I love the new Jeep commercials. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi0SbrrGaiw America, the commercial goes, has always been a country of craftsmen, builders. It is a great vision of an historic America. But how accurate is it a picture of today's America?
Starting with the traditional Department of Labor "American Worker" http://newsok.com/article/3492012 speech, which this year for the first time ever was delivered in Spanish and English. Signpost 1: no shock to anyone but the American Worker is diverse. The diversity of the American workforce is nothing new. Immigrants during the Industrial Revolution helped fuel what the Jeep commercial touts as American ingenuity and craftsmanship. Today is no different. Our immigrant make up has changed, no doubt, but the American Worker, when he works with diligence and dedication and assimilates himself and his family finds success regardless of ethnicity.
Also indicative of the image of the American Worker in 2010, the speech diverted form its traditional "State of the American Worker" and became a "what we're doing for the American Worker speech" since clearly the state of the American Worker is something 1 of 10, and more like 2 of 10 when we count underemployed, don't care to talk about this holiday. Signpost 2: So the state of the American Worker is underemployed or unemployed.
According to a recent AP study our economy has taken a permanent shift. We as the American Worker, and what the Secretary of Labor will not tell you is that if you have a specialized skill or education, you will continue to enjoy opportunities in America.
Secondarily, if you are the lower-skilled, lower-paid jobs you will continue to see growth in this area. Healthcare workers, waitresses, waiters, service-industry and service focused roles will always have a need at least through the next generation. We need our lawns mowed and our suits tailored and our nails manicured.
Those in the middle, well, it will not fare well for you. Your choice, like so many American’s today, is one of choosing a lower income job or retooling your skills, getting a degree or an advanced certification, specializing further into a field such as software, healthcare, or science.
Reminds of me an interesting conversation with a neighbor and good friend. He sells journals. The big, heavy, professional, leather-bound with cotton rag paper journals you used to see across the back of a desk, or on a bookshelf in a doctor or lawyer’s office. I told him he’s at a crossroads. How, in reality, can he expect with iPads and iPods and smart phones and tablets out the wazzoo, how could he expect in reality any of the students today in law school or medical school would ever even crack one of those open when in two flicks of their iPad they can have each reference to their topic of choice downloaded across every journal ever published?
Similarly, it is time to evaluate your skills, your job, your role. The value you are driving into your organization, your company, your market sector. Not the sweetest lesson we can have on Labor Day, but perhaps today, more than ever, it is the most needed.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
The question is leadership
Leadership can be defined by many ways. Like “love” or “responsibility”, leadership evokes an emotional response. “We know it when we see it” is an oft heard descriptor. For the purposes of this conversation, let us look at the DDI study on global management.
In their survey of 412 executives published in 2008, they found a number of priorities related to leadership. Among their priorities, ranking first was the leader’s ability to motivate. Further, working well across disparate cultures, making tough decisions, strategy and execution were among the top priorities.
This treatise is not a comprehensive analysis of policy decisions, macro and microeconomics impacts of taxes, not a discussion of race or religion or moral capacity or lack thereof, etc. We as a people need to go to the basic core of what leadership is and what we want it to be. In the political realm, we need to decide, is President Obama hitting the mark or not w/ one criterion: leadership.
Before we use DDI’s priorities of leadership, let’s start by also pointing out leaders have followers; a simple precept of leadership, really. If you are leading, and no one’s following, guess what, you’re not leading.
Who is following Barak Obama? According to Peter Brown at the WSJ, no one. At least, not as many as were one year ago. His support is at an all-time low, 41-44% depending on which survey you look to. Most importantly, his support across all demographics has dwindled. Only 19% of WASPs support Obama, down from 35%; only 12% of Republicans (more later on that); 38% of independents support the president.
What about the key liberal demographic, the wheelhouse of his support? Consistently liberals are abandoning him as well. It’s slowed less than other demographics, many of the liberal organizations moving against Obama. Friends of the Earth in March 2010 ran ads denouncing Obama’s environmental policies.
Without followers, how does anyone claim to be a leader? Perhaps I can end my analysis here…
But let’s look at DDI’s list and analyze the facts about the President Obama’s leadership abilities. Clearly the president is struggling when it comes to motivation. Influencing the electorate is playing out to one of the worst political slaughters our nation’s history, if current polling data holds from now until November. With control of the Congress, White House, and Courts, Obama was barely able to eke out one legislative “victory” in his healthcare bill. An extremely watered down (thankfully) version of his original vision passed by the skin of his teeth.
How about Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia? Has the president been able to influence the electorate enough to continue his agenda? What other major motivations has Obama been able to achieve? How’s North Korea reacted to his pursuits? How about Iran? How much did his numerous apology tours net the people of the United States?
