Led down the proverbial primrose path

Did you ever waste time thinking you had a problem in one area, only to find it was caused by something that was easily corrected? That happened to me yesterday, in trying to access the Internet from Tsinghua University School of Law.

Internet access here at the law school has several unusual aspects. In the first place, free wireless service is available in the library and in many classrooms. However, such service permits access only to Chinese-based web sites, plus limited English web sites (namely Google). People who want unlimited Internet access must subscribe to a paid Tsinghua network service called TUNet, and receive a user-ID and password. Furthermore, in order to use TUNet, one HAS to be connected via a physical Ethernet cable connection (i.e., one has to have a cable connection from the computer to a wall jack). TUNet access is not available using a wireless connection (don't ask me why, that's just the way it is--something I have come to expect while here).

I use TUNet on my own laptop, via an installation program my host student, Cissy, gave me. It works fine and I can access the Internet without problems. However, yesterday I did have problems, when using a library computer.

The library in the law school has a computer lab. The computers are connected to a local area network via Ethernet cables. These computers have the same TUNet program, and users can access the Internet.

I went to the lab, sat down by one of the computers, brought up TUNet and tried to sign on. I entered a userID and my password, but was unsuccessful. TUNet displayed a message saying that the password was invalid. I tried several times more, each time getting the same message. I then hooked my own laptop, started TUNet and entered the same password I used for the lab computers. This time, as I expected, I was able to start TUNet just fine. So, I went BACK to the lab computer, started TUNet there, and again I got the same message, "invalid password."

Finally, I went to the TUNet office, and explained to them what was happening. The woman in charge, who has helped me before, asked to sign onto TUNet using a computer in their office, and I did so. Right after I entered a userID and password, she stopped me, immediately noticing an issue. Instead of ending my user ID with "c08" I was ending it with "c2008." I never noticed the issue because my userID is saved on my laptop version of the program. Once I corrected the userID, everything was fine.

Clearly, I made a mistake in entering the userID. The password really had nothing to do with the problem. In both cases, whether on the library computer or on my own laptop, I entered the "right" one. However, when I entered the "wrong" userID, the system couldn't make a match, and gave me an error.

However, think about this situation more: really, the system gave me the wrong message. Chances are, the "wrong" userID I entered doesn't really exist on the system. In that case, rather than telling me "invalid password," it should have told me "invalid userID." That would have saved me time, and kept me from looking in the wrong place for an answer.

Moral: if you're getting error messages, check everything. Don't assume the message is pointing you to the right place. Second, if you're designing a system, make sure your error messages are accurate and not misleading.

Taking care of a defective Sony Vaio, part I

“CALVIN!! DO SOMETHING! IT’S MELTING!”

My wife, Michelle, yelled at me on Saturday morning, September 27 as she was writing, on her Sony Vaio notebook computer, an account of our current stay in Beijing. She had purchased the computer less than a year ago, through a Sony Style store outside Philadelphia. She is attending Tsinghua University as a visiting scholar at their school of art, and I am studying and teaching at their school of law. Our apartment is northeast of the Olympic Village, right by Bei Yuan Lu North station, on the newly-constructed #5 subway line, finished weeks before the Olympics began.

As Michelle was working on her computer, it suddenly became significantly warmer by the left hinge, at which the AC power adapter is plugged into the computer. Suddenly, the left side of the monitor frame began to melt. We immediately shut down the computer and unplugged the AC adapter, but by that time a small section of metal underneath the lid frame had become exposed.

Here’s where the real fun began.

In searching the Internet, we learned that certain Vaio computers were being recalled due to wiring problems that could cause short circuits and overheating. http://esupport.sony.com/US/perl/news-item.pl?template_id=1&news_id=272 We called Sony customer service, in the U.S., and they confirmed that our Vaio was affected by this recall. We asked about the procedures for having the problem fixed, and they told us that they would send us an empty shipping container. Their plan called for us to pack the Vaio inside and ship everything back to a Sony facility in San Diego.

We naturally expressed concern over this plan, saying that it would take too long, and asked instead if we could find a facility in China, and if we could receive service at this facility. The Sony person we spoke to said that he couldn’t answer the question, and would have to escalate the call to a level 2 person. After forty five minutes on hold, we reached that person. However, he also did not know the answer, but said he would have his supervisor e-mail us with an answer.

A day went by, and we heard nothing from anyone at Sony. We called back, and after another long wait, reached another level 2 person. This second person told us that the first person really had misspoken in committing an answer to us. Because our call occurred on the weekend, no supervisors were available. In addition, the computer systems that might contain the desired information, regarding Sony repair centers in Beijing, also were unavailable.

He probably meant well, but this second Sony person then made an unbelievable statement to us: he suggested that we go to the Sony China web site and try to look up the information ourselves. We replied that this idea had two complications. First, the web site is in Chinese, with no apparent way to display an English version. Second, even if we did locate this center, we had concerns over whether they would know how to handle our situation. He apologized, but said that until the weekend was finished, he could do nothing more.

Next: The Sony answer, and our response

Experience at Beijing subway stop

Sorry for the long delay in posting. This fall, I am in Beijing, studying and teaching at Tsinghua University School of Law.

Last night, we went downtown to the Wangfujing section of town. It's an area that has numerous shops and restaurants, including the famous Donglaixun. The main part of this section of town features streets closed to cars, and thus turned into a pedestrian mall. Always popular, the area was especially teeming with people because of the National Day holiday.

As we emerged from the #1 subway line at Wangfujing station, we saw an odd sight. The gates to this particular exit, B, were only partially open. Close to a hundred people were on the opposite side of the gate, and they seemed to be arguing with the subway staff about wanting to enter. However, the staff were refusing them entry, keeping the gate open only enough to allow arriving passengers, such as us, to exit.

I couldn't help but look back and wonder as we were leaving the station. Later, it occurred to me that maybe the staff was trying to make that point an exit-only area, for whatever reason. In that case (assuming I'm right), the staff was making their job harder than necessary. What could they have done differently? For starters, what about posting signs at the top of the entrance, i.e. at street level, telling people that this entry point is really only an exit point. Second, as a longer term solution, what about installing one-way revolving doors, as in New York: The door revolves only one way. Only half of the exit is usable, because the other half is blocked by gates. The door arms interleave with and pass through the gate, but people cannot. Therefore, people can leave, but people on the other side can't come in.

