. al.
When other countries like Ireland begin to reach the state Greece is in, the EuroFolk may try to heal Ireland's malady with Greek medication. This does not always work.
The analogy: Any woman who ever had children can tell you, when one gets sick, they all get sick. Then, they give whatever it is back to the one they caught it from in the first place.
EuroFlu is no different.
No sooner than Greece gets well, than Ireland will need help. Or Italy.
Then there are the issues of incompatible medications and competing physicians. As I've read in the news, only recently have Germany and France formed a compact. EuroBankers have contradicted EuroCrats, Analysts have argue with both and each other.
The solution must involve all the nations. The solution to one country's problems may not work for another. However, the solving of one nation's problems must not cause problems for another nor make it impossible for the other country to move forward.
The EuroCratic approach is beginning to appear less like a fraternity and more like a tontine.
Regards,
Slim
slimfairview@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
True, Greece needs help with its debt. However, while the EuroCrats have become fixated on Greece, they are ignoring the problems of Ireland, Italy, Spain, et. al.
When other countries like Ireland begin to reach the state Greece is in, the EuroFolk may try to heal Ireland's malady with Greek medication. This does not always work.
The analogy: Any woman who ever had children can tell you, when one gets sick, they all get sick. Then, they give whatever it is back to the one they caught it from in the first place.
EuroFlu is no different.
No sooner than Greece gets well, than Ireland will need help. Or Italy.
Then there are the issues of incompatible medications and competing physicians. As I've read in the news, only recently have Germany and France formed a compact. EuroBankers have contradicted EuroCrats, Analysts have argue with both and each other.
The solution must involve all the nations. The solution to one country's problems may not work for another. However, the solving of one nation's problems must not cause problems for another nor make it impossible for the other country to move forward.
The EuroCratic approach is beginning to appear less like a fraternity and more like a tontine.
Regards,
Slim
slimfairview@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
Monday, July 18, 2011
Wolf Blitzer Buys a New Suit: How to fix the economy
Wolf Blitzer Buys a New Suit
For those who still have no grasp on how to fix the economy, another metaphor.
Wolf Blitzer wants to buy a new suit. This, he figures, will attract more viewers [customers]. He borrows the money from John King—a CNN colleague.
Mr. Blitzer’s ratings [revenue] go up. He repays Mr. King.
Mr. King, seeing Mr. Blitzer’s success, uses the profits from his lending venture to buy a new suit. His ratings [customers] go up.
Upstairs, Mr. Turner is looking over the balance sheets. He sees this uptick in [revenue]. He asks his accountant what happened. His accountant tells him. Mr. Turner gets an idea. He issues a memo to his on air people.
CNN will make low interest loans to those who want to go out and buy a new outfit to wear on the air.
Ratings go up. Revenue goes up. Mr. Turner issues another memo.
Up until now, in the cafeteria, employees could buy a meal [breakfast, lunch, or dinner] for $10. Due to the increased revenue, we are going to charge you [tax you] only $5.
As a result, the employees have more money to spend. John King buys a new tie. Gloria Borger buys a new scarf. Candy Crowley buys a necklace. Don Lemon buys a new shirt.
This upgrade in the “metaphorical image” generates more viewers [customers]. Revenues go up. Salaries are increased. All is well in CNNtopia.
However, what if all were not so enlightened.
What if Wolf Blitzer had borrowed the money for his new suit from Bret Baier?
Well, Mr. Blitzer would still have a new suit. However, the profits would have gone to Mr. Baier who would have used his profits to buy a new suit. Mr. King, not having the profits from his loan to Mr. Blitzer, would have had to go to Shepard Smith for a loan to buy his new suit.
Now, Bret Baier and Shepard Smith could use their profits to invest in a business partnership to lend money to fellow Fox News Anchors. They would have a spiffed up image and more viewers [customers] generating more revenue.
Back to CNN.
With Mr. Blitzer and Mr. King having to pay interest on the loans to people at Fox, they have to cut back on expenditures. Now, instead of buying lunch or dinner in the cafeteria, they brown-bag it. Revenues in the cafeteria fall. CNN issues a memo. Due to lost revenues, the cafeteria will have to raise prices [taxes] on lunches and dinners. This affects the other employees. No shirts, no scarves, no ties, no necklaces, declining image, lost customers, decreased revenues—CNNistant.
What is the crucial difference between CNNtopia and CNNistan? That is the difference between solving the US economic crisis and not solving the US economic crisis.
Now, on to Economic Experts.
In another monograph, I referred to selling blue paint. I chose blue because blue is my favourite colour. As Freud said, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”
However, there is an opportunity to create a metaphor.
You watch CNN. You watch as experts explain the economy.
One economist works for a company that makes red paint. He says, “If you want to sell more widgets, paint the walls of your company red.”