What about making those tough decisions all leaders are faced to make? Formulating stagey and executing on that strategy? This isn’t a critique of actual decisions or even strategy, policy decisions are what they are. While we might not always agree on leaders’ decisions or strategies, do they at least make decisions or have any kind of strategic vision? If we look at the process used and timing on making decisions we have a clearer understanding of basic leadership and management skills.
Example 1: Afghanistan. Obama’s polices on Afghanistan have changed three times. Within the first 30 days of his presidency Obama announced a winding down and adding 17,000 troops for the purpose of “stabilizing” Afghanistan. 40-days later he unveiled another shift with the purpose of counterinsurgency, appointing Richard Holbrooke as special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. May 2009 saw Gen Stanley McChrystal taking command in Afghanistan, in alignment w/ the new counterinsurgency strategy. But then by October 2009 all actions put on hold as VP Joe Biden argues the mission is changing again moving from counterinsurgency and to counterterrorism. Since then the strategy has shifted again, there’s talk of another shift, and a major shakeup in the military leadership with General David Petraeus taking over for McChrystal.
Example 2: The BP oil spill. Just one article in the WSJ has outlined just the highest level missteps by the Obama administration during the BP oil spill debacle. According to author Paul Rubin, the EPA refused to modify regulations around the amount of oil permissible in the discharged water. This would have allowed the literal dozens of skimmers available to be more useful and involved much earlier and kept thousands of gallons of oil off the shores in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi.
Further, the Jones Act we heard so much about could have been waived. Bush did this immediately during Katrina, an oft and ill-used example of Presidential mismanagement. This one response from Obama would have allowed foreign vessels to operate in US coastal waters to help assist with the cleanup. As Rubin points out, the failure of Obama to act on these two items alone cost the use of one Taiwanese ship that could have dispersed roughly 500,000 barrels of oil – per day.
Additionally, Obama could have ordered the freeing of American-based skimmers. Of the 2000 skimmers in the US only 400 were deployed to the gulf. The other skimmers sit in reserve only awaiting another potential spill. What spill could take place that had the potential of being this large as to require 5 times the amount of skimmers used in the Gulf?!
This is probably the most egregious misfeasance ever documented in any national or international tragedy. Ever.
Clearly Obama is in over his head. He lacks the basic leadership skills we demand from our line bosses or managers. He does not have the building blocks in place, regardless of political philosophy or ideology, to lead a team, let alone a nation. President Obama, for his loquaciousness, his charm, his charisma, but for his lack of leadership is his undoing.
In their survey of 412 executives published in 2008, they found a number of priorities related to leadership. Among their priorities, ranking first was the leader’s ability to motivate. Further, working well across disparate cultures, making tough decisions, strategy and execution were among the top priorities.
This treatise is not a comprehensive analysis of policy decisions, macro and microeconomics impacts of taxes, not a discussion of race or religion or moral capacity or lack thereof, etc. We as a people need to go to the basic core of what leadership is and what we want it to be. In the political realm, we need to decide, is President Obama hitting the mark or not w/ one criterion: leadership.
Before we use DDI’s priorities of leadership, let’s start by also pointing out leaders have followers; a simple precept of leadership, really. If you are leading, and no one’s following, guess what, you’re not leading.
Who is following Barak Obama? According to Peter Brown at the WSJ, no one. At least, not as many as were one year ago. His support is at an all-time low, 41-44% depending on which survey you look to. Most importantly, his support across all demographics has dwindled. Only 19% of WASPs support Obama, down from 35%; only 12% of Republicans (more later on that); 38% of independents support the president.
What about the key liberal demographic, the wheelhouse of his support? Consistently liberals are abandoning him as well. It’s slowed less than other demographics, many of the liberal organizations moving against Obama. Friends of the Earth in March 2010 ran ads denouncing Obama’s environmental policies.
Without followers, how does anyone claim to be a leader? Perhaps I can end my analysis here…
But let’s look at DDI’s list and analyze the facts about the President Obama’s leadership abilities. Clearly the president is struggling when it comes to motivation. Influencing the electorate is playing out to one of the worst political slaughters our nation’s history, if current polling data holds from now until November. With control of the Congress, White House, and Courts, Obama was barely able to eke out one legislative “victory” in his healthcare bill. An extremely watered down (thankfully) version of his original vision passed by the skin of his teeth.
How about Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia? Has the president been able to influence the electorate enough to continue his agenda? What other major motivations has Obama been able to achieve? How’s North Korea reacted to his pursuits? How about Iran? How much did his numerous apology tours net the people of the United States?