Blindsided by Fidelity Investments

Last week I was in Texas, as part of a church missions trip, so I didn't have time or facilities to blog. Now I'm back, and want to share how Fidelity Investments "blindsided" me.

Because of lack of access to a computer, I could use only the Fidelity telephone system, FAST, to get quotes or trade. One day last week, I called and placed a trade. I specified the stock, quantity and type of order. The system announced it back to me, I indicated that I was OK with it, and then the system made the trade.

A few seconds later, the system told me that the trade was complete. However, it also gave me a commission amount far higher than what I was expecting, specifically one far higher than what I receive when trading on the Fidelity web site.

I spoke to a representative, and expressed my concern over the different commission levels. After listening, the representative agreed, and said that this one time, he would credit me for the difference.

I was glad to hear this news, but was still irritated by being surprised. There might well be good reasons for the differences in commission amounts. However, to avoid similar customer dissatisfaction, Fidelity could have done things differently, in particular, they could (and should) have alerted customers to this matter beforehand. Here are some possible ways:

- As soon as caller presses the key for "trading," the system could announce in general a message "caution: the commission levels for telephone trading may differ from those via the Fidelity web site."
- (even better): when the system announces the desired trade, prior to execution, it also could include the commission amount as well

In either case, callers have notice.

You can learn from this experience of mine, because it doesn't have to do only with trading with Fidelity. In your own jobs, try to minimize those instances in which you surprise people negatively.

10 ways to work better with your boss

• Date: December 18th, 2007
• Author: Calvin Sun
• Category: 10 things, Career
• Tags: Advice, Boss, Professional Development, Performance Management, Career, Human Resources, Workforce Management, Calvin Sun
• 
  

2 comment(s)

• Email
• Save
• Print
• Digg This
• Thanks
• 25

I’m gettin’ paid by the hour, and older by the minute

My boss just pushed me over the limit

I’d like to call him somethin’

I think I’ll just call it a day…

– Alan Jackson, Jimmy Buffett, “It’s Five O’clock Somewhere”

Bosses: You can’t live with them, and you can’t live without them. Like it or not, most of us must deal with a boss, and the way we do so affects not just our career advancement and our salary, but also our mental well-being. Here are some tips on how to get along better with your boss.

Note: This information is also available as a PDF download.

#1: Remember that your boss just might have useful insights

Think you have a clueless boss? Remember the words of Mark Twain, who once said that when he was 14, his father was so stupid it was unbearable. Then, he continued, when he became 21, he was amazed at how much his father had learned in just seven years....

The rest of the article is at Tech Republic

10 gaffes to avoid with respect to Chinese culture

My latest post at Tech Republic:

If you’re doing business in China, meeting with people from China, or planning to work there, you’ll want to avoid certain missteps. Calvin Sun explains a bit about Chinese culture and provides a heads-up on a few common mistakes and misconceptions.

---

– You walk into the party wearing jeans — and everyone else is black tie.

– You’re the emcee at a banquet, and as you’re introducing the speaker, you forget the speaker’s name.

– You write a check to your mother-in-law — and it bounces.

Gaffes are bad enough in your own circle of friends, associates, and family. They’re infinitely worse when they occur in the context of another culture. According to the Everest Group, the market for outsourcing of information technology and other business processes to China is growing at 38% a year. By 2010, according to Everest, that market could reach $7 billion.

These numbers mean huge opportunity, but also huge opportunity to make mistakes. If you’re doing business in China, or meeting with people from China, or want to work in China, watch out for these trouble areas, and avoid problems.

Note: This information is also available as a PDF download.

[to read the entire entry, please visit http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=385]

Someone posted a comment in reaction to the article, discussing how in fact there IS a written form of Cantonese. One learns something new every day...

Non-transparent technology

Tomorrow I am going out of town, on a Delta flight that is a Northwest code share. In other words, I made the reservation through Delta, and the flight has a Delta flight number, but the actual flight is operated by Northwest. I had purchased the ticket about two weeks ago, and received my e-mail receipt.

This morning, I signed onto the Delta site, brought up my itinerary, and tried to check in. No way, because the "check in" command button was greyed out.

I called Delta, and after about twenty minutes on hold, reached a live person, who of course said she couldn't find my reservation. After more searching, she finally did find it. However, she apologized and said even she couldn't check me in. Rather, I had to have my NORTHWEST confirmation number (which is different from my Delta confirmation number) and I had to check in at the Northwest web site.

I then visited the Northwest site and checked in. However, the experience left me puzzled and got me to think. Here was an example of where technology failed to mirror business processes. In order to have code sharing, Northwest and Delta had to have gotten together to negotiate the arrangements. There had to be communications between them and between their reservations systems. However, that communications and transparency didn't carry over to the Delta web site. If it had, that web site should have provided at least a link to the Northwest web site, and provided the Northwest confirmation number. In fact, to take transparency to its greatest level, I simply should have been able to check in at Delta.

Keep this incident in mind if you're developing a system. Make sure it mirrors the business process you're supporting. Make the technology as transparent as possible.

Cultural communications issues: high vs. low context styles

I recently came across some fascinating work by a man named Edward Hall. The research took place years ago, but still is relevant today. Hall developed the concept of high context vs. low context communications styles. The former refers to an environment in which communications occurs more by context and less by words. For example, I come into a room and see that everyone but one person has a beverage. So, without saying or asking anything, I give a beverage to that person. I obtained my information by looking and observing, i.e. from context.

Suppose, instead, I went to that person, and said, "would you like a beverage?" Then suppose I said "OK, I'll get you one." Then, after giving it, I said "Here it is." This second example illustrates low context communications. There's more use of words, and less on observation.

Problems can arise if a person is expecting one context level of communications and gets another. This issue arises particularly with people of different cultures. Hall posited, for example, that many Asian cultures have higher levels of context, while the US has lower levels. So, on the one hand, we could annoy people by telling them too much, but also by telling them too little.

Keep this concept in mind when communicating with people, especially from different cultures.

