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.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Friday, June 27, 2008
"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.
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.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
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.
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.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
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
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
Sunday, June 22, 2008
"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.
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.
Friday, June 20, 2008
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, visithttp://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=371
Friday, June 13, 2008
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?
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?
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
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)Monday, June 9, 2008
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.
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.
Friday, June 6, 2008
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
