Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Thursday, July 16, 2015
Life Is Too Short To Work For Idiots
Life is too short to work for idiots, except for any idiots who might happen to be paying us today. Those idiots are "grandfathered in."
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Saturday, May 30, 2015
The Best And The Brightest
I remember marveling at the knowledge and qualifications of my college professors. They seemed brighter and more accomplished than even the best of my high school teachers. Over time, the depth and breadth of their understand became even more impressive.
Even in the upper level classes, students sometimes asked for an explanation of a problem over which they had struggled for hours or even days. The professor would walk up to the blackboard and solve the problem in a few minutes. Then they would throw in a comment about how simple the problem was and how we should have been able to solve it. We'd walk out of the classroom feeling like idiots.
I was naïve enough to expect something similar when I entered the corporate world. I expected management to comprise the best and brightest individuals in the company, people who had worked hard to develop an impressive knowledge of the operations of the firm and the underlying processes and technologies that support those operations. The truth was rather disappointing.
Of people for whom I have worked over the years, very few could have done my job, even poorly. This might make sense in cases where I was brought in as a subject matter expert later in my career. But even as an inexperience newbie straight out of college, I was amazed at how little my bosses understood about what they were asking me to do.
When your boss doesn't understand what you do, they won't understand the challenges that you face, either. Their ability to support you and to give you a fair assessment at the end of the year is compromised. And forget training and mentoring. Even in my first job, I found myself explaining things to the bosses more often than they explained things to me.
Over the years, I did work for very good managers. Some were technically proficient. Some were organized and knew how keep a project on schedule. Some were good at attracting and developing personnel. Some had a knack for coming up with creative ideas.
But a surprising number of my bosses were organizationally ineffective, technically challenged, or both. I remember wondering how some of these folks came to hold positions of responsibility.
Was it a matter of being in the right place at the right time? Had an unexpected vacancy forced the department to fill a role with whomever was available? Had they relied on contacts, perhaps in the ranks of upper management? Did they present themselves impressively in an interview despite their apparent lack of ability and qualifications?
I still don't know. Promotion of people into and up through the ranks of corporate management is one of human society's great mysteries, like Stonehenge or crop circles.
Perhaps those aren't fair comparisons. Stonehenge was an impressively engineered astronomical calendar. Crop circles are hoaxes brilliantly coordinated by skilled pranksters. Corporate management is neither impressively engineered nor brilliantly coordinated, although it does make use of calendars, its budgets can be astronomical, and it could be perceived as a hoax - just not one that's perpetrated by skilled practitioners.
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Even in the upper level classes, students sometimes asked for an explanation of a problem over which they had struggled for hours or even days. The professor would walk up to the blackboard and solve the problem in a few minutes. Then they would throw in a comment about how simple the problem was and how we should have been able to solve it. We'd walk out of the classroom feeling like idiots.
I was naïve enough to expect something similar when I entered the corporate world. I expected management to comprise the best and brightest individuals in the company, people who had worked hard to develop an impressive knowledge of the operations of the firm and the underlying processes and technologies that support those operations. The truth was rather disappointing.
Of people for whom I have worked over the years, very few could have done my job, even poorly. This might make sense in cases where I was brought in as a subject matter expert later in my career. But even as an inexperience newbie straight out of college, I was amazed at how little my bosses understood about what they were asking me to do.
When your boss doesn't understand what you do, they won't understand the challenges that you face, either. Their ability to support you and to give you a fair assessment at the end of the year is compromised. And forget training and mentoring. Even in my first job, I found myself explaining things to the bosses more often than they explained things to me.
Over the years, I did work for very good managers. Some were technically proficient. Some were organized and knew how keep a project on schedule. Some were good at attracting and developing personnel. Some had a knack for coming up with creative ideas.
But a surprising number of my bosses were organizationally ineffective, technically challenged, or both. I remember wondering how some of these folks came to hold positions of responsibility.
Was it a matter of being in the right place at the right time? Had an unexpected vacancy forced the department to fill a role with whomever was available? Had they relied on contacts, perhaps in the ranks of upper management? Did they present themselves impressively in an interview despite their apparent lack of ability and qualifications?
I still don't know. Promotion of people into and up through the ranks of corporate management is one of human society's great mysteries, like Stonehenge or crop circles.
Perhaps those aren't fair comparisons. Stonehenge was an impressively engineered astronomical calendar. Crop circles are hoaxes brilliantly coordinated by skilled pranksters. Corporate management is neither impressively engineered nor brilliantly coordinated, although it does make use of calendars, its budgets can be astronomical, and it could be perceived as a hoax - just not one that's perpetrated by skilled practitioners.
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Thursday, April 30, 2015
What Your Boss Hates The Most
Bosses hate to have their hypocrisy exposed, especially by an employee. Think twice before calling the boss out on an unfair practice. They probably won't take is well and could consider whether to get rid of you.
But if you have exhausted all other options, and if you have the capacity to handle a sudden job change, it's possible that the organization will benefit from a frank conversation about unfair practices by a manger.
For a while, I worked for a guy who was chronically late. At least three days a week, he staggered into the office at 10:30 am or later. Upon his arrival, he would waste more time complaining to the staff about how poorly he was feeling, how difficult his commute had been, or whatever the excuse of the day might have been. He didn't begin any actual work until well past eleven.
However, on the occasional days when this guy showed up on time - as when he had to attend an early meeting - he was absolutely intolerant of tardiness by anyone else on the team.
If someone arrived at 9:05, he would confront them in the hallway and bellow "Good Afternoon!" or "Glad you could make it!" He had a booming voice that carried throughout the office suite. This initial confrontation could be embarrassing and demoralizing, but it got even worse.
Throughout the day, the boss would ask staff members to join him in a conference room. Then, behind closed doors, he would rant at length about the person who had arrived late.
"I don't know where Fred's head is these days. He seems so unfocused. I tried to give him a chance, I try to give him responsibility, but now I don't know whether he's got what it takes to do this job."
On and on, the rant would rage, sometimes for thirty minutes or longer.
Don't forget. This guy commonly staggered in late, sometimes looking as though he was coming down from a major bender. But when one of his employees arrived five minutes late, it was perceived as a major problem. It was ridiculously unfair.
Exposing Hypocrisy
One day, I decided to go out for a morning coffee break at about 10:40. As I was leaving the building, I spied the boss walking in through the turnstiles with a worried, guilty look on his face.
