Teams: Contributors and Those Seeking Validation.
As I read various discussion boards, I notice something not at all unusual. Some people repeat what has already been said--repeatedly.
Other people give evidence of not having read comments posted by others.
As with the Twitters and Emails to News People, some people just want to say something whether or not it is worth anything. Except, perhaps, for the therapeutic effect. Case in point: I blog because I can't sing and I'm not cute.
We learn to acknowledge what someone has said, provide some response to it, sometimes ask for amplification, and solicit comments from others. (Of course, I learned that when majoring in elementary education.)
Employees will find satisfaction for contributing something of value--as evidenced by others in the group responding to it as if it were valuable. This is different from positive reinforcement and other "techniques".
Employees who do not contribute something of value will not be satisfied. Team mates may say nice things, but the absence of value in the contribution will become evident.
One thing that may help is to have the challenging members of your virtual team track his or her own development, advancement, improvement to achieve a higher quality of input.
A second is to give the bright ones more challenging assignments; to tell them that it is a more challenging assignment; and letting them know that achievement is the issue. If they fail to pass muster, they must do a self evaluation, find the flaw in their contributions, and fix the problems so the quality of their contribution rises.
Ownership of a project too often causes its own set of problems. People tend to become territorial, possessive, defensive, and hyper-sensitive. Actually, that can be said better. Let me say instead, "people tend to become attached to the project. They may resist change due to that attachment." Much better.
Sometimes we can have brain-storming sessions, do the fish-bone thing, do consensus building, find a shared vision; however, other times it is necessary for a boss to implement a change--Quickly!--in order to get the project moving again. Despite what some people have to say about the last suggestion, That does have a powerful effect of energizing the whole team and the project. People still do like leaders.
[The Constitution declares the President of the United States to be the Commander-in-Chief of the US Military. It does not declare the President to be the Chairman of the Committee--in-Chief of the Military.
Regards,
Slim
PS. If you find anything here to be helpful, please don't hesitate to send me
a really tricked-out Mac Book and to tuck a few dollars into the envelope along
with the thank you note. Sincerely, Slim.
Bob Asken
Box 33
Pen Argyl, PA 18072
slimfairview@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2011 Bob Asken
All rights reserved
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
China: The Economy and a Word Beginning with the Letter P
How will China do in the coming years? Fine. How do I know? It is all about three little words. They are not “I love you”.
They are words that begin the letter P.
Plan. Process. Project.
Years back two things happened to me that crystallised my perceptions.
The First:
While working on an Economic Development Committee, I observed that the committee was obsessed with the process. Whom should we contact, include, discuss this with? Should we write a letter? Should we take a survey? Should we include this in the newsletter? Whom do we invite to the meeting to discuss this, that, or something else?
As the months passed, we eventually had a plan. We also had a stroke of good luck. A big, important Government Official, who worked for an agency whose raison d’etre was to give money away, was coming to meet with us.
We made every effort to impress. We arranged a tour, a presentation, a luncheon. We even had a helicopter tour of the area.
Long story—very short. We were told, “We give money away for projects, not plans.” [We were shot down!]
After the rebuff, we licked our wounds. We agreed with the one who said, “We got all wrapped up in the big P.”
Well, no we didn’t. The big P was project. We were all wrapped up in the little p. Plan.
This acceptance of responsibility is actually an abrogation of culpability. That is correct. Not to tell tales out of school, but it was similar to what my wife said to me in a discussion about a topic I long forgot. However, I did not forget her assessment.
“You’re blaming me.”
“I’m not blaming you. I’m blaming myself.”
“No you’re not. You’re blaming me. You’re just taking the responsibility.”
My wife spoke the truth. That is how I know that our illustrious group member was washing his hands.
We had a plan. However, that is not the worst of it. The worst of it was the process. Another word beginning with the letter P.
The Second:
The County Executive had a project. Infrastructure. His administration tried to float a bond issue—very low nine figures: like $100,000,000. That is low nine figures.
This was not for warm and fuzzy, touchy-feely programmes. This was, as stated, for infrastructure. The purpose? Make the county attractive to business.
