SmallCanBeBig.org : Home
Shared via AddThis
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Golfing
Earlier this week my father and I finally took my aunt golfing, a brand new sport to her. Not the easist activity to get into the swing of thing(a dun dun, pun intended). She did quite well for her first time on the course, however, not letting go of her insane pull to the right on her drives.
Here's a good picture of her off the 5th green. She chipped the ball about 50 yards away from the green onto this mound. As dry as the grounds were that day, gravity just didn't do it's job on this one.
Here's my favorite outlook on the course over the 8th hole. The green is up above a hill that overlooks the 15th hole dipping right over those trees. Unfortunately the picture doesn't give justice to the actual beauty of the surroundings.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Jeff Jacoby Op-Ed (Crime and Punishment)
Excellent Op-Ed piece in the Boston Globe on August 5th by Jeff Jacoby. He takes a stab at report called, "No Exit: The Expanding Use of Life Sentences in America" by a group called the Sentencing Project. The following is an excerpt from the editorial challenging some of the statistics and facts used to corroborate the Project's argument to abolish life sentences and the death penalty.
[Nowhere in “No Exit’’ is there any breakdown of the crimes that led to the 140,000 life sentences now being served. Yet the report devotes almost obsessive attention (including five statistical tables) to the alleged racial disparity those sentences reflect. About 48 percent of lifers are black, 33 percent are white, and 14 percent are Hispanic. “These figures are consistent with a larger pattern in the criminal justice system,’’ the report notes, “in which African Americans are represented at an increasingly disproportionate rate across the continuum from arrest through incarceration.’’
Yet the report mentions only in passing another striking disparity: Nearly 97 percent of inmates serving life terms are men. If it is noteworthy that blacks, who account for 12 percent of the general population, make up 48 percent of lifers, shouldn’t it be even more significant that men, who comprise less than half the population at large, represent nearly all those sentenced to life?
The explanation, of course, is that men commit the vast majority of serious crime; that fact, not sexism, explains the disproportionate incarceration rate.
Likewise the racial disparity: Though blacks account for just one-eighth of the US population, they are six times more likely than whites to be murdered, and seven times more likely to commit murder. That hard fact, not racism, explains the high proportion of lifers who are black. But such inconvenient facts appear nowhere in the Sentencing Project’s report. “No Exit’’ brims over with information and statistics - but only those that reinforce its sponsor’s preconceived views.]
Economic Logic or Bad Publicity?
As I was cruising through the news channels this morning, I had noticed a headline off of MSNBC that brought be to the Wall Street Journal's website. Images posted, as one shown here, display signs coffee shop/cafe owners are posted to deter laptop users from squatting over seats. The issue owners have with these individuals is the built up frustration concerning the use of their space with little economic return. Laptop users essentially are paying little, staying long, and not putting up the money owners are looking for to cover expenses associated with offering free wireless access. Many laptop toting patrons are being asked to use their electronic extremities during specified no-peak hours, or, not to use them altogether. This issue drives criticism from many unemployed or freelancers who rely on coffee shops as external offices, for personal getaways, and meeting places.It's quite understandable why owners are frustrated with individuals who throw down $2 for a cup of coffee and nurse it throughout the day. Though personally i'm not a fan of the sugary $5 concoctions, i'll lay down for the less expensive and more natural coffee drinks and spend an hour or two on my laptop. Is this time paid for properly? Probably not. But, does the hospitality and level friendliness of the staff keep me a recurring customer? Most definitely.
Customers are right in that their once frequented stops are now alienating up to half of the customer base. But at the same, the logic flows that no one should usurp limited space without compensating for it. I hate to take even a minimal position against laptop users such as myself, but I do find it annoying (and would for others) when space is taken and you're there without a laptop, possibly with friends looking for a place to sit down and chat.