I couldn't help myself. I yelled "Hey! Good Afternoon!" I mocked the tone of his voice for effect.
He was not pleased.
Later that day, Mr. Tardy called me into a conference room. He looked me in the eye, and with a pricelessly earnest expression on his face, explained, "we shouldn't say things like that in the office. It makes a bad impression."
A whole bunch of thoughts raced through my mind in that moment.
But if you have exhausted all other options, and if you have the capacity to handle a sudden job change, it's possible that the organization will benefit from a frank conversation about unfair practices by a manger.
For a while, I worked for a guy who was chronically late. At least three days a week, he staggered into the office at 10:30 am or later. Upon his arrival, he would waste more time complaining to the staff about how poorly he was feeling, how difficult his commute had been, or whatever the excuse of the day might have been. He didn't begin any actual work until well past eleven.
However, on the occasional days when this guy showed up on time - as when he had to attend an early meeting - he was absolutely intolerant of tardiness by anyone else on the team.
If someone arrived at 9:05, he would confront them in the hallway and bellow "Good Afternoon!" or "Glad you could make it!" He had a booming voice that carried throughout the office suite. This initial confrontation could be embarrassing and demoralizing, but it got even worse.
Throughout the day, the boss would ask staff members to join him in a conference room. Then, behind closed doors, he would rant at length about the person who had arrived late.
"I don't know where Fred's head is these days. He seems so unfocused. I tried to give him a chance, I try to give him responsibility, but now I don't know whether he's got what it takes to do this job."
On and on, the rant would rage, sometimes for thirty minutes or longer.
Don't forget. This guy commonly staggered in late, sometimes looking as though he was coming down from a major bender. But when one of his employees arrived five minutes late, it was perceived as a major problem. It was ridiculously unfair.
Exposing Hypocrisy
One day, I decided to go out for a morning coffee break at about 10:40. As I was leaving the building, I spied the boss walking in through the turnstiles with a worried, guilty look on his face.
I couldn't help myself. I yelled "Hey! Good Afternoon!" I mocked the tone of his voice for effect.
He was not pleased.
Later that day, Mr. Tardy called me into a conference room. He looked me in the eye, and with a pricelessly earnest expression on his face, explained, "we shouldn't say things like that in the office. It makes a bad impression."
A whole bunch of thoughts raced through my mind in that moment.
Bad impression? Really? If the guy was concerned about impressions, why did he stagger in late more often than not?
We shouldn't say things like this in the office? Really? I heard him direct those very same comments toward others on dozens of occasions.
Perhaps it's not really hypocrisy if you're completely ignorant of your own shortcomings. Perhaps it's just pathetic.
Finally, Mr. Suck Up betrayed his real concern: "What if someone from senior management heard you say that?"
For the record, no one from "senior management" was in the lobby when I made my comment - just me, him, and one lonely security guard. I wouldn't have made the comment if influential people had been present. I wasn't trying to be cruel to the guy, just bluntly honest.
This guy lived in a world of his own creation where he was the ultimate authority and could do no wrong, and where the employees took constant criticism. It was a miserable experience.
Perhaps it's not really hypocrisy if you're completely ignorant of your own shortcomings. Perhaps it's just pathetic.
Finally, Mr. Suck Up betrayed his real concern: "What if someone from senior management heard you say that?"
For the record, no one from "senior management" was in the lobby when I made my comment - just me, him, and one lonely security guard. I wouldn't have made the comment if influential people had been present. I wasn't trying to be cruel to the guy, just bluntly honest.
This guy lived in a world of his own creation where he was the ultimate authority and could do no wrong, and where the employees took constant criticism. It was a miserable experience.
Eventually, the guy laid me off. I am forever in his gratitude for releasing me from that toxic situation.
An Expectation Of Fairness
Human beings aren't perfect. It's unreasonable to expect our management to act with flawless integrity at all times. But it's not unreasonable to expect fairness in their dealings with employees.
Business is built on a concept called an "arm's length transaction," the idea that deals should be based on terms that are mutually beneficial for all parties involved. No party should be coerced or duped into accepting an agreement that doesn't serve their best interests.
Employees have the right to expect fair treatment from their management. This is critical, because bosses have the power to make decisions that impact the employee's livelihood, including compensation, promotion, and the term and location of employment.
When a manager or a series of managers treats employees unfairly, the employee is in an uncomfortable and potentially perilous position. If they raise concerns about fair treatment, management can punish them.
Examples Of Unfair Management
- Managers who chastise employees (especially women) for taking time off to tend to their families, but who freely decide to take time off or "work from home" whenever they have to deal with their own personal demands.
- Bosses who hound employees to complete tasks on time, but who let their own deadlines slip. We see this behavior during the annual review process. The employee is expected to complete their self-review promptly, while the boss delays adding his or her own comments to the last possible minute...or beyond.
- Bosses who don't permit employees to select their choice of vacation days, but who schedule their own vacation time without any input from the team.
It's important to realize that inequitable management is common. If you find yourself dealing with one of the problems discussed above, or something similar, you're not alone. The lopsided power structure between management and employee permits it.
Your job shouldn't drive your crazy or make you sick. Every employee should be respected and valued. That can't happen when employer hypocrisy has to be tolerated for long periods of time.
An Expectation Of Fairness
Human beings aren't perfect. It's unreasonable to expect our management to act with flawless integrity at all times. But it's not unreasonable to expect fairness in their dealings with employees.
Business is built on a concept called an "arm's length transaction," the idea that deals should be based on terms that are mutually beneficial for all parties involved. No party should be coerced or duped into accepting an agreement that doesn't serve their best interests.
Employees have the right to expect fair treatment from their management. This is critical, because bosses have the power to make decisions that impact the employee's livelihood, including compensation, promotion, and the term and location of employment.
When a manager or a series of managers treats employees unfairly, the employee is in an uncomfortable and potentially perilous position. If they raise concerns about fair treatment, management can punish them.
Examples Of Unfair Management
- Managers who chastise employees (especially women) for taking time off to tend to their families, but who freely decide to take time off or "work from home" whenever they have to deal with their own personal demands.
- Bosses who hound employees to complete tasks on time, but who let their own deadlines slip. We see this behavior during the annual review process. The employee is expected to complete their self-review promptly, while the boss delays adding his or her own comments to the last possible minute...or beyond.
