I don't cease to be amazed about what happens to people I know from way back in the past. I've known them, I've spent time with them and suddenly ten years later they're something completely different.
There's this one guy who is now a campaign manager for one of the Netherlands' most prominent politicians; back in high school there wasn't a single person in the entire year who was sent out of class more than he was. Of course now his demeanor comes in handy in his work and current role. And it just doesn't end with this: people who were the biggest party animals in high school (middle school even) got married and now have 2.4 kids. They are homemakers now. In the past ten years we've seen people turning to religion, who were not religious in the first place; turning away from religion when they very much so initially; guys who were dead set to move out of the country only to come back again, tail between legs and all.
Which comes to show: everybody in our generation is going through the same waves and each of us has to deal with the same question how to make sense of life after - in casu - high school. That may or may not have to do with how anyone has presented him- or herself in the past.
For a lot of people - myself included - life pretty much gave them what they asked for and invested in (...so far). But the others mentioned before changed course, backtracked and did something else, which we of greater distance would call strangely out-of-character.
And that doesn't make sense, because it does make perfect sense to them. I guess everyone has the natural reaction to be surprised by something unexpected.
This is of course speaking from the perspective from someone who has stayed doggedly on course since kindergarten.
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Friday, April 28, 2006
Some observations about women
I'm sure these statements were made in jest, but they were so off the wall, they worked:
- In any enclosed space where at least one woman is present, it's always too cold or too warm
- If a man makes friends with one woman, three more become his enemy
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Will over Common Sense
I am a great believer in the power of will. The biggest achievements in life are often the ones done by people with the will to move past boundaries and limits and prejudice. People can actually do more than they think they can, but it takes a strong conviction to push through all the physical and mental constraints.
Now I also believe you can go further than is actually wise. The power of will is not equal to wisdom and can in fact cancel it out. There's a very fine line between being willful and being stupid.
Or actually, it's called stubborn.
Guess which I am.
Now I also believe you can go further than is actually wise. The power of will is not equal to wisdom and can in fact cancel it out. There's a very fine line between being willful and being stupid.
Or actually, it's called stubborn.
Guess which I am.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
I have a job to do, but why?
In my business I do jobs for people who are either unfit, too busy or otherwise unable to do the jobs themselves. This job could entail something like building a system, or shaping a business process, or organizing a group of people. Of course it’s not just enough to do the job, you have to be successful in it. Thankfully there are a lot of ways to go around doing this.
The customers I’m working for obviously has to be comfortable how I do my job for them. They would have procedures to do so, or a have a particular organization in place that I would have to adhere to. Some even follow a methodology, or a framework, or guidelines. It can be enforced with tools, bylaws, legal proceedings and so on.
Some customers have got nothing of the sort, and are only interested in getting things done. In fact, I would then have total and complete freedom how to handle the job at hand. Given enough experience I could even impose my own way of working on the customer.
The perception of a job well done and the actual outcome can be very different from each other. Even more so in my line of work, where few, if any standards are universally applied, and where the industry is far from reaching maturity. Everyone and his uncle has a different path to success and it mostly depends on how well you fit the job, the environment and the situation how well the result is received. There's the habits, the unified process, rapid development, feng shui, tao management, waterfall project management, prince, and about a dozen others.
What I’ve seen so far, it apparently is not natural for people to work effectively. Working effectively takes up energy and attention, which people would rather spend on things they value more than work, crazily enough. Every theory we’ve come up with, every framework or proceeding gives people incentives to complete a task effectively, or directs them into an effective, or more productive mindset. These are only slightly less demanding than religions.
So why aren't we effective people from the outset? Why do we need to be told, enlightened (sometimes reminded) how we should be doing our work? Why is it against our nature to be successful, productive and dedicated?
The customers I’m working for obviously has to be comfortable how I do my job for them. They would have procedures to do so, or a have a particular organization in place that I would have to adhere to. Some even follow a methodology, or a framework, or guidelines. It can be enforced with tools, bylaws, legal proceedings and so on.
