My current day serves as evidence of the inefficiences of the corporate business model.
One of my main goals for the day, aside from my usual daily archiving and footage request duties, was to finish up with the gathering of information I needed for our entries for the 2008 Gemini Awards, and have the packages for each entry sent off by early afternoon.
It's 3:00pm now. I started the day at 6:30am needing nothing more than a few jpegs for marketing purposes, a 1-page biography from a crew member, and a handful of signatures. Incidentally, I started yesterday needing the same few things. I have yet to accomplish any of the above. Through a combination of not returning my emails, not returning my phone calls, and just generally staying up in carpet city all day (the third floor) the 2 or 3 people who have what I need have managed to shrug me off for approx. 3 days now.
It seems impossible to do anything fast here. It's become standard practice for me to send off an email requesting that I be given permission to purchase something (.. let's say a hundred bucks worth of CD-Rs or something..), then just go out and buy them, and then wait a few days until I finally get the affirmative response before going upstairs to hand in my receipts.
I think people plan their days entirely chronologically with no attention to the efficiency or relative simplicity of simply 'doing some things really quick right now...' For example, it seems extremely odd.. and wearing.. to me that I'll send off an email saying, 'can you do this little 2 paragraph write-up for me so I can send this off in the next hour?' and get the response... 'ohhh... no that's gonna be tomorrow afternoon at the earliest...'
... and then see that person chatting over coffee about their daughter's soccer game with a bunch of co-workers down at the cafeteria.
By all means, take breaks, have conversations.. but what I'm asking for will (should..) take a maximum of approx. 8 minutes to accomplish. Heck.. do it right now!! Send it off and be done with me.
Rather, I wait. I'm waiting. Right now. For a 2 paragraph writeup, and a signature. Screw the jpegs. I'll find my own and call it a day. And if I'm lucky, it'll be around Monday afternoon, following another 2 or 3 emails.
Lame. Big time.
Is it not entirely rediculous that I can make phone calls inside my own company, to my own bosses, and be ignored? I don't mean that my messages will be ignored (though that happens as well...). I mean that the call will be immediately forwarded to their blackberry, and they will physically hit 'ignore' on the phone, so as to send me to a voicemail.. which they will then ignore. Note: a normal voicemail will pick up after approx. 5 rings. A blackberry sent to voicemail via 'ignore' will go to voicemail after 1 or 2 rings. nobody sets their desk phone to go to voicemail after 1 ring.
Is it not a problem that I see it as the 'utterly ideal' that I might actually call a co-worker and that the phone would be answered? By a person? With an immediate response to my question?
I called HR yesterday with a question. She said 'ya ya, of course Jonny.. I'll look into that and get right back to you.' The original call was at approx. 9:30am. At approx. 3:00pm, I called HR again. She picked up and said, 'Jonny! Hi.. funny, I was just about to call you..'
Nope. You were not just about to call me.
I get approximately 12 emails a day that read, 'Ya Dennis, I know who you should be talking to. I'll take care of it. Signed, Jeff.' End of sentence. I, of course, am not Dennis. Or Jeff. I scroll down to find another body of text.. presumably the email to which Jeff was responding. It reads, 'Jeff, I need the tapes Marlene mentioned RIGHT NOW. Bring them by? Signed, Dennis.' I scroll down further to find another body of text, which reads, 'Dennis, do you have those tapes we talked about? Signed, Marlene.' Further down..'Marlene, I need the tapes about the moose and the badger. Signed Greg.' And then I say.. 'screw it.' and call up Jeff and ask what he needs.
ugh.
J
Friday, February 29, 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Power vs. Force
I read something interesting the other day. It was this idea about the difference between 'power' and 'force' when it comes to our response to situations in our lives. When it comes to accomplishing something, we use either power or force to achieve results.