- Bosses who don't permit employees to select their choice of vacation days, but who schedule their own vacation time without any input from the team.
It's important to realize that inequitable management is common. If you find yourself dealing with one of the problems discussed above, or something similar, you're not alone. The lopsided power structure between management and employee permits it.
Your job shouldn't drive your crazy or make you sick. Every employee should be respected and valued. That can't happen when employer hypocrisy has to be tolerated for long periods of time.
If your relationship with management seems unfair or inequitable, communicate. Let others know what you're going through and receive support openly. Hypocrisy cannot thrive the cold light of day. Ultimately, you may need to move on. Hypocrites aren't likely to change. If they're forced to change, there's a chance that they could become bitter and resentful toward their staff.
To reiterate, don't expect your management to be perfect, but DO expect them to be fair. If your situation is irreconcilable, make a plan move on as soon as possible. Life is too short to put up with an inequitable work relationship.
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
To reiterate, don't expect your management to be perfect, but DO expect them to be fair. If your situation is irreconcilable, make a plan move on as soon as possible. Life is too short to put up with an inequitable work relationship.
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
Rewarding Poor Performance
Daft Universal Media and Broadcasting Corporation (DUMB) has two divisions headed by their executive vice presidents, Tom and Jerry.
Tom's division enjoys consistently high levels of customer satisfaction. Jerry's division receives customer complaints nearly every day.
When Tom's division brings out a new or updated product, it's almost always launched on time and within the predicted budget.
Jerry's product releases are often delayed, sometimes extensively. Delays result in budget overruns and customer frustration.
The customer service department for Tom's division adds value by helping customers to understand the advanced features of the product.
Jerry's division has a customer service department, but they're swamped with phone calls all day long as they try to offer quick fixes to problems with the products.
Tom's division is highly organized. Everyone understands their role and what they need to deliver and by when their part is due.
Jerry's division is less organized. Activity is often frenzied as the team scrambles to appease customers after missed deliverables or faulty products.
Tom's team works late on occasion, but typically they leave the office on time every day. Some team members participate in the company softball and bowling leagues. Many are dedicated to attending the extra-curricular activities of their children.
Jerry's team spends a lot of nights and weekends in the office or working from home on the phone. They keep an intense 24x7 schedule going throughout most of the year.
Bonus Implications
When Tom and his team receive their annual bonuses, they are disappointed. Most feel that the bonus amounts dropped significantly since the previous year. To, calls the COO, Mr. Myopic, and requests an impromptu meeting to discuss the compensation figures.
Tom: Hi, Fred. Thanks for meeting with me.
COO: Sure thing, Tom! What can I do for you?
Tom: Well, I have to tell you, Fred. My people aren't happy with their bonus numbers this year.
COO: I understand that, Tom. You have a great crew. We appreciate the work that they do, very much.
Tom: I thought the company was doing well this year.
COO: We did do well. We gained market share and brought in record revenues.
Tom: Well, then why aren't my people being rewarded?
COO: Well, we want to reward everybody, Tom, but look at this realistically. We need to focus on our top performers.
Tom: What do you mean by "top performers," Fred? My people meet every delivery on schedule, and we get excellent feedback from the customers.
COO: That's great, Tom. And again, we appreciate everything that you and your crew do. But look at Jerry's people. They work around the clock and on weekends while your crew is out at a bowling tournament.
Bottom Line
Yes, this grossly unfair, short-sighted bullshit happens in the corporate world. And yes, bullshit is the appropriate word in this context, because no other word to describe the act of giving higher rewards for lower productivity.
Jerry's people aren't working harder than Tom's team. They're working a lot of hours because they're disorganized and undisciplined, and they constantly have to play catch up and put out fires, so to speak.
But as the old saying goes, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease." Hyperactivity can look like extreme performance to upper level management that's too busy to notice and too opaque to care. At the same time, a well-run division full of effective and disciplined people can give the impression of being slackers.
When in doubt, look busy.
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Tom's division enjoys consistently high levels of customer satisfaction. Jerry's division receives customer complaints nearly every day.
When Tom's division brings out a new or updated product, it's almost always launched on time and within the predicted budget.
Jerry's product releases are often delayed, sometimes extensively. Delays result in budget overruns and customer frustration.
The customer service department for Tom's division adds value by helping customers to understand the advanced features of the product.
Jerry's division has a customer service department, but they're swamped with phone calls all day long as they try to offer quick fixes to problems with the products.
Tom's division is highly organized. Everyone understands their role and what they need to deliver and by when their part is due.
Jerry's division is less organized. Activity is often frenzied as the team scrambles to appease customers after missed deliverables or faulty products.
Tom's team works late on occasion, but typically they leave the office on time every day. Some team members participate in the company softball and bowling leagues. Many are dedicated to attending the extra-curricular activities of their children.
Jerry's team spends a lot of nights and weekends in the office or working from home on the phone. They keep an intense 24x7 schedule going throughout most of the year.
Bonus Implications
When Tom and his team receive their annual bonuses, they are disappointed. Most feel that the bonus amounts dropped significantly since the previous year. To, calls the COO, Mr. Myopic, and requests an impromptu meeting to discuss the compensation figures.
Tom: Hi, Fred. Thanks for meeting with me.
COO: Sure thing, Tom! What can I do for you?
Tom: Well, I have to tell you, Fred. My people aren't happy with their bonus numbers this year.
COO: I understand that, Tom. You have a great crew. We appreciate the work that they do, very much.
Tom: I thought the company was doing well this year.
COO: We did do well. We gained market share and brought in record revenues.
Tom: Well, then why aren't my people being rewarded?
COO: Well, we want to reward everybody, Tom, but look at this realistically. We need to focus on our top performers.
Tom: What do you mean by "top performers," Fred? My people meet every delivery on schedule, and we get excellent feedback from the customers.
COO: That's great, Tom. And again, we appreciate everything that you and your crew do. But look at Jerry's people. They work around the clock and on weekends while your crew is out at a bowling tournament.
Bottom Line
Yes, this grossly unfair, short-sighted bullshit happens in the corporate world. And yes, bullshit is the appropriate word in this context, because no other word to describe the act of giving higher rewards for lower productivity.
Jerry's people aren't working harder than Tom's team. They're working a lot of hours because they're disorganized and undisciplined, and they constantly have to play catch up and put out fires, so to speak.