I was asked by an elected official to speak to the council. Not as a chamber member, but as a citizen. I spoke for 22 minutes on The Multiplier Effect. I know this because I received an e-mail from an opposition activist who informed me that no one addressed the council for longer than 5 minutes in over two years.
Nonetheless, my contribution notwithstanding, the bond issue passed. We had infrastructure. This helped to blunt the effect of the first recession during the Bush administration, but not the second. Still, we are better off than we would have been without the bond issue.
This man may or may not have had a plan. What he did have, though, was a project. A Project. As in PMP® Project Management Professional. Not, process management profession. Not planning management professional. Not, “Strategic Planning.” Only Project!
Now, what does this have to do with China?
China has a project. China, in fact, has several projects: A Dam—hydroelectric power; Housing (Bubbles notwithstanding.); Currency—making the Yuan a global currency. China is working on projects. Elsewhere, countries are trying to come up with plans. Elsewhere, countries are obsessed with “The Process”.
Two articles that will not please the chattering classes. (Once a phrase having to do with the friends of Truman Capote.) The Chattering Classes. Those with credentials. Okay, so maybe credentials are important. Still, today, everyone has credentials. Today, everyone disagrees. A topic covered in my monograph: on experts. http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2010/11/experts.html
Today, China is in the news again. This time, unrest. The sad thing is, experts are looking to this unrest as a source of validation for their considered opinions. They are, after all, in a fencing match with other experts. Therefore, I offer up two more monographs on the topic of China.
Will the Facebook Revolution Spread to China? Probably not.
Will the Facebook Revolution Spread to China? Part 2. Credentialism
The way the world is moving, and I have said this before, we cannot afford to approach global matters as a zero sum game.
To underscore what I’ve just said, I will cite two experts. (Je vous en prie, remission.)
General George Washington. A General
Dr. Albert Einstein. A Physicist.
George Washington, a General Washington said, to paraphrase “If you want peace, prepare for war.”
Dr. Einstein said, “You cannot simultaneously prepare for peace and war.”
In a paraphrase, Washington the General admonishes that to secure the peace we must be prepared for war.
Einstein, the Physicist admonishes, we must fight for peace.
Well, in plain English, we are all quite prepared for war. Now that we are quite prepared for war, we should be prepared to fight for peace. This will come when we abolish the zero-sum game mentality of international balance of trade, currency rates, and military one-upmanship.
China has a project. Other nations have a plan. Let’s not end up like a chamber of commerce economic development committee and find ourselves shot down.
Regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Economic Stimulus, by Metaphor
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
Now to explain. For this, we will need to create that all-important metaphor. Too, I should like to apologise in advance for the one snarky remark I will make about a former President. (One must compare apples to apples.)
For the purposes of this lesson, we will assume that Joy, brown-bags it every day except Friday. On Friday, she takes 10 hard-earned dollars and goes to Whoopi's Sandwich Store for a baloney sandwich.
Now Elisabeth is out of work. However, Jimmy Carter feels her pain. Therefore, he taxes Joy $10 and gives it to Elisabeth so she can buy a baloney sandwich. Joy is not happy. She's being ripped off. Elisabeth is no better off because she still does not have a job. Now, what about Whoopi? She is no better off because she is still selling one baloney sandwich a week.
In response to critics, Jimmy decides to tax Whoopi $10 to train Elisabeth how to make baloney sandwiches. After getting her certificate, she goes to Whoopi's store looking for a job. However, Whoopi tells her, "Sorry, Friday is my last day. Jimmy Carter taxed me out of business."
Now, President Obama comes along and says, "That is not how to do it. I am going to have the SBA lend Elisabeth the money to go into her own business."
Elisabeth opens up a soda store next door to Whoopi's Sandwich Store.
Back to Joy. Aptly named because her tax cut allows her to go back to Whoopi's store and buy a baloney sandwich; and she goes next door to buy a soda.
Elisabeth is happy because she's making money, so she treats herself to a baloney sandwich.
Whoopi is thrilled because she doubled her sales volume and revenue. In fact, she is doing so well; she hires Sherri to help make sandwiches. (Whoopi trains Sherri, as it should be in business.)
Sherri is happy because she has a job, and, please forgive my little joke, her compensation package includes a free lunch. However, no beverage. Therefore, Sherry goes next door to Elisabeth's soda store to buy a soda. Well, with all this soda being sold, Elisabeth hires Barbara to work in her soda store. Now Barbara is thrilled because she has a job.
