Last night I attended a seminar on Emotional Intelligence at Cabrini. For the time being I’ll spare you my thoughts on EI. However, I did pick up an interesting facilitation tip.
We had a couple break out groups, which are popular amongst us corporate trainer types, and I was impressed with the speakers simple tactic to get us back on track after the group.
She asked the whole group to do something (i.e. raise your hand, stand up) and like sheep we all followed her command.
After she told us to sit down she went on with her topic. She confessed that this was a tactic to refocus things. It worked well until she told us what she was doing.
Now getting participants out of their seats is hardly ground breaking and I (like others)use activities often to lively things up. However, never for the sole purpose of getting people to be quite.
I look forward to trying it.
Posted in Training & Development
By now everyone has heard the story about a corporate trainer type using waterboarding as a sales training tactic. You’ll be happy to know that apparently it has not hurt sales.
So, while most of us corporate trainer types know that torture is not an acceptable form of training, I was surprised to learn at a Chester County SHRM meeting that during internal EEOC investigations it is acceptable practice to terminate uncooperative witnesses.
Of course termination should not be the first course of action, only a final option.
It was suggested that you work up to this by first “guilting”the witness. Talk about all the bad things that could happen if this goes to court without accurate information. Remind them of the serious nature of holding back facts, people’s livelihoods are at stake.
If the witness is a manager it was suggested they should be reminded of their “duties” as a manager.
Only after trying to logic with them should the possibility of termination be brought up. It would be prudent to give the individual an evening to mull it over if there is time.
It would be just as prudent to take a couple hours to ask yourself if waterboarding is really a good training method.
If your blessed with a union environment check with the union rep before waterboarding or terminating witnesses.
Posted in HR, Talent
After firing up my favorite website in the whole wide world Google and rubbing my eyes I went into troubleshooting mode.
I cursed Bill Gate’s name while trying to figure out what silly IE7 setting I must have screwed up for the background to be black.
After realizing that it was the benevolent folks at Google and not the henchmen at Microsoft I pondered why I assume that Google is so good and Microsoft is so evil. An opinion I believe is shared by most. (correct me if I’m wrong)
Both companies give us tools we use everyday. Google with its magical search engine and many other magical tools. Microsoft with Windows, Office, and a variety of other tools that the absence of would cause society to collapse.
Perhaps its a money thing. I’ve never given a penny to Google, but I’ve paid a small fortune to MS over the years.
This Google”black out” shows that Google has somehow has built a rock-solid reputation using arguably less technology. MS on the other hand is and probably always will be cursed. Despite that without Windows I wouldn’t have the faintest idea how to find Google.
Google seems to have well thought out risking its reputation:
Why did Google choose this specific organization?
We believe in doing our part to help combat climate change, and found the Earth Hour initiative to be a timely, important event. Further, we think the “lights out” idea’s individual-centered nature is something that millions of people worldwide can participate in. In short, we really like it. So we did something about it.
In fact, this bold move will probably only strengthen Google street cred.
I guess this goes to show that a good corporate reputation can’t be bought no matter how many schools of the future you build.
Caution should also be taken when blindly trusting organizations collectively seen as benevolent. What is to stop them from making the whole site red to advertise Macy’s red tag sale … for a good cause of course.
Posted in Rants, Technology
On occasion I hear software vendors claim that their software is “intuitive”. They are of course implying that it just so simple anyone can do it.
On the other hand I sometimes here complaints that so and so software is not “intuitive” meaning its too hard.
Perhaps I am nitpicking at at vocabulary but it seems to me that no software can be intuitive.
Software skills are not inborn (well at least not yet) so we all must learn the basic skills needed to stumble our way around technology.
Most of my generation was raised on the Apple ][e. A fine machine but not really anything like my fancy new Vista laptop. Today’s kids have been raised on the past few generations of MS and Apple OSs.
My point being that what is intuitive to me isn’t always intuitive to others. It all boils down to what software each individual has had experience with. The broader the experience the more software will seem intuitive.
On the other hand maybe there is an underlying common software psyche, a blend of the most common software over the past few years.
Posted in Technology