What about making those tough decisions all leaders are faced to make? Formulating stagey and executing on that strategy? This isn’t a critique of actual decisions or even strategy, policy decisions are what they are. While we might not always agree on leaders’ decisions or strategies, do they at least make decisions or have any kind of strategic vision? If we look at the process used and timing on making decisions we have a clearer understanding of basic leadership and management skills.
Example 1: Afghanistan. Obama’s polices on Afghanistan have changed three times. Within the first 30 days of his presidency Obama announced a winding down and adding 17,000 troops for the purpose of “stabilizing” Afghanistan. 40-days later he unveiled another shift with the purpose of counterinsurgency, appointing Richard Holbrooke as special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. May 2009 saw Gen Stanley McChrystal taking command in Afghanistan, in alignment w/ the new counterinsurgency strategy. But then by October 2009 all actions put on hold as VP Joe Biden argues the mission is changing again moving from counterinsurgency and to counterterrorism. Since then the strategy has shifted again, there’s talk of another shift, and a major shakeup in the military leadership with General David Petraeus taking over for McChrystal.
Example 2: The BP oil spill. Just one article in the WSJ has outlined just the highest level missteps by the Obama administration during the BP oil spill debacle. According to author Paul Rubin, the EPA refused to modify regulations around the amount of oil permissible in the discharged water. This would have allowed the literal dozens of skimmers available to be more useful and involved much earlier and kept thousands of gallons of oil off the shores in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi.
Further, the Jones Act we heard so much about could have been waived. Bush did this immediately during Katrina, an oft and ill-used example of Presidential mismanagement. This one response from Obama would have allowed foreign vessels to operate in US coastal waters to help assist with the cleanup. As Rubin points out, the failure of Obama to act on these two items alone cost the use of one Taiwanese ship that could have dispersed roughly 500,000 barrels of oil – per day.
Additionally, Obama could have ordered the freeing of American-based skimmers. Of the 2000 skimmers in the US only 400 were deployed to the gulf. The other skimmers sit in reserve only awaiting another potential spill. What spill could take place that had the potential of being this large as to require 5 times the amount of skimmers used in the Gulf?!
This is probably the most egregious misfeasance ever documented in any national or international tragedy. Ever.
Clearly Obama is in over his head. He lacks the basic leadership skills we demand from our line bosses or managers. He does not have the building blocks in place, regardless of political philosophy or ideology, to lead a team, let alone a nation. President Obama, for his loquaciousness, his charm, his charisma, but for his lack of leadership is his undoing.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
New rules of IT
Recently IT has adopted a variety of sweeping changes in how they support, respond, and fix equipment and the related services. IT took the best practices of industries and the government and applied to respective changes after diligent research.
Below are samples of these changes:
1) Network access will be on a first-come, first-serve basis from this point forward. Modeled after America's large cities' traffic and road infrastructures, we don't design roads to actually hold the cars that need to use them, we adopted the same philosophy in our network infrastructure. "Oh, you mean ALL 800 of your employees need to get on the network starting between 8 and 9? Sorry, we'll take 1/4. The rest need to either get in earlier or come in later."
2) Based on best practices of public works departments, after hour change windows are canceled immediately. Our people will actually do the work when it's convenient for them, not the end users. This applies to applications and all systems. Additionally, changes to these systems will be performed without communicating when or if the changes will take place or how long they will take.
3) Based on our exemplary airline industry, meetings and project timelines or anything with dates or timed delivery are eliminated. The amount of overhead we can remove from actually planning, scheduling, then trying to keep that schedule will be astounding. We will, however, give you general guidelines and estimated timetables. We would ask that all employees attempting to meet with IT staff please arrive two hours ahead of time.
4) Based on traffic speed limits, network thresholds will be scaled back and limited. Some of you are going too fast across our network and being too productive. We should all strive to have the same level of productivity and work at the same pace regardless of how powerful your computer is or your proficiency in using that computer.
Finally, 5) Alternate routing of network/Internet traffic will be eliminated. Also, features of network traffic that retransmit packet failures will be eliminated. If an email fails to reach its destination, for example, it is now the sender's responsibility to find an alternate route to deliver that message.
It's amazing the ridiculous inconveniences we put up with everyday that we wouldn't stand for for one minute in our IT infrastructure!
Feel free to cut and past this and forward, maybe even forward to your favorite IT professional.
Below are samples of these changes:
1) Network access will be on a first-come, first-serve basis from this point forward. Modeled after America's large cities' traffic and road infrastructures, we don't design roads to actually hold the cars that need to use them, we adopted the same philosophy in our network infrastructure. "Oh, you mean ALL 800 of your employees need to get on the network starting between 8 and 9? Sorry, we'll take 1/4. The rest need to either get in earlier or come in later."