Another economist works for a company that makes blue paint. He says, “If you want to sell more widgets, paint the walls of your company blue.”
Well, the bias is obvious. Less so, the supporting facts.
Red: “We have a study that says employees in companies with red walls are more pumped up and make more widgets—increased productivity.
Blue: We have a study that says employees in companies with blue walls are more serene and make fewer mistakes—higher quality.
What both sides don’t say:
Employees in companies with red walls make more widgets but make more mistakes resulting in many widgets rejected for poor quality.
Employees in companies with blue walls make higher quality widgets with fewer mistakes, but make fewer widgets which results in lower productivity.
You can say both the Red Economist and The Blue Economist told the truth, half the truth, or half a lie [by omission].
Both sides misled the customers of the benefits of the paint they sell.
How do you fix an economy?
Here are a few easy to understand monographs on the topic. Will this help you fix the economy? Well, is fixing the economy your job? What it will do is protect you from the politicians trying to sell you paint you don’t need to fix a problem that can’t be fixed with a can of paint.
Will $1 Billion Dollars create 7,000 jobs? Yes and No.
Economic Stimulus, by Metaphor
The Multiplier Effect
Regards,
Slim
PS. I am not Paul Harvey. However, I am open to becoming a commentator, columnist, or paid blogger.
If you’ve found anything I said to be helpful, please don’t hesitate to send me one of those tricked-out laptops and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along with the thank you note.
Sincerest regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Understanding Economics: An introduction by metaphor
Commentary on Global Political and Economic Events by Slim Fairview. Please also see also http://sidestreetjournal.blogspot.com Please do click the follow button for Slimviews--and please email a link to your friends.
Thank you.
Slim
Thank you.
Slim
As Congress is approaching the solving of the economic crisis in a manner consistent with the layman’s approach to understanding economics, I shall offer a series of monographs on economics aimed at explaining economics to the layman.
I’ve posted these monographs:
1. Economics Illustrated: A Primer in Economics, by metaphor
2. Economic Stimulus, by Metaphor
3. The Multiplier Effect: Illustrated
4. Wolf Blitzer Buys a New Suit or How to fix the economy
5. Will $1,000,000,000.00 Create 7,000 jobs? Yes and no.
6. You Don’t Create Jobs by Selling Blue Paint
Regards,
Slim
PS. I am not Paul Harvey. Still, I am open to becoming a paid blogger, columnist, or commentator.
In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.
In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.
Sincerely,
Slim
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Publishing: The Silent Film Industry of Publishing
Commentary on Global Political and Economic Events by Slim Fairview Please also see also http://sidestreetjournal.blogspot.com Please do click the follow button for Slimviews--and please email a link to your friends. Thank you.
Slim
Slim
Would silent films have had any success after talkies came out if the silent film makers began making silent movies in colour?
Will the publishing industry survive technology if the publishing industry comes up with clever new ways of doing the same old stuff?
I know, I know, I've heard it before. The Publishers are doing a bang up job. Business is good.
The Metaphor:
"Don't tell me how to run my business you rapscallion. My Great Grandpa started the Corn Cob Shipping and Delivery Company nearly a hundred and fifty years ago.
We're the only shipping company in the surrounding 11 counties and the only company to ship U-Needa Biscuits in the surrounding 17 counties.
I'm not gonna have some whippersnapper come in here and tell me I gotta buy no new fangled motor car to stay in business. We been delivering U-Needa biscuits by horse and wagon fer 150 years and we'll keep right on doing it that way fer another 150 years. Now git, you varmint."
Enough said? No. Enough said!
Sincerest regards,
Slim
PS. I am not Paul Harvey. Still, I am open to becoming a paid blogger, columnist, or commentator.
In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.
In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.
Sincerely
Slim
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
Pakistan: Friend or No?
I have two skills. An analytical mind and the ability to speak in metaphors.
Analogy.
We have a round table and two chairs on the front porch. In addition to Trygg, our cat, Trygg has about 8 to 10 free-range friends who show up regularly for breakfast and dinner.
Trygg likes to come and go through the window. There is a latch. I open the latch and push the window out. Trygg jumps from the table to the chair and in through the window. The other cats see this. Only Buddy is influenced.
Buddy likes to stand up on the window sill, to try to push the window open. He leaves paw prints on the outside of the window. When I open the window for Trygg to come in, I leave fingerprints on the inside of the window. The window gets dirty.
Now, the window needs to be washed. If I wash the inside of the window first, Buddy looks like the culprit. If I wash the outside of the window first, I look like the culprit.
My wife keeps tabs on what is going on. Guess which side of the window I wash first? However, as I said, my wife monitors the situation. I am not going to fool my wife by washing the inside of the window first.
We are not going to make Pakistan look bad by washing our side of the window first. We cannot claim we are washing our side of the window first, so we can better see where the outside needs to be cleaned.
Pakistan? Friend or No?