Some customers have got nothing of the sort, and are only interested in getting things done. In fact, I would then have total and complete freedom how to handle the job at hand. Given enough experience I could even impose my own way of working on the customer.
The perception of a job well done and the actual outcome can be very different from each other. Even more so in my line of work, where few, if any standards are universally applied, and where the industry is far from reaching maturity. Everyone and his uncle has a different path to success and it mostly depends on how well you fit the job, the environment and the situation how well the result is received. There's the habits, the unified process, rapid development, feng shui, tao management, waterfall project management, prince, and about a dozen others.
What I’ve seen so far, it apparently is not natural for people to work effectively. Working effectively takes up energy and attention, which people would rather spend on things they value more than work, crazily enough. Every theory we’ve come up with, every framework or proceeding gives people incentives to complete a task effectively, or directs them into an effective, or more productive mindset. These are only slightly less demanding than religions.
So why aren't we effective people from the outset? Why do we need to be told, enlightened (sometimes reminded) how we should be doing our work? Why is it against our nature to be successful, productive and dedicated?
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Closing the deal
At business school negotiation techniques was an elective, filled with theories and excercises about game theory and the like. Unfortunately everyone knows about these, so there's no advantage to be gained from following this course now.
I've found the most successful negotiations are highly personal and tightly-bound to context, environment and situation. It's just a matter of what you can get away with to determine if you had a good deal or not. Generally everybody feels fine if they spend less of what they have and get more of what they want. There's really no strategy to that, so it all comes back down to the tactics.
The objective success of a deal is thus the degree to which you got what you wanted opposed to all other alternative outcomes. If your goal is to do exactly that, then here's some tactics I found which work:
I've found the most successful negotiations are highly personal and tightly-bound to context, environment and situation. It's just a matter of what you can get away with to determine if you had a good deal or not. Generally everybody feels fine if they spend less of what they have and get more of what they want. There's really no strategy to that, so it all comes back down to the tactics.
The objective success of a deal is thus the degree to which you got what you wanted opposed to all other alternative outcomes. If your goal is to do exactly that, then here's some tactics I found which work:
- Negotiations grow gradually more personal, the longer and the more conflictuous one gets; it also means that parties get closer to their limits, and they no longer see solutions within scope; use this knowledge to profit from.
- Everyone knows and expects that all parties know the rules of engagement, zero-sum games, negotiation etiquette etcetera. People who don't know, are supposed to be taken advantage of. However, if you keep handling the rules haphazardly, but correctly, you keep the other parties on their toes. Eccentricity breeds uncomfortability. Uncomfortability becomes a commodity in the negotiation, which you can take advantage of.
- Understanding the opposition is paramount. Sharing goals is much better than fighting for your own. Also, parties who are each other's worst enemies will go to the ends of the earth to mess each other - and their negotiation - up. (Just look at the Middle East) And that means that everyone will go much further in a destructive direction, than they would have during a cordial negotiation.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Liar Liar, Pants On Fire
Some people strive to be as honest and open as possible. Others, like me I guess, strive for diplomacy and tact. This makes for quite different approaches how people handle issues in life. Let me explain why I swing the way I do.
It takes very little to humiliate or insult a person, or at the very least make him/her uncomfortable. Sometimes a mere utterance or a simple gesture is enough. I take it the risk of saying something humiliating or insulting is bigger if you are really open and honest. To keep the peace I'd rather be diplomatic and tactful. Less things to fix, means less time wasted in my account.
With diplomacy comes the unfortunate consequence that you have to be frugal with information. You have to be careful what you say, who you say it to and when. Sometimes you have to hide your thoughts. Sometimes lying is involved. It takes a lot of energy to pay attention to all this. It takes a lot of energy to keep track of all the lies.
I guess the downside is here, diplomatic people are deemed less trustworthy, which undermines the entire deal of showing tact in the first place, keeping the peace.
Which works out better? Being honest or showing tact? I guess it depends on how well you go with the flow. There's a very fine nuance between the two approaches, but the contrasts are fundamental, and the tactics ultimately used are wildly different. I think honesty gets you a lot of places, but honesty will polarize people faster as well. Diplomacy by its very nature handles everyone the same as much as possible, and that is closer to where I am at.
It takes very little to humiliate or insult a person, or at the very least make him/her uncomfortable. Sometimes a mere utterance or a simple gesture is enough. I take it the risk of saying something humiliating or insulting is bigger if you are really open and honest. To keep the peace I'd rather be diplomatic and tactful. Less things to fix, means less time wasted in my account.
With diplomacy comes the unfortunate consequence that you have to be frugal with information. You have to be careful what you say, who you say it to and when. Sometimes you have to hide your thoughts. Sometimes lying is involved. It takes a lot of energy to pay attention to all this. It takes a lot of energy to keep track of all the lies.
I guess the downside is here, diplomatic people are deemed less trustworthy, which undermines the entire deal of showing tact in the first place, keeping the peace.
Which works out better? Being honest or showing tact? I guess it depends on how well you go with the flow. There's a very fine nuance between the two approaches, but the contrasts are fundamental, and the tactics ultimately used are wildly different. I think honesty gets you a lot of places, but honesty will polarize people faster as well. Diplomacy by its very nature handles everyone the same as much as possible, and that is closer to where I am at.
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Governments vs Corporations
Don't get me wrong... I feel for the guys and girls at Nedcar who are in serious threat of losing their jobs very soon now. I am sad for the Netherlands losing another thousand or so labour places to the far (cheaper) east. Not to mention the personal losses people would suffer...
But come on... picture the CEO of Mitsubishi coming over to a rather small country just next to Germany. He hears he's meeting with the Prime Minister of that fine country, so he prepares himself thoroughly, shines his gold Rolex wrist watch, combs his hair (badly by the way, by the looks of his television interview); and then he meets Balkenende... this is what the CEO must be thinking afterwards:
"ARE YOU BLOODY SERIOUS? THIS IS THE PM OF YOUR COUNTRY?"
(Or something similar in Japanese.)
Can you blame Mitsubishi to just think: "piss off, with your expensive good-for-nothing car factory and your goody-too-shoes Harry Potter-look-a-like; I'm taking my business to those farmers in China." They are not taking us seriously. At all.
It's not like Balkenende can threaten to attack the Mitsubishi head office with his fleet of F-16s, just like G.W. Bush and Iraq. Balkenende can also not just deny Japanese companies access through the Netherlands, because it will hurt us just as much as it will hurt them.
This is a perfect example why you need a charismatic, strong, attractive and eloquent figurehead to be spokesperson for a country. Now all we have is a Japanese company mocking us, taking away our jobs, and we've got nothing to show for it.
But come on... picture the CEO of Mitsubishi coming over to a rather small country just next to Germany. He hears he's meeting with the Prime Minister of that fine country, so he prepares himself thoroughly, shines his gold Rolex wrist watch, combs his hair (badly by the way, by the looks of his television interview); and then he meets Balkenende... this is what the CEO must be thinking afterwards:
"ARE YOU BLOODY SERIOUS? THIS IS THE PM OF YOUR COUNTRY?"
(Or something similar in Japanese.)
Can you blame Mitsubishi to just think: "piss off, with your expensive good-for-nothing car factory and your goody-too-shoes Harry Potter-look-a-like; I'm taking my business to those farmers in China." They are not taking us seriously. At all.
It's not like Balkenende can threaten to attack the Mitsubishi head office with his fleet of F-16s, just like G.W. Bush and Iraq. Balkenende can also not just deny Japanese companies access through the Netherlands, because it will hurt us just as much as it will hurt them.
This is a perfect example why you need a charismatic, strong, attractive and eloquent figurehead to be spokesperson for a country. Now all we have is a Japanese company mocking us, taking away our jobs, and we've got nothing to show for it.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
Things I think about this Easter
- Anyone can sympathize with the sufferings of a friend, but it requires a very fine nature to sympathize with a friend's success (Oscar Wilde)
- When you are in the business of selling things, use someone from the opposite sex to the customer. Works like a charm.
- Mockery is an important social tool for squelching stupidity (Scott Adams)
- Excitement, respect and justice are the three aspects that I want, demand and expect to get from whatever I do; however they do go back to one single motive: I invest time and energy to get and to receive. Quite selfish.