To thank or not to thank (Computerworld v. Tech Republic)

In a previous post I discussed the heat I took for suggesting, in a Tech Republic article, that interviewees send a thank you note to the interviewer after a job interview. Well a few days later, I posted a question in that regard to Sharkbait, of Computerworld. The responses there were almost completely different from those of Tech Republic. The Sharkbait posters generally agreed with me that such a note was a good thing to do, as long as one stayed away from sending the impression of being desperately in need of a job.

Here's the Computerworld post

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.

"Credibility" vs. "etiquette": keep in mind the reader's point of view

I'm working on an article for Tech Republic that discusses the posting of items on forums or chat sessions. My original title was going to deal with "etiquette when posting online."

I thought about that title, and then said to myself, "Who is ever going to read an article with that title?" Is that a dull and boring topic, or what?

Then I thought some more, and said to myself, "how can I make the title more attractive?" I thought even more, and said, "Well, if people fail to follow my advice, they could end up sounding less persuasive, or more foolish."

Therefore, what about a title such as "How to protect and enhance your credibility when posting to discussion groups"? Isn't that a better title? It conveys a more concrete benefit to the reader, right? Keep this thought in mind in your own writing and presentations, i.e. try to stress how your material benefits the reader.

Leaving a trail?

Never write if you can speak; never speak if you can nod; never nod if you can wink.

According to to Wikipedia, the above quote is attributable to Massachusetts politician Martin Lomasney, regarding the importance of discretion.

Think about Mr. Lomasney's statement the next time you write an e-mail. In a previous post, I referenced my article on legal terms for IT professionals, and one of those terms was e-discovery. If your company is involved in a lawsuit, the other side will be asking for documents your company has, including e-mail. So, be careful what you put down electronically.

I thought of this point just the other day, when I received an e-mail from someone at a client company. I had visited this company and done a presentation for them. The person who e-mailed me thanked me for that work, but said there were additional management and organizational issues that existed, and that it would be good for me to return and do additional work. The person then requested that I not associate that person's name with the person's comments if and when I talked to leadership in that company.

I'm certainly fine with that request, and would keep that confidence. I was surprised, though, that this person, in sending me the e-mail, used the address and e-mail system of the company itself. I would never betray the confidence or anonymity of the person, but that person actually potentially did, by using the company system. Not to be paranoid, but once that information goes through the company mail servers, there's a chance someone technically able could view it.

Had I been this person, I would have done the following alternatives:
- used a private e-mail (e.g. gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail), and then from a non-company computer e.g. home, or Internet cafe or library computer, and preferably where no sign in or electronic login is needed
- used alternate content, such as "Calvin, could you call me, because I wanted to discuss something?" (then given a home or non-company cell phone number)

Of course, these alternatives aren't foolproof, but they do offer more privacy than what the person actually did.

Always think about what you're putting down, and about who could be looking at it.

Joe Pruitt, of DevCentral, discussed my Computerworld article

Joe Pruitt, host of DevCentral, recently discussed my Computerworld article on career suicide. A video of Mr. Pruitt is at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0SDlvoSMA


Here is a link to Mr. Pruitt's blog:
http://devcentral.f5.com/weblogs/dcdaily

The Computerworld article

"Contact lens solution" and intercultural communications

"Contact lens solution? You need a prescription for that."

My wife, who just yesterday returned from a trip to Japan, told of a humorous exchange she had. While on a side trip to Kyoto, she had left her bottle of contact lens solution at the hotel there. Now, having returned to the city of Fukuoka, she had none, and needed some.

When she explained to a front desk manager that she needed to borrow contact lens solution, the manager initially agreed, but seemed reluctant. Then, suddenly, the manager made the statement above, i.e. that my wife needed a prescription.

Eventually, my wife found a store and bought solution on her own. However, in thinking about the situation, she realized that her choice of words might have caused confusion. In particular, the word "solution" might have had a different meaning for the manager. My wife, of course, was referring to "solution" as the liquid one uses to soak and clean contact lenses. The manager, most likely, was thinking that my wife wanted more contact lenses as a "solution" to her problem. For that reason, the manager made his remark about the need for a prescription.

This incident is humorous, but it raises an important reminder when we're dealing with people from other cultures. Be aware that phrases you use might be interpreted differently by the listener. This problem occurs even between people of the same culture, but becomes more likely (and more serious) when dealing with people of other cultures.

10+ things to know if your company is involved in a lawsuit

If your company gets caught up in a lawsuit, you’ll probably need to work with lawyers — even if the matter doesn’t involve something IT did or failed to do. Here are 10 legal concepts that are likely to come into play.

---

Let’s face it: We live in a society that loves to sue. Because much evidence is created or stored on computers, lawsuits involving companies invariably require work by its IT staff. I understand that most of you are IT pros, not lawyers. However, if your company becomes involved in a lawsuit, chances are you will have to work with lawyers, even if the matter doesn’t involve something you personally did or failed to do. Below are 10 terms that you might encounter during that process, along with their meanings.

To help put these terms in the proper context, let’s say that as part of a “reduction in force” initiative at your company, Stan, a manager there, laid off John, one of his employees. Convinced that his layoff was unlawful, John now has retained an attorney and has filed a suit against the company.

Note: This information is also available as a PDF download.

#1: Discovery (electronic discovery, e-discovery)

Discovery is the process by which parties to a lawsuit (i.e., the sides in conflict) show each other the evidence they have and identify the witnesses they’re going to call. You know how, when playing poker, everyone lays down their cards after they’re all finished with their bets? The same principle applies with discovery, except it occurs at the beginning rather than at the end. In other words, that stuff you see in the movies or on television about the “surprise witness” is a total myth.

For the rest of the article, visit

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=371

I'm takin' heat for my "interview" article lol

Wow...talk about asbestos suit lol. A few days ago, at Tech Republic, I wrote an article on "The 10 best ways to handle a job interview" http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=363 A number of people commented, and much was made of two specific tips. One was to occupy oneself if one arrived early, and the other was to write a thank you note afterwards.

A number of people raised issues, but Tech Republic subscriber Oz_media stands out. His/her points were that instead of occupying oneself, it's better to talk and joke with the receptionist, as well as others who are walking by, to show that one is already "part of the company." Conversely, doing work is rude, and what about all the time needed to shut down the computer when it's time for the interview?