2) Based on best practices of public works departments, after hour change windows are canceled immediately. Our people will actually do the work when it's convenient for them, not the end users. This applies to applications and all systems. Additionally, changes to these systems will be performed without communicating when or if the changes will take place or how long they will take.
3) Based on our exemplary airline industry, meetings and project timelines or anything with dates or timed delivery are eliminated. The amount of overhead we can remove from actually planning, scheduling, then trying to keep that schedule will be astounding. We will, however, give you general guidelines and estimated timetables. We would ask that all employees attempting to meet with IT staff please arrive two hours ahead of time.
4) Based on traffic speed limits, network thresholds will be scaled back and limited. Some of you are going too fast across our network and being too productive. We should all strive to have the same level of productivity and work at the same pace regardless of how powerful your computer is or your proficiency in using that computer.
Finally, 5) Alternate routing of network/Internet traffic will be eliminated. Also, features of network traffic that retransmit packet failures will be eliminated. If an email fails to reach its destination, for example, it is now the sender's responsibility to find an alternate route to deliver that message.
It's amazing the ridiculous inconveniences we put up with everyday that we wouldn't stand for for one minute in our IT infrastructure!
Feel free to cut and past this and forward, maybe even forward to your favorite IT professional.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
I have had the "opportunity" to travel quite frequently for business and pleasure over the years. I could fill a book with stories and experiences I have had on and in and around planes.
No experience comes close to what I had this past week. When I checked in the seat next to me, in the exit row, was blocked. It is a fairly common occurrence, one of the few benefits of frequent travel. After boarding, however, I noticed an obviously Middle-Eastern young man, probably 25 at the most, who was confused about the seating arrangements, what aisle was where, where the lettered seats were. Eventually he figures out he’s in the seat next to me. "Hmmm, last minute purchase," I think to myself.
And then the series of events continues… A phone call is made. A conversation is initiated. Soon I realize this is not so much a conversation, but a monotone statement, almost being read or recited, and in Arabic. This continues. Four minutes. Five minutes. “Sir, will you please turn off your cell phone?” Six minutes. “Sir, we are trying to take off.” We are taxing now. Abruptly, in the middle of his sentence, he turns the phone off.
I am not going to lie, at this point I am nervous. I eyeball our row-mate, on the window. We immediately read each other’s minds. I turn and lock eyes with the men across the aisle from me, both of which were already looking our way, intrigued to say the least. Again, minds’ were read.
At that moment, the prayers started. Now I’m a little more than nervous. We have mumbling prayers, bowing at the waist, starting after straightening of the clothes, squaring himself and his feet with his body, and continued bowing at the waist, continued mumbling Arabic.
I play dumb and interrupt. “Excuse me, do you need something?” Young Arab continues to look straight ahead, praying, bowing. “Excuse me, are you OK?” No answer. After 2-3 minutes, he does look my direction as I am staring at him intently, and does speak. “I’m sorry, I was praying.” “Oh, really, OK, praying for good things, I hope?” “Oh yes, very good things.”
Yes, we made it to our destination safely. Yes, perhaps my nervousness was slightly unnecessary. But if you are Muslim in America, I’m sorry; your brothers have cost you the right to pray, out loud, bowing, in Arabic, on a plane. You lost that right on 9/12/2001. If you want to say your prayers in private, fine. If you want to pray to yourself, as I do on every flight, great!
Similarly, if you are Muslim in America you lost the right to build a mosque at Ground Zero. If you are a religion of peace, if the majority of hardworking, honest Muslims are peaceful and seek to be good neighbors, would a good neighbor cause such an outrage?
Ask yourself, would the Nazi Party build a historical center at Auschwitz? It is equally offensive that we, now as the assimilationists, as the democrats, as the most forbearing people ever assembled, must now push our tolerance to this level.
I trust the people of New York and the processes in place will put an end to this affront.
No experience comes close to what I had this past week. When I checked in the seat next to me, in the exit row, was blocked. It is a fairly common occurrence, one of the few benefits of frequent travel. After boarding, however, I noticed an obviously Middle-Eastern young man, probably 25 at the most, who was confused about the seating arrangements, what aisle was where, where the lettered seats were. Eventually he figures out he’s in the seat next to me. "Hmmm, last minute purchase," I think to myself.
And then the series of events continues… A phone call is made. A conversation is initiated. Soon I realize this is not so much a conversation, but a monotone statement, almost being read or recited, and in Arabic. This continues. Four minutes. Five minutes. “Sir, will you please turn off your cell phone?” Six minutes. “Sir, we are trying to take off.” We are taxing now. Abruptly, in the middle of his sentence, he turns the phone off.