Back to the Oval Office:
The President's economic advisor comes in.
"You wanted to see me, Sir?"
"Yes, I have some money for you. It is part of Sherri and Barbara's benefits payments. They are out of work. I want you to send the money to Sherry and Barbara."
However, the advisor says to the President, "But Mr. President, Sherri and Barbara don't need that money anymore. They have jobs."
"That's great," the President says. "The government is saving money."
The advisor continues. "It's better than that. Since they are working, they are paying income taxes. So, I have some money to give to you from Sherri and Barbara."
"Wow", the President says. "I save money because Sherri and Barbara are working, and I bring in money because they are paying taxes. This stimulus package is great."
This is how economics works. It takes a little time, but this is how the system works.
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
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Monday, June 6, 2011
Food, India, and Growing Global Influence
Food: The Price is the Crisis
At the risk of sounding trite, the law of supply and demand still functions. To solve the price crisis in India, supply must be increased. This is a matter of "time place utility"; "form utility"; "economies to scale"; and direct foreign investment. I mention the last consideration because the advice to some can also be considered advice to another. In short, if you know where and how people are being advised to invest, you can position yourself to be the where and the how.
I've included "Having Problems with Foreign Direct Investment?" to give insight into what investors can look for. This can also give insight into those who want to benefit from the investors. I've included The Marketing of India. I've included a metaphor: Starving Nations and Food Equations: A metaphor. This is not to be interpreted as reference to people actually dying. It is to discuss the economics of agriculture.
Having Problems with Foreign Direct Investment?
What are some of the barriers?
Leverage.
ROI.
It is easy to see that start up costs in some countries are much lower than start up costs in another. If the other country does not have the physical plant for example, it will be cheaper to build that plant in the other country.
Currency considerations are another factor
Incentives from a country with little industry are greater than they are from a country where you will compete with the locals.
Market penetration. Would people in countries in the region be more inclined to buy from countries in the region or from western nations.
Partnering. It is easier to partner with business in some countries where western technology is not readily available by making that technology available.
Just a few thoughts.
Now, for a few more thought.
The Marketing of India
Find a need and fill it.
Who has a need for what you can produce?
Partner with that (nation's) companies.
In addition to the profits, offer a minority interest in the company. (This will give investors an incentive to succeed.)
Offer a profit share to the suppliers. (This will give the farmers(?) an incentive to join in the venture.
In addition to money, offer other incentives. [Prestige]. For example: Build schools in the areas where the people are most enthusiastic.
If one or two small companies cannot find the funding (through govt. funding--a bad idea) go to the marketplace.
Economies to scale.
Create a marketing group for the several smaller companies, so they can pool their resources.
In Vermont there is a joke:
Q: "Do you think the rain will hurt the rhubarb?"
A: "Not if they're in cans."
If produce spoils before it hits the market, set up a joint effort to can the produce at the source.
Roads are a government responsibility.
Just a few ideas. (Call me old-fashioned)
Anyone care to amplify, amend, or correct?
Sincerest regards,
Slim
PS. Read The Caste Busters article in the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/magazine/02Striver-t.html
Mail slimfairvew@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
Starving Nations and Food Equations: A Metaphor
[This metaphor does not refer to people actually dying. This refers to the discordance in the economy of agriculture specifically and in the economy as a whole.]
If one person in the group does not have enough food to eat, he may die.
For a while, that means more food for the rest of the group. However, that also means one less person to work the farm. That means less food to eat. Less food to eat means someone will die.
For a while, that means more food for the rest of the group. However, that also means one less person to work the farm. That means less food to eat. Less food to eat means someone will die.
Soon, there won't be enough people to work the farm. That means there won't be enough food to eat.
Get the idea?
Slim
Mail: slimfairview@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview
Food, India, the World
According to the large article in the Sunday New York Times, global food production is on the brink of disaster. This, of course, is not news to people who are starving. This is news to those who are engaged in the pretext of helping starving people to stave off the guilt of being well fed if not over fed. I call it the Ebenezer Effect. (More about that later.)
