Steve Jobs vs. process

A list of Steve Jobs quotes brought me back to the thought about how foolish it is to try and do "leadership by process". Process can do great things, particularly when you're trying to orchestrate a large group of average people toward an above-average result. But, I think you'll always get a better result with minimal process (though still present in necessary areas, particularly those that nobody cares about) and smaller groups of high quality people who are passionate about what they're doing. Unfortunately, I think that once you turn leadership into a process in your organization, you rule out the chance of a true leader -- one who does not need a process -- from ever occupying that role. You've planned for and embraced mediocrity.

Unfortunately, organizations to which nobody is attracted (because they do boring work) may often have to fall back to "leadership by process". It's easy to see why many people would be excited to work on the products that Apple works on, but not so easy to raise the enthusiasm of an office full of accountants, doing work that nobody appreciates and which only garners attention when it breaks down, to the same level.

It's also a reminder that the published comments of leaders have to be understood in the context of that leader's own company or industry, and that many of the thoughts may not be applicable to your own.

Technorati: Steve Jobs, process

Energy crises and the church

In the UK, Church of England leaders are becoming involved in the debate about future directions for electricity generation, suggesting that nuclear be avoided by placing more emphasis on the need for the population to conserve in the interests of the future of the planet.

I like the clarity of their message, and it removes some of the ambiguity about the position that religious leaders have in this debate. It often appeared to me that religion in general wasn't very concerned with either this issue, or the issue of global warming, presumably deferring judgement to a higher power.

It's very appropriate for the church to get involved in this discussion as churches are centres of motivation toward deferring yourself as an individual to a greater purpose. Most, if not all, religions challenge their constituents to constrain their desires and work toward something outside themselves, and this will be a very important attitude to have in dealing with energy crises as they appear on the horizon.

I'm similarly impressed with Japan's approach. This type of self-sacrifice is something I find very hard to foresee in North American culture; it'd be great if Michael Coren would get on-board :)

Technorati: peak oil, religion, energy, Michael Coren

The edges of workforce demographics

There's been quite a lot said recently in the mainstream press about twentysomethings generally drifting in life without families or responsibilities. The recent movie Failure To Launch (which I have not seen) affirmed it as a cultural trend that has been acknowledged by the mainstream, preceded by lesser-known movies such as Garden State and Elizabethtown, and mainstream articles on gold-collar consumers. But, while it's appropriate to see the humour in the situation, it's also prudent to consider the other side of the coin, which is that when these twentysomethings do try to go out on their own, it's often not successful; even-handed books which acknowledge both the unrealistic expectations that this generation has for the quality of their initial independent lifestyle, but also the unfavourable market that they are seeking employment in, have been published on this subject, as well.

And now comes a recent episode of CBC Venture that explored the trend from a different angle: the new generation of unshackled, younger workers don't have the same fears and motivations that family-motivated workers have and are less worried about their fortunes in the job market. If they lose their job, they'll just wait until they can find another one. Or, maybe they'll just quit if they don't like it. There's no pressure to do anything in particular, making them less vulnerable to pressure from their employers.

A similar trend that I haven't seen mentioned in the mainstream, though, and is only from personal observation, is that the other end of this situation is that baby boomers may soon realize that they don't need their jobs, either. If their retirement plans are progressing as planned, they may start doing the calculations to figure out what their position is, and end up realizing that they can actually afford to retire sooner than they thought. It's a possibility. If that happens, they may either leave the workforce or just drift until their leave is expedited by the company they work for; they don't need their job, but they'll be happy to sit in their chair and collect an inflated paycheque until the company decides that they're no longer needed. But, their drive will be gone, and so will their productivity.

Either way, there is the potential that both ends of the workforce will have no motivation to continue to do the work they're doing, and feel no need to succumb to pressure from their employers to meet unreasonable demands (demands which are often status-quo). The middle -- generation X, and the tail-end of the baby boomers -- will be squeezed, as a result.

There will always be people who love the work that they do. But, I don't think you'll find many of these people in large corporations. Such corporations, recognizing the lack of intrinsic benefit in the work offered, seem to rely heavily on the use of job market forces to devise employee compensation schemes. These are the ones that will suffer if this comes to pass, I think.

Technorati: twentysomethings, baby boomers, employment, demographics

Interim solutions and "peak oil"

A good post by Paula Hay questions the intense emphasis on the endgame of Peak Oil and attempts to shift focus back to the period between now and then; for example, well before oil is depleted, significant economic hardship will affect the least-prepared well in advance of the finale. The main point of the post, though, is that an unwillingness to discuss the issue of money and personal financial situations with others, or even amongst friends, in many cultures will prevent an appropriately elaborate discussion of the effects that will be felt; money is a taboo subject, but is critical in a discussion that hopes to communicate the issues around impending economic hardship. A further obstacle is that many parents even feel uncomfortable approaching the subject of money with their adult children: many parents reject their childrens' irresponsible approach to money, have voiced this view in the past with negative results, and are now uncomfortable starting what has a history of becoming a hostile conversation.

As a further example of this problem, if money is a taboo subject, how do you suggest to friends that it is imperative that they focus on paying down their mortgage before the downturn? And, how do you encourage them to free themselves of the other financial debts that they've accumulated? Discussion of money is taken as an invasion of privacy in this culture, and suggestions about improving their situation are taken as insults. The minority who are aware of these issues will address them in their personal situations, but for the problem to be minimized, knowledge of this issue has to be transferred to others in their social network.

Personally, I find many individual preparations for periods of scarcity a bit strange: such preparations are often based on assumptions of a reduced, but still present, resource supply, a stable society and friendly neighbourhood relations. In my mind, one of the first things that will happen when true scarcity genuinely exists is that anything you've prepared for will be taken from you at gunpoint by one or more of the 2-4% of the sociopathic population. Your homegrown organic produce and electric generator will be stolen, and your house will be invaded and looted. Also, these are endgame preparations that distract from the solutions to problems that will occur in the interim, and will hit hard when they do. Hay's post echoes some of these thoughts, too.

Of course, this problem is still off in the future. I don't think it's anything to get particularly worked up about just yet, but I believe that it will be a problem in my lifetime, perhaps in the first half, and it's much easier to start thinking about these issues sooner rather than later in order to achieve a rational response relatively free of panic.

I've categorized this as a "peak oil" issue, but it's really a post-peak-oil issue, isn't it?

Technorati: peak oil

"It's not rocket science!"

A few comments:

• rocket science is challenging for rocket scientists, let alone those who aren't
• the people who say this are normally not rocket scientists
• many of the things that rocket scientists do, but which are not rocket science, are challenging to people who aren't rocket scientists
• many of said people might as well say, "it's not basic algebra!"

One potential problem: "it's not basic algebra!" has more syllables than "it's not rocket science!"

Technorati: rocket science, phrases

The side-effects of microwave cooking

I came across a couple of articles recently (one while in search of the other) which beg questions about the safety of microwaves. I don't remember when microwaves first came to be because they've always been around for as long as I can remember, but the only safety concerns that I've heard from people are those around your proximity to the microwave while it is actively cooking; for example, "don't stand too close to the microwave while it's cooking".

But, what about its effect on the food that we eat?

The first article is from New Scientist, and says that the flavonoids in broccoli are virtually destroyed when the vegetable is cooked in the microwave. The flavonoids do not even leach into the water -- they are simply destroyed. Next, from worst to best, is boiling, pressure cooking, and steaming. Blanching vegetables (done prior to freezing frozen vegetables) also had a deleterious effect on antioxidants, and this wouldn't alter the claim that "frozen vegetables are as nutritious as fresh", because antioxidants aren't nutrients.

But, what about this (unsubstantiated) article from Men's Fitness which says that "vegetables are best when cooked in the microwave, losing fewer of their vitamins and nutrients and less of their color."? Of the two, I think I'll believe New Scientist.

The second article has a footnote referring to the fact that microwaving blood destroys the blood's red cells, and that the use of a microwave to warm blood for the purpose of a transfusion may be fatal to the patient.

So, what are microwaves doing to the subjects of their intensity which makes them alter the structure of the subjects so much? The fact that the microwave is ubiquitous in societies having increased incidence of certain types of diseases in the latter part of the period following the introduction of the microwave makes it at least worth a look, I think. Maybe it has been studied and I just don't know about it, but it seems apparent that it's not the best cooking method to use if you want to get the most from your food (though, by standards of taste, I think we already knew that).

Movie opinions, and one for TV

(out of 5)

Crash (2004) 3.5
I liked it overall, but there were too many caricatures. Creating caricatures to make a very valid point is unnecessary, and is the easy way out. If we look back and find that this movie has had an impact on society, I will rate it higher in retrospect.

The Devil's Rejects 4
Very stylish; a sequel better than the original. The only reason I didn't give it a 5 is that it's a bit difficult to say that a movie based on this type of material is perfect :)

House of Sand and Fog 4
Crash reminded me of this movie, and I think this one was slightly better. The way that the conflict is setup is very good, and it left ambiguous feelings, even though, logically, the moral perimeter was clearly defined.

Garden State 5
Excellent, and perhaps just because this subject matter is relevant to me and underexplored (mainly because it is a recent phenomenon).

Cinderella Man 3.5
To me, this was more of a depression-era slice of life than a film about boxing. The finale was very well executed, but I have a feeling that I wouldn't have found it as gripping if I hadn't watched Million Dollar Baby recently, though my excessive viewings of Rocky IV had an impact on my viewing of this one, too.