I am not going to lie, at this point I am nervous. I eyeball our row-mate, on the window. We immediately read each other’s minds. I turn and lock eyes with the men across the aisle from me, both of which were already looking our way, intrigued to say the least. Again, minds’ were read.
At that moment, the prayers started. Now I’m a little more than nervous. We have mumbling prayers, bowing at the waist, starting after straightening of the clothes, squaring himself and his feet with his body, and continued bowing at the waist, continued mumbling Arabic.
I play dumb and interrupt. “Excuse me, do you need something?” Young Arab continues to look straight ahead, praying, bowing. “Excuse me, are you OK?” No answer. After 2-3 minutes, he does look my direction as I am staring at him intently, and does speak. “I’m sorry, I was praying.” “Oh, really, OK, praying for good things, I hope?” “Oh yes, very good things.”
Yes, we made it to our destination safely. Yes, perhaps my nervousness was slightly unnecessary. But if you are Muslim in America, I’m sorry; your brothers have cost you the right to pray, out loud, bowing, in Arabic, on a plane. You lost that right on 9/12/2001. If you want to say your prayers in private, fine. If you want to pray to yourself, as I do on every flight, great!
Similarly, if you are Muslim in America you lost the right to build a mosque at Ground Zero. If you are a religion of peace, if the majority of hardworking, honest Muslims are peaceful and seek to be good neighbors, would a good neighbor cause such an outrage?
Ask yourself, would the Nazi Party build a historical center at Auschwitz? It is equally offensive that we, now as the assimilationists, as the democrats, as the most forbearing people ever assembled, must now push our tolerance to this level.
I trust the people of New York and the processes in place will put an end to this affront.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Monday, July 12, 2010
And so it begins...
Recently on Facebook I happened across a post. It was a typical link to a typical article. What caught my eye first in the headline was the use of the word "WASP." Then, upon further inspection I noticed the word "decline." Little bit like “Dog Bites Man,” especially considering the source (New York Times, need I say more?) but I have to admit I was intrigued.
What followed was an interesting op-ed piece which ballyhooed the decline of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, using the recent shift in the Supreme Court as a backdrop. Curious, I read on (link at the bottom of my post).
My original assumptions, along the lines of praising the decline of the WASP as the bearer of all things diseased, self-promoting, and inherently evil, were met happily with a more sincere appreciation which touted the very inclusion and non-discriminatory practices which are the hallmark of WASP-culture.
The trumpeting of this decline, it appears, is proof the Protestant Work Ethic actually did what it set out to do - build a nation where merit was rewarded, effort compensated accordingly, and work was a God-given obligation that tended the soul and elevated the culture.
I agree with the premise. Inclusion has not always been the bellwether of the WASP among those subscribing to the conventional wisdom but I will perhaps argue this point at a later post.
What I will fight, one blog post at a time, is the continual assault on the traditions and values and character of this great land. Any God-fearing man or woman places value on effort, diligence, and discipline. Those attributes should be rewarded and praised regardless of race, creed, or color.
I will remind those who have benefited from these graces, the value we place on these ideals are mutual.
The WASP’s kindness should never be confused with weakness.
I hope you like my blog and return often!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/opinion/28feldman.html?pagewanted=2&ref=opinion
What followed was an interesting op-ed piece which ballyhooed the decline of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, using the recent shift in the Supreme Court as a backdrop. Curious, I read on (link at the bottom of my post).
My original assumptions, along the lines of praising the decline of the WASP as the bearer of all things diseased, self-promoting, and inherently evil, were met happily with a more sincere appreciation which touted the very inclusion and non-discriminatory practices which are the hallmark of WASP-culture.
The trumpeting of this decline, it appears, is proof the Protestant Work Ethic actually did what it set out to do - build a nation where merit was rewarded, effort compensated accordingly, and work was a God-given obligation that tended the soul and elevated the culture.
I agree with the premise. Inclusion has not always been the bellwether of the WASP among those subscribing to the conventional wisdom but I will perhaps argue this point at a later post.
What I will fight, one blog post at a time, is the continual assault on the traditions and values and character of this great land. Any God-fearing man or woman places value on effort, diligence, and discipline. Those attributes should be rewarded and praised regardless of race, creed, or color.
I will remind those who have benefited from these graces, the value we place on these ideals are mutual.
The WASP’s kindness should never be confused with weakness.
I hope you like my blog and return often!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/opinion/28feldman.html?pagewanted=2&ref=opinion
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)