We learn from the article by Mr. Justin Gillis that the problem is multi-faceted. Increased demand from rising population and affluence coupled with a series of disasters—natural and man made have been used to create a graph whose trajectory is not good, but that there is hope.
The Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus made a similar prognostication. It went like this. Food production increases arithmetically: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5... The Population increases geometrically: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16… The Reverend Malthus went on to point out that, population growth is checked by famine and disease. An austere position but one that must be heeded.
After filtering out the echoes of Al Gore and Global Warming, indeed a problem (Global Warming and Al Gore) the good news spells out good news for the poor, the hungry, emerging nations and struggling economies; and, the good news goes beyond food.
Global warming and flooding have renewed the interest in agro studies. Two advances looming are flood resistant rice and drought resistant wheat.
However, as is often the case with most science, the discussion ignores many questions.
If global warming is encroaching on cooler months, will the growing season at least shift if not lengthen?
If sunlight is an issue, will that influence the type of plant modification that will become necessary?
If flooding and drought are problems, why don’t we use floodwaters to fill underground reservoirs to irrigate drought stricken fields? Hydroelectric power can run the pumps. Solar powered UV systems can disinfect the water. The reservoirs can be located beneath land that frequently suffers from droughts.
The Cost? Perhaps it would be astronomical. Plan B? No Food. People die. As plan B is not an option, let’s consider reservoirs for the floodwaters. (This, too, could ameliorate the damages caused by floods.)
Would this approach offset the negative impact of floods and droughts in Australia converting Australia into a global breadbasket?
The next issue is pricing. Food, too often, is too expensive for those with a modest income. The poor, the working poor, the middle class, all going hungry. In addition, as it is illegal for both a rich man and a poor man to sleep under a bridge, neither a rich man nor a poor man can buy food when there isn’t any.
Farmers respond to higher prices by planting more food. This drives the prices down. This cuts into farm income. This causes a cutback in food production. This causes an increase in food prices. All of this, of course, assumes that the weather has co-operated.
The platitudes of Government officials are not reassuring. Statements about “…days of cheap food being over” or “…our mindset was surpluses.” is analogous to “…the days of cheap gas are over.” Jimmy Carter, 63¢ a gallon—outrage! George W. Bush, $3.00—lament. Barack Obama, $4.00—resignation. The days of cheap gas are over. That does not translate well to food. You don’t have to drive. You don’t have to drive a gas-guzzler. You do have to eat. There are energy alternatives. There are no alternatives to food.
Some positive statistics (Caveat!): The percentage of starving among poor nations 40 years ago was 1/3 of the population of poor countries. By the 1990’s it was 20%. (Fraction to decimal?) The drop from 34% to 20% is a drop of 14%. Next: The population going hungry was 800 million. Now, it is 925 million. 925 – 800 = 125 million people. That is a 15.65% increase.
However, the world population is growing. In addition, hunger is spreading to industrial nations. That includes the U.S. Yes, the US. Yes, US!
Research budgets to find solutions are tight. In the West there is a different mindset” “If we run out of food, we just go to the supermarket to buy more.”
Another problem is contrived science.
Greenhouse gasses will fertilise the crops offsetting the decline in water and rise in temperature. Wrong. They may work as a complement to water and good weather, but as substitute, no. These ideas were propounded by experts. Does that make you feel better?
I called this contrived science. Actually, this is sad science.
Then there is social and economic policy. We converted land to grow food for people into land to grow food for cars. (Ethanol.) The problems with that:
1. There was no major benefit to the environment.
2. It drove up the cost for food.
3. It disrupted the markets.
4. It was made moot by the switch to electric or hybrid automobiles.
Number 4 will have an effect on the oil industry. This will push down the price of oil. Countries that rely on oil money to buy food will have less money to buy food. The result will be food riots, toppled government, instability, and so on.
The best we can do to forestall disaster is to have a global consortium that cannot distinguish between consensus and groupthink. A bigger problem lies in the fact that a fresh look will be taken by the people who got it wrong in the first place.
Bill Gates and his foundation are leading the way into the future. Question? Who is going to follow? While governments bump up the commitment to solving the problem, (spend money), when the problem goes away, so does the commitment.
Another issue seldom addressed is storing food. If America produces twice what we need, we can store half of what we produce. Other countries, those who are blessed to produce enough, cannot afford to store enough to offset the impact of natural disasters in addition to man made disasters--and I am not talking about global warming.
1. Drought
2. Floods
3. Crop Disease
4. Population rise
5. Food Hoarding
6. Food Riots
7. Government Collapse
8. Anarchy
&c.
China has a population of 1.35 Billion people. China must deal with a flood here and a drought there. What happens when China has 2.35 Billion people?
India is emerging as a technological superpower. It won’t be long before a clear sighted, market driven, goal oriented approach takes root and flourishes. In addition, India is developing flood resistant rice. Soon, food processing will help get food to markets rather than rot in the field. Farms will evolve into agro-business. There will be improved channels of distribution, cash crops for export, and commodity futures investments. This will have a two-fold effect. Affluence will drive up the demand for food. India may become more vulnerable to disaster.
If you refer to comments I made about oil price declines and natural disasters having a negative impact on the people of oil-export nations, you will see that the Arab Spring could turn into an Arab Winter.
If the population of the US increases by 10%, we add another 30 million people. If India (with a population of one billion people) has a population increase of 10%, India will have to feed an additional 100 Million people. Op. cit. my comments on food storage.
In addition to the food crisis turmoil, we will see population migrations that will redefine the matrix.
Can Australia become a breadbasket nation to the world? Can India? Will China be able to feed itself? Will Africa?
All of this so far has ignored another looming problem. Energy. Germany and Switzerland are ending their love affair with nuclear energy.
CNN reported that China is planning to build 400 nuclear power plants compared (contrasted) to the 400 new plants being built in the rest of the world. Rather than predict a nuclear disaster—that is the easy part—I will predict a depression in oil prices.
True, clean energy initiatives may help to advance the hydroelectric, solar, and wind powered energy industries. In addition, Canada may resurrect the hydroelectric project shelved when Mario Cuomo (New York Governor) decided not to buy Canadian Power.
Then there is the possibility of political backlash in the United States. There may be a power shift in Washington. The Tea Party out! The Lunch Crowd in! What would happen if we elect Food Hoarding Agro-isolationists?
The world can no longer play a zero-sum game.
The Future of the G 20 in Good Times and Bad
http://www.slideshare.net/slimfairview/the-g-20-in-good-times-and-bad-5802178
Then there is the issue of people simply not understanding economics. If you listen to economists you will know why. With so much disagreement among them, one isn't certain if economists understand economics. Thus:
http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2011/01/economics-illustrated-primer-in.html
Then, “When the tide comes in, all boats in the harbour rise.”
Now, “When the boat sinks, everyone on the boat drowns.”
Regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Saturday, June 4, 2011
The Middle East. Problem? Solution!
The Middle East
With approximately 5,000 years of wisdom and culture to build upon, the question is not, what is happening in the Middle East, the question is why?
I ask this question not from the Western Perspective. We had our revolution. The French have Bastille Day. The English have Runnymede.
While the American style government may not suit the people in the Middle East (The Arabs don’t want Western Government, The Arabs want Western Freedom.), and while citing The English may be poor salesmanship, there must be something within the Arab culture and history that will allow a peaceful transition into the future that is preferable to the efforts now being made to change the course of history.
It seems axiomatic. You can change the course of history but you cannot stop history from happening. You cannot stand in the way of history. It is coming. The conundrum: you won’t know what happened until it does.
Now, you can say, “You cannot predict the future.” However, that is not an appropriate rebuff to the person who says, “Get off the tracks, the train is coming.”
Then, too, there is the failed policy of shooting the messenger.
All this begs the question, ‘What can be done to smooth the transition?”
Arab leaders working from a propter hoc position. (Because of the fact that there is no immediate precedent for what is happening in the Middle East.)
Each leader, each nation, is attempting to come to an understanding of what is going on in his nation, with his people and how best to respond? True, there are religious differences. There are different economic circumstances. There are different global alliances—both historical and expedient. This, however, ignores the old saying; the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
Leaders of all the Middle East nations would do well to follow the example of some of the Middle East nations. That example would be to have a conclave (A Private Meeting) of the Leaders of the Middle East nations and the Reform Movement Leaders. Look to a nation like Turkey to host the meeting.