But as the old saying goes, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease." Hyperactivity can look like extreme performance to upper level management that's too busy to notice and too opaque to care. At the same time, a well-run division full of effective and disciplined people can give the impression of being slackers.
When in doubt, look busy.
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Wednesday, February 11, 2015
Poor Grammar Makes A Bad Impression
I attended a business presentation a couple of weeks ago. The speaker welcomed everyone warmly and began her speech with the following sentence.
"This presentation is comprised of three topics."
It might not be obvious - the verb "to comprise" is not used widely in daily conversation - but the speaker made a glaring grammatical error.
Imagine your child coming home from school one day and saying, "My homework is included of three assignments." You would recognize immediately that this isn't proper English, and you would correct them immediately.
"To comprise" means "to include" - the two words are synonyms - so saying "is comprised of" makes no more sense than saying "is included of."
Apparently, the speaker didn't realize this. She used a word that she didn't understand and lost credibility when she used it improperly.
Any of the following sentences would have been acceptable.
1. This presentation comprises three topics.
2. This presentation includes three topics.
3. This presentation is composed of three topics.
I prefer the first one. Here, the word "comprise" is used elegantly and effectively. It would have set a good tone for the presentation. I might have listened with actual interest.
Instead, I listened in shock as the speaker made repeated grammatical errors. The presentation was meant to be informational, but I began to doubt how thoroughly she understood the subject. I certainly would not have chosen her to manage in important project or program.
Subjects and Objects
The speaker struggled with proper usage of personal pronouns. To be fair, this is a common problem among English-speaking people. I don't know why the rest of the world understands pronouns more thoroughly than Americans do. Perhaps it underscores a weakness in our educational system.
"You can direct your questions to Paul or I," the speaker offered near the end of her presentation.
The pronoun "I" is always a subject. The subject is the person or thing that performs the action described by the verb. The person or thing that receives the action is the object.
"I will contact Dave." I am doing the contacting (subject), and Dave is being contacted (object). The grammar here is clear and simple.
"Mary or I will contact Dave." Mary and I are the subjects. Dave is the object.
"Mary will contact me." Mary is the subject. I am the object. But because I am the object in this sentence, I need to use the object form of the first person pronoun ("me").
We can't say: "Mary will contact I." This is clearly incorrect. Every able-minded English speaker over the age of four understands this implicitly.
But here is where the personal pronouns become tricky for so many people.
"Mary will contact Dave or me."
This is absolutely correct. Mary, the subject, is doing the contacting. Dave and I are objects. But when I refer to myself as an object, I have to use the word "me." There are NO EXCEPTIONS. (The fact that Dave is also an object makes no difference.)
Many people would say: "Mary will contact Dave or I." But "I" doesn't belong in this sentence, because it's not an object.
"I" is never an object. Never. You can't call I. You can't shake hands with I. You can't have lunch with Mary and I. All of these sentences require the personal pronoun "me".
During the presentation, the speaker should have said:
"You can direct your questions to Paul or me."
It's simple, clean, elegant, accurate, and absolutely correct.
To her credit, the speaker did refer to herself with the correct object pronoun once during the presentation. Once. I was so proud of her in that moment. I can't help it; I love to root for the underdog.
Misuse of Reflexive Pronouns
Unfortunately, an ambiguous comprehension of subjects and objects leads some speakers to make an even sillier grammatical faux pas - misuse of reflexive pronouns. Here's an example, again from the same presentation.
"You can contact Mary or myself if you need a copy of the presentation."
The word "myself" has absolutely no business being in this sentence - NONE - and its usage here is beyond idiotic.
Myself is a reflexive pronoun; its use is reserved for two special cases.
Case 1 - When you are both the subject and the object of the verb:
"I cut myself." - I did the cutting (subject), and I also received the action of cutting (object).
Case 2 - For emphasis of your own preference or opinion:
"I myself prefer wine over beer."
Those are only two times when you can use the word "myself" properly. You cannot ask other people to "contact myself."
Think about it. The only person who can do anything to "yourself" is YOU.
"I treated myself to a massage."
No one else can do this.
"My sister cooked myself dinner."
Again, clearly, no one can do anything to "yourself" except you. So please stop asking people to contact yourself, unless you want yourself to sound foolish and inept.
Bottom Line
People in positions of responsibility, people who give presentations as part of their careers, and people with upper middle class incomes should understand the fundamentals of English grammar. If you don't have the ability to communicate effectively, people will question your abilities in other areas. If you're wondering why you didn't get that big promotion or the project that you wanted, check your pronouns.
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
"This presentation is comprised of three topics."
It might not be obvious - the verb "to comprise" is not used widely in daily conversation - but the speaker made a glaring grammatical error.
Imagine your child coming home from school one day and saying, "My homework is included of three assignments." You would recognize immediately that this isn't proper English, and you would correct them immediately.
"To comprise" means "to include" - the two words are synonyms - so saying "is comprised of" makes no more sense than saying "is included of."
Apparently, the speaker didn't realize this. She used a word that she didn't understand and lost credibility when she used it improperly.
Any of the following sentences would have been acceptable.
1. This presentation comprises three topics.
2. This presentation includes three topics.
3. This presentation is composed of three topics.
I prefer the first one. Here, the word "comprise" is used elegantly and effectively. It would have set a good tone for the presentation. I might have listened with actual interest.
Instead, I listened in shock as the speaker made repeated grammatical errors. The presentation was meant to be informational, but I began to doubt how thoroughly she understood the subject. I certainly would not have chosen her to manage in important project or program.
Subjects and Objects
The speaker struggled with proper usage of personal pronouns. To be fair, this is a common problem among English-speaking people. I don't know why the rest of the world understands pronouns more thoroughly than Americans do. Perhaps it underscores a weakness in our educational system.
"You can direct your questions to Paul or I," the speaker offered near the end of her presentation.
The pronoun "I" is always a subject. The subject is the person or thing that performs the action described by the verb. The person or thing that receives the action is the object.
"I will contact Dave." I am doing the contacting (subject), and Dave is being contacted (object). The grammar here is clear and simple.
"Mary or I will contact Dave." Mary and I are the subjects. Dave is the object.
"Mary will contact me." Mary is the subject. I am the object. But because I am the object in this sentence, I need to use the object form of the first person pronoun ("me").