My response: yes, it's fine to establish rapport (in fact, one of my ten points is to treat support staff there, including receptionists, with courtesy). So yes, making conversations is fine. On the other hand, going overboard might be taken negatively, in that your talking too much takes that person away from his or her job.

As far as occupying oneself: it's good to show that one uses time wisely. One need not have a computer on to do so. What about entering notes in your Blackberry, or even a paper tablet? As far as computer use, I agree that if you need 20 minutes to shut it down, and thus delay your interview by 20 minutes, that's a problem. But if you shut it down say five minutes before your scheduled time, what's wrong with that?

The other issue involved sending a thank you note. Several subscribers said such a note would be ridiculed, and that it's insincere. I responded to these concerns a couple of ways: first, I said that if people responded negatively to my thank you note by not hiring me or giving me a job offer, maybe that's not the kind of place I would want to work at anyway. Second, is their concern the thank you note per se, or only the INSINCERE thank you note. Third, are we too concerned about what other people think, vs. doing what's right?

Consider the process of preparing to have a job candidate come for an interview. If you're part of the interview team, you have to take time out of your day to prepare, and for the interview. You might have to review resumes, including the one of the person who's coming in. Afterwards, you have to spend time evaluating the candidate, either by yourself or in meetings with others. In other words, holding the interview takes time and effort on your part. Would you really react negatively to a candidate who, after the interview, tells you that he/she appreciates the time and effort involved in that interview?

What are your thoughts?

The 10 best ways to handle a job interview

Another Tech Republic blog entry of mine, from June 3:

Given the current economy, maintaining contacts with other companies can be critical. Knowing the right people can help you land a better job, one with more pay or perhaps the chance of advancement. Getting that next job, of course, often involves an interview. Here are some tips to help you excel.

Note: This information is also available as a PDF download.

#1: Be on time

Give yourself enough time to reach your destination, especially if you’re unfamiliar with the area. You will have enough stress with respect to the actual interview. Don’t add to it by complicating your travel to there. Consider a dry run prior to interview day, especially if you’re driving. Remember that mapping and navigational services could take you (as they did me) through an empty field or the wrong way on a one-way street.

Don’t get there too early, either. Doing so makes you look as though you have no other job and could hurt you later during salary negotiations. Plan to arrive between 10 to 20 minutes before your time. If you really do get there on the early side, consider joking with the receptionist or your interviewer about your surprise or “anger” over the lack of traffic. Then get serious and say that all you need is a place to sit down, because you have work you can do while you wait.

(for the rest of the article, visit http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=363)

Yahoo/Forbes article on outsource-proofing your job

This article appeared today in Yahoo! Finance: http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/105209/How-to-Make-Your-Job-Outsource-Proof

For me, the key points are the same as in keeping one's own job: show that you're adding value. I had an old boss that gave a career counseling presentation, and I still remember one of his recommendations: "don't be a conduit." In other words, don't be someone who simply passes information from one party to another. Make sure you're adding something, i.e. some analysis or evaluation.

10+ ways to motivate a team

I recently posted the article below at Tech Republic. If you read it, you'll see some insightful comments afterwards. One in particular caught my attention. In one of my tips, I said, basically, praise in public and counsel in private. The commenter said to be aware that some people might be averse to being singled out in public, even if the reason is praise. I agreed, and said that a better point would have been "if you're going to single someone out in public, make sure it's for praise and not for castigation." Or, add that thought and keep my original point. Anyway, I hope you find the article helpful.

10+ things you can do to motivate your team

• Date: May 28th, 2008
• Author: Calvin Sun
• Category: 10 things, Career, IT management
• Tags: Team, Guard, Generalities, Team Management, Management, Calvin Sun
• 
  

9 comment(s)

• Email
• Save
• Print
• Digg This
• Thanks
• 15

To get things done these days, working in teams is almost imperative. But how can you, as a leader, motivate a team to accomplish your objectives? How can you avoid common mistakes that can kill performance and morale? This article discusses ways of doing so.

Note: This information is also available as a PDF download.

#1: Believe in your team’s objectives

Do you believe in what you want the team to accomplish? Do you think your goals are realistic? If not, rethink your position, because your team will sense your uncertainty. You may say the right words, but your body language and overall demeanor will give you away. On the other hand, if you truly are dedicated and believe in your goals, your team will sense it and will react accordingly.

The rest of the article is at http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=358

New Tech Republic article, "10+ things you can do to motivate your team"

To get things done these days, working in teams is almost imperative. But how can you, as a leader, motivate a team to accomplish your objectives? How can you avoid common mistakes that can kill performance and morale? This article discusses ways of doing so.

#1: Believe in your team’s objectives

Do you believe in what you want the team to accomplish? Do you think your goals are realistic? If not, rethink your position, because your team will sense your uncertainty. You may say the right words, but your body language and overall demeanor will give you away. On the other hand, if you truly are dedicated and believe in your goals, your team will sense it and will react accordingly.

[to read the rest of the article, visit
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=358]

How to resolve the diet dilemma?

No matter what your job or where it's located, the ability to work through differences with others is key to your career success.

How would you handle the following situation? It's based on something that happened a long time ago, but I've updated it to fit today's context. Let me know your thoughts. I'll post the actual results shortly:

You have been selected for a leadership development program. For six weeks, you will be at a special training location, where you will learn topics such as communications, resolving conflicts and dealing with change. During your time at this location, you are to eat a special diet that will enhance your learning and your overall fitness.

The trouble is, this diet violates certain religious beliefs you have. You'd rather not take part in this diet. However, your stance has created a problem for the manager of the leadership program. This person is concerned that your failure to take the diet will affect your appearance and your performance, and hence will hurt this person in his/her own career. You don't want to cause harm to this person's career, but you also want to be true your religious beliefs, and you want to stay in the program and company.

What do you do?

Clueless in Amtrak?

"Ridiculous!" "Inconsiderate!"

I heard these comments, and others, as I took my seat yesterday on the scheduled 2:00 regional Amtrak train from Washington to Philadelphia. Those comments weren't directed at me, thankfully, but rather to a woman one row ahead of me, on the other side. She was watching a movie on her laptop computer, and the sound carried throughout the car.