Remember:
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
Omar Khayyám
Regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Why I Read Newspapers
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
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 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.
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.
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
Monday, May 23, 2011
You Go Into an Ice Cream Parlour
You go into an ice cream parlour. You sit in a booth. You look at a menu. You like cherry vanilla ice cream. You check the sizes available. You look at the prices. You order cherry vanilla, you eat cherry vanilla, you enjoy cherry vanilla, you leave a tip, pay your bill and leave.
I go into an ice cream parlour. I stand in line at the counter. I see the assorted flavours in their containers in the freezer case. I see the maple-walnut, the butter-pecan, the chocolate. I see the dishes, the sizes, the cones, and the variety of cones, the sprinkles, and the toppings. I decide I can handle two scoops. Butter-pecan and chocolate. I ask for hot-fudge. I ask for wet-walnuts. I pay the bill, leave a tip and enjoy the ice cream, the toppings, and the experience.
You enjoy the ice cream. I enjoy the experience and the ice cream.
The problem arises when there are too many choices. Though perhaps not with ice cream, but perhaps with sweaters.
You have an event to attend. You shop for a sweater. The choices are red, white, and blue.
You don’t want white, because it shows every little spot. Red, well, you have a skirt to go with a red sweater, but only one. Blue is nice. You have a blue sweater but it is light blue. This is dark blue. It goes with several skirts. You buy the blue sweater. You have closure. You are happy.
Your friend is attending the same event. Your friend goes to another store. There are many colours from which to choose.
Your friend thinks green. Will it go with her outfit? There is mint green. Too light? Kelly green. Too bright? Forest green. Too plain? What about blue? Royal blue, navy blue, sky blue, or aquamarine?
Your friend decides on the Kelly green. Your friend gets home and has doubts about her choice. Your friend reviews the options she’d had in the store. Your friend does not have closure. Your friend is not happy.
There are different aspects to life. How we approach each event is determined more by the event.
The considerations:
Cost
Duration
Purpose
Previous experience
Rather than approach the activity at hand, or the choices among different activities available, focus on the different aspects of the experience and match them up to what you are looking to find in the experience.
If all you want is an ice cream, buy a package of Klondike Bars at the supermarket. If all you want to do is wear a sweater, pull one out of your closet. When you go beyond that, think about what you really want from the experience.
For those who might enjoy an extended metaphor on the topic
http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2011/05/you-go-into-ice-cream-parlour.html
Regards,
http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2011/05/you-go-into-ice-cream-parlour.html
Regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Friday, May 20, 2011
Designing Qualified Employees for the Renewable Energy Industry
On the news: A report on the two-year degree tech employee.
Part of the problem with the lack of qualified employees in the tech industry, specially the renewable energy industry, is the self-defeating ideas about qualified employees and schooling.
Our renewable energy industry may go out of business waiting to convince the public of the need for tech education then waiting for the supply of educated applicants to rise to meet demands in hiring.
The energy industry, (renewables) may just have to man up and own up to the fact that the traditional pipeline of qualified employees has gone the way of the dinosaur. (Allusion to oil intended.) What the renewable energy industry has to do is to educate and or train the needed employees themselves. Get rid of the "stuck in the mud" mentality of credentialism.
The programmes and solutions floating around have the same odious flavour of the Jimmy Carter job training idea of reducing (double-digit) unemployment: Tax business, to train people for jobs that won't exist because business can't afford to hire people due to higher taxes.
Real employers, with real jobs, train their own people. Energy does not get a magical pass. Hire people with the capability to learn the job. Put them through an on-the-job training programme to handle the mechanical aspects and an educational programme to educate them to the technical aspects.
It is analogous to the Theory plus Case Method of education
Good luck.
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Monday, May 16, 2011
The Failure of US Diplomacy in the Middle East 3.0
The impending failure of Western Diplomacy discussed in the previous monograph on the topic is now focused on the US.
Few people analyse a situation as it is. Most interpret the situation in a way that best helps their agenda.
Here is an analogy. The math analogy plays well to America’s position in international testing among school students.
With global relations, the dispute is not that 10 x 10 = 100. Upon that, we can all agree. However, when the teacher poses the question to her class and Billy responds 99, we break into two camps. One camp says that 99 is 99% correct. The other camp says that 99 is 100% wrong. Neither side realises that Billy does not understand arithmetic.
We are so focused on the American paradigm that we lack the ability to grasp the concept of what we are dealing with.
In the previous monograph, I said that we assume that the Arab Spring will result in a region of Pro-Western democracies. In 1776, we had a revolution. We built a democracy. We assume the same will hold true for the Middle East. We simply do not allow, for example, that Libya will be a country run by ruling councils.
Let us assume, however, for the purposes of discussion, that there is a wave of revolutionary fervor throughout the Middle East. Let us assume further, that there are a dozen democracies. Why should we then assume that the democracies would become our allies and trading partners?
The problem with Western Diplomacy is that it is a product of Western Diplomacy. Perhaps we are attempting to celebrate the success of Ben Franklin, Ambassador to France—200 years ago. The conundrum? The Middle East is not France.
We have decided, over the past several decades, that we will treat people the way we want to be treated. Nothing wrong with that if we want to be treated with respect. The simplistic solution is to treat people with respect and we will be respected. The problem with that is that different people define respect in different terms.
“If we were more concerned with being respectable and dignified, we would be more often treated with dignity and respect.” Slim Fairview.
Libya is not Egypt. Syria is not Libya.
I’d said, on previous occaision, that we are not fighting three wars in the Middle East. We are not fighting two wars in the Middle East. We are fighting one war in the Middle East. I was wrong. The war we are fighting is with ourselves.
If the Arab Spring spreads to other nations, those nations may very well form a Middle Eastern Diplomatic Union. (Thing of The European Union except with more money, less debt.)
There might not be an OPEC style union but rather a free-market union. One with the Union Members’ self-interest as the cornerstone. Not an ideological self-interest, not a theological self-interest, but rather an economic self-interest. Are we prepared for another “front”? Financially? Economically?
View our immigration policies. We are disputing immigration reform. The two sides of the issue are the interests of the immigrants and our national self-interest. (Economic and Security) We applaud our munificence. However, almost all of the immigrants come from countries with relatively few freedoms and with poor economic conditions. We completely ignore the fact that the immigration rise can be attributed to the conditions in the countries from which the immigrants emigrate. We help a few thousand while a few million continue to suffer. We hurt many and help few.
We’ve had a history of embracing these failed polices: The pursuit of symbolic gestures over substantive gains. Here are some examples from the past 60 years.
Penal reform in the late 50’ and early 60’s intended to reduce recidivism in our prisons resulted in a rise in crime and a rise in the prison population.
Parole reform, intended to reduce recidivism resulted in a rise in crime and a rise in the prison population.
We repeatedly attempted to tax our way to prosperity. Then we attempt to cut the programmes the money is being spent on.
Add to that the fact that we’ve outsourced jobs to cut costs to increase corporate profits to stay in business. The result? We’ve put our American customers out of work here at home. The result? The American customer can’t afford to buy our products. The result? Lower sales. The result? Lower corporate profits.
What will happen if the Middle Eastern nations form a Diplomatic Union? They will go into the free market. China is becoming an increasingly more profitable customer. Latin America is emerging from economic turmoil to economic growth. Can anyone see a symbiotic relationship between the Middle East (oil), China (money), and Latin America (expanding markets)?
We don’t need to rethink our Middle Eastern Diplomatic relationships. We need to learn how to do business globally.
For additional reading:
The G-20 in Good Times and Bad
http://www.slideshare.net/slimfairview/the-g-20-in-good-times-and-bad-5802178
Global Management: A shift in the paradigm of corporate America.
http://www.slideshare.net/slimfairview/global-management-5415780
The impending Failure of Western Diplomacy in the Middle East.
http://www.slideshare.net/slimfairview/the-impending-failure-of-western-diplomacy-in-the-middle-east
The Fallacy of US Diplomacy in Libya
http://www.slideshare.net/slimfairview/the-fallacy-of-us-diplomacy-in-libya
Social Media is the Medium: Greater than the sum of its parts.
http://www.slideshare.net/slimfairview/social-media-is-the-medium
Regards,
Slim
Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)