Quote of the Day
Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Congratulations, John Rich, Celebrity Apprentice 2011!
 |
Courtesy of Rick Diamond, Getty Images |
Normally, I would not be pushing the winner of a reality television show (never mind pushing a Trump decision after panning his political opinions), but John Rich has been the dominant player on the show (since I started watching about mid-season); I also pushed his single "For the Kids", which I have personally downloaded for a minor fee with proceeds going to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. I thought he was pushing the hard sell a bit by continuing to pump in front of Trump how much he wanted the $250K with the win for his chosen charity. I think Marlee tried to pull the sympathy card (being a deaf celebrity) by pushing how much it would mean to deaf people and kids to see her win the contest. We now have a mystery which may clear up in a day or two, but Donald Trump said just before the decision he was going to do things a little differently--and I inferred (like many viewers on an entertainment blog after the decision) that he was going to name John Rich and Marlee Matlin co-winners, which would have been unfair to John. John showed much more initiative (for example, securing additional funds for the final task, which wasn't a fund-raising event as Marlee complained) and serving as project manager more times. John's work ethic, initiative and performance remind me of my own. Granted, program editing may hide some moments of leadership Marlee may have shown, but in my opinion, while the women's team was beginning to fray with internal disputes she seemed to be detached and not very assertive as project lead.
#1 on the Libertarian Hot 100: The TSA Pokey Pokey
I'm referring to the three Presidential candidates I've repeatedly listed as my favorites for the 2012 Presidential race. Retiring Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels (R) removed himself from consideration of the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination for what appears to be personal reasons. Mitch and Cheri Daniels had divorced in 1993 while Daniels was a private citizen, with his retaining primary custody of their 4 daughters. Ms. Daniels and a doctor married and moved to California; in 1997, Cheri divorced the doctor and remarried Mitch. It is believed that Cheri and the Daniels daughters did not want their privacy over the painful circumstances part of the publicity circus of a Presidential campaign and exercised their family veto.
Tim Pawlenty is officially announcing tomorrow, but he released the video below today. Romney's private sector success should make a difference, but he's been handling the RomneyCare defensively. The problem I see for Tim Pawlenty is that he hasn't surged in the polls and his South Carolina debate performance was unimpressive. But with Huckabee, Daniels, and Trump gone and Gingrich off to a bad start, Pawlenty could and should emerge as Romney's chief rival. If Pawlenty doesn't fill the gap, fellow Minnesotan Michele Bachmann is expected to announce soon. Two other potential candidates, who have repeatedly denied interest, are former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and Gov. Rick Perry (TX).
Both the Gallup and Rasmussen Obama job approval ratings are at 49% this weekend.
McDonald's, Usability, Etc.
I've written a few posts for my nutrition blog this month. The latest, published yesterday, is an alternate take on McDonald's. No doubt everyone has an opinion about the world's largest restaurant chain; no, I've never worked at a fast food place (although I worked at campus dining halls, mopping floors, washing dishes, and assisting the cook). The reader might expect a nutrition blogger, even a layman like myself, to conventionally blast the chain for nutritionally dubious food or seductive marketing to children (like sugary cereal gimmicks or cigarette mascots). But whatever the topic I'm discussing, it's never been my intention to engage in red meat politics or to demonize the opposition (although I can be sharply critical); I attempt to outline a more constructive, effective approach.
Take, for instance, my persistent criticisms of the TSA; I don't argue about the need for airline safety. I'm talking about things like money-wasting, inefficient search processes more about political correctness than safety, unnecessarily obtrusive processes, privacy-violating technology that can be readily modified to protect one's modesty. Or take another example: road toll collections; the same people who would be critical of charities for, say, spending more than 15% of donated dollars for overhead, promotional fees, etc., don't say a word about tolls where a hefty percentage is not about improving the roads but the enormous overhead of maintaining toll administration.
Somewhere along the way we lose focus: it's no longer about the customer, the citizen, the taxpayer. It's about our accommodating the arbitrary rules and regulations of an organization, for the convenience of its managers or personnel. It's not just the government, but what's particularly onerous is the fact if we don't like the government's goods and services, we can't simply switch to another. But businesses can be quite dense at times. A favorite example is my broadband provider. Invariably I'm asked for a long-digit customer identifier: as if there is any functional need for me to memorize idiosyncratic customer identifications with the dozens of vendors with which I've done business: oh, it's on my invoice. Let's see: do I have a convenient invoice nearby or accessible through my PC? So now I have to do through all this busy work--for what reason exactly? What does anything have to do with why I originally called the company? All of this is to make things more convenient to the company--not for me. However, the only way I get my service problem addressed is to jump through the company's hoops.