- Why do I have to be a coffee connaisseur just to order some espresso from the internet? And what does the color light blue have to do with a Brazilian coffee bean?
Friday, April 14, 2006
Beliefs
We do have questions about life. Why are we here? What are we supposed to do here? What happens after we die? Why does a cat always land on its feet? Some of us have found the answers to these questions in love, family, money, or work or something else entirely. Others have turned to religion and found what they sought over there.
It is quite natural to have these questions, even more so to be curious about the answers. Our time here is limited, so there’s a certain urgency to get these things out of the way. Religion, any religion, gets us there faster.
I do sense that the troubles we have nowadays come from trying to convince people that some answers - or means to get to them - are better than other ones. Again this seems to be an inherent characteristic of us humans. Our time is limited, and we don’t want to spend it all sampling all the different alternatives. Also we don’t want to be tempted by the alternatives, so we tend to block them out or otherwise disqualify them in a manner palpable to us. Given any question, everybody can come up with an answer. Everybody can dispute any other answer.
I personally cannot be bothered searching for all the answers until I found the one truth. Yet I would go for something that would be satisfactory, and be done with it. Furthermore I don’t need anyone else to share such a thing with me. You’re welcome to join, but you can also have your own way. At the moment I do not have need to be shown a more satisfactory way of life. Maybe I will never have. Anyway, if I want your input, I will ask.
It is quite natural to have these questions, even more so to be curious about the answers. Our time here is limited, so there’s a certain urgency to get these things out of the way. Religion, any religion, gets us there faster.
I do sense that the troubles we have nowadays come from trying to convince people that some answers - or means to get to them - are better than other ones. Again this seems to be an inherent characteristic of us humans. Our time is limited, and we don’t want to spend it all sampling all the different alternatives. Also we don’t want to be tempted by the alternatives, so we tend to block them out or otherwise disqualify them in a manner palpable to us. Given any question, everybody can come up with an answer. Everybody can dispute any other answer.
I personally cannot be bothered searching for all the answers until I found the one truth. Yet I would go for something that would be satisfactory, and be done with it. Furthermore I don’t need anyone else to share such a thing with me. You’re welcome to join, but you can also have your own way. At the moment I do not have need to be shown a more satisfactory way of life. Maybe I will never have. Anyway, if I want your input, I will ask.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Generation Indifferent
As far back as I can remember my classes in high school were... uneventful. They were eerily quiet whenever the teacher asked a question. I guess there were maybe two or three people who always gave the answers (these are the guys/girls who always had the highest grades), but most people were silent. I guess I was one of them.
It's not that we were not smart, we all got through our mid-terms and tests and exams. Some of us even got the highest grades; I guess for most people in my class, it's not that we were afraid of the teacher or our peers. However I do think, I do believe my classes were very indifferent. We didn't care about our classes; it was something to get through until we got to do something personal. The teacher was someone who we tolerated, much less listened to.
In France the government nearly installed youth-labour laws that would make it easy for employers to hire and fire under-26-year-olds. Nearly, is the key word here, as the people revolted, rioted and got results. The law was nixed. The government was forced to listen to the people.
I don't see it happening in the Netherlands. If the classes I've been in are symptomatic of our current generation, then the government will have little trouble pushing the most innane things on us. And we will be too indifferent to do anything about it. In fact we would complain, and nag and sulk like little children... but ultimately we do nothing.
I don't think I should have the right to complain about something I didn't get, if I don't ask for it, or do something to get it. For me it's don't ask, don't get. So here's to me taking charge. Here's to other people picking up the gauntlet. The pond might be little, but big fish always look good in them. They're the fat golden ones swimming around calmly in the middle. That's a nice place to be.
It's not that we were not smart, we all got through our mid-terms and tests and exams. Some of us even got the highest grades; I guess for most people in my class, it's not that we were afraid of the teacher or our peers. However I do think, I do believe my classes were very indifferent. We didn't care about our classes; it was something to get through until we got to do something personal. The teacher was someone who we tolerated, much less listened to.