I say, friend.
Sincerest regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Monday, July 11, 2011
Does Publishing Have a Future in Education?
Slimviews: Commentary on Global Political and Economic Events by Slim Fairview Please also see also http://sidestreetjournal.blogspot.com Please do click the follow button for Slimviews--and please email a link to your friends. Thank you.
Slim
Slim
The Future for Publishing in Education.
Quill Pens and Powdered Wigs in Today's Classrooms Corporate Update
On the matter of education. The topic of technology seems to be lost in a quagmire of tradition. I tradition I embrace. However, I am 58 years old, not 8 years old. We need to change. Thus:Quill Pens and Powdered Wigs in Today's Classrooms
http://www.slideshare.net/slimfairview/quill-pens-and-powdered-wigs-in-todays-classrooms
&
Social Media is the Medium: Greater than the sum of its parts.
http://www.slideshare.net/slimfairview/social-media-is-the-medium
This should do it.
Regards,
Slim
Because, Everyone, my postings are not about cash and prizes.
I post because, as much as I can see what is coming, I am:
a.) naive in believing that the publishing industry will move forward in any way that would be consistent with my having gone to B-school
b.) I believe that what I have posted on these matters is an indicator of what will happen.
"The fact that one cannot predict the future is not a proper rebuff to someone who says, get off the tracks, a train is coming." The Quotations of Slim Fairview (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
I published a comment in a Linkedin discussion about publishing and copy-pasted it into the Notes on my Facebook page. The Future of Publishing: if it has one.
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?created&¬e_id=10150236691940698#!/notes/slim-fairview/the-future-of-publishing-if-it-has-one/10150236691940698
For the Publishing Industry to be a player in the future of education in America and around the world, it must go outside the Publishing Industry for advice.
That is why I have chosen to post on the matters propounded here at HMH. If anyone in the Publishing Industry cares about the future of the Publishing Industry, they may pursue the information. I will not, however, chase them on the matter of their survival.
Sincerest regards,
Slim
slimfairview@yahoo.com
Thank you for your encouragement.
I went to the Q&A. I started working as a free-lance website designer 11 years ago. (I was an elementary education major for a while and taught 7th & 8th grade math briefly.) I liked your idea. I voted for it.
The Q&A here is like the Q&A everywhere. It is a customer service provision.
As I've stated. If HMH is interested, they will contact me. This is not about gifts and prizes. The future is going to happen no matter what the Editors at HMH do. The only question is "Will HMH be a part of it or not?" Just trying to navigate this website it is intuitively obvious to the casual observer that they will not be part of the future.
There is no indication that this website functions in the smooth and "user friendly" way other websites function.
Consider the following business blunders:
"That will never get of the ground. If God wanted me to fly, He'd have given me wings."
"The Motor Car? Noisy, smelly toy for the rich. It will never replace the horse."
"Talking pictures? People don't want to listen to all that chatter, they want to see real acting."
"We are concerned about our youngsters and the future of education in this country. That is why we are opening up to suggestions from as many people as we can to embrace the potential of the ideas of so many gifted, created, and talented people who have so much to share with us especially in the areas of technology. We are committed to bringing technology into the classroom because we see this as a powerful tool for helping to educate young people to meet the challenges of tomorrow by giving them a head start in the latest advancements....................."
I think you get the idea. I have heard no reports, have read no articles, have seen so evidence that the publishing industry (especially in the area of education) is being the least bit pro-active in embracing the reality of what is to come.
If the publishing industry in the field of education, wants to survive, they must take the lead. This leadership comes from the top. Not from marketing, not from sales, not from a new business team. This leadership must come from the top. Leadership is taking initiative.
If HMH or any other firm wants to survive, they must go outside the firm--not necessarily to me, but certainly to someone like me--they must make the first move, they must initiate the contact, they must want information.
"Some people ask questions seeking information. Other people ask questions so they can interrupt, argue, and pretend they're right." From the Quotations of Slim Fairview (c) 2011 Slim Fairview.
I am not going to pursue them if they are going to sit back hoping a good idea comes across the technological "slush pile".
If publishing is to survive, the Publisher is going to have to become involved.
This is not about books. This is about business. The business of books is business.
Thank you again for your kind comments.
Regards,
Slim
ps.
I have 8 thumbs up and 12 thumbs down. Right away, I can see that that this project appears to be the "Dancing with the Stars" of the publishing industry. 40% in favour and 60& against.
What I have described is what we will have in our classrooms. What we already have in some classrooms. It is a propter hoc system of education reform.
"Education reform: A government programme based on the fear that someone, somewhere is learning to read." Slim Fairview from the Quotations of Slim Fairview
Thank you again.
Regard,
Slim
PS. I am not Paul Harvey. Still, I am open to becoming a paid blogger, columnist, or commentator.
In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.
In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.
Sincerely
Slim
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)