Another example: have you ever run into a situation where they've made changes to logons for an account tied to an obsolete email account? And, of course, their verification procedures are tied to that email account. Now there are ways of dealing with that, e.g., can you tell me your telephone number from 8 years ago and 4 moves earlier? Okay, sir, if you won't cooperate with me on this (I'm just doing my job, after all; I don't like the tone of your voice; I have to put you on hold now...) you can always set up a new account--of course, until you can prove to us you are whom you say you are--after all, of course, this is for YOUR benefit and protecting YOUR privacy--you won't be able to merge your accounts.
What I find incredulous about these generalized experiences is how many people put up with this nonsense, e.g., it's their company, their rules...; how would I feel if I was the customer support agent fielding this call, etc. I've mentioned before how, while I was teaching, it was hardly uncommon to hear the same question asked 2 or 3 times during a lecture. I could have disciplined the students by asking why they weren't paying attention the first time I answered the question--or I could simply answer the question again, which would have saved time and effort.
Over the weekend, I sat through 2 showings of one of my favorite movies, the 1998 romantic comedy "You've Got Mail", involving an online anonymous relationship between a third-generation family-owned bookstore chain executive Joe Fox (Tom Hanks) and Kathleen Kelly (Meg Ryan), whom owns a small New York City family-run bookstore which unfortunately is located right across the corner from where the latest Fox superstore is being built. There is this one scene where Kathleen, grocery shopping for Thanksgiving, unintentionally got into a cash-only line and found herself at checkout without enough cash for payment, facing an unsmiling "rules are rules" cashier and unsympathetic, complaining customers behind her in line. Mortified, Kathleen asks for the cashier (Rose) to make an exception and to accept her credit card. Joe Fox, who happens to be in the store, comes up and offers to pay cash for her, but she isn't about to accept help from her arch-rival. Joe Fox manages to charm the female cashier, convincing her it was no big deal to make the problem go away by simply swiping the credit card through the available card reader.
I have written some articles and book chapters on usability; probably a good analogy to use is that usable technology, written material, etc., are like a good waiter; a good waiter knows when you are ready for the next course or need a refill of your cup of coffee without interrupting whatever you are doing.
One of the points of the McDonald's post is it shows how common sense really isn't that common. I don't comment about this in the post, but I don't quite understand how candying a walnut fits a healthy lifestyle; it's adding empty carbs. But knowing a plurality of Americans may be overweight or diet-conscious, McDonald's doesn't really focus from their perspective. In part, I think there's a rationale by management that customers aren't coming for healthy food, and healthy food doesn't sell that well. I argue in part that's because they don't focus on providing information convenient from the sake of the health-conscious consumer. True, they do provide nutrition information, but it's more of a kit (versus dieter-friendly approach): they don't provide consumer wizards for selecting, say, meals with fewer calories and/or lower fat or carbohydrates; they don't offer the option of whole-grain pancakes, buns or tortillas or non-carbonated drink options to meal bundles.
We have analogous considerations in the public sector. I've made reference to Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels' obsession with DMV waiting times; there are the infamous 2000-page bills from the last Congress, never mind hundreds of filed exceptions to the health bill; there are hopelessly convoluted income tax forms; even a kid selling lemonade may have to deal with zoning restrictions, permits, business licenses, health departments, taxes, etc.
One example from my own experience is a certain type of federal background investigation. In the final 7 years, I've had to fill out the same type of information 5 times, 3 times manually (including the last), twice online. The requests required exactly the same detailed information (job, location, contact information, references, etc.) going back up to last 7 years, contiguously. (This level of detail can be staggering if you've done multiple gigs per year.) None of the 5 agencies recognizes the investigation from another; what I was told last time was that the investigators could research any relevant background investigations by my social security number to minimize reinvention of the wheel, but the paperwork would be rejected at the outset if it was incomplete. This is a perfect example for describing the dysfunctional state of the federal government. I pointed out I had a e-QIP on file; all I should have to do is update the last year or two interactively. It didn't matter; rules are rules--for the convenience of the pencil-pushers, not to any legitimate investigation. Oh, yeah: plus after 2 months or so on multiple occasions, I have gotten called in to have my fingerprints redone.
Harmon Killebrew's Philosophy
According to the Hall of Fame slugger's son-in-law Craig Bair:
Harmon's philosophy was so simple and very clear and he wanted to make it clear to us. It goes like this: 'Always give more than you take. Always maintain an even calmness that you might calm others. Truly know that you are loved beyond measure and go out and share that love. Find a place of peace with your partner. Experience daily the love of your family. Enjoy your friends. Know your neighbors and especially go out of your way to do the same to the people new in your life.'
Fukushima Nuclear Incident Update
Atomic Power Review notes:
- Sunday: Some radioactive debris was located outside of reactor 3, coolant flow to reactor 3 lessened, and the "mega-float" barge has arