--Multitasking is Bad--

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/25/multitasking.harmful/index.html

How many times have you seen people stumbling down the street while trying to text someone with their cell phone?

Or even worse, what about those who text while driving? ARG!

People have limits to their perception. Some are more perceptive than others, but some are very much less than others...

I know that some modern work ethic seems to push people into *thinking* they are being more productive by scattering their efforts across various focuses, but that just isn't the case. You end up doing a less-than half-ass job at everything!

Read the CNN article -- it is interesting...

--Better Estimating through Time Studies--

I'm haggling with a co-worker about how long it will take to do something (a repetitive procedure that is worked on weekly, throughout the course of the week). We are not getting anywhere with our haggling (of course we both think we are correct )...

So, I'm going to keep track of how long I spend on what this week (exciting, eh?) by recording the times in a spreadsheet. We'll take a look next week and see who was correct -- I mean which estimate was correct.

Sometimes keeping a quick journal (paper, Excel, whatever) of what time is spent on what is enough to get you a bit more perspective on how long (or little) you spend working on what. The recorded times usually surprises people.

Remember that the basis of estimates is previous experience. *Recorded* experience can help guide future estimates.

--When do you pull the plug?--

One of my co-workers was trying to get back from Charlotte (to O'Hare) this evening. The weather was predicted to be horrible at O'Hare including tornado warnings, severe thunderstorm warnings, and hail (I know that is a bit redundant, but the hail is what supposedly canceled all the flights). At 2pm Charlotte-time all flights up to 8pm were canceled and the 8pm one was the only one left. I suggested he just cut his losses and go get a hotel room, have a nice dinner, and get a good night's rest because there was a good chance his flight would be canceled.

It was. But not until 9:30pm his time. (So he waited at the airport from 2pm until 9:30pm to find out what we both suspected -- they would cancel his flight...)

So at what point do you cut your losses and just give up on something?

I think it is human nature to hold on to hope that a situation will turn itself around, but how to balance that with common sense? I suppose part of it is based on experience. I have been doing business travel for 22+ years. I know the signs... And there is the desire to "get home" that might cloud judgment.

I guess the only advice I can give about this is if you have a gut-hunch that the airline is going to cancel your flight, AND you have "status" with the airline, cut your losses and ask to be re-booked on the next day's flight. I'm told you want to be on the earlier flights if possible, but from my perspective, if that means getting up at 5am, the heck with that...

I guess this has a broader business application: be self-aware of your situation to know when to cut your losses and change your approach. The weather -- and many other things -- are totally out of your control.

--Is a small effort a project?--

One of my students recently asked if creating something for her office, by herself (a one-person team), was a project. Of course I said yes.

How can a one-person effort be a project? Well a project is any effort that has a defined start, a defined end (or deadline), a defined goal, and has resources involved. Remember that resources are anything that help you finish a task: people, machines, money, permits, etc.

Even when working on something yourself, you usually have to give some type of status or report how close to finished you are. You can't really tell how close to finish you are without some type of plan. In order to do a plan, you have to clearly define the goal.

So I would argue that any effort where you:

1. Clearly define the goal (and perhaps what the goal *is not*)
2. Plan your work (to-do list, steps, major deliverables)
3. Manage that work to meet expectations (budget, deadline, quality standards)

...is a project!

--Politics and Religion--

There is a saying that one should not talk about politics or religion at social events. I think the saying has been corrupted over the years from "you should not talk politics because politics are religion."

With yet another US election coming up, and strong feelings (either way) about the current leadership, now would be the time to have open discussions about politics and points of view. However that doesn't seem to be possible any more. "Discussion" consists of people with inflexible points of view, arrived at by some inferential jump that they cannot explain, attempting to convince the other point of view that they are wrong. And stupid. I'm not sure how that started, but lately it seems that many people have the attitude that others should blindly agree with them, otherwise the dissenters are stupid. Years ago I was taught in public speaking that when a party resorts to personal attacks, it is because they realize they have lost the logical argument. Something to consider with the current individual and party mud-slinging.

Political discussion should be a discussion, not an argument, where both sides explain their position, and attempt to understand the other person's point of view. A good discussion should be one where both parties walk away pondering the ideas of the other. Ideally, that would lead to more discussion.

I just tried to find a favorite Thomas Jefferson quote about this, but of course cannot at this time. The gist of it is: "Disagreement leads to discussion, and discussion leads to truth."

At a time when there are such strong emotional and irrational attitudes being taken, we need more discussions about political beliefs and how they were formed or decided. But just as you cannot "argue" that Buddhists are "better" than Methodists, the discussions should strive for understanding more than one's own perspective.

--Pregnant Pauses and E-mail--

E-mail gives the illusion of immediacy. If the person receiving the message happens to be at the keyboard and happens to read your message and happens to be moved to immediately reply to said message, well, e-mail can appear to be pretty immediate. Sometimes this is not good.

An immediate reply might mean the other person might be clearing out their inbox. Or perhaps they were waiting for your message. Or perhaps they are bored out of their mind and this distraction is just what they needed. Maybe the other person is working on a different assignment or task and this brief e-mail check was a quick mental break before diving back into the work at hand.

So what does a long pause before replying to an e-mail mean? Nothing! There are an unlimited number of reasons someone might not "immediately" reply to an e-mail. Perhaps their Internet provider is having technical difficulties. Perhaps they are busy on a telephone call and (appropriately and politely) are giving that call all of their attention. Perhaps (*gasp*) they walked away from the computer to do something else. There might also be a chance that they are thinking about their reply, so that they communicate correctly and make sure the so-called "tone" (e-mail does not have tone!!!) of the message is as intended.

More than 80% of communication is non-verbal. That means (at best) e-mail communicates 20% of the real message. Because of this, people try to read too much into the choice of words in the e-mail, the "timeliness" of the e-mail reply, and sometimes even the font choice, font color, and font size. Good grief!

Also consider that (especially in business) perhaps the other person is talking or e-mailing with several other people to get their opinions, perspectives, and advice about the current situation. As more people are consulted, the delay before a reply is increased. Usually.

So what is wrong with immediate replies? Immediate replies re-enforce the impression that e-mail is immediate (or "always" immediate). Immediate replies might also give the impression that not a lot of care or thought went into the reply. Immediate replies also can confuse the other person when all of a sudden there is a long delay or pregnant pause before receiving another reply (which - remember - might not mean anything). I'd suggest you consider the implication of an immediate reply before firing it off. There is nothing wrong with focusing on the task at hand, and check e-mail perhaps slightly more frequently than you check your postal mail. (Some senior executives advocate two to three times a day as the maximum number of times they and their reports check e-mail!)

--Summer's Here - Looking towards Autumn--

Speaking a business colleague the other day we were commiserating that we were already starting to plan out our September and October. Here it is only the beginning of July! While nobody was complaining about the work, I think we were more distraught that we had not really thought out our own personal time for the rest of the summer.

By personal time, I (personally) was thinking of personal and professional development. I belong to several professional organizations that seem to (wisely) offer professional development opportunities during the summer months. Now to avoid temptation and actually attend! Business professionals, especially consultants, can get set in their ways. It is always good to shake things up a bit and listen to other opinions, ideas, and perspectives. In person. At an all day thing. Not just sitting at the computer reading somebody's blog. Like this one.

What counts as personal or professional development? I'd say reading some hardcover book that has been sitting on the shelf (or worse, the floor) forever. Bonus points if it is work-related! Seriously, even the "ghosts and the paranormal" book I just finished had several work applications. Okay, if that didn't catch your attention - nothing will. The book discussed several authors and their approach to their work (I'm an author - I got several tips out of that). The book also discussed some of the more (ahem) esoteric historical highlights of central and western Canada (one of my companies works a lot in Canada). The book also talked a lot about how belief systems need to be occasionally reviewed and perhaps challenged to make sure the environment has not changed so much that perhaps the belief system is no longer beneficial (ummm, isn't this what I do for a living?).

Just for the record, I am also seriously considering attending a face-to-face one-day professional development day in downtown Chicago this week with what I (personally) consider "lite" topics but there should be many different perspectives and... who knows, I might get something out of it. Heck, for $75 for a full day of potential enlightenment, I'm there...

--Fairness and Consistency in Communication Frequency--

There are many people in the business world who only communicate when they need something. While this might be efficient from their perspective, it does not build a good working relationship. Sometimes a nice informal "how's it going" e-mail even though you really don't have much else to say goes a long way to keeping the communication channels open.

A HUGE mistake is to ignore the other person for weeks or months on end, then all of a sudden send or leave several panic e-mails or voice-mails commanding a response immediately. Very, very uncool and rude.

The guideline I use, is I try to mirror the other person's frequency of communication, erroring on the side of communicating a little more often than the other person. However what I find this doing is surprising the other person that I dare ignore their random panic interactions.

How often should business people (who are supposedly working together) communicate? It depends, but I don't think once a month is unreasonable just to stay in touch. Again, it migth be in the form of a quick e-mail, e-mailing a website link that you think would be interesting to the other person, or perhaps even a quick voice-mail or phone call.

Speaking as a consultant that sometimes is "rented out" by others as a sub-contractor, I would strongly suggest some type of communication right before the engagement (to make sure everything is set up), perhaps a quick check in during the engagement (to make sure everything is going fine), and certainly a quick communication after the engagement (to get a debrief).

The bottom line is that if you use very infrequent communication attempts, then don't expect the other party to drop everything and jump when you need something. That is not playing fair.

--What a Good Seminar Looks Like--

Talking with a fellow adult educator today, we were commiserating about how much bad training there is out there. How does it survive? I am guessing the same way that bad managers survive... People who are incompetent cannot recognize competence. People who have never attended a well-run meeting do not know what a well-run meeting experience is. People who have only attended bad training learn that "bad training" is just the way training is.

I cannot speak French. How in the world would I know if someone is speaking good French or not? I mention this as an example. If you have never attended a training session or seminar or workshop that got you thinking for the entire commute home, why or how would you expect such a thing to exist?

Two years ago I attended a presentation conducted by someone who is billed as one of the best speakers of the Project Management Institute. She doesn't work for the Project Management Institute (PMI) -- but she doesn't fight the confusion over her "being" the PMI... I was absolutely mortified. At one point she appeared to be speaking in tongues, and towards the end she took a doll out of her briefcase and jumped on it in rage. Now I have no problem with those that speak in tongues, however at a professional meeting where the topic was supposed to be Gantt Charts, I find it deeply disturbing that I witnessed either an epileptic fit or a person's religious epiphany. Oh, the audience loved it...

Now how in the world would someone think that choking a rag-doll and screaming is a professional presentation??? I can only guess that the audience was used to memorized speeches or reading PowerPoint slides, so anything "different" is "good."

So what does a good seminar look like? Well, PowerPoint is a tool that should enhance the background - and at a very high level summarize the presentation. The PowerPoint should not be the presentation. The presenter should verbally add to the presentation, talking more "off the cuff" (or seemingly so!) and adding a personal element to show real-world application or understanding. A good seminar should have you thinking about the concepts or the topic or the material as you commute home or try to fall asleep that night. A good seminar should leave you energized; not drained. A good seminar should get you thinking about how you can apply these good ideas in your personal or professional life. A good seminar can be shocking, and might make you question your current beliefs, but should not be revolting. Confusion over how to process a presentation is usually a bad thing, not a sign of brilliance.

How does one attempt to ensure a good presentation? Check with which organizations the presenting organization (or individual) is affiliated with. While not a sure thing, somebody belonging to the National Association of Professional Speakers, or the Canadian Association of Professional Speakers (CAPS), shows some commitment to a professional presentation.

That said, do not assume just because a professional organization is hosting a presentation / seminar / workshop that is it a good one. Most organizations subcontract out such work, with little if no interest in the quality of the experience. Remember when you are a "non" profit organization focused on money, income - not quality or repeat business - is the most important factor. Because heck, most people won't recognize crap when they see it!

--KISS or why Radio Shack still matters (or how $6.99 trumps $279)--

I have been on a three month quest to get music from my computer (namely, from MusicMatch which has streaming Internet radio) over to my stereo so that I can hear the music throughout the office. There are several devices that claim to connect computer to stereo via a wireless connection. None of them work.

I tried everything from the $39 X10 option all the way up to the DLINK Media Server ($279) without success. Oddly enough, the X10 option technically worked, but the quality of the connection was so bad it ruined the listening experience. All of the other more "high tech" (quotes because I wonder) options refused to work. I could see my network, but couldn't connect. Or I could connect, but couldn't interact with the network. Even if the components were literally inches away from the wireless router. Oh, and I tried three different routers just in case that might be the problem. No.

Thinking back to something I McGuivered years ago, I ran over to our near by Radio Shack and purchased a Y-cable. Plugging in to the Line Out on the computer's sound card, then into the back of the stereo AUX plug did the trick. We now have MusicMatch streaming Internet radio through the stereo with perfect quality.

The point?

Why did I think I immediately had to jump to the more complicated solution? Yes the office has a wireless network, but that does not mean that I had to use that particular technology. Some times the quick and simple solution is the best option. To save time and effort, wouldn't it be better to start with the simple and progress to something more complicated? How many times does an organization make the same mistake? Why not make KISS (keep it simple, stupid) the first course of action?