In France the government nearly installed youth-labour laws that would make it easy for employers to hire and fire under-26-year-olds. Nearly, is the key word here, as the people revolted, rioted and got results. The law was nixed. The government was forced to listen to the people.
I don't see it happening in the Netherlands. If the classes I've been in are symptomatic of our current generation, then the government will have little trouble pushing the most innane things on us. And we will be too indifferent to do anything about it. In fact we would complain, and nag and sulk like little children... but ultimately we do nothing.
I don't think I should have the right to complain about something I didn't get, if I don't ask for it, or do something to get it. For me it's don't ask, don't get. So here's to me taking charge. Here's to other people picking up the gauntlet. The pond might be little, but big fish always look good in them. They're the fat golden ones swimming around calmly in the middle. That's a nice place to be.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Oh no I think I failed... oh no I didn't
I guess worrying about your mid-terms, and then eventually passing them comfortably doesn't really make you more popular.
You also hated the guy who you just know learnt his ass off all night for the exam, is making everybody nervous with all his cautious predictions, and then you find out he scored 96% of the questions correctly, right?
Making poor project estimates doesn't really endear you to clients and managers.
Telling everyone you're sick, but still getting a personal best, doesn't always make you more popular.
I guess in the end, to err on the safe side is the slowest way to failure.
You also hated the guy who you just know learnt his ass off all night for the exam, is making everybody nervous with all his cautious predictions, and then you find out he scored 96% of the questions correctly, right?
Making poor project estimates doesn't really endear you to clients and managers.
Telling everyone you're sick, but still getting a personal best, doesn't always make you more popular.
I guess in the end, to err on the safe side is the slowest way to failure.
Saturday, April 08, 2006
Welcome to the new century
In celebration of hitting the century mark, I checked out Google Analytics to see what the most read articles were and here they are:
Thursday, April 06, 2006
If I were traffic and mobility minister
If I were traffic and mobility minister I would pass the following legislation:
- In case of a head-tail collision (i.e. usually tailgating), instead of the back car bearing all of the blame, all the blame will fall squarely on the car in front.
In case of a collision between two cars side-by-side, the car on the left-most lane takes all the blame. This will discourage people to drive on the left lane so much, and especially drive slowly on the left lane. - However the cost of damages as the result of any collision where speeds have exceeded the limit, is not insured, similar to the situation in Germany. Then the rules as they exist now return to effect.
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Successful And Happy
As far as I can see, degree of success is less the achievement of goals, and more how much time, attention, money and other stuff you can legitimately claim from other people for something you do, provide or are. You make a good product, more people will buy it from you. You put on a great show, more people will spend time out of their day to watch you. You have a great story, more people will listen to it. The idea is getting more of what you want than others who are doing the same.
You still need to determine what it is exactly that you want to claim and how you want to do it. If you're in love, you are only successful if you actually get the attention from the one you're in love with (instead of anyone else); If you are looking to get famous, you might consider a movie career rather than garbage collection.
While success in this sense is externally driven, happiness is something personal, internal... and independent. Being happy is a state of mind. Sometimes it's even completely irrational. It can have something to do with meeting goals or being successful, but the absence of either does not preclude happiness. You can be happy without being successful; you can be successful without being happy.
If you are both successful and happy, consider yourself fortunate. Can't really say I've seen it much around me, for extended periods of time. At the moment I consider myself pretty average in both respects, and I am not too sure whether I should emphasize one over the other, or go for broke on both... or just leave everything be. The latter seems the most relaxed option, but relies heavily on luck (and possibly fate)... and I'm simply not the gambling kind of guy.
You still need to determine what it is exactly that you want to claim and how you want to do it. If you're in love, you are only successful if you actually get the attention from the one you're in love with (instead of anyone else); If you are looking to get famous, you might consider a movie career rather than garbage collection.
While success in this sense is externally driven, happiness is something personal, internal... and independent. Being happy is a state of mind. Sometimes it's even completely irrational. It can have something to do with meeting goals or being successful, but the absence of either does not preclude happiness. You can be happy without being successful; you can be successful without being happy.
