Researchers indicate the total hours worked for the average employee in developed countries, is around 2,000 hours per year, once you take away bits like lunch, holidays and mental health days. For many, that figure sounds conservative and a lot of time away from home and family. Companies looking to keep employees with reduced hours while looking for the ability to increase productivity, are wrestling with ways to appease their workers and stay profitable. Technology long alluded to be the saviour of time allocated to needless tasks, has in fact contributed to even more time spent connected to work, giving companies pause to think where else can they cut hours effectively.
One item on the time reduction agenda for many companies are meetings and the ancillary effects that come out those meetings. If meetings can be countered and their time sucking influence addressed, then Henry Ford as a proponent of shorter working hours can rest easier in his grave. Ford was the first of the production line magnates to figure out his workers were the biggest consumers of his product and if he didn't give them adequate leisure time there was no reason for the next model T to roll off the line.
In a year, it is not uncommon for meetings to take up to 10% of the yearly allocation of hours, think a two hour weekly meeting and a couple of random hourly meetings per week and you have 200 hours of coffee and stale pastries. Most companies agree meetings get in the way but struggle getting out of the routine. A better managed agenda and agreeing on outcomes, be that decisions, status reports, communicating or generating ideas, can cut meetings by 50% giving a company back 100 hours. Those 100 hours have not been allocated for any particular work, in fact they have been lost forever in the wilderness that is meeting overload, so why not consider giving that time back to employees?
This minor concession goes a long way to backing up studies supporting a four day work week to increase consumption, invigorate the economy, increase levels of employee health and education while aiding in the reduction of transport costs and the contributory effects on the environment. Concessions such as these has seen average worker hours decreasing in many developed countries with the Netherlands leading, working an average 27 hours per week. This strategy could see the Netherlands become the first country to reach an average work week of under 21 hours. This particular number is interesting and has been pushed by the New Economics Foundation citing 21 hours as the panacea for unemployment, pollution emissions, increased health benefits, reunification of the family unit and the general lack of leisure time disappearing with the aid of technology.
For many, 21 hours per week, equals a 50% cut in work time and would not see work production to any level of satisfaction for the company or the employee. Adding stress trying to achieve that number would also see many into an early grave. Having said that, other bench marks do exist, as long as we are willing to compromise the brick veneer triple front great Australian dream. With little care in the world, the Kapauku people of PNG think it bad luck to work two consecutive days while the Kung Bushmen have a two and half day work week organised, showing not everyone needs to attend a meeting.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Friday, October 26, 2012
Love your work?
Do you love your work? How do you know you love your work? Do you say it enough times and eventually believe it? People tell you, you have the best job, so you must love it. Do you love the people you work with or the money that comes with the job. If you don't love all of your job, do you love 40% of it? The questions about loving your job are often not asked and seldom answered with people not wanting to admit, should they be attempting something else more aligned with their passions in life? The obvious retort is work is work and most passions, I want to be a rock star dude, don't pay the mortgage so get off the couch, grow some, go to work and stop whining.
Throw out those compromises and think about reasons people love a job, jump out of bed every morning with anticipation and make a difference. If you are lucky enough to work from home and your work is your lifestyle, then it likely won't feel like work at all. No amount of sitting around in your pyjamas doing creative things ever feels like work. The lines will blur between what you do for a living and living, aligning your work passions to the enthusiasm you have for life. Everything you do becomes an extension of your life and you question whether you are really working when it doesn't feel like work? The ideal workplace should feel like home and it's the reason so many companies are providing office fit outs without the ubiquitous pods and including open spaces, more natural light, daily distractions and building a culture around family.
The corporate mantra of excessive hours and always on game leaves little room to love your job if you can't see over the pod walls but if work gives you the opportunity to make room for the rest of your life, you have a reason to love it as a provider, a means to an end. Work can give you the resources to be complete, to engage, to enjoy and to become immersed in life outside the confines of public transport and office buildings. The winners in this case, are companies encouraging sensible work hours mixed with recreation and social interaction who then end up in the higher productivity surveys.
It's rare to not have something dear to your heart at work and if that ends up being the 40% you love, then it requires your ultimate conviction. No one ever got sacked for doing a great job on passionate projects, bringing in new ideas, developing initiatives and being a lynchpin. You need to find the corners you are comfortable in, where the work brings out your best, where you can develop a passion that spreads.
It's never about the money as countless research has indicated, it's always the softer things that people love about their work, the people, the culture, the family. These are the staple items of happiness for most of us, helping work blur the lines between the front door and the office elevator. Studies by luminaries such as the National Academy of Sciences have found people who reported being happiest, had a 35% reduced risk of dying and isn't that what employers want, staff for life?
Throw out those compromises and think about reasons people love a job, jump out of bed every morning with anticipation and make a difference. If you are lucky enough to work from home and your work is your lifestyle, then it likely won't feel like work at all. No amount of sitting around in your pyjamas doing creative things ever feels like work. The lines will blur between what you do for a living and living, aligning your work passions to the enthusiasm you have for life. Everything you do becomes an extension of your life and you question whether you are really working when it doesn't feel like work? The ideal workplace should feel like home and it's the reason so many companies are providing office fit outs without the ubiquitous pods and including open spaces, more natural light, daily distractions and building a culture around family.
The corporate mantra of excessive hours and always on game leaves little room to love your job if you can't see over the pod walls but if work gives you the opportunity to make room for the rest of your life, you have a reason to love it as a provider, a means to an end. Work can give you the resources to be complete, to engage, to enjoy and to become immersed in life outside the confines of public transport and office buildings. The winners in this case, are companies encouraging sensible work hours mixed with recreation and social interaction who then end up in the higher productivity surveys.
It's rare to not have something dear to your heart at work and if that ends up being the 40% you love, then it requires your ultimate conviction. No one ever got sacked for doing a great job on passionate projects, bringing in new ideas, developing initiatives and being a lynchpin. You need to find the corners you are comfortable in, where the work brings out your best, where you can develop a passion that spreads.
It's never about the money as countless research has indicated, it's always the softer things that people love about their work, the people, the culture, the family. These are the staple items of happiness for most of us, helping work blur the lines between the front door and the office elevator. Studies by luminaries such as the National Academy of Sciences have found people who reported being happiest, had a 35% reduced risk of dying and isn't that what employers want, staff for life?
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Freaks and Geeks.
In 1962 the Beatles broke into the Top 40 and they were hailed as freakish overnight sensations. No one outside of Liverpool knew who they were, no one knew if they could sustain the quality of music they showed up with and no one knew the influence they would have over music the next 50 years. The IPO for Microsoft in 1986 saw a few billionaires like Bill Gates and Paul Allen created, along with the establishment of 12,000 millionaires. They were seemingly created overnight with the Microsoft Windows operating system, which was to become the standard platform for the world's computers for decades to come. Surprisingly neither the freakish musical geniuses or the newest geeks, were overnight successes.
Before that first venture into the Top 40, the Beatles spent years on the club circuit honing their skills, sometimes playing the Hamburg clubs for months on end, in 8 gruelling sets a day. By the time they hit the studio for "Love me do", they had amassed over 10,000 performances, something artists of today would struggle with, even with the required amount of drugs. Bill Gates spent most of his formative youth sneaking into computer labs testing his MS Dos language and continued to amplify his skills, eventually founding Microsoft with Paul Allen in 1975. From 1975 to 1986 they worked at refining their systems, testing their platform to eventually to end up at the successful IPO.
Malcolm Gladwell in his seminal 2008 tome, "Outliers", looked at many examples of so called overnight successes and came up with his own version of success attributable to a a long period of activity within a speciality craved by those individuals and groups alike. Gladwell theorised it took a minimum of 10,000 hours of practice to get to the highest level of proficiency, regardless of industry or sector, be it business, music or sport. The Beatles with their 10,000 gigs before hitting it big and Bill Gates spending 10 years before becoming the world's favourite geek are examples that resonate with Gladwell.
Many today argue that time has become compressed via the net and the myriad of social sites, allowing instant global recognition and giving people the opportunity to become overnight successes without the need for those 10,000 hours of practice. If that were the case, why do so many disappear just as quickly as they arrived? The need to become proficient has never been more important and I'm not sure the shortcuts people see on the net and the social landscape will hold up if they don't have the background they say they have.
Over night success today, is often about brief recognition or notoriety given by the new media avenues and brings with it a feeling that short cuts are accepted. A YouTube video downloaded by a few million people doesn't translate into longevity and does not replace the knowledge and skills required to sustain longevity when it comes to success, especially within the business world. Business today is still about long term relationships, a base of knowledge that is acknowledged by your partners and if you have been diligent, 10,000 hours of practice in your chosen field.
If you are looking to work with professionals, don't look for quick imitations of the real deal, look for the practiced, the authentic and if you want people to seek you out, think how many of those 10,000 hours you have completed? From the freakishly talented to the geekishly innovative there are no shortcuts to success.
Before that first venture into the Top 40, the Beatles spent years on the club circuit honing their skills, sometimes playing the Hamburg clubs for months on end, in 8 gruelling sets a day. By the time they hit the studio for "Love me do", they had amassed over 10,000 performances, something artists of today would struggle with, even with the required amount of drugs. Bill Gates spent most of his formative youth sneaking into computer labs testing his MS Dos language and continued to amplify his skills, eventually founding Microsoft with Paul Allen in 1975. From 1975 to 1986 they worked at refining their systems, testing their platform to eventually to end up at the successful IPO.
Malcolm Gladwell in his seminal 2008 tome, "Outliers", looked at many examples of so called overnight successes and came up with his own version of success attributable to a a long period of activity within a speciality craved by those individuals and groups alike. Gladwell theorised it took a minimum of 10,000 hours of practice to get to the highest level of proficiency, regardless of industry or sector, be it business, music or sport. The Beatles with their 10,000 gigs before hitting it big and Bill Gates spending 10 years before becoming the world's favourite geek are examples that resonate with Gladwell.
Many today argue that time has become compressed via the net and the myriad of social sites, allowing instant global recognition and giving people the opportunity to become overnight successes without the need for those 10,000 hours of practice. If that were the case, why do so many disappear just as quickly as they arrived? The need to become proficient has never been more important and I'm not sure the shortcuts people see on the net and the social landscape will hold up if they don't have the background they say they have.
Over night success today, is often about brief recognition or notoriety given by the new media avenues and brings with it a feeling that short cuts are accepted. A YouTube video downloaded by a few million people doesn't translate into longevity and does not replace the knowledge and skills required to sustain longevity when it comes to success, especially within the business world. Business today is still about long term relationships, a base of knowledge that is acknowledged by your partners and if you have been diligent, 10,000 hours of practice in your chosen field.
If you are looking to work with professionals, don't look for quick imitations of the real deal, look for the practiced, the authentic and if you want people to seek you out, think how many of those 10,000 hours you have completed? From the freakishly talented to the geekishly innovative there are no shortcuts to success.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Pegs and holes.
Square pegs, round holes, round pegs, square holes, universal analogies for not fitting in, individualism, mentioned frequently in business in good and bad situations. Depending on the requirements of a job, the above analogy can provide a world of opportunities or a world of pain, for the employee and the employer. The square peg has always been the idiomatic expression of individuality and in the past, companies have always needed to carefully assess consequences, culturally and economic when hiring such individuals, especially in top management roles.
Companies often looked externally for CEOs with a proven track record of success and achievement but this did not always translate, especially if the ingrained culture of a company was detrimentally affected by the new arrival. Past examples abound, of CEOs coming into companies and trying to change things but finding, in the end, that culture trumps strategy every time. Robert Nardelli was a GE genius when he arrived at Home Depot in 2000, using his past experience and the Six Sigma management strategy, he replaced the entrepreneurial culture of the company and turned off the public which eventually saw him sacked in 2007, when he went on to lead Chrysler with similar bad experiences to be again ousted in 2009. Ten years ago, Booz Allen Hamilton studies found nearly 50% of CEOs hired from external companies failed, while 75% promoted from within succeeded. Like all business situations, there are always two sides and it behoves the company and the individual to consider ramifications of their actions in cases like the above.
Today there is a trend towards individualistic entrepreneurism that companies are looking to embrace and CEO or floor worker, it's likely everyone has felt like a square peg at one time or a other. Not fitting in, brings with it a raft of emotions and decisions to be made, decisions to change dramatically or even just a little to fit in or continue to search for a better fit elsewhere. A favourite square peg example comes from a common business phrase, "thinking outside the box" and the implications of those pegs shackled by legacy thinking. Xerox in 1970 invested research into the "Alto", the first personal computer with a full suite of icons, pages and a mouse all used via a graphical interface. They were years ahead of the competition but Xerox had issues with their square peg computer guys because the company made copiers, great copiers, fantastic copiers, in fact the world's best copiers so Xerox had difficulties seeing the future beyond the reems of paper stacked against the copy machines. The "Box" guys as they were known, could think outside of it but the rest of the company couldn't "think outside the box" and eventually saw their square pegs disperse to HP, Apple and Microsoft success, leaving Xerox to rue their lost opportunity.
If companies have the capacity to allow individuals to do what they are good at, while still being able to fit culturally, the strengths gained from this process will almost guarantee success. Allowing for this individuality requires forward thinking management, willing to accept business unusual versus the way things have always been done. The world's leading companies today see the advantage of the square peg and embrace the individual, providing them with comfortable and safe environments from which to flourish and succeed. You need look no further than the burgeoning IT sector, where outcasts and displaced specialists are courted for their individual flair, their unique insights and their esoteric thinking.
The success of companies from Apple, through Google, to Amazon and Zappos are directly attributable to the individuals who lead them and the individuals they hire. They understand a factory mindset will produce a widget but catching lightning in a bottle to produce the iPod, the Kindle and Google Maps requires differentiation, non conformity and and uniqueness that only a square peg can provide. Here's to the square pegs of the world, thank you for being different.
Companies often looked externally for CEOs with a proven track record of success and achievement but this did not always translate, especially if the ingrained culture of a company was detrimentally affected by the new arrival. Past examples abound, of CEOs coming into companies and trying to change things but finding, in the end, that culture trumps strategy every time. Robert Nardelli was a GE genius when he arrived at Home Depot in 2000, using his past experience and the Six Sigma management strategy, he replaced the entrepreneurial culture of the company and turned off the public which eventually saw him sacked in 2007, when he went on to lead Chrysler with similar bad experiences to be again ousted in 2009. Ten years ago, Booz Allen Hamilton studies found nearly 50% of CEOs hired from external companies failed, while 75% promoted from within succeeded. Like all business situations, there are always two sides and it behoves the company and the individual to consider ramifications of their actions in cases like the above.
Today there is a trend towards individualistic entrepreneurism that companies are looking to embrace and CEO or floor worker, it's likely everyone has felt like a square peg at one time or a other. Not fitting in, brings with it a raft of emotions and decisions to be made, decisions to change dramatically or even just a little to fit in or continue to search for a better fit elsewhere. A favourite square peg example comes from a common business phrase, "thinking outside the box" and the implications of those pegs shackled by legacy thinking. Xerox in 1970 invested research into the "Alto", the first personal computer with a full suite of icons, pages and a mouse all used via a graphical interface. They were years ahead of the competition but Xerox had issues with their square peg computer guys because the company made copiers, great copiers, fantastic copiers, in fact the world's best copiers so Xerox had difficulties seeing the future beyond the reems of paper stacked against the copy machines. The "Box" guys as they were known, could think outside of it but the rest of the company couldn't "think outside the box" and eventually saw their square pegs disperse to HP, Apple and Microsoft success, leaving Xerox to rue their lost opportunity.
If companies have the capacity to allow individuals to do what they are good at, while still being able to fit culturally, the strengths gained from this process will almost guarantee success. Allowing for this individuality requires forward thinking management, willing to accept business unusual versus the way things have always been done. The world's leading companies today see the advantage of the square peg and embrace the individual, providing them with comfortable and safe environments from which to flourish and succeed. You need look no further than the burgeoning IT sector, where outcasts and displaced specialists are courted for their individual flair, their unique insights and their esoteric thinking.
The success of companies from Apple, through Google, to Amazon and Zappos are directly attributable to the individuals who lead them and the individuals they hire. They understand a factory mindset will produce a widget but catching lightning in a bottle to produce the iPod, the Kindle and Google Maps requires differentiation, non conformity and and uniqueness that only a square peg can provide. Here's to the square pegs of the world, thank you for being different.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Dumb and dumber.
Time is the only hindrance, time is holding me back, time is the only curtailment in my quest for knowledge. If I could spend the rest of my life on Google, would I become the smartest person on the planet, the most up to date individual in the world or would I still meet someone at lunch who knows more about the finer intricacies of Chinese fiscal policies? I'm not talking about total omniscience, actually knowing everything that can be known but inherent omniscience, the ability to know anything that one chooses to know and can be known. Seth Godin recently wrote about knowledge becoming ubiquitous and that no excuse could be given for not knowing something, which still amazes me when I meet people who are clueless on all levels about the people and industries they work in.
With the web available on every device known to man, available 24/365 and constantly being updated, the excuse for not knowing something is astonishing on the surface and almost criminal on every other level. The ability to look someone up, look at their industry and even their company, minutes before you talk with them has become so easy that excuses can no longer be tolerated in the business world. Business ignorance today, can only mean severe isolation from technology or choosing to live on a desert island.
It's no longer okay to not know something for any extended length of time, it's no longer okay to not know what people do for a job and ignorance is no longer bliss, it's ignorance.
Every effort is being made, to make the world's information available to every level of society, Google, Bing, Yahoo et al are taking it upon themselves in a race to compile and collate everything of value to everyone and some things of no value to anyone. The accomplishment for individuals is all about a continued search for knowledge and the ease with which that can be attained.
The days of acceptance are over, no matter if you are talking to a doctor, a lawyer or your family know it all. Having the recourse of instant information at your finger tips, behoves you to at least make the effort and once having made the effort, to then digest the information for your own good. Don't be the last one to know, nothing takes longer than a few minutes with the investigative power of the meta search engines. The ubiquity of "just Google it" gives everyone the chance to stay ahead by drilling straight to the core of any information needed.
This ability to find everything out about everything, doesn't negate the need for the education process, it just gives people dexterity to refine the broader education base and bring forth matter expertise when required. You no longer have to find that mountain top and gaze at your navel for extended periods of time, to figure out what it all means, it's all there, right in front of you on Google.
With the web available on every device known to man, available 24/365 and constantly being updated, the excuse for not knowing something is astonishing on the surface and almost criminal on every other level. The ability to look someone up, look at their industry and even their company, minutes before you talk with them has become so easy that excuses can no longer be tolerated in the business world. Business ignorance today, can only mean severe isolation from technology or choosing to live on a desert island.
It's no longer okay to not know something for any extended length of time, it's no longer okay to not know what people do for a job and ignorance is no longer bliss, it's ignorance.
Every effort is being made, to make the world's information available to every level of society, Google, Bing, Yahoo et al are taking it upon themselves in a race to compile and collate everything of value to everyone and some things of no value to anyone. The accomplishment for individuals is all about a continued search for knowledge and the ease with which that can be attained.
The days of acceptance are over, no matter if you are talking to a doctor, a lawyer or your family know it all. Having the recourse of instant information at your finger tips, behoves you to at least make the effort and once having made the effort, to then digest the information for your own good. Don't be the last one to know, nothing takes longer than a few minutes with the investigative power of the meta search engines. The ubiquity of "just Google it" gives everyone the chance to stay ahead by drilling straight to the core of any information needed.
This ability to find everything out about everything, doesn't negate the need for the education process, it just gives people dexterity to refine the broader education base and bring forth matter expertise when required. You no longer have to find that mountain top and gaze at your navel for extended periods of time, to figure out what it all means, it's all there, right in front of you on Google.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
One person with passion is better than forty people merely interested.
The above quote is from English novelist E. M. Forster and I mention it today as I find myself short of ideas, passion and stories to write about. I ask myself who cares, I quickly come back with my answer, I care and this gets me thinking about what creates and drives passion in people? Whatever you are passionate about and lucky enough to do for a living or even a hobby, has limits and sometimes you run out of steam and just can't seem to find that zeal, to get out of bed, go to work, go for a workout or call your best friend. So how do you rekindle that passion, and I'm not talking romantic moonlit dinner, but about refocusing your desire to accomplish, be authentic, regain purpose and re-like what you like?
The surfeit of psychiatrists, social psychologists and self help gurus who comment on our lives, have libraries dedicated to ways we can zero in on our passionate core and many offer up opinions but we are more attuned to listening to admired leaders or people close to us. People like Richard Branson never miss an opportunity to opine on passion and his work history gives credence to someone who found his essence and indulged all the way to success. From Richard through to Obama, there is no shortage of achieving archetypes to chose from and it is good they are willing to open up and expose their feelings for others to learn from.
From aspirational lists, through jobs with purpose and the way of Buddha, people are constantly looking for ways to find that spark to accelerate them to the next level, the next best thing and bring an accord of achievement. For me it's less about the leaders and more about my peers who spur me on by way of their own determination, commitment and stories. People leading extraordinary lives based on their passion for work, for helping others, learning, educating and being a pillar to their tribe of family and friends. Yet sometimes it's just up to me and then I need to find ways of obtaining that spark again.