Many of these initiatives are being taken in busy metropolitan areas, however, I wouldn't be surprised if these kind of actions took off in smaller communities when space may pose a problem. Though it's surely inconvenient for those who lack offices or need a solid spot to speak with potential clients, I believe the compromise owners have taken with non-peak use is fair until issues with space and money recede - that saying if they ever do.
Monday, August 3, 2009
XX v. XY, Who Makes Better Managers?
We all at some point, particularly if you've been through any business/psychology/communication study track, that "leadership" and "management" are different. Their difference is an entire blog post unto itself, however - i'm talking about the latter. Who makes better managers, women or men, and WHY?
I ran across an interesting piece off of the NYT Business section which followed later with some excerpts from some of the social psychologists, researchers, and academics in the field of management. There is a large consensus on the stereotypical concepts of managerial style based on gender. Men are more risk taking, women build and harbour relationships, men like to hear themselves speak and purge ideas more readily onto the table, women welcome opinions and ideas from others before hankering down their own, women are less likely to make bold and rash decisions. There are reasons for all of these stereotypes many of which stem from historical imbalances and of course emotional and psychological differences between genders.
I hope we can all agree of the truth is what is known as the "glass ceiling." Though many acknowledge the theory, some are less willing to accept its effects. It has been, it is, and it will be a hindrance on upward movement and the ability for a woman to act as boldly as a man would in fear of losing respect and more damningly their job in the event of any mistake. Leora Tanenbaum, author of Catfight: Rivalries Among Women... states, "The best managers, female or male, are those who admit that the corporate structure favors men and who recognize their responsibility to help others follow in their footsteps." Egh, great, but it doesn't say much about why or how gender differences may play a role in successful management. Ultimately with all the research out there, I haven't come across ONE blanket statement on which gender breeds "better managers."
I don't think anyone can make such a bold assessment nor can any research confirm or deny any hypothesis. We can invest as much time and money as afforded toward this question, but it'd be a wasted effort because no one gender carries a greater level of management than the other. Each is naturally equipped with advantages and disadvantages that prescribe successful management practices. Women may feel the pressure of some assertions because on the whole they have not caught up to the positions of power and authority that men have privileged since the beginning of society. Of course we see female politicians, executives, academicians, etc. but continue to look around and the statistics are dauntingly skewed and still will be. As we push forward in time we'll see more women climb into positions of managerial prowess as my generation and that ahead of me will be offered more opportunities for women to gain experience and support to boost their promotional credibility. Until then, I wince at any conclusion from any study on who makes better managers. We can have preferences, we can make assessments based on styles and personalities, but we cannot make conclusions.
I ran across an interesting piece off of the NYT Business section which followed later with some excerpts from some of the social psychologists, researchers, and academics in the field of management. There is a large consensus on the stereotypical concepts of managerial style based on gender. Men are more risk taking, women build and harbour relationships, men like to hear themselves speak and purge ideas more readily onto the table, women welcome opinions and ideas from others before hankering down their own, women are less likely to make bold and rash decisions. There are reasons for all of these stereotypes many of which stem from historical imbalances and of course emotional and psychological differences between genders.
I hope we can all agree of the truth is what is known as the "glass ceiling." Though many acknowledge the theory, some are less willing to accept its effects. It has been, it is, and it will be a hindrance on upward movement and the ability for a woman to act as boldly as a man would in fear of losing respect and more damningly their job in the event of any mistake. Leora Tanenbaum, author of Catfight: Rivalries Among Women... states, "The best managers, female or male, are those who admit that the corporate structure favors men and who recognize their responsibility to help others follow in their footsteps." Egh, great, but it doesn't say much about why or how gender differences may play a role in successful management. Ultimately with all the research out there, I haven't come across ONE blanket statement on which gender breeds "better managers."
I don't think anyone can make such a bold assessment nor can any research confirm or deny any hypothesis. We can invest as much time and money as afforded toward this question, but it'd be a wasted effort because no one gender carries a greater level of management than the other. Each is naturally equipped with advantages and disadvantages that prescribe successful management practices. Women may feel the pressure of some assertions because on the whole they have not caught up to the positions of power and authority that men have privileged since the beginning of society. Of course we see female politicians, executives, academicians, etc. but continue to look around and the statistics are dauntingly skewed and still will be. As we push forward in time we'll see more women climb into positions of managerial prowess as my generation and that ahead of me will be offered more opportunities for women to gain experience and support to boost their promotional credibility. Until then, I wince at any conclusion from any study on who makes better managers. We can have preferences, we can make assessments based on styles and personalities, but we cannot make conclusions.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Behaviors Chosen For You
I remember a high school teacher discussing parental habits on their children's choices later in life, a preordained measure of what a grown individual will choose based on their parents habits. This being an interesting psychological observation which reminded me of Albert Bandura's social learning theory. Bandura, who states, "learning would be exceedingly laborious, not to mention hazardous, if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own actions to inform them what to do."
True somewhat, isn't it?
I know an individual, who will remain anonymous, who states an all but true characteristic that bridges on being politically correct; so I will alter it slightly. "If you show me an overweight kid, i'll show you an overweight parent." As rude or incongruous as this may seem, it's an unfortunate truth. Behaviors of parents largely dictate attitudes, values, and norms of their children. Personalities I believe are greatly uno-centric, however, largely formed by the nurturing process. More so, the extrinsic choices young adults make (i.e. spending habits, nutrition and exercise habits) are also largely based upon the lifestyle of those whom they modeled after, their guardians. Examples as simple and remote as picking a toothpaste or a news channel to more serious life style choices such as setting up retirement plans early and being a philanthropic community contributor, are acts stemming from our parent's behaviors.
True in form; I buy Colgate toothpaste. I read the Boston Globe. I watch FoxNews (despite...). I'm a Red Sox fan. The gas in my car is never below a quarter tank. Peanut Butter of choice? Jiffy. All of these minor preferences and choices i've made above stem from a model of social behavior of my parents. Of course what i've exampled for myself are minor and ultimately have little effect on who I am as a person or to that of others, however, they do characterize me. More importantly there are values and life style habits I follow that severely dictate my long term well-being - again, predisposed choices based those of my models.
You'd like to think you're completely self-made, and in many measures you are. The steps however taken to get to where you are were indirectly chosen by your guardians. I'm not a psychologist, nor have any credentials toward social theory. Just plain human observation and of course a little insightful reading on the side.
True somewhat, isn't it?
I know an individual, who will remain anonymous, who states an all but true characteristic that bridges on being politically correct; so I will alter it slightly. "If you show me an overweight kid, i'll show you an overweight parent." As rude or incongruous as this may seem, it's an unfortunate truth. Behaviors of parents largely dictate attitudes, values, and norms of their children. Personalities I believe are greatly uno-centric, however, largely formed by the nurturing process. More so, the extrinsic choices young adults make (i.e. spending habits, nutrition and exercise habits) are also largely based upon the lifestyle of those whom they modeled after, their guardians. Examples as simple and remote as picking a toothpaste or a news channel to more serious life style choices such as setting up retirement plans early and being a philanthropic community contributor, are acts stemming from our parent's behaviors.
True in form; I buy Colgate toothpaste. I read the Boston Globe. I watch FoxNews (despite...). I'm a Red Sox fan. The gas in my car is never below a quarter tank. Peanut Butter of choice? Jiffy. All of these minor preferences and choices i've made above stem from a model of social behavior of my parents. Of course what i've exampled for myself are minor and ultimately have little effect on who I am as a person or to that of others, however, they do characterize me. More importantly there are values and life style habits I follow that severely dictate my long term well-being - again, predisposed choices based those of my models.
You'd like to think you're completely self-made, and in many measures you are. The steps however taken to get to where you are were indirectly chosen by your guardians. I'm not a psychologist, nor have any credentials toward social theory. Just plain human observation and of course a little insightful reading on the side.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