The difference is that 'power' is an internal thing; a source of energy based on a desire to achieve one's maximum potential. 'Force' is an external thing; a source of energy based on attempting to achieve victory over the existant obstacles which stand in the way. Where there is force, there is always a counter-force. A pushback. Every action creates an equal and opposite reaction. Your goal is to pull together enough force to overcome that counter-force. This is an inherently defensive stance. It's a question of 'can I succeed?'.. success, in this case, being measured as the ability to rise above the pushback. The author was suggesting that when a human being thinks along those lines, they are inherently weaker than when they think from a stance of power. He used this example:
Stand with your arm stretched straight out from your body and have somebody push down on that arm while you attempt to resist the push. While doing this, think about a current work or school situation from a position of force. Ask yourself, 'Can I make it? Will I have what it takes to succeed?' Then, do the same drill, but while doing so, get past the concept of achieving success as determined by some human-divised 'system', or success as determined by another person. Rather, think only about the concept of maximizing on your potential, on becoming the human being you were created to be.
He suggests that you will find it much easier, physically, to resist the weight on your arms the second time through based solely on your thoughts.
I want to try to think about this over the next while. I think it's true. When life is happening, I often find myself crippled by attempts to succeed by 'force.' The measuring stick associated with that mindset tends to breed a sense of anxiety and paranoia. By approaching things from a position of 'power', I'm focused only on becoming more 'me'.
A hockey player who is racing after a loose puck thinking only about beating his opponent to the puck will not be as fast as a hockey player who is racing after a loose puck thinking only about reaching his maximum potential speed.
The most powerful person in the world is someone who sees life as an opportunity to become, as opposed to an obstacle to overcome.
J
The difference is that 'power' is an internal thing; a source of energy based on a desire to achieve one's maximum potential. 'Force' is an external thing; a source of energy based on attempting to achieve victory over the existant obstacles which stand in the way. Where there is force, there is always a counter-force. A pushback. Every action creates an equal and opposite reaction. Your goal is to pull together enough force to overcome that counter-force. This is an inherently defensive stance. It's a question of 'can I succeed?'.. success, in this case, being measured as the ability to rise above the pushback. The author was suggesting that when a human being thinks along those lines, they are inherently weaker than when they think from a stance of power. He used this example:
Stand with your arm stretched straight out from your body and have somebody push down on that arm while you attempt to resist the push. While doing this, think about a current work or school situation from a position of force. Ask yourself, 'Can I make it? Will I have what it takes to succeed?' Then, do the same drill, but while doing so, get past the concept of achieving success as determined by some human-divised 'system', or success as determined by another person. Rather, think only about the concept of maximizing on your potential, on becoming the human being you were created to be.
He suggests that you will find it much easier, physically, to resist the weight on your arms the second time through based solely on your thoughts.
I want to try to think about this over the next while. I think it's true. When life is happening, I often find myself crippled by attempts to succeed by 'force.' The measuring stick associated with that mindset tends to breed a sense of anxiety and paranoia. By approaching things from a position of 'power', I'm focused only on becoming more 'me'.
A hockey player who is racing after a loose puck thinking only about beating his opponent to the puck will not be as fast as a hockey player who is racing after a loose puck thinking only about reaching his maximum potential speed.
The most powerful person in the world is someone who sees life as an opportunity to become, as opposed to an obstacle to overcome.
J
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Bands I Should Like (but don't)
I came across an interesting list the other day while randomly perusing the internet. People were discussing the 'Bands I'm supposed to like, but absolutely don't..'
See... modern popular music has a weird stigma attached to it.. sortof an 'insiders' club. Do you ever find yourself listening to records that you don't particularly like, or understand, but trying to force yourself to get into the music based on the fact that everybody around you seems to be raving about it, and thus, you feel like you should too?
So what are yours?
The following are some of mine:
1. U2. I mean, everybody is supposed to love U2 right? Greatest rock band of the modern era.. hit after hit, etc. etc. I like what I see of their live concert footage, and I think I'll end up seeing them someday as a matter of course, but I'll be honest... I own "The Joshua Tree', and 'Vertigo'. I like the first 5 songs of The Joshua Tree, I generally find Vertigo annoying, and I'm always left with an overall sense of... 'what the heck is the big deal with these guys?'
2. The Rolling Stones. These guys are paraded around as one of the greatest rock bands in history. I find them completely unbearable. Jagger's voice is.. well, it is a lot of what it is, and they always strike me as being a sortof quickly assembled high school garage band.
3. Led Zeppelin. Sorry Boombatty. Oh... good gracious. ohhh... mercy mercy. Does it count that I'm falling in love with Robert Plant's duet album with Alison Krauss? (in spite of the fact that I every time he starts doing that yelping repetitious thing over Alison's voice that he always did in Zeppelin, I wanna reach over and backhand him?)
4. All Hip Hop. teehee.. no, but seriously, please read the following Billy Corgan quote: "No, I think there's a tremendous amount of work, but it's inherently a negative expression in my eyes. It values skills that aren't necessary at the end of the day. I thinkn it's done a lot of damage. I think it will be looked upon someday as a sort of embarrassment. I know that's very unpopular." Preach it.
5. Tragically Hip. What is it with Canadians and these guys??
6. Nirvana. I know, I know... timing and uniqueness... but seriously. How many times do I hear Nirvana on the radio? Every day. And how many times do I immediately change the station? Always... unless it's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit', in which case I juice it and air drum like my life depends on it.
And probably the biggest one of all.....
7. Pearl Jam. Not only is Eddie Vedder's voice the original incarnation of all that is evil in terms of that 'Seattle Vocal' sound (Creed, Nickelback, and every other man who sings with his mout half open and his chin jutted out) but these guys' average song length is about 27 minutes. So 'Alive' comes on, and you're like.. oh crap, it's Pearl Jam, so you flip the radio over to CBC radio 2 to get the traffic. 5 minutes later, you flip back only to find that Eddie and the gang are just dropping out of the final triple chorus and sliding straight into that outro section they do on every freaking song, where the one guitar line is just the chorus repeated, and then another guitar is doing a repetitive 3 note solo over top, and then above it all, Eddie is crooning.. 'aawww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhhh, awww huhh, awww huhhh, awww huhh... and then eventually, the guitars mercifully give way, and everything drops down, and just one or two electric guitars are left doing 3 note solos, abeit quieter versions of what preceded them, and so now it's just Eddie, still crooning 'awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh.......'
And I swear, because everybody shares this inexplicable reverance for Pearl Jam, you know those announcers wouldn't DARE step over the end of the song to lead into the traffic report or the upcoming set. No... they just stay the heck away, and wait patiently while Eddie takes us all home.
My goodness.
I'm still alive.. ehhyehhyaaaawwwwhuuhhhh. ohhhhhhh I'm still alive.
But barely.
J
See... modern popular music has a weird stigma attached to it.. sortof an 'insiders' club. Do you ever find yourself listening to records that you don't particularly like, or understand, but trying to force yourself to get into the music based on the fact that everybody around you seems to be raving about it, and thus, you feel like you should too?
So what are yours?
The following are some of mine:
1. U2. I mean, everybody is supposed to love U2 right? Greatest rock band of the modern era.. hit after hit, etc. etc. I like what I see of their live concert footage, and I think I'll end up seeing them someday as a matter of course, but I'll be honest... I own "The Joshua Tree', and 'Vertigo'. I like the first 5 songs of The Joshua Tree, I generally find Vertigo annoying, and I'm always left with an overall sense of... 'what the heck is the big deal with these guys?'
2. The Rolling Stones. These guys are paraded around as one of the greatest rock bands in history. I find them completely unbearable. Jagger's voice is.. well, it is a lot of what it is, and they always strike me as being a sortof quickly assembled high school garage band.
3. Led Zeppelin. Sorry Boombatty. Oh... good gracious. ohhh... mercy mercy. Does it count that I'm falling in love with Robert Plant's duet album with Alison Krauss? (in spite of the fact that I every time he starts doing that yelping repetitious thing over Alison's voice that he always did in Zeppelin, I wanna reach over and backhand him?)
4. All Hip Hop. teehee.. no, but seriously, please read the following Billy Corgan quote: "No, I think there's a tremendous amount of work, but it's inherently a negative expression in my eyes. It values skills that aren't necessary at the end of the day. I thinkn it's done a lot of damage. I think it will be looked upon someday as a sort of embarrassment. I know that's very unpopular." Preach it.
5. Tragically Hip. What is it with Canadians and these guys??
6. Nirvana. I know, I know... timing and uniqueness... but seriously. How many times do I hear Nirvana on the radio? Every day. And how many times do I immediately change the station? Always... unless it's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit', in which case I juice it and air drum like my life depends on it.
And probably the biggest one of all.....
7. Pearl Jam. Not only is Eddie Vedder's voice the original incarnation of all that is evil in terms of that 'Seattle Vocal' sound (Creed, Nickelback, and every other man who sings with his mout half open and his chin jutted out) but these guys' average song length is about 27 minutes. So 'Alive' comes on, and you're like.. oh crap, it's Pearl Jam, so you flip the radio over to CBC radio 2 to get the traffic. 5 minutes later, you flip back only to find that Eddie and the gang are just dropping out of the final triple chorus and sliding straight into that outro section they do on every freaking song, where the one guitar line is just the chorus repeated, and then another guitar is doing a repetitive 3 note solo over top, and then above it all, Eddie is crooning.. 'aawww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhhh, awww huhh, awww huhhh, awww huhh... and then eventually, the guitars mercifully give way, and everything drops down, and just one or two electric guitars are left doing 3 note solos, abeit quieter versions of what preceded them, and so now it's just Eddie, still crooning 'awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh, awww huhh.......'
And I swear, because everybody shares this inexplicable reverance for Pearl Jam, you know those announcers wouldn't DARE step over the end of the song to lead into the traffic report or the upcoming set. No... they just stay the heck away, and wait patiently while Eddie takes us all home.
My goodness.
I'm still alive.. ehhyehhyaaaawwwwhuuhhhh. ohhhhhhh I'm still alive.
But barely.
J
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
A Generation Late
I was born a generation late.
It proves itself time and time again.
Take a moment to peruse the following:
I
The above are the artists of my Dad's generation. When our parents look back on their formative years, and smile about those moments, hanging out with friends, grabbing a milkshake from the A&W, brushing off the old turntable, and throwing on an LP, these are the men they are talking about.
When I'm 55, and my son asks, 'Dad, when you were my age, what did you listen to??' I'll smile, look up into the clouds and think back on those glorious moments.. I'll remember the ups and downs, the laughter and the tears... I'll think about the music that moved me, that stretched me to new heights... the music that I loved, with its power to change the world, to spur growth and renewal... and I'll look my son in the eye, and I'll say.. 'son.....
When I was a teenager, I pretty much just listened to James Taylor........
J
It proves itself time and time again.
Take a moment to peruse the following:
I
The above are the artists of my Dad's generation. When our parents look back on their formative years, and smile about those moments, hanging out with friends, grabbing a milkshake from the A&W, brushing off the old turntable, and throwing on an LP, these are the men they are talking about.
When I'm 55, and my son asks, 'Dad, when you were my age, what did you listen to??' I'll smile, look up into the clouds and think back on those glorious moments.. I'll remember the ups and downs, the laughter and the tears... I'll think about the music that moved me, that stretched me to new heights... the music that I loved, with its power to change the world, to spur growth and renewal... and I'll look my son in the eye, and I'll say.. 'son.....
When I was a teenager, I pretty much just listened to James Taylor........
J
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)