As morbid as it sounds, envisaging your own funeral brings with it an appropriateness and exactitude for honesty hearing your eulogy wrapping up your life's accomplishments, finding out where you made a difference, brought smiles to people, generally succeeded and elucidating your search for the missing passion. The clarity of death brings with it a focus not evident in day to day activities but don't dwell on the dark side. I also think about what I could be teaching people and this again brings back focus to my commitments. Daydreaming about what I wanted to be when I grow up or what I want to do next year can also articulate and scrutinise my thinking to refocus that inner amplitude of passion. Self analysis of this kind, brings out the best in you, if you bench mark yourself against relevant and passionate high achievers.
The more conversations I have with myself, the more I fixate appropriately on the challenge at hand, getting my arse into gear and doing what I enjoy most with the passion it deserves. I'm back.
I know, you didn't think I was gone.
The surfeit of psychiatrists, social psychologists and self help gurus who comment on our lives, have libraries dedicated to ways we can zero in on our passionate core and many offer up opinions but we are more attuned to listening to admired leaders or people close to us. People like Richard Branson never miss an opportunity to opine on passion and his work history gives credence to someone who found his essence and indulged all the way to success. From Richard through to Obama, there is no shortage of achieving archetypes to chose from and it is good they are willing to open up and expose their feelings for others to learn from.
From aspirational lists, through jobs with purpose and the way of Buddha, people are constantly looking for ways to find that spark to accelerate them to the next level, the next best thing and bring an accord of achievement. For me it's less about the leaders and more about my peers who spur me on by way of their own determination, commitment and stories. People leading extraordinary lives based on their passion for work, for helping others, learning, educating and being a pillar to their tribe of family and friends. Yet sometimes it's just up to me and then I need to find ways of obtaining that spark again.
As morbid as it sounds, envisaging your own funeral brings with it an appropriateness and exactitude for honesty hearing your eulogy wrapping up your life's accomplishments, finding out where you made a difference, brought smiles to people, generally succeeded and elucidating your search for the missing passion. The clarity of death brings with it a focus not evident in day to day activities but don't dwell on the dark side. I also think about what I could be teaching people and this again brings back focus to my commitments. Daydreaming about what I wanted to be when I grow up or what I want to do next year can also articulate and scrutinise my thinking to refocus that inner amplitude of passion. Self analysis of this kind, brings out the best in you, if you bench mark yourself against relevant and passionate high achievers.
The more conversations I have with myself, the more I fixate appropriately on the challenge at hand, getting my arse into gear and doing what I enjoy most with the passion it deserves. I'm back.
I know, you didn't think I was gone.
Friday, October 5, 2012
Please turn off.
"Any mobile devices, as they may interfere with the aircraft's navigational system."
Alec Baldwin was tossed from a plane ( not literally ) last year for refusing to stop playing a game on his phone during take off and it caused an incident because he was defying airline safety rules. We've all been there, with one more text needing to be sent before the plane takes off, one more goodbye to say before the plane door shuts and an urgent call that can't wait for the tyres to hit the airport runway on landing. So do we really have cause for concern, our technology will bring down aircraft or is everyone too scared to push that envelope with a 50 kilogram gate keeper handing out coffee and tea?
The airline restrictions on the use of technology date back to the early 90s, when mobile phones weighed more than a brick, all computers were beige and apple was still a fruit. To err on the side of caution, airlines used anecdotal evidence from pilots and flight crew, who surmised navigational glitches that had occurred were likely caused by the new gizmos people were wanting to carry on board aircraft. For years, aircraft manufacturers like Boeing tried to replicate the scenarios to empirically define answers to the anxiety brought forth by technology wielding passengers who were less than diligent in traveling to airline accord. Without any replaceable and authenticated evidence, airlines decided to agree on the possibility that technology may interfere with aircraft equipment but no one could say for sure.
Who hasn't forgotten to turn off their phone, their tablet or PC? I know I stopped worrying after the first few times forgetting to turn of my devices, thinking my errant attitude could cause a malfunction that would bring me to earth with a crash. Surveys and research done with hundreds of flyers in the US, over the last year, showed over 40% never bothered to turn off their phones during take off and landings, with a Bolshie 2% doing an Alec Baldwin and using their devices whenever they liked.
So why haven't aircraft dropped out of the skies? Aircraft are designed with fail safe systems that flying through a hurricane may cause bumps, yet turning on a phone with the runway in sight is considered more dangerous. Has logic left us, the numbers from the surveys and likely your own experiences show decisions made over two decades ago don't have much bearing on today. The chances that every device on every aircraft, flying right now, being turned off is imponderable and yet the fear remains.
The cause and effect of something going wrong and something else happening at the same time, like a navigational glitch while some piece of technology is turned on is a great story and anecdotally believable, giving the airlines plausible deniability and playing on our fear of the unknown. Airlines are all working on retaining and acquiring as many passengers as possible, so why isn't one of them doing a full scientific study of technology and its affect on aircraft navigational equipment. You have to believe, the first airline that has a flight attendant announcing all and any technology devices can be left on and operated throughout the flight time, take off and landing included, will garner praise along with increased passenger uptake.
The fact no aircraft fall out of the sky because flight attendants are diligent in their duty to make sure no one is seen to be using their technology, affirms the belief in the status quo and links our fear to uncorroborated evidence from decades past. Too many plane crash movies will keep that phone in our pockets but it may not be turned off.
Alec Baldwin was tossed from a plane ( not literally ) last year for refusing to stop playing a game on his phone during take off and it caused an incident because he was defying airline safety rules. We've all been there, with one more text needing to be sent before the plane takes off, one more goodbye to say before the plane door shuts and an urgent call that can't wait for the tyres to hit the airport runway on landing. So do we really have cause for concern, our technology will bring down aircraft or is everyone too scared to push that envelope with a 50 kilogram gate keeper handing out coffee and tea?
The airline restrictions on the use of technology date back to the early 90s, when mobile phones weighed more than a brick, all computers were beige and apple was still a fruit. To err on the side of caution, airlines used anecdotal evidence from pilots and flight crew, who surmised navigational glitches that had occurred were likely caused by the new gizmos people were wanting to carry on board aircraft. For years, aircraft manufacturers like Boeing tried to replicate the scenarios to empirically define answers to the anxiety brought forth by technology wielding passengers who were less than diligent in traveling to airline accord. Without any replaceable and authenticated evidence, airlines decided to agree on the possibility that technology may interfere with aircraft equipment but no one could say for sure.
Who hasn't forgotten to turn off their phone, their tablet or PC? I know I stopped worrying after the first few times forgetting to turn of my devices, thinking my errant attitude could cause a malfunction that would bring me to earth with a crash. Surveys and research done with hundreds of flyers in the US, over the last year, showed over 40% never bothered to turn off their phones during take off and landings, with a Bolshie 2% doing an Alec Baldwin and using their devices whenever they liked.
So why haven't aircraft dropped out of the skies? Aircraft are designed with fail safe systems that flying through a hurricane may cause bumps, yet turning on a phone with the runway in sight is considered more dangerous. Has logic left us, the numbers from the surveys and likely your own experiences show decisions made over two decades ago don't have much bearing on today. The chances that every device on every aircraft, flying right now, being turned off is imponderable and yet the fear remains.
The cause and effect of something going wrong and something else happening at the same time, like a navigational glitch while some piece of technology is turned on is a great story and anecdotally believable, giving the airlines plausible deniability and playing on our fear of the unknown. Airlines are all working on retaining and acquiring as many passengers as possible, so why isn't one of them doing a full scientific study of technology and its affect on aircraft navigational equipment. You have to believe, the first airline that has a flight attendant announcing all and any technology devices can be left on and operated throughout the flight time, take off and landing included, will garner praise along with increased passenger uptake.
The fact no aircraft fall out of the sky because flight attendants are diligent in their duty to make sure no one is seen to be using their technology, affirms the belief in the status quo and links our fear to uncorroborated evidence from decades past. Too many plane crash movies will keep that phone in our pockets but it may not be turned off.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Please Release Me.
In the inimitable words of Englebert Humperdinck, "let me go". How much did I love those emails when they first arrived, the emails about the latest and greatest of everything I was interested in last year. With the world on offer I took up all the offers, why not, when space is not a premium. Why not tick the box that will fill my inbox with offers, recipes, news, music, art and all manner of interests to engage me, edify me and make me interesting to talk to at the next gathering. You know the ending, so many emails I don't have enough hours in the day to even open up the interesting ones.
So a concerted effort this long weekend to rid myself of emails that no longer piquéd my interest, to clear my inbox and unclutter my mind, was supposed to take no longer than a coffee break. The first thing to surprise me was how many irrelevant emails I now get from subscriptions I thought would be of benefit, to my work regime, to my own education or just absorbing to read. From recipe catalogues, through sport reports to technology and entertainment, I find my inbox overwhelmed with correspondence that in the old days I would have taken from my letter box and used to light the BBQ. Nowadays that process is only a click away and my inbox will once again be mine, or so I thought.
Technology can lull you into a false sense of security with its speed, its attention to detail and its ability to cut corners to get you where you want to be right now. It is never as easy as they say it is and I found this out pouring my third cup of coffee and having hardly scratched the surface of my tidy up. I should have guessed by the fourth unsubscribe that caffeine was going to be my friend this morning.
The first email asked me to hit the unsubscribe button, which then led me to a website where I needed to re-enter my email address and re-hit unsubscribe, which then sent an email back to my inbox with a link for me to unsubscribe, which redirected me back to the website saying they were sorry to see me go and if I maybe, someday, somehow I wanted to receive emails again, I should just hit a designated button. I needed lots of coffee after the first go around. Today you cannot send commercial emails without the obligatory unsubscribe button but there is nothing to say they should make it easy to leave once they have you on their list, even if there are laws governing the use of such emails.
The CAN-SPAM law ( Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography And Marketing Act of 2003 ) enacted by George Bush was an example of governments trying to cope with the tirades of unhappy voters who's inbox had become a battleground for pornography and commercial marketers that had maybe forgotten, to put that little unsubscribe button at the bottom of their most important messages. Yet they never thought the activity could be so onerous and some time lines last up to ten days before you can get off the lists. Meaning many never bother and the inboxes continue to fill.
My morning was baffled by the myriad of processes and amazement at the lengths many companies employed to keep me informed. I gave up eventually, because my time is precious but I did finish with a plethora of subscription emails ending up in my spam filter to be cleared at the end of the month with a flourish of the delete button. In the end I retained my right to not be abused for hitting that subscribe button and regaining some control over my inbox, with the help of Mr Nespresso, who I still subscribe to.
So a concerted effort this long weekend to rid myself of emails that no longer piquéd my interest, to clear my inbox and unclutter my mind, was supposed to take no longer than a coffee break. The first thing to surprise me was how many irrelevant emails I now get from subscriptions I thought would be of benefit, to my work regime, to my own education or just absorbing to read. From recipe catalogues, through sport reports to technology and entertainment, I find my inbox overwhelmed with correspondence that in the old days I would have taken from my letter box and used to light the BBQ. Nowadays that process is only a click away and my inbox will once again be mine, or so I thought.
Technology can lull you into a false sense of security with its speed, its attention to detail and its ability to cut corners to get you where you want to be right now. It is never as easy as they say it is and I found this out pouring my third cup of coffee and having hardly scratched the surface of my tidy up. I should have guessed by the fourth unsubscribe that caffeine was going to be my friend this morning.
The first email asked me to hit the unsubscribe button, which then led me to a website where I needed to re-enter my email address and re-hit unsubscribe, which then sent an email back to my inbox with a link for me to unsubscribe, which redirected me back to the website saying they were sorry to see me go and if I maybe, someday, somehow I wanted to receive emails again, I should just hit a designated button. I needed lots of coffee after the first go around. Today you cannot send commercial emails without the obligatory unsubscribe button but there is nothing to say they should make it easy to leave once they have you on their list, even if there are laws governing the use of such emails.
The CAN-SPAM law ( Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography And Marketing Act of 2003 ) enacted by George Bush was an example of governments trying to cope with the tirades of unhappy voters who's inbox had become a battleground for pornography and commercial marketers that had maybe forgotten, to put that little unsubscribe button at the bottom of their most important messages. Yet they never thought the activity could be so onerous and some time lines last up to ten days before you can get off the lists. Meaning many never bother and the inboxes continue to fill.
My morning was baffled by the myriad of processes and amazement at the lengths many companies employed to keep me informed. I gave up eventually, because my time is precious but I did finish with a plethora of subscription emails ending up in my spam filter to be cleared at the end of the month with a flourish of the delete button. In the end I retained my right to not be abused for hitting that subscribe button and regaining some control over my inbox, with the help of Mr Nespresso, who I still subscribe to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