Batman Begins 2
I like bats. I like the point that, to be intimidating to others, a man would model himself after what he himself finds most frightening. But, a man that wants to act like a bat is a bit strange. And, when I see Christian Bale, I can't stop seeing Patrick Bat(e)man from American Psycho -- a movie that I liked better than this one -- and this obviously has a deleterious effect on the focus of the movie for me.

Palindromes 4
I like Todd Solondz movies a lot. He doesn't stop at introducing quirky characters. He explores them, whether they're the lead or not. This wasn't his best movie, and I liked the three predecessors more than this one. In this one, he uses different actresses to play the same character throughout the movie, allowing you to explore whether or not you feel differently about a character based on how they look. I think he did it for more reasons than this, but I thought that this was one of the interesting results.

The Barber 4
A Canadian movie that's not about odd sex or homicidal squeegee kids usually stands a chance with me, and this one had a lot of atmosphere, partly due to the lack of light (it is based in Alaska during the season of perpetual darkness). It had a very strange mistake right in the first scene of the movie, but other than that it was great.

Ripley's Game 5
John Malkovich is excellent in this role. I suspect that, to appreciate it, you have to be interested in the terrible effects that sociopaths can have on your life if you can't weed them out early on in their involvement.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind 3
It seems like Charlie Kaufman has figured out that, to avoid the sequel curse, you just have to make sure that you avoid making sequels with the same characters, and that you can't give the movies similar names. This one is similar in concept to Being John Malkovich and Adaptation., and I felt like I was watching a sequel to one or both of those movies.

Million Dollar Baby 3
After this one, I felt similar to how I did after Crash, and they were screenwritten by the same person. Frankly, I don't really find womens' boxing very appealing, especially if they're also mothers (which, in this, she wasn't, but I think it's a worthwhile emphasis). The film was well-directed and well-written, but it's one of those movies about which I will agree with someone who says that it was an academically-sound movie (unless they're drinking a latte), but that didn't really motivate me in any particular direction.

...and one for TV (just to make a point).

Dawson's Creek 5
This is the only TV show that has meant anything to me over the past 10-15 years, though I don't watch much TV. The last 2/3 of the series ruined what was a very sensitively told fable-with-a-grain-of-truth. Most of the negative hyperbole about the moral decadence of this series was based on the last 2/3, and I agree with much of what has been said. The first two seasons (particularly the first season) were excellent. I was able to relate very much to the neurotic lead -- the aspiring screenwriter who scripts his future based on an unassuming seed, and is disappointed when the script isn't followed as closely as he'd like. The characters were real, they had depth, and they were consistent. They talked a bit too much like adults, and always seemed to know better than their parents, but that's artistic license, I suppose. The show started to deteriorate when the original creator began to distance himself from the show at or around season 3, although seasons 3-4 were still quite good. By season 5, it was almost unrecognizable. The creator came back to cap the series with the finale and, although I didn't like the outcome, it brought faithful closure.

Technorati: movies, Dawson's Creek

Product placement in "Curious George"

A recent article by Linda Hales in the Toronto Star opining the product placement aimed at children in the childrens' animation "Curious George" misses the mark, I think. The Dole bananas and Volkswagen cars in the cartoon aren't aimed at children. They're primarily aimed at the parents who accompany their children to the movie. This kind of cross-appeal has been going on for a long time in cartoons. It's why Phil Collins sang the music in Disney's "Tarzan", and why Jack Johnson sings the music in "Curious George". It also explains the insertion of undercover adult jokes into big-production cartoons surreptitiously aimed only at children. Parents like the music, so they'll be more willing to take their children to see something that has something in it for them. Hit them from multiple angles. Otherwise, why pay Jack Johnson or Phil Collins to come up with the cartoon's soundtrack? Children won't care.

Also, it's not the first time that products like this have appeared in childrens' programming. What about Herbie the Volkswagen "Love Bug"?

Technorati: Curious George, cartoons, movies, marketing

OEMs and Windows Vista versions

After the news this week about Windows Vista coming in 6 different versions, my question is: which versions will the OEMs choose?

Seeing as the versions will be upgradeable on-the-fly, this looks like a good opportunity for Microsoft to double-dip from the OEM market. By selling the OEMs the Basic version at or below what Windows XP Home currently sells for, Microsoft can focus on enticing users to pay an upgrade fee at some later point in time to upgrade the copy of Windows that came with their PC. Since OEM versions of Windows are tied to the PC that they were originally installed on, there's not much concern about being able to carry-forward the upgraded features to another PC. It may also shave a few dollars off the price of a budget PC if the licensing fee for Vista Home Basic drops with the reduction in functionality.

It'll put more pressure on Apple, too, because their cheapest computer just went up $100 with the introduction of the Intel-based Mac Mini.

On the topic of Vista, I have one final comment. I think that the new Glass look is ugly, and I hope the appearance of Vista changes significantly before it's released because I find it hard to believe that this looks attractive. Failing any significant change, I suppose there's always the possibility of just turning it off, which you can do.

Technorati: Windows Vista, Windows