We can't say: "Mary will contact I." This is clearly incorrect. Every able-minded English speaker over the age of four understands this implicitly.
But here is where the personal pronouns become tricky for so many people.
"Mary will contact Dave or me."
This is absolutely correct. Mary, the subject, is doing the contacting. Dave and I are objects. But when I refer to myself as an object, I have to use the word "me." There are NO EXCEPTIONS. (The fact that Dave is also an object makes no difference.)
Many people would say: "Mary will contact Dave or I." But "I" doesn't belong in this sentence, because it's not an object.
"I" is never an object. Never. You can't call I. You can't shake hands with I. You can't have lunch with Mary and I. All of these sentences require the personal pronoun "me".
During the presentation, the speaker should have said:
"You can direct your questions to Paul or me."
It's simple, clean, elegant, accurate, and absolutely correct.
To her credit, the speaker did refer to herself with the correct object pronoun once during the presentation. Once. I was so proud of her in that moment. I can't help it; I love to root for the underdog.
Misuse of Reflexive Pronouns
Unfortunately, an ambiguous comprehension of subjects and objects leads some speakers to make an even sillier grammatical faux pas - misuse of reflexive pronouns. Here's an example, again from the same presentation.
"You can contact Mary or myself if you need a copy of the presentation."
The word "myself" has absolutely no business being in this sentence - NONE - and its usage here is beyond idiotic.
Myself is a reflexive pronoun; its use is reserved for two special cases.
Case 1 - When you are both the subject and the object of the verb:
"I cut myself." - I did the cutting (subject), and I also received the action of cutting (object).
Case 2 - For emphasis of your own preference or opinion:
"I myself prefer wine over beer."
Those are only two times when you can use the word "myself" properly. You cannot ask other people to "contact myself."
Think about it. The only person who can do anything to "yourself" is YOU.
"I treated myself to a massage."
No one else can do this.
"My sister cooked myself dinner."
Again, clearly, no one can do anything to "yourself" except you. So please stop asking people to contact yourself, unless you want yourself to sound foolish and inept.
Bottom Line
People in positions of responsibility, people who give presentations as part of their careers, and people with upper middle class incomes should understand the fundamentals of English grammar. If you don't have the ability to communicate effectively, people will question your abilities in other areas. If you're wondering why you didn't get that big promotion or the project that you wanted, check your pronouns.
Copyright © 2015 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Sunday, August 24, 2014
Reorganization - The Ugly Truth
Congratulations! Your company/division/team has just been reorganized. You're going to be working with new people and taking on new responsibilities. You might have a new boss. Or your boss has a new boss.
How do you feel? Are you excited? Concerned? Hoping that things won't change as much as you fear that they will?
Management seems to think very highly of the revamped organizational structure. They talk about opportunity and possibilities for growth and collaboration.
Surprise! Surprise!
But consider this. If it really is good to undergo a reorganization, why didn't management tell you about it in advance? Everyone could have anticipated this with a sense of forthcoming excitement. "Hey! Did you hear? A reorganization is coming! We don't want to miss out on that!"
Of course, that's not how it works. That's not how it works at all. Management didn't tell you in advance, because reorganization is rarely a positive experience, and if you've every endured one, you're probably not looking forward to going through the process again.
Your daily routine is about to become more difficult. You may end up working more and liking your job less. Colleagues whom you have come to know and on whom you depend will be moved around or let go. You might be reassigned to a new boss, perhaps a person who knows little about you.
Well, guess what? There's nothing that you can do about it. All of these decisions were made before you knew what was going to happen. The people who made them didn't ask for your opinion. Your work life is being altered significantly, and they expect you to accept it - at least long enough to determine whether they need to keep you on.
It's probably a good time to polish up your résumé. Because in addition to things getting more challenging, more changes will be coming. And then next time, you might end up with a target on your back.
Why Reorganize?
There are three main reasons to reorganize. When company wants to change its core business, it may benefit from subtle or radical restructuring.
In the 1980's, IBM was primarily a manufacturer of large mainframe computer systems. But the management of IBM foresaw a different future. IBM restructured and focused more of its business on technology services and consulting.
When the technology bubble burst at the end of the 1990's, IBM maintained its business (and stock price) while many other "tech" companies stumbled. IBM's reorganization was a well-timed and well-executed success.
Transforming the business may be the best reason to reorganize, but it can still be an uncomfortable experience. No one likes to endure unanticipated changes. But change is often necessary. If your organization becomes more competitive and prosperous as a result of restructuring, that might work in your favor.
Cost Cutting and Downsizing
Sometimes companies reorganize in order to cut costs. They might downsize a less profitable division or combine teams in an effort eliminate redundant jobs.
Unfortunately, this means that some people will be left behind. If you make it through a round of layoffs, consider yourself lucky but only in the short term. Your number can come up next time.
If you are laid off during a restructuring or at any time, handle it professionally. It never helps to burn bridges. Accept what's happening and put all of your energy into finding a new place to work. Leaving your old company and making a fresh start might turn out to be a blessing in disguise.
Circular Reorganization
The third and final reason to reorganize is least productive and the most difficult to justify. Here's how it works.
Imagine a hospital with several different departments - orthopedics, obstetrics, heart and lung care, internal medicine, etc. Each department employs both doctors and nurses.
The hospital's administration does a study. Nurses in different departments do things differently. It's difficult to train someone from one area to work in another.
The administration suggests the creation of a centralized nursing department. Move all of the nurses out of their individual departments and into a centrally managed pool. Individual departments will pay depending on how many nurses they use.
A key selling point is that the new structure will help to standardize practices across departments. All of the nurses will be taught to do things in the same way. They'll be able to cover shifts in different departments and change departments altogether if they so choose. This will reduce burnout and increase the experience level of nurses throughout the hospital.
The change is implemented, but after a while, some of the departments beging to complain. The nurses that they trained have been moved into other roles. The new nurses require more training and observation. The doctors complain that they are paying more money for a lower level of service.
New administrators take over and promise a solution to the doctors' concerns. They move most of the nurses out of the centralized nursing department and put them back into individual departments.
Great Waste
The first set of hospital administrators boasted on their résumés that they increased efficiency and effectiveness by creating a centralized nursing department.
The second set of administrators boasted that they increased efficiency and effectiveness by decentralizing nurses and moving them back into the departments.