After deliberating a few moments, I got up and approached her. As I did, I noticed with some puzzlement that she actually was wearing headphones, and that they were plugged into the laptop.

"Excuse me," I said to her politely, "but the sound is kind of loud. Is there a way of lowering the volume?"

Seeing her puzzled look, and remembering the headphones, I suddenly had an idea. "Could you check to make sure the headphones are plugged into the correct jack?" I continued. There are two of them, microphone and headphone, and they look alike."

She looked at me, then at the computer. We unplugged the headphones from the one jack and replugged them into the other. Immediately the sound stopped from the laptop speaker, and instead went through her headphones. Until I spoke to her, she had been unaware that her actions were annoying others.

This phenomenon is known in communications theory as the "blind spot." Sometimes we do things or say things that affect others (usually negatively), but about which we're unaware. In this case, the woman's blind spot arose because no one (until me) told her that the sounds were bothering others.

Be aware of this blind spot when you yourself communicate with others.

How to handle the exit interview?

In a recent article at Tech Republic, I discussed steps to take if and when you resign. Since that time, I've gotten comments and questions on one specific issue: how to handle the exit interview, in particular the inevitable question "what suggestions do you have?"

Some people suggest being frank about sharing issues. On the one hand, maybe your comments will be considered. On the other hand, maybe those comments will be seen as "bridge burning.

How about this option? Instead of dwelling on your concerns and complaints, can you identify something your soon-to-be-former employer did RIGHT? Focus on that point, and say, "This is something I really appreciated, and it would be good to have more of that."

Of course, you have to be sincere. Don't fake it, because people can tell.

The Starbucks "we're closed" experience

• You're trying to run away from a knife wielding attacker, but you're unarmed and your legs have turned to rubber, rendering you defenseless
• You've entered the movie theater to see Iron Man, but the movie never starts
• You just began your final examination, but just realized you can't answer a SINGLE question

Have you ever had dreams like these? I had a similar one last night: I'm in line to buy ice cream. There are 10 or 12 people in front of me. I look down to check my watch, and when I look up again, the ice cream window is CLOSED.

They say dreams speak to what is real, and in fact something like this happened to me a few months ago, only it wasn't at an ice cream place. Rather, it was at a Starbucks at a rest stop on the New Jersey Turnpike. I was about the fifth person in line, with another six or seven people behind me. All of a sudden, a Starbucks barista comes forward, tells everyone "We're closing" and shuts the gate (and it was right at their closing time). Those of us in line are left looking at each other in amazement.

What arguments can one make on either side for why they were right or wrong for closing this way, with people in line? What alternatives could they have considered?

On the one hand, Starbucks wants to be considerate of its employees. They have schedules and families, and an expected closing time. On the other hand, how do you think all of us, as waiting customers, reacted? We spent time in line, getting there before their closing time, expecting to get service. But we received none. Is it possible the negative reaction from the customers outweighs the benefits to Starbucks of closing "on time"?

I actually wrote a letter to Starbucks, suggesting an alternative: if customers are in line, stay open until all of the ones who entered the line prior to closing are served. At closing time, instead of shutting the gate, maybe the barista could put an orange cone in back of the last person in line. Then, he or she could tell the line that they were welcome to stay in line, and that they would get service. However, no one else would be able to enter the line.

Does that sound like a good solution? What others could you think of? More importantly, can you apply this lesson on "expectations" to your own job situations?

New article at Tech Republic: "10 ways to develop customer self-sufficiency"

Here's my latest entry at Tech Republic, on developing customer self-sufficiency:

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=353

Saving time: benefitting from the "80-20 rule"

Most of us have too much to do and too little time to do it in. May I suggest a tool and technique that can help in this regard: the 80-20 rule?

I first learned about this principle years ago, from a book by consultant Alan Lakein, entitled How to Get Control of Your Time and Your Life. He gave examples of this principle, such as

• 80% of a company's business comes from 20% of its customers
• 80% of a company's complaints from from 20% of its customers
• 80% of a company's sales comes from 20% of its product line

I could go on, but I think you get the point: A small number of "things" exerts a high degree of influence.

How does this principle apply to you? Think about all of your assignments. Chances are, a small number of them have the biggest impact on your job. So, to maximize your effectiveness, focus first on those 20% of things that bring 80% of benefit, not the other way around. Notice, I didn't say to IGNORE that other 80%, just to give first priority to the "big 20%" first.

The snappy answer that (maybe?) I could have given?

Back to the Computerworld article, in which I discuss career suicide. As I said in a previous post, I did not report back to "Carl" about what the other executive said about him, that is, the comment "Why should I care what 'Carl' thinks?"

I have a different question now. I did not say anything in response to this question, but merely thanked the person and hung up.

What if I had said instead, "Well, I thought Carl was well respected in the organization, and that his opinion would mean something. Was I wrong to think that?"

Would this response have been appropriate?

Should I have told?

In my Computerworld article "5 Easy Steps to Career Suicide," I relate an incident in which I call a client company and reach a person there that I haven't done work for previously. I tell that person that "Carl" (my client contact, and therefore a co-worker of this person) has been pleased with my work. The person said in response, "Why should I care what Carl thinks?"

In other words, one person in the organization is "dissing" another person to me, an outsider. This remark demonstrates a lack of unity and professionalism on the part of the person I called.

As you can guess, that call really went nowhere. Afterwards, I didn't do anything in follow up. However, I'm wondering if I should have told "Carl" what this person said. On the one hand, it's good for him to have a "heads up." Also, that person never really expected that remark to be confidential. On the other hand, might "Carl" "shoot the messenger?" And, does it make me a tattle-tale?

What do you think?

"Avoiding career suicide" (my article in Computerworld)

Here's a link to my article in Computerworld www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9079721&intsrc=hm_ts_head In fact, it's the top story for today http://www.computerworld.com

Reactions to my Tech Republic "ATM post"

I recently published a

post at the Desktop Support blog of Tech Republic.


It concerned a "pet peeve" of mine, i.e. the practice of many bank automated teller machines (ATMs) to dispense cash, and only afterwards to prompt the customer for removal of the card. This practice has caused me several times to forget my ATM card, causing inconvenience for me and expense for the bank. In my Tech Republic post, I suggested a solution that made sense, at least to me, namely to reprogram the ATM to reverse these actions. That is, required the customer to remove his ATM card before being able to receive cash. True, this change would inconvenience those people who have more than one transaction. However, I respond that possibly the majority of ATM visits consist of a single transaction, and that single transaction consists of a cash withdrawal.

My point in publishing that post was to underscore the importance of looking at things from the other person's point of view.

I was, frankly, surprised by the vehement reactions I received. Some did agree with me. However, others chided me for my views. For example,

dchow@ said "Thinking in life is critical period. We don't need to hear about how you used to suck at it, then you went and decided learning the hard way was getting old." Ouch!!!

Big Ole Jack said "Why must things be dumbed down for the masses because of a few dimwitted dolts out there? Nevermind that...the release of Windows Vista answers that question quite well because the masses are a bunch of dumbasses."

However, qhartman@ summed up the negative reaction the best: "So, you propose that ATM designers make life harder for a small, but likely quite significant, group of people to protect an even smaller group of people from their own thoughtlessness? What an American way to think. "Won't someone think of the children?!?!" Give me a break. If you can't be present enough in your own life to remember your card, you _deserve_ the pain of having to replace it."

Let's examine each reaction.

Dchow is right: thinking IS important. However, I have found that simply telling people this fact doesn't get it across. Illustrating the point via example helps make it clearer and more vivid. For example, Jesus used parables to make important points.

Big Ole Jack and qhartman object to "dumbing things down." Believe it or not, I agree with them in general. However, this particular situation is different, because possibly the benefits of making my change outweigh the costs.

What are costs involved in keeping things the way they are? From the customer's view, there's a loss of time in calling the bank, and a loss of convenience in not having the ATM card while waiting for the replacement card. From the bank's view, there's the time the call center staff spends in processing the replacement card request, the expense of generating the new card and the expense of mailing it. These expenses are not one time, but rather recur every time a customer leaves a card in the ATM.

On the other hand, what are the costs of making the program change? Probably one or two lines of code, plus testing, plus release. Chances are this change is a one time change. I've never programmed an ATM, but I suspect the costs of the program change are less than the costs of the forgotten ATM.

Assuming I'm right: is there really a compelling reason to have the ATM operate the way it does now (i.e. cash first, card second)? It doesn't appear so. In fact, I was reminded, after the Tech Republic post, that my bank DOES do it the "right way," (card then cash) but only if I select the "quick cash" option. That fact makes the "cash then card" approach even less persuasive.

Next, is anyone made worse off by doing card-then-cash? As we saw above, those who do multiple transactions would have to reinsert the card. But they would have to do anyway if they selected "quick cash." I suspect most would be better off.

Given these facts, I still fail to see why banks still do cash-then-card.

Remember, a key to succeeding at work is to look at things from the other person's point of view, something the bank is failing to do.

"You know you have a bad web site / phone system when..."

...people have to do a Google search to find your contact information."

Don't laugh, it just happened to me. I had to fax a medical examination form to my daughter's pediatrician. The office doesn't open until 8:30, and I wanted to leave my house by 8 am. No one was there to answer the phone and give me the fax, and when I called, all I got was the after-hours message, but no announcement of their fax number. I pressed the option to speak with a live person, but after ten minutes gave up.

I googled the office name, and found several listings. One was the "official" site for the office, but it had no fax number.

Finally, I located another listing, not the official one, but a physician directory, and found their fax.

What's the moral? Check your web pages and phone systems. Try to figure out what information most callers will need (that is, apply the 80-20 rule). Try to make that information available.

If people have to Google to find your information, there's a problem in how you're presenting it.

An embarrassing e-mail

I received a note from someone today, in reaction to my Tech Republic article on avoiding e-mail blunders http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/helpdesk/?p=56.

This person had received, from someone he knew, a note in error. The sender did not mean to send it to this person, but rather to someone with whom the sender was having an affair. The person who e-mailed me wondered if he should have let the sender know, then concluded he probably shouldn't, because of the resulting embarrassment.

I don't know how to answer this person, so I'd like to get your comments. From my perspective, I see two issues:
- addressing and sending too quickly
The person mentioned in the email probably didn't check the address field. If they have predictive fill-in, it's easy to send a message to the wronge person.
- relying on e-mail in the first place
Putting such intimate thoughts in an e-mail is questionable by itself. One doesn't know if the note will be forwarded, and in addition, the contents of e-mail are generally open for being read by others. Rather than putting dangerous or sensitive thoughts in e-mail (and I'm not advocating that you have an affair), think about simply asking the other person to call.

Principles from giving driving directions

I don't know why, but I love looking and reading maps. I love giving directions to people who are looking for a particular place. Even when I'm away from home, for example if I'm in Washington, invariably someone will stop me and ask for directions. Yes, maybe they're sizing me up because they want to mug me lol. Nonetheless, I still like giving directions.

Giving directions involves communications. We don't want people to get lost, so it's important our directions be clear. The principles involved in giving directions apply to the way we communicate in our jobs as well.

"Begin with the end in mind."

If this phrase sounds familiar, it's because it came from Steven Covey, the author of The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. Dr. Covey recommends that before starting a project, to think about what we want our results to be.

In the specific case of giving driving directions, think about beginning your directions with a description of the final destination, rather than by simply giving turn-by-turn instructions. Why? You might save the other person time, if he or she recognizes the place.

One time I was trying to find the location of a business near my home. I went to their web site, and saw the following instructions:

• Take Route 202 southbound to the Route 252 northbound (North Valley Forge Road)
• Make a right at the bottom of the ramp onto Route 252 northbound
• Take Route 252 northbound about 0.1 miles to first traffic light
• Make a right at light (Anthony Wayne Drive)
• Immediately make a sharp right into Gateway Shopping Center

Look at these directions, and keep in mind the Covey principle. Also, remember that I said this business is near my home. How would you change these directions?

If I were doing them, I would mention Gateway Shopping Center first, as an introductory paragraph. My theory and assumption is that most of the people who are interested in this business already are familiar with the general area. By telling "Gateway Shopping Center" first, you save many of them the time and effort of reading through the whole set of directions.

By rewording the directions to put destination first, you are "beginning with the end in mind." More importantly, you are communicating from the point of view of your listener.

OK to answer phone with just "Hello" at work?

Last night I received an email from someone who was reacting to my "10 telephone blunders" article at Tech Republic, http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=196. He (the sender) disagreed with my point #9, in which I criticize people who answer the phone by saying just "hello."

The sender said had an issue with that advice, saying that I had things backwards. He continued by saying,

It's common courtesy for the caller to identify himself when the phone he
calls is answered, before stating his request -- not the other way around.

"Hello" is a perfectly good answer for the callee to give. Nothing unprofessional about it.

It also isn't any more of a time-waster than the way you suggest.

Either way any time-wastage is essentially the same.

In replying, I said that we were really addressing two separate issues. My focus was on the CALLED party answered the phone. His focus was on how the CALLER responded to the "callee." In particular, he was concerned with callers who then would say, "Who's this?" I told the e-mail sender that in this case, I agreed with him that asking "Who's this?" is unprofessional and rude. I went on to say that regardless, answering with "hello" wastes time and is equally unprofessional.

This exchange illustrates what I call a "violent agreement" lol. Two people appear to disagree, but actually, when you look at it, are saying the same thing, often because they're addressing different issues. Stay tuned to Tech Republic, because I have an article coming out soon on how to keep disagreements under control.

Advice re. bad boss: don't repay evil for evil

Last night I received an e-mail that complimented me on a recent article, "10 tips on working better with your boss," http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=284. However, in going on, he said that probably my advice wouldn't help him in the case of his own boss, who often publicly chastised and humiliated this person, who told his boss that if that behavior continued, he would do the same to her. This person asked my advice on how to handle the situation.

[WARNING: BIBLE REFERENCES FOLLOW]

I pointed this person to Romans 12:17, and its advice to readers not to repay evil for evil. In other words, I said, don't do the same thing to the boss that the boss is doing to him. Rather, I said, talk to the boss privately, and use neutral language to discuss the issue, e.g. instead of "your behavior troubles me," saying "I'm troubled this THIS behavior." I also advised him to document each incident in writing.

I hope your bosses don't treat you this way.

Tips on explaining things more clearly; and additional comments

My article on tips for explaining things more clearly is at http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=330

I did, however, have to take exception to one comment, by alxnsc@... He said that "analogies cannot be used to explain and never make things clearer." Another poster (and I) both disagreed, and pointed to the parables that Jesus used. Jesus used stories to illustrate spiritual truths.

Canceling vs. changing a hotel reservation

You probably have to travel as part of your job. If so, and if you ever need to arrive at a hotel on a date later than your original reservation, never tell the hotel staff that you are "canceling" those first few days. Instead, tell them that you are CHANGING your reservation, specifically that you are changing your arrival date. The danger in telling them that you are canceling the first x days of your reservation is that the hotel staff might end up canceling your ENTIRE reservation. This situation happened a few years ago to a friend of my wife. The friend was a senior at Franklin and Marshall College, in Lancaster PA, and had made a reservation for her parents, who were arriving for graduation. The friend had called the hotel to "cancel" the first day of the parents' reservation, and the hotel ended up canceling the whole stay. I don't remember what happened, but do remember that our friend was quite agitated.

The nonexistent car wash

I recently had a meeting at The Inn at Penn with a professor I had while at Wharton. We had a great discussion, during which I talked about my customer service work. It's too bad I lacked the ability to see into the future, because after leaving that meeting I had a frustrating experience.

On the way back from the meeting, I stopped at a gas station that had a car wash. These types of gas stations allow the customer, via the pump, to specify a car wash in addition to the gasoline purchase. The price of the former is added to the price of the latter, and a code number is printed on the gasoline receipt. The customer then takes the receipt, drives to the car wash entrance, types the code number into a keypad by the entrance and enters the car wash. Usually, the customer need not get the car wash right at that time. Usually, the code is good for a few days, or even for a month.

After I received my receipt, I drove the short distance to the car wash. I saw in front of me a closed door. "I guess the entrance is at the other end," I said to myself, and continued to the other end. I looked there, and THAT door was closed too. How to get in? Well, I drove back to the gas pumps and asked the attendant how to get into the car wash. His answer? The car wash closed at 5:00, about a half hour before I had arrived.

In annoyance, I asked for my money back for the car wash. Even though I probably could have come back later, I rarely drive by that station.

This situation is what I term "leading customers down the primrose path." Setting up a customer expectation, only to dash it later, leads to dissatisfaction. What could the station have done differently? In order of increasing complexity, perhaps

• post a sign by the pump, giving the car wash hours
• disabling the car wash purchase option at the pump, and requiring purchase at the attendant booth
• programming the pump to display hours of the car wash before allowing customer to select it
• programming the pump to allow car wash purchase only during the hours the car wash is actually open.

Any of these options would reduce the chance of dissatisfaction.

What do you think?

No overcoats permitted at the Renoir exhibit!

A few weeks ago, my wife, daughter and I attended the Renoir exhibit at the Philadelphia Museum of Art. This exhibit was well attended, so I figured parking would be a problem. After dropping them off, I headed off to find a parking spot. A few minutes later my wife called, upset about an incident that occurred as they were entering. Apparently, my daughter had worn her ski jacket into the museum, rather than checking it, as my wife had done. A museum staff person approached my daughter and told her that she (my daughter) HAD to check her jacket. My wife was upset not so much at this requirement as she was at the way the directions were given.

While I was on the phone, my wife, she asked that person to speak to me. This person explained that because of the large number of attendees, space was an issue. My daughter's jacket, in their view, was sufficiently bulky that it might cause problems within the exhibit. In fact, the person told me, they had had an incident in which two people collided, and one of them brushed against one of the paintings.

After hanging up and parking the car, I entered the museum. As soon as I did so, a guard asked me to check my own jacket as well.

I can understand this policy, now that it had been explained. However, the museum could have taken one simple step: namely, to publicize this policy in writing. Doing so helps set expectations of visitors. In addition, it helps "take the heat off" guards, some of whom probably received negative comments.

Learn from this situation: if you to be persuasive with someone, it helps to be able to point to a piece of paper or sign that supports your view. That outside evidence can augment your own credibility.

The exhibit was otherwise fantastic.

A poorly worded help screen

I discovered this afternoon, by accident, that my fax machine was preventing my voicemail system from being activated. An incoming call would cause the fax machine to answer prior to the voicemail. One way to solve the problem would have been to change the "ring count" on voicemail, so that it would answer on say the second ring rather than the fourth.

So, I called my voicemail number and listened for an option to change the ring count. I listened and listened but heard no options for it. So, I went to the "customer care" screen on the web site for Cavalier, my telephone provider. http://www.cavtel.com/help/ In the middle of the screen, under the title "Look Up Voice Mail Guide" is a field that asks for "telephone number." I entered my own telephone number, and the web page responded "No Guide Found for this Number." I tried two or three more times, and got the same result each time. By this point, I was getting annoyed and frustrated.

Then I stopped and said to myself, "Maybe that's not the number they're looking for." I thought some more and then said to myself, "Aha, maybe they want me to enter the number that I call when I want to use voicemail." I entered that number and voila, I was able to access the voicemail guide.

Even after I did so, I still didn't see a way to change the ring count, but that's another issue.

The point to remember here is the ambiguity in the screen. A field label that reads simply "Telephone number" is bound to be misinterpreted. Take the time to label things clearly. In this case, a better label might be "Telephone number you call to access voicemail."

Taking a little time here can save your customers large amounts of time as a result.

Learning from a poorly-designed sign

Yesterday I took my wife to a new dentist. I found the office building, and turned into the parking lot. Right by the entrance to that lot was a sign that displayed to tenants. I looked for the dentist's name, and because his last name began with "L," I focused on the middle of the sign. To my surprise, I saw all sorts of last names, beginning with all sorts of letters. I looked again, and realized the sign was organized not by alphabet, but by floor. That is, all of the first floor tenants were at the top, followed by second floor and so on.

I did eventually find the right dentist. However, the experience frustrated me, and it's not the first time or the first office building that has signs this way. Let's analyze the situation, because there are lessons for how you should communicate with people.

Think about it: when you go into an office building to see a particular person, do you really care who's on each floor and in each office? Probably not. You're looking for a particular person, say Dr. Smith. But if the sign is organized by floor or office, you might have to look multiple places before finding Dr. Smith. Doesn't it make more sense to organize the sign by last name? Doing so reduces the number of times you have to look.

What's the lesson? Look at things from your customer's perspective. In this case, organize the sign the way your customer most likely would find it most convenient.

Problems with the Metrocard

Over the Christmas holiday, my family, along with friends of my younger daughter, spent time in New York City. One day, the nine of us took the subway from Chinatown to midtown. The MTA (the transit authority for New York City) has an arrangement under which a person can purchase five subway trips (at $2 each) and get a sixth trip free. "Great," I said to myself, "there are nine of us, so I can put $30 on a MetroCard, and get 18 trips rather than 15--that's just enough to get the nine of us up to midtown and back."

At this point, I'm thinking I'm a genius. I put $30 on a single MetroCard, proceed to the turnstile, and begin swiping it. Each time I do so, one of our group goes through. The first four go through fine. However, when I swipe it the fifth time, the turnstile locks up and displays a message, "transfer limit exceeded." I swipe it again, and get the same message. Not wanting to take chances, I get more MetroCards and get the rest of our group through.

After we arrive at our destination (Bryant Park, behind the Public Library), I go back into the station and ask the booth attendant what happened. She told me that the MetroCard has a four-person limit--that is, a maximum of four people can use a single MetroCard. That's why, when I swiped it the fifth time, I received the message.

Looking back, I see two issues with the MetroCard limitation. First, nowhere are we told about this four-person limitation. I couldn't find any signage in the station about it, nor did I see any reference to it on the MTA web site www.mta.info Second, the text of the error message doesn't really convey the issue. If it had said, for example, "Maximum passenger limit exceeded" it would have been clearer.

Apply these lessons to your job. If you're designing a computer system, make sure your error messages are meaningful. If you have limits to your process, make sure people know about those limits.

Even if you're not designing a computer, these principles still apply in communicating with others. Be sure they understand you, and try not to surprise them. In other words, set their expectations.

Ends vs. means: negotiations tips, from the book of Daniel

Did you ever have a disagreement with a co-worker, customer or boss about something the other person wanted you to do, but you didn't want to do it, because of good reasons you had? Did you ever think about how to handle that situation better?

My favorite source of advice for this situation comes from , of all places, the Bible--in particular, the Old Testament book of Daniel. The events in Daniel take place during the time the people of Israel were captured and taken in captivity to the city of Babylon. Among those taken was, of course, Daniel. Because he was young and of good appearance, the king selected Daniel to be in a program that groomed him for service in the kingdom--think of it as a early version of "The Apprentice." There was only one problem, though: part of this program involved a diet set by the king. This diet, however, contained food that Daniel objected to on religious grounds.

The lower level official in charge of the young men argued with Daniel about this matter. He insisted that Daniel eat the royal food, because if he didn't, the official would literally lose his head.

Does this sound familiar? The other person has a good reason for wanting you to do something. You have an equally good reason for not wanting to do it. So, how did Danile solve the problem, and what can we learn?

It turns out that the real fear of the official was that Daniel, by not eating the royal food, would look worse than the other young men. When Daniel learned this fact, he proposed an alternate arrangement to the official: for ten days, Daniel would eat only vegetables and drink only water. If, at the end of that time, Daniel looked bad, he would begin the royal diet. If, however, Daniel looked as good as the others, Daniel would be allowed to keep that vegetables and water diet.

You guessed it: Daniel looked even BETTER than the others, and could continue his own diet.

What's the point here? First, don't get caught up in the "means." Look at the "ends" as well. If the only options are eating royal food vs. not eating royal food, then there's no good solution. Someone has to win and someone has to lose. However, each side had a different "end" or objective: Daniel wanted to keep his diet and the official wanted to keep his head. Daniel's idea allowed BOTH objectives to be met.

For example, suppose a co-worker or boss wants you to "cut corners" on a project or falsify a report. Ask the other person if the objective can be met some other way that doesn't involve questionable actions.

Thinking this way helps you maintain your integrity while keeping good relations with the other person.

My Tech Republic article on how to be more persuasive

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=304