If you are both successful and happy, consider yourself fortunate. Can't really say I've seen it much around me, for extended periods of time. At the moment I consider myself pretty average in both respects, and I am not too sure whether I should emphasize one over the other, or go for broke on both... or just leave everything be. The latter seems the most relaxed option, but relies heavily on luck (and possibly fate)... and I'm simply not the gambling kind of guy.
Sunday, April 02, 2006
Insights of a sports spectator
Soccer doesn't do it for me anymore. I've already experienced the greatest emotions (UEFA Champions League '95 and '99), and that can never be improved upon. (Ok... a World Cup victory this summer would be nice); That's why I don't follow Formula 1 or Indycar as religiously as before; the drivers at the top nowadays don't interest me in the least. I'm completely indifferent whether or not Kimi Raikonnen or Fernando Alonso win a Grand Prix or crash, and if Michael Schumacher retires or not.
For a sport to be successful, it needs to have the following:
Sports spectating can be quite emotional if you're totally into the sport, the players, the occasion. You can get shivers down your spine when your team or they athlete you're rooting for wins the World Title, the Superbowl, the World Series, the World Cup, the Olympics, beats a world record, or has a personal best performance. It doesn't even have to be about victories either... personal losses like Ayrton Senna's death in 1994 still spooks the bejesus out of me, as did Greg Moore's in 1999.
The American professional sports NFL, NBA, Major League Baseball and the NHL, still have a lot of emotion and grandeur to offer that I've never experienced, there's some players and teams I still root for, and the media and the respective leagues have got the ability to turn an ontherwise meaningless match into a historic bout. You can partly attribute that to the Americans' obsession with statistics.
Purely based on the criteria stated I should call the WWE a successful sports league... and that isn't really true. Don't get me wrong, I find great value in watching, hearing, feeling 50.000 people get on their feet, when the underdog finally wins the big one; one of the old favorites makes his run-in, when a superstar's theme music starts; when he hits his finisher or does his signature poses... Yeah it's scripted, but the wrestling moves hurt just the same. But this scripted nature makes it more of a soap opera or a stage play masquerading as a sports event, despite the intentions of the hardcore fans and WWE itself to convince us otherwise.
I am a sports spectator because I will never be there on the field, in the ring or on the rink at any significant level. I don't have the physical talents, and I haven't invested time in training any one discipline. Still I want to experience part of the emotions and I don't really mind which sport (or sort-of) I get it from.
Read full article
For a sport to be successful, it needs to have the following:
- strong emotional payoffs for players and the crowd
- believable and appealing participants/characters
- appreciation for history and story telling
Sports spectating can be quite emotional if you're totally into the sport, the players, the occasion. You can get shivers down your spine when your team or they athlete you're rooting for wins the World Title, the Superbowl, the World Series, the World Cup, the Olympics, beats a world record, or has a personal best performance. It doesn't even have to be about victories either... personal losses like Ayrton Senna's death in 1994 still spooks the bejesus out of me, as did Greg Moore's in 1999.
The American professional sports NFL, NBA, Major League Baseball and the NHL, still have a lot of emotion and grandeur to offer that I've never experienced, there's some players and teams I still root for, and the media and the respective leagues have got the ability to turn an ontherwise meaningless match into a historic bout. You can partly attribute that to the Americans' obsession with statistics.
Purely based on the criteria stated I should call the WWE a successful sports league... and that isn't really true. Don't get me wrong, I find great value in watching, hearing, feeling 50.000 people get on their feet, when the underdog finally wins the big one; one of the old favorites makes his run-in, when a superstar's theme music starts; when he hits his finisher or does his signature poses... Yeah it's scripted, but the wrestling moves hurt just the same. But this scripted nature makes it more of a soap opera or a stage play masquerading as a sports event, despite the intentions of the hardcore fans and WWE itself to convince us otherwise.
I am a sports spectator because I will never be there on the field, in the ring or on the rink at any significant level. I don't have the physical talents, and I haven't invested time in training any one discipline. Still I want to experience part of the emotions and I don't really mind which sport (or sort-of) I get it from.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)