Both can make a case for what they did. But in reality, did the hospital run any more smoothly either way? Did the patients receive better care either way?
The nurses still worked hard every day caring for patients regardless of their reporting structure.
The only people who really benefitted from the various attempts at reorganization were where administrators. Restructuring departments gave them something to do, something to make them feel important, and something to put on their résumés.
Even if reorganization didn't accomplish anything important, it sounded nice.
Bottom Line
Reorganization is a reality of corporate life. Sometimes it fulfills a clear and vital purpose, and sometimes, it's just a big waste of time.
In nearly every case, however, even when it's a good idea, reorganization creates stress, confusion, and additional burdens for the work force. Reorganize if you must, but accept that reorganization is more than moving boxes around on an org chart.
There is a real human cost to restructuring. Think carefully before asking your people to assume that cost.
Copyright © 2014 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
How do you feel? Are you excited? Concerned? Hoping that things won't change as much as you fear that they will?
Management seems to think very highly of the revamped organizational structure. They talk about opportunity and possibilities for growth and collaboration.
Surprise! Surprise!
But consider this. If it really is good to undergo a reorganization, why didn't management tell you about it in advance? Everyone could have anticipated this with a sense of forthcoming excitement. "Hey! Did you hear? A reorganization is coming! We don't want to miss out on that!"
Of course, that's not how it works. That's not how it works at all. Management didn't tell you in advance, because reorganization is rarely a positive experience, and if you've every endured one, you're probably not looking forward to going through the process again.
Your daily routine is about to become more difficult. You may end up working more and liking your job less. Colleagues whom you have come to know and on whom you depend will be moved around or let go. You might be reassigned to a new boss, perhaps a person who knows little about you.
Well, guess what? There's nothing that you can do about it. All of these decisions were made before you knew what was going to happen. The people who made them didn't ask for your opinion. Your work life is being altered significantly, and they expect you to accept it - at least long enough to determine whether they need to keep you on.
It's probably a good time to polish up your résumé. Because in addition to things getting more challenging, more changes will be coming. And then next time, you might end up with a target on your back.
Why Reorganize?
There are three main reasons to reorganize. When company wants to change its core business, it may benefit from subtle or radical restructuring.
In the 1980's, IBM was primarily a manufacturer of large mainframe computer systems. But the management of IBM foresaw a different future. IBM restructured and focused more of its business on technology services and consulting.
When the technology bubble burst at the end of the 1990's, IBM maintained its business (and stock price) while many other "tech" companies stumbled. IBM's reorganization was a well-timed and well-executed success.
Transforming the business may be the best reason to reorganize, but it can still be an uncomfortable experience. No one likes to endure unanticipated changes. But change is often necessary. If your organization becomes more competitive and prosperous as a result of restructuring, that might work in your favor.
Cost Cutting and Downsizing
Sometimes companies reorganize in order to cut costs. They might downsize a less profitable division or combine teams in an effort eliminate redundant jobs.
Unfortunately, this means that some people will be left behind. If you make it through a round of layoffs, consider yourself lucky but only in the short term. Your number can come up next time.
If you are laid off during a restructuring or at any time, handle it professionally. It never helps to burn bridges. Accept what's happening and put all of your energy into finding a new place to work. Leaving your old company and making a fresh start might turn out to be a blessing in disguise.
Circular Reorganization
The third and final reason to reorganize is least productive and the most difficult to justify. Here's how it works.
Imagine a hospital with several different departments - orthopedics, obstetrics, heart and lung care, internal medicine, etc. Each department employs both doctors and nurses.
The hospital's administration does a study. Nurses in different departments do things differently. It's difficult to train someone from one area to work in another.
The administration suggests the creation of a centralized nursing department. Move all of the nurses out of their individual departments and into a centrally managed pool. Individual departments will pay depending on how many nurses they use.
A key selling point is that the new structure will help to standardize practices across departments. All of the nurses will be taught to do things in the same way. They'll be able to cover shifts in different departments and change departments altogether if they so choose. This will reduce burnout and increase the experience level of nurses throughout the hospital.
The change is implemented, but after a while, some of the departments beging to complain. The nurses that they trained have been moved into other roles. The new nurses require more training and observation. The doctors complain that they are paying more money for a lower level of service.
New administrators take over and promise a solution to the doctors' concerns. They move most of the nurses out of the centralized nursing department and put them back into individual departments.
Great Waste
The first set of hospital administrators boasted on their résumés that they increased efficiency and effectiveness by creating a centralized nursing department.
The second set of administrators boasted that they increased efficiency and effectiveness by decentralizing nurses and moving them back into the departments.
Both can make a case for what they did. But in reality, did the hospital run any more smoothly either way? Did the patients receive better care either way?
The nurses still worked hard every day caring for patients regardless of their reporting structure.
The only people who really benefitted from the various attempts at reorganization were where administrators. Restructuring departments gave them something to do, something to make them feel important, and something to put on their résumés.
Even if reorganization didn't accomplish anything important, it sounded nice.
Bottom Line
Reorganization is a reality of corporate life. Sometimes it fulfills a clear and vital purpose, and sometimes, it's just a big waste of time.
In nearly every case, however, even when it's a good idea, reorganization creates stress, confusion, and additional burdens for the work force. Reorganize if you must, but accept that reorganization is more than moving boxes around on an org chart.
There is a real human cost to restructuring. Think carefully before asking your people to assume that cost.
Copyright © 2014 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
A Brief History of Wasting Time
How To Avoid Results and Not Get Much Done Without Really Trying
Time is our most precious resource. Once spent, it can never be recovered. Time cannot be manufactured, mined, or synthesized from component elements. A day cannot be expanded, an hour stretched, a minute slowed down to last longer. And you can't run to the bank to borrow and extra 50,000 hours for a big project.
The time that we have is ALL that we have. And yet, how often do we use time to its best advantage?
Down Time
Each of us needs time to rest, relax, and refresh our minds and bodies. This so-called "down time" - time spent on sleep, exercise, recreation, and connection with loved ones - is not a waste. It shouldn't be hurried or sacrificed.
Time spent on refreshment and revitalization is an essential partner of the time that we spend being productive, i.e., the time that we use to accomplish things. Without adequate rest and relaxation, we cannot maintain our energy level or our mental clarity. We need energy and clarity in order to meet our obligations and accomplish objectives.
Productive Time
Productive time is the time that we dedicate to getting things done or for preparing to do the same. Here are some examples of productive time. I am listing them in reverse order to show their hierarchical relationship.
- Time spent solving a problem for a client.
- Time spent making a presentation to the client.
- Time spent developing the presentation.
- Time spent doing research in order to understand what the client needs and what to offer.
- Time spent acquiring the skills that enable us to help the client.
- Time spent setting up and managing a business that helps clients.
Wasting Time
We waste our Productive Time when we don't use it to its optimal benefit. There are two ways to waste time.
Time Wasting Strategy 1
We can spend time on something that's unrelated to accomplishing our objective - gossip, gaming, non-essential internet surfing, rehashing sporting events or television programs, etc.
Time Wasting Strategy 2
The second way to waste time is to spend it working inefficiently. Through lack of planning, understanding, insight, or communication, we can waste time even when we think that we are being productive and effective.
Focus and Awareness
It's easy to waste time when we lack focus or fail to maintain an awareness of its importance. Here's a common situation. I've witnessed similar activity countless times.
Mr. Latecomer arrives at the office at a leisurely hour (i.e. considerably later than the official office starting time). A few minutes later, a colleague ask the latecomer for assistance with something.
"I can't talk to you right now," insists Mr. Latecomer. "I'm working on a deadline." The colleague returns to his desk empty handed.
Thirty minutes later, someone in the office mentions they're vacation plans. It turns our that Mr. Latecomer has vacation time scheduled, so he joins into the conversation for several minutes.
Time for a Lesson
Mr. Latecomer was acting without focus. If he had been more aware of time and it's impact on the productivity of the team, he might have reached one or more of the following conclusions.
1. If you're working against a pressing deadline, try to arrive promptly rather than strolling into the workplace at a leisurely hour.
2. If you arrive at a leisurely hour, don't make excuses about how busy you are when someone asks for assistance.
3. If you're too busy to help a colleague with a work-related request, don't waste the time by joining off topic conversations.
Institutionalized Time Wasting
Sometimes policies backfire. A department might believe that it can save money by reducing the number of administrators on staff. But the result is that more highly paid workers will have to spend more of their day handling administrative tasks.
It doesn't make sense to have highly paid engineers or sales reps spend time filling out expense reports. They should focus on the work that they were hired to do. And yet, many companies reduce administrative support to save the expense of a modest salary. It's inefficient to put it mildly.
Ye Olde Car Service Scam
Corporations enact unproductive policies, but employee abuse of those policies by employees is also a problem. A notable example involves car service.
In larger cities, many employees take mass transit to the office. Sometimes business requires employees to work late when bus or train service becomes more limited.
In these cases, employees can book a car service to take them home. (This is similar to having a car pick you up at the airport.)
If an employee works past a certain hour (typically, 8 pm, but some companies have moved this up to 9), they are allowed to ride home using a car service. The company pays the bill for the ride. But is the expense justified?
Did the employee really need to work this late? Were other options feasible, such as commuting at a normal hour and working from home? Could they catch up on their work the following morning? Or could they have gotten more done during normal business hours if they had used their time more wisely?
The car service abuser is a busy person. At 5:30, they're still working hard - when they're no boasting to fellow employees about how late they'll need to work.
By 6:00, the employee has slowed down a bit due to fatigue. They take a short break to call their family, to let them know that they'll be working late and that they'll come home via the car service. "Don't wait for me! Go ahead and have dinner. I'll be late."
Ah, dinner! Even busy people get hungry. By 6:30, the late-working employee has looked through a drawer full of menus and placed an order for take out. At seven, they're in the lobby waiting for the food delivery to arrive. From seven to seven-thirty, the employee enjoys their dinner while glancing at their computer screen half-heartedly.
At 7:30, they wash their hands, use the rest room, and place one last call to the family to let them know that they'll be leaving soon.
And what do you know? It's time to pack up and get to the car!
Car service isn't cheap. What does the company gain in return for having a limo driver usher Mr. Busy back home to the suburbs? At best an extra sixty to ninety minutes of effort from an already tired employee who could just as easily have completed the same amount of work from the comfort of home.
Environmental Time Wasting
External events and conditions can inspire time wasting, as well. People discuss the Olympic Games, the Super Bowl, and the World Cup at length in the office. Ditto the World Series and the Academy Awards. Workers spend time on office pools during football season and college basketball's March Madness.
Companies aren't responsible for these events, but they do occur, and they dominate people's attention when work would otherwise be getting done.
Boom and Bust
The Internet boom of the late 1990's and early 2000's was worst environmental time wasting phenomenon that I have ever witnessed. It surpassed the impact of the Olympics, the Super Bowl, the World Cup, political conventions, royal marriages, and everything else fifty fold.
Office workers monitored their portfolios all day long. Today, we complain when someone is texting rather than paying attention to what we say. During the "dot com" boom, people had one eye trained on their stock positions and their pending trades virtually at all times. It was out of control.
People used to daydream about joining a successful start up company or making enough through "day trading" to stop working for a boss altogether.
Everyone seemed to know someone who knew someone with stock options that were worth "a paper million" - even though very few people actually sold the options and realized windfalls of such magnitude. "We would all soon be rich!" thought the conventional wisdom. It was only a matter of time.
Of course, the overhyped, over-inflated market eventually collapsed and crashed. Portfolios that were once apparently rocketing toward the stratosphere were now sinking rapidly into quicksand. Workers lost interest in market updates and financial reports when the news was no longer euphoric. Day trader envy disappeared overnight.
It's easy to become captivated by compelling environmental conditions. It's easy to be driven to distraction, especially when everyone in the office is riding the same bandwagon and sipping the same Kool-Aid.
Tempus Fugit
Time management is a vast and complex topic. I could list countless anecdotal examples of time wasting activities that I've witnessed in the workplace. But let's table that discussion until another day. I wouldn't want to waste your time.
Copyright © 2014 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Time is our most precious resource. Once spent, it can never be recovered. Time cannot be manufactured, mined, or synthesized from component elements. A day cannot be expanded, an hour stretched, a minute slowed down to last longer. And you can't run to the bank to borrow and extra 50,000 hours for a big project.
The time that we have is ALL that we have. And yet, how often do we use time to its best advantage?
Down Time
Each of us needs time to rest, relax, and refresh our minds and bodies. This so-called "down time" - time spent on sleep, exercise, recreation, and connection with loved ones - is not a waste. It shouldn't be hurried or sacrificed.
Time spent on refreshment and revitalization is an essential partner of the time that we spend being productive, i.e., the time that we use to accomplish things. Without adequate rest and relaxation, we cannot maintain our energy level or our mental clarity. We need energy and clarity in order to meet our obligations and accomplish objectives.
Productive Time
Productive time is the time that we dedicate to getting things done or for preparing to do the same. Here are some examples of productive time. I am listing them in reverse order to show their hierarchical relationship.
- Time spent solving a problem for a client.
- Time spent making a presentation to the client.
- Time spent developing the presentation.
- Time spent doing research in order to understand what the client needs and what to offer.
- Time spent acquiring the skills that enable us to help the client.
- Time spent setting up and managing a business that helps clients.
Wasting Time
We waste our Productive Time when we don't use it to its optimal benefit. There are two ways to waste time.
Time Wasting Strategy 1
We can spend time on something that's unrelated to accomplishing our objective - gossip, gaming, non-essential internet surfing, rehashing sporting events or television programs, etc.
Time Wasting Strategy 2
The second way to waste time is to spend it working inefficiently. Through lack of planning, understanding, insight, or communication, we can waste time even when we think that we are being productive and effective.
Focus and Awareness
It's easy to waste time when we lack focus or fail to maintain an awareness of its importance. Here's a common situation. I've witnessed similar activity countless times.
Mr. Latecomer arrives at the office at a leisurely hour (i.e. considerably later than the official office starting time). A few minutes later, a colleague ask the latecomer for assistance with something.
"I can't talk to you right now," insists Mr. Latecomer. "I'm working on a deadline." The colleague returns to his desk empty handed.
Thirty minutes later, someone in the office mentions they're vacation plans. It turns our that Mr. Latecomer has vacation time scheduled, so he joins into the conversation for several minutes.
Time for a Lesson
Mr. Latecomer was acting without focus. If he had been more aware of time and it's impact on the productivity of the team, he might have reached one or more of the following conclusions.
1. If you're working against a pressing deadline, try to arrive promptly rather than strolling into the workplace at a leisurely hour.
2. If you arrive at a leisurely hour, don't make excuses about how busy you are when someone asks for assistance.
3. If you're too busy to help a colleague with a work-related request, don't waste the time by joining off topic conversations.
Institutionalized Time Wasting
Sometimes policies backfire. A department might believe that it can save money by reducing the number of administrators on staff. But the result is that more highly paid workers will have to spend more of their day handling administrative tasks.
It doesn't make sense to have highly paid engineers or sales reps spend time filling out expense reports. They should focus on the work that they were hired to do. And yet, many companies reduce administrative support to save the expense of a modest salary. It's inefficient to put it mildly.
Ye Olde Car Service Scam
Corporations enact unproductive policies, but employee abuse of those policies by employees is also a problem. A notable example involves car service.
In larger cities, many employees take mass transit to the office. Sometimes business requires employees to work late when bus or train service becomes more limited.
In these cases, employees can book a car service to take them home. (This is similar to having a car pick you up at the airport.)
If an employee works past a certain hour (typically, 8 pm, but some companies have moved this up to 9), they are allowed to ride home using a car service. The company pays the bill for the ride. But is the expense justified?
Did the employee really need to work this late? Were other options feasible, such as commuting at a normal hour and working from home? Could they catch up on their work the following morning? Or could they have gotten more done during normal business hours if they had used their time more wisely?
The car service abuser is a busy person. At 5:30, they're still working hard - when they're no boasting to fellow employees about how late they'll need to work.
By 6:00, the employee has slowed down a bit due to fatigue. They take a short break to call their family, to let them know that they'll be working late and that they'll come home via the car service. "Don't wait for me! Go ahead and have dinner. I'll be late."
Ah, dinner! Even busy people get hungry. By 6:30, the late-working employee has looked through a drawer full of menus and placed an order for take out. At seven, they're in the lobby waiting for the food delivery to arrive. From seven to seven-thirty, the employee enjoys their dinner while glancing at their computer screen half-heartedly.
At 7:30, they wash their hands, use the rest room, and place one last call to the family to let them know that they'll be leaving soon.
And what do you know? It's time to pack up and get to the car!
Car service isn't cheap. What does the company gain in return for having a limo driver usher Mr. Busy back home to the suburbs? At best an extra sixty to ninety minutes of effort from an already tired employee who could just as easily have completed the same amount of work from the comfort of home.
Environmental Time Wasting
External events and conditions can inspire time wasting, as well. People discuss the Olympic Games, the Super Bowl, and the World Cup at length in the office. Ditto the World Series and the Academy Awards. Workers spend time on office pools during football season and college basketball's March Madness.
Companies aren't responsible for these events, but they do occur, and they dominate people's attention when work would otherwise be getting done.
Boom and Bust
The Internet boom of the late 1990's and early 2000's was worst environmental time wasting phenomenon that I have ever witnessed. It surpassed the impact of the Olympics, the Super Bowl, the World Cup, political conventions, royal marriages, and everything else fifty fold.
Office workers monitored their portfolios all day long. Today, we complain when someone is texting rather than paying attention to what we say. During the "dot com" boom, people had one eye trained on their stock positions and their pending trades virtually at all times. It was out of control.
People used to daydream about joining a successful start up company or making enough through "day trading" to stop working for a boss altogether.
Everyone seemed to know someone who knew someone with stock options that were worth "a paper million" - even though very few people actually sold the options and realized windfalls of such magnitude. "We would all soon be rich!" thought the conventional wisdom. It was only a matter of time.
Of course, the overhyped, over-inflated market eventually collapsed and crashed. Portfolios that were once apparently rocketing toward the stratosphere were now sinking rapidly into quicksand. Workers lost interest in market updates and financial reports when the news was no longer euphoric. Day trader envy disappeared overnight.
It's easy to become captivated by compelling environmental conditions. It's easy to be driven to distraction, especially when everyone in the office is riding the same bandwagon and sipping the same Kool-Aid.
Tempus Fugit
Time management is a vast and complex topic. I could list countless anecdotal examples of time wasting activities that I've witnessed in the workplace. But let's table that discussion until another day. I wouldn't want to waste your time.
Copyright © 2014 www.corporateabsurdity.com
All Rationality Reserved
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)