As mentioned in the prior post I got a bunch of responses to my questions on HR and Recruiting. Some of the responses were just amazing!!!
Listed below is the query I framed and a few selected responses -
"Quite often I hear - "... a resume has less than 30 seconds to make an impact to a recruiter - independent or corporate HR.." WHY?"
- "Let me first correct you: It takes 3-10 seconds to review a resume to verify if it meets qualifications for a majority of positions. If it was 30 seconds, I would never get any work done."
- "Because time is money."
- "10-15 seconds tops... You have to market yourself if you are missing some requirements on the job description...otherwise 10 seconds is all you will get."
- "My goodness, I don't read resumes for a living, but do you know how many of these answers I could skim over in 30 seconds and get a pretty darn good idea of what they were talking about?"
- "For the same reason cyber security is in such great (sic) shape in this country and beyond. As far as I can tell that's 29 seconds past the maximum attention span of most recruiters."
- "The way we see the problem is often greater than the problem we're trying to solve.
To most people;
1. Busy = important, 30 seconds "I must be busy, I'm important"
2. Decision Making = Important, "5's" (performance level relative to the 1,000's in their industry) aren't asked their thoughts on "move the needle" issues, thus, why not make it up in volume, 30 seconds at a time ... important again
3. Believe their intentions are good; say a prayer and move on
I coach the coachable HR people on how to do the process more effectively and efficiently. However, my systems reward / create consequences for HR performance as most don't.
Litmus Test on the Culture of an HR Dept:
What % of the HR Payroll will be paid, regardless of who is hired?
Example: $5M in salaries and $4.7 is paid regardless while $4.9 - $5.1 has a 95% chance of getting paid. Where's the motivation?
Life's too short to worry about it unless you're helping someone that is open to changing it."
- "They're not, by and large, out there searching for talent. They're the gatekeepers, who screen applications sent in."
- "Because HR people are the equivalent of soccer goalies - their job is not to let anyone in but to keep just about everyone out. ...Getting your resume or a letter in front of the hiring manager is the only way you can get through the stonewall the square peg HR gatekeepers put in your path."
Now keep in mind the above are just a few excerpts from from about 25% of the responses received, the majority of them were basically of the opinion "How dare I ask this question and bring this issue up!".
Well here are a few of my rebuttals - enjoy!
- "...most of the responses seem to validate the "30 Second" rule / hypothesis.
So taking that for a baseline if one was a great recruiter and received and average of 100 resumes a day, that's about 50mins of your time in the day. I'll be generous and round it up to 60min, wait I'll be magnanimous and give you 1min per resume that's 2 hours of your day every single day of the month. Almost every recruiter out in the field would kill for those kind of potential leads, the fact is none have them, get them, or come even come close to generating them!
So, what do you do the rest of the day? Waste of company time and money if internal Dept. and do outrageously high billing if an external recruiter!
If I was a CEO/CFO/COO I would take a quick look at my HR recruiting Dept and partner recruiting companies and FIRE THEM! HR guys you just discredited your entire industry! You just proved that you provide very little value addition to the hiring process which can be completely substituted by an automated system, albeit one that may require a little more fine tuning"
- "The responses here themselves say a resume is a way to get your "toe" into the door! How can you make a judgement call for an individual by "seeing" their so called "toes" only? It's like the story of the 5 blind men who touched a different part of an elephant and came to a different set of conclusions as to what it was and what it could do, without seeing or even feeling the entire elephant."
- "...almost every other function that you said a "Generalist" may handle has been outsourced or is in the process of being outsourced and automated, or the employee is being "empowered" to handle on their own with the service provider.
So the one pure HR function that you can add value to internally is recruiting, however if that seems too much for most don't blame outsourcing and automation when it takes over completely. What you call "screening" can be done by anyone sitting half way around the world in a window less room, and then making an appointment for the hiring individual by an email or a phone call."
- "...In this day and age of almost 12% unemployment in the US, why employers are unable to fill positions with the "right" and properly "qualified" candidates is the mystery worth exploring..."
Showing posts with label HR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HR. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Gatekeepers and Screeners at the door - That's what HR recruiters call themselves!
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Irrational Exuberance or Stupidity? Part - I
For an individual that has been closely associated with the two business sectors in the
This sense of deja vu is not of the same optimistic kind promoted and shared by a lot of other evangelists of developing world growth patterns.
I rejoice at the phenomenal growth that has and is continuing to happen in
Let's not forget what the acronym ITES stands for - Information Technology Enabled Services, in the majority of cases this is nothing but once again a fancy term for low end backroom processing support work that has been offshored to India from the more developed nations.
Support activity can only happen if there is primary business activity to be supported, if we keep on creating and encouraging an environment where home grown physical industries are decimated and discouraged we will face the same consequences that the US is currently facing.
The home grown US economy is already frayed at the edges and is starting to tear apart due to the lack of regular investments in in the physical infrastructure for almost the last 30years. Let's not forget even the robust internet era of the 1990's in the US could not keep the economy going for long.
I understand all investments follow the money trail, but you cannot have isolated islands of economic prosperity and growth in a land of 1.2billion people, not have some kind of equitable balance being maintained without having nasty repercussions. We have seen the former
At the time when I was moving to the US in the early '90s, major trans-national consumer (hard and soft goods) corporations were making a beeline to India to capitalize on the spending power of the - emerging Indian middle class. Many of them lost their shirts in the ensuing years and some have barely managed to stay around profitably even after all these years. This despite all the years of boom activity.
There is risk in all activity, however when people lose sight of rationality in understanding and accepting risk, it is politely termed - Irrational Exuberance, or in layman terms - Stupidity!
The Indian stock market has been growing at a double digit rates for the past few years, the real-estate situation is even worse prices are going up in triple digits and the lay people are lapping it up in the name of growth, being led around by organized opportunists - like rats dancing to the tune of the Pied Piper!
My opinions may seem harsh to many, but I have my reasons and will elaborate on them going forward.
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 14
*
Is attrition a "thing" of the new century? Why isn't anybody bothered about it?
“Attrition, it can be a blessing as well as a curse for both the employer & employee, has always been there & is not a new buzz word.
When organizations face a tough competitive landscape for cost control, attrition - albeit voluntary may provide an easy way to cut spending without having to incur additional costs related to separation. Depending on the employee that departs there may be associated repercussions, for example if a key employee that is part of a crucial project or team leaves then there may be more problems, however, if a relatively non-essential/under-performing employee departs it may be a blessing?
Attrition also keeps an organization vibrant a& dynamic by infusing new ideas & talent, the flip side is loss of employees with key talent & experience possibly to competitors exacerbating the situation further.
For organizations facing high attrition rates in any industry or geographical location it is symptomatic of problems such as -
*Highly skilled workers employed in basic entry level jobs.
*Depressed wages in a high demand industry.
*Stressful & high pressure work environment.
*Improper or lack of verification of candidate credentials.
*Poor internal company culture that contradicts the projected company vision.
*Last, but not the least poor HR practices - hiring, training, & orientation of new employees.
Of the above I would like to touch on the last 3 in more detail -
In my experience employees having a short history of tenure at earlier 'jobs' are unlikely to stay longer at any future opportunity.
2ndly, their short tenure at previous positions would seriously inhibit their ability to gain expertise for future positions.
The part about internal company culture vs. projected vision. I 'm sure almost all of us can vouch for knowing organizations embodying the above. Due a meteoric rise or an isolated blockbuster product/service companies starts to live in their own 'lala land' which has absolutely no co-relation to their work practices.
Lastly, due to internal organizational pressures the HR staff is out of the communication loop when parameters are being drawn up for the various requirements internal departments have for workforce selection.
I have come across situations where requirements are so vague that all you need is a - 'warm body with a pulse' or so exacting and stringent no matter where you look you may not find a qualified candidate. Once a consensus is reached on hiring a certain individual there hardly any proper follow up regarding training/orientation.
Per my observations almost 80% of new employees get a cursory walk through of organizational practices & objectives & then get thrown into a grind-mill. There is no communication with these employees from the HR staff who after hiring take a hands off approach. There is very little if any contact of new employees with their immediate supervisors except in work related meetings, where they are supposed to listen only. Till the time they get their formal review/appraisal at least 6 months if not a year down the road, new employees are 'MAYBE" given a benchmark of performance objectives they were supposed to have been performing against. Even so no rhyme or reason is given for a majority of the ratings that are handed out. Most companies have some kind of exit interview programs, but they are hardly utilized. In HR forums everyone agrees ‘Exit interviews’ are a powerful tool to reveal causes for attrition, however most either do not use them or even when they are used nothing is done with the results.
Going back to my point about internal communication of HR staff within the organization, they have an unenviable job if it is to be done right. Almost 90% of HR recruiters are generalists & people who are usually at the entry level position of most organizations yet we put the burden of screening and selecting potential future superstars for the organization on them. Would welcome more observations... ”
Is attrition a "thing" of the new century? Why isn't anybody bothered about it?
“Attrition, it can be a blessing as well as a curse for both the employer & employee, has always been there & is not a new buzz word.
When organizations face a tough competitive landscape for cost control, attrition - albeit voluntary may provide an easy way to cut spending without having to incur additional costs related to separation. Depending on the employee that departs there may be associated repercussions, for example if a key employee that is part of a crucial project or team leaves then there may be more problems, however, if a relatively non-essential/under-performing employee departs it may be a blessing?
Attrition also keeps an organization vibrant a& dynamic by infusing new ideas & talent, the flip side is loss of employees with key talent & experience possibly to competitors exacerbating the situation further.
For organizations facing high attrition rates in any industry or geographical location it is symptomatic of problems such as -
*Highly skilled workers employed in basic entry level jobs.
*Depressed wages in a high demand industry.
*Stressful & high pressure work environment.
*Improper or lack of verification of candidate credentials.
*Poor internal company culture that contradicts the projected company vision.
*Last, but not the least poor HR practices - hiring, training, & orientation of new employees.
Of the above I would like to touch on the last 3 in more detail -
In my experience employees having a short history of tenure at earlier 'jobs' are unlikely to stay longer at any future opportunity.
2ndly, their short tenure at previous positions would seriously inhibit their ability to gain expertise for future positions.
The part about internal company culture vs. projected vision. I 'm sure almost all of us can vouch for knowing organizations embodying the above. Due a meteoric rise or an isolated blockbuster product/service companies starts to live in their own 'lala land' which has absolutely no co-relation to their work practices.
Lastly, due to internal organizational pressures the HR staff is out of the communication loop when parameters are being drawn up for the various requirements internal departments have for workforce selection.
I have come across situations where requirements are so vague that all you need is a - 'warm body with a pulse' or so exacting and stringent no matter where you look you may not find a qualified candidate. Once a consensus is reached on hiring a certain individual there hardly any proper follow up regarding training/orientation.
Per my observations almost 80% of new employees get a cursory walk through of organizational practices & objectives & then get thrown into a grind-mill. There is no communication with these employees from the HR staff who after hiring take a hands off approach. There is very little if any contact of new employees with their immediate supervisors except in work related meetings, where they are supposed to listen only. Till the time they get their formal review/appraisal at least 6 months if not a year down the road, new employees are 'MAYBE" given a benchmark of performance objectives they were supposed to have been performing against. Even so no rhyme or reason is given for a majority of the ratings that are handed out. Most companies have some kind of exit interview programs, but they are hardly utilized. In HR forums everyone agrees ‘Exit interviews’ are a powerful tool to reveal causes for attrition, however most either do not use them or even when they are used nothing is done with the results.
Going back to my point about internal communication of HR staff within the organization, they have an unenviable job if it is to be done right. Almost 90% of HR recruiters are generalists & people who are usually at the entry level position of most organizations yet we put the burden of screening and selecting potential future superstars for the organization on them. Would welcome more observations... ”
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 13
*
What is the funniest human resources story you have????
“My comment does not pertain to any particular incident, but to the seemingly insane, moronic, as well as oxy-moronic questions that potential qualified candidates get asked during interviews, and the person asking feels that they are going to get a real and genuine answer.
Sometimes, when I have been asked such questions I have felt like giving the 'genuine' answer, but then good sense or rather - 'hypocrisy' has prevailed and I have kept my real answer to myself. There have been instances when the person sitting next to me has asked a potential candidate one of the questions and I have had to literally choke and chortle myself from blurting something on the verge of being censored!
My list (can always be added to) with the top questions in random order -
* What is your current compensation?
* What are your current compensation expectations?
* Why do you want to leave your existing job?
* Why do you want to work with our company?
* Can we contact your current & immediate boss?
* Where do you see yourself with our organization in the next 5 years?
* What do you rate as important in your life - money, family, career, or something else?
* Can you get along with your boss?
* What kind of boss would you like?
* Why do you think we should hire you?
* What would your boss say about you?
* Do you get along with people?
* Can you work 'overtime' to finish a crucial project, if needed?
The list not all inclusive, but just a sampling.
Here's one I was actually asked by one of the biggest MNCs in India, it went like this - (after 2 hours of a grueling 2nd interview) - ...we really like what you have to offer, we are the final decision makers with no further review and would be willing to make an offer on the spot, keep in mind we have people lined up to do almost anything to work for us (true). "Would you be willing to shave your facial hair? The culture of our company predicates that people with facial hair are perceived as being lazy and incompetent. Please take 15minutes to review and let us know your answer."
I heard the offer, their condition, and expectation of the response. Without even batting an eyelid I put my papers in my bag, got up, thanked them for their time and added " ... it was a shame that they did not review my application in detail earlier, as it would have spared everyone the trouble of wasting so much time, as my photograph (a requirement for the job application) was on it with facial hair, secondly nowhere in the job ad was there such a stipulation that one had to be clean shaved!...." I extended my hand for a handshake, but then just waved, turned around and walked out of the room.
Outside, I was stopped by an HR associate who came running upto to me and asked me to wait in another room for a minute. No sooner than I went in the 2 gentlemen who supposedly held my fate (job-wise) in their hands came into congratulate me on being selected to join their company. I was a little taken aback and asked what about the 'facial hair' they brushed it off as a "TEST" to see how susceptible I would be to various pressures in compromising my integrity!”
“My comment does not pertain to any particular incident, but to the seemingly insane, moronic, as well as oxy-moronic questions that potential qualified candidates get asked during interviews, and the person asking feels that they are going to get a real and genuine answer.
Sometimes, when I have been asked such questions I have felt like giving the 'genuine' answer, but then good sense or rather - 'hypocrisy' has prevailed and I have kept my real answer to myself. There have been instances when the person sitting next to me has asked a potential candidate one of the questions and I have had to literally choke and chortle myself from blurting something on the verge of being censored!
My list (can always be added to) with the top questions in random order -
* What is your current compensation?
* What are your current compensation expectations?
* Why do you want to leave your existing job?
* Why do you want to work with our company?
* Can we contact your current & immediate boss?
* Where do you see yourself with our organization in the next 5 years?
* What do you rate as important in your life - money, family, career, or something else?
* Can you get along with your boss?
* What kind of boss would you like?
* Why do you think we should hire you?
* What would your boss say about you?
* Do you get along with people?
* Can you work 'overtime' to finish a crucial project, if needed?
The list not all inclusive, but just a sampling.
Here's one I was actually asked by one of the biggest MNCs in India, it went like this - (after 2 hours of a grueling 2nd interview) - ...we really like what you have to offer, we are the final decision makers with no further review and would be willing to make an offer on the spot, keep in mind we have people lined up to do almost anything to work for us (true). "Would you be willing to shave your facial hair? The culture of our company predicates that people with facial hair are perceived as being lazy and incompetent. Please take 15minutes to review and let us know your answer."
I heard the offer, their condition, and expectation of the response. Without even batting an eyelid I put my papers in my bag, got up, thanked them for their time and added " ... it was a shame that they did not review my application in detail earlier, as it would have spared everyone the trouble of wasting so much time, as my photograph (a requirement for the job application) was on it with facial hair, secondly nowhere in the job ad was there such a stipulation that one had to be clean shaved!...." I extended my hand for a handshake, but then just waved, turned around and walked out of the room.
Outside, I was stopped by an HR associate who came running upto to me and asked me to wait in another room for a minute. No sooner than I went in the 2 gentlemen who supposedly held my fate (job-wise) in their hands came into congratulate me on being selected to join their company. I was a little taken aback and asked what about the 'facial hair' they brushed it off as a "TEST" to see how susceptible I would be to various pressures in compromising my integrity!”
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 12
*
Call Centre Groups
“ It depends where you are based there are several such associations. If you were to do a Google search and then localize it you may find what you are looking for. You may want to check the following site
http://www.customerservicemanager.com/call-center-associations.htm ”
“ It depends where you are based there are several such associations. If you were to do a Google search and then localize it you may find what you are looking for. You may want to check the following site
http://www.customerservicemanager.com/call-center-associations.htm ”
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 11
*
What are the top 3 things that are critical for the success of your projects?
“My top 3 critical requirements for the success of any project - large or small are -
* - Clarity of Vision - CONSTANT FOCUS - through Communication, internal & external.
* - Commitment of Vision - OF ADEQUATE RESOUCES - internal & external.
* - Implementation of Vision, adhering to time-lines otherwise - ORGANIZATIONAL APATHY - sets in.”
What are the top 3 things that are critical for the success of your projects?
“My top 3 critical requirements for the success of any project - large or small are -
* - Clarity of Vision - CONSTANT FOCUS - through Communication, internal & external.
* - Commitment of Vision - OF ADEQUATE RESOUCES - internal & external.
* - Implementation of Vision, adhering to time-lines otherwise - ORGANIZATIONAL APATHY - sets in.”
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 10
*
Google is a leading company on Internet, in the ads market, in video distribution services, mail services, map services, in networks and datacenters. They're everywhere, before everybody, how long do you think the others will survive ?
“Disruptive new offerings that would take peer to peer social networking technology and apply them to the CRM and ecommerce fields, making the marketing and sales of various services on a peer to peer targeted basis. This would eventually lead to greater and more diverse outsourcing of various services / functions by large corporations, as their scale would prevent them from entering this realm. These customized offerings could be monetized or be offered gratis depending on the provider of such services. The above could be achieved by advances in technology - hardware and software, which would come from the creation of the much anticipated and hyped ‘neural net P2P computing grid’ where each peer node would be a server and client simultaneously, thus doing away with the massive data centers that companies like GOOGLE have. Secondly, a lot of information being part of the public domain would be the base on which individual services would be built. Once again making the individual the master of their domain. I’m sure someone will point out privacy and security concerns; however I’m sure supporting technology would be available to filter and scrub the relevant personal information and yet make the information meaningful enough to others for various purposes. That’s my vision of the future…”
Google is a leading company on Internet, in the ads market, in video distribution services, mail services, map services, in networks and datacenters. They're everywhere, before everybody, how long do you think the others will survive ?
“Disruptive new offerings that would take peer to peer social networking technology and apply them to the CRM and ecommerce fields, making the marketing and sales of various services on a peer to peer targeted basis. This would eventually lead to greater and more diverse outsourcing of various services / functions by large corporations, as their scale would prevent them from entering this realm. These customized offerings could be monetized or be offered gratis depending on the provider of such services. The above could be achieved by advances in technology - hardware and software, which would come from the creation of the much anticipated and hyped ‘neural net P2P computing grid’ where each peer node would be a server and client simultaneously, thus doing away with the massive data centers that companies like GOOGLE have. Secondly, a lot of information being part of the public domain would be the base on which individual services would be built. Once again making the individual the master of their domain. I’m sure someone will point out privacy and security concerns; however I’m sure supporting technology would be available to filter and scrub the relevant personal information and yet make the information meaningful enough to others for various purposes. That’s my vision of the future…”
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 9
*
Is 'BRIBING' the right thing to do to become really powerful?
“Was that a ‘real question’ or a ‘rhetorical question’ and what is the context of this question?
The reason I ask is to determine how to answer it, instead of giving an answer full of moral platitudes and ethical values.
Depending on where you are and what the business environment values are, a referral fee commission may be viewed as a ‘bribe’ in certain situations, whereas a ‘bribe’ in another environment may be business as usual somewhere else.
The second part of the question ‘ becoming powerful’ is an enigma in itself to the person asking the question. So without knowing the context of this query I guess all answers are moot…”
“Was that a ‘real question’ or a ‘rhetorical question’ and what is the context of this question?
The reason I ask is to determine how to answer it, instead of giving an answer full of moral platitudes and ethical values.
Depending on where you are and what the business environment values are, a referral fee commission may be viewed as a ‘bribe’ in certain situations, whereas a ‘bribe’ in another environment may be business as usual somewhere else.
The second part of the question ‘ becoming powerful’ is an enigma in itself to the person asking the question. So without knowing the context of this query I guess all answers are moot…”
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 8
*
How would you differentiate between skill, knowledge and competency ?
“Competency = basic / learned capability required gain knowledge and skills.
Knowledge = basic / advanced information required to perform certain functions.
Skills = the dexterity to required to perform those functions.
Expertise = Competency + Knowledge + Skills ”
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 7
*
I am looking for Professionals, Managers who are responsible for outsourcing contracts.
“Please provide details on your domains of expertise, a few references of projects currently ongoing or recently completed, billing rates, and average lead times along-with your location in India. Will certainly get back to you if this passes muster with my associates. ”
“Please provide details on your domains of expertise, a few references of projects currently ongoing or recently completed, billing rates, and average lead times along-with your location in India. Will certainly get back to you if this passes muster with my associates. ”
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 4
*
How do you ask a former star employee to leave?
“Your question on "How to?" seems a little more in-depth than just a superficial question to a performance related situation.
You mention - - this person is emotionally attached to the company
- Why / How ? - is this person a former partner who is not happy with a new direction the organization may be going?
- Was this person promised / awarded with high rewards compared to initial baseline
expectations than what the company initially had? Now that that the business is maturing the expectations are different? So a change in star status????
- Since yours may still be a fledgling organization you may not have a formal HR setup and everyone maybe viewing themselves as having potential ownership of the company, though in reality there may be only one or two real owners.
- No matter where you are or what you do a - 'friend' is never perceived as a - 'boss' or 'mentor', so don't try to become a 'boss' now after being a 'friend'. You will usually be ignored at best and / or be viewed with antagonism and being arrogant otherwise.
My suggestion is to have a peer of your's have a formal heart to heart talk with this associate and plant a seed of separation on either a voluntary or involuntary basis. Sometimes even the office grapevine has it's uses in resolving such issues. This way if and when you finally discuss the separation issue directly it will not come as a surprise to this individual as then it would be viewed as inevitable since others in the work place knew of it also.
Lastly, I can't imagine having dead weight around as you imply is good for the company bottom-line, so also mention that the organization's finances cannot support operational inefficiencies therefore separation would be the most mutually beneficial option. Keep the discussion focussed on the organizational needs and expectations, do not delve into personal issues, habits, or behaviour as this would be counter-productive.
Be firm, but compassionate. Offer a personal recommendation to assist with new endevours if the person requests and keep it brief and business oriented. Hopefully, your friendship will survive this incident."
How do you ask a former star employee to leave?
“Your question on "How to?" seems a little more in-depth than just a superficial question to a performance related situation.
You mention - - this person is emotionally attached to the company
- Why / How ? - is this person a former partner who is not happy with a new direction the organization may be going?
- Was this person promised / awarded with high rewards compared to initial baseline
expectations than what the company initially had? Now that that the business is maturing the expectations are different? So a change in star status????
- Since yours may still be a fledgling organization you may not have a formal HR setup and everyone maybe viewing themselves as having potential ownership of the company, though in reality there may be only one or two real owners.
- No matter where you are or what you do a - 'friend' is never perceived as a - 'boss' or 'mentor', so don't try to become a 'boss' now after being a 'friend'. You will usually be ignored at best and / or be viewed with antagonism and being arrogant otherwise.
My suggestion is to have a peer of your's have a formal heart to heart talk with this associate and plant a seed of separation on either a voluntary or involuntary basis. Sometimes even the office grapevine has it's uses in resolving such issues. This way if and when you finally discuss the separation issue directly it will not come as a surprise to this individual as then it would be viewed as inevitable since others in the work place knew of it also.
Lastly, I can't imagine having dead weight around as you imply is good for the company bottom-line, so also mention that the organization's finances cannot support operational inefficiencies therefore separation would be the most mutually beneficial option. Keep the discussion focussed on the organizational needs and expectations, do not delve into personal issues, habits, or behaviour as this would be counter-productive.
Be firm, but compassionate. Offer a personal recommendation to assist with new endevours if the person requests and keep it brief and business oriented. Hopefully, your friendship will survive this incident."
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 3
*
Greed is good. But what’s better than greed?
“Having your CAKE and being ABLE TO EAT IT !
Greed is only a CONCEPT, a means to an end... THE CAKE !
If you never get the CAKE, and always keep running after it - You are labeled GREEDY !
Those that have are - CONTENT, those that don't have are - GREEDY !
CONTENTMENT IS BLISS !!!!!!!!!”
Greed is good. But what’s better than greed?
“Having your CAKE and being ABLE TO EAT IT !
Greed is only a CONCEPT, a means to an end... THE CAKE !
If you never get the CAKE, and always keep running after it - You are labeled GREEDY !
Those that have are - CONTENT, those that don't have are - GREEDY !
CONTENTMENT IS BLISS !!!!!!!!!”
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Sample of my musings on Linked In - 1
*
Do we (as a society) still need business, jobs, companies and corporations?
Jobs, business, companies and corporations do not occur naturally in nature. They are social constructions - items created to serve a purpose.
Their origins can be traced to the Industrial Revolution were their predecessors were created in order to make use of the new technology that was available. For example, where work had once meant running a farm, the new idea of a "job" - a package of work - was created to organise people in the factories.
Ignoring the depression and similar incidents, all in all, this has worked well. Businesses, jobs, companies and the like have raised everyone out of poverty by providing all of our basic needs - like food, shelter, education and medicine and clothing - at low costs. Thanks to the hard work of our forebears, these days, we live in an Age of Affluence - where we have enough products to satisfy everyone needs.
As such, it seems the need for having business, jobs, companies and corporations is gone. We now longer need to be lifted from poverty - as we have arrived.
So do we still need them? Should we be looking at better ways to organise society?
---
PS. I put this question under career development, because the answer will affect how my career will develop over the next 60-70 years. In only the last 10, I've seen the great changes brought about by the internet, so I'm trying to get a grasp what will happen next.
And I believe you can already see the facturing at the edges of these social structures. For example, micro-commerce and the long tail are eating away at the traditional concepts and people are choosing to down-size and opt out of consumer capitalism - rather than push for bigger and better jobs and careers.
“I presume this question to falls into the rhetorical category, therefore I suggest you may want to spend sometime reading ancient and medieval history and economy of Asia. The reading by itself will answer this question of your's.”
*
Do you recommend any books specifically? What ideas did you take away from them?
For starters I suggest you check the link on wikipedia. If your interest is piqued enough I'm sure you will find enough publications on your own to review the business environment around the world prior to the industrial revolution.
It is unfortunate that not enough has been published in the realm and context of business practices prior to the era of industrial revolution that you refer to. Most works are basic academic exercises in the study and documentation of human history only.
It is not hard to comprehend that if formal trade routes existed then there was some kind of organized commerce, which would necessitate the existence of some kind of organized manufacturing activity. All this would have created some kind of economic activity and which would have created wealth and had some impact on the social structure of the populace involved in such activities.
You will find several references to such instances as described above in the literary works of various writers from the ancient to the medieval ages.
So the notion that an organized business and accompanying social / economic structure is of recent vintage is a fallacy. The accompanying corollary that such social structures have or will become obsolete in the future is therefore fallacious also.
I am an avid fan of science fiction, in the '70's when everyone thought utopia was right around the corner a lifestyle of blissful retirement at age 30 in the near future was propagated. Now in the 21st century we find that most people do want to have jobs to be able to sustain their increased economic consumption, as well as to last them through their increased life span due to the marvels of science.
If you are one of the few that has thought of and can opt out of consumer capitalism you are indeed very, very, very lucky and privileged to do so. You represent a very minute fraction of a minuscule percentage of people worldwide who can do so voluntarily, the rest are still trying to attain that level of affluence, so the cycle will keep going on, keep being rediscovered and reinvented over and over again.
I hope I don't sound cynical nor is it my intent to do so, but I find that the more new fangled and revolutionary a certain idea is made out to be if you dig far and hard enough you will find someone, somewhere else has already come up with it beforehand.
Last but not the least the talk of the internet bringing people together and closer is indeed ironic for a society that at first wanted to have anonymity so moved away from the close family and local social community structure through the use of technology, is now trying to rebuild those social networks albeit in the virtual world.
Cheers,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road
Do we (as a society) still need business, jobs, companies and corporations?
Jobs, business, companies and corporations do not occur naturally in nature. They are social constructions - items created to serve a purpose.
Their origins can be traced to the Industrial Revolution were their predecessors were created in order to make use of the new technology that was available. For example, where work had once meant running a farm, the new idea of a "job" - a package of work - was created to organise people in the factories.
Ignoring the depression and similar incidents, all in all, this has worked well. Businesses, jobs, companies and the like have raised everyone out of poverty by providing all of our basic needs - like food, shelter, education and medicine and clothing - at low costs. Thanks to the hard work of our forebears, these days, we live in an Age of Affluence - where we have enough products to satisfy everyone needs.
As such, it seems the need for having business, jobs, companies and corporations is gone. We now longer need to be lifted from poverty - as we have arrived.
So do we still need them? Should we be looking at better ways to organise society?
---
PS. I put this question under career development, because the answer will affect how my career will develop over the next 60-70 years. In only the last 10, I've seen the great changes brought about by the internet, so I'm trying to get a grasp what will happen next.
And I believe you can already see the facturing at the edges of these social structures. For example, micro-commerce and the long tail are eating away at the traditional concepts and people are choosing to down-size and opt out of consumer capitalism - rather than push for bigger and better jobs and careers.
“I presume this question to falls into the rhetorical category, therefore I suggest you may want to spend sometime reading ancient and medieval history and economy of Asia. The reading by itself will answer this question of your's.”
*
Do you recommend any books specifically? What ideas did you take away from them?
For starters I suggest you check the link on wikipedia. If your interest is piqued enough I'm sure you will find enough publications on your own to review the business environment around the world prior to the industrial revolution.
It is unfortunate that not enough has been published in the realm and context of business practices prior to the era of industrial revolution that you refer to. Most works are basic academic exercises in the study and documentation of human history only.
It is not hard to comprehend that if formal trade routes existed then there was some kind of organized commerce, which would necessitate the existence of some kind of organized manufacturing activity. All this would have created some kind of economic activity and which would have created wealth and had some impact on the social structure of the populace involved in such activities.
You will find several references to such instances as described above in the literary works of various writers from the ancient to the medieval ages.
So the notion that an organized business and accompanying social / economic structure is of recent vintage is a fallacy. The accompanying corollary that such social structures have or will become obsolete in the future is therefore fallacious also.
I am an avid fan of science fiction, in the '70's when everyone thought utopia was right around the corner a lifestyle of blissful retirement at age 30 in the near future was propagated. Now in the 21st century we find that most people do want to have jobs to be able to sustain their increased economic consumption, as well as to last them through their increased life span due to the marvels of science.
If you are one of the few that has thought of and can opt out of consumer capitalism you are indeed very, very, very lucky and privileged to do so. You represent a very minute fraction of a minuscule percentage of people worldwide who can do so voluntarily, the rest are still trying to attain that level of affluence, so the cycle will keep going on, keep being rediscovered and reinvented over and over again.
I hope I don't sound cynical nor is it my intent to do so, but I find that the more new fangled and revolutionary a certain idea is made out to be if you dig far and hard enough you will find someone, somewhere else has already come up with it beforehand.
Last but not the least the talk of the internet bringing people together and closer is indeed ironic for a society that at first wanted to have anonymity so moved away from the close family and local social community structure through the use of technology, is now trying to rebuild those social networks albeit in the virtual world.
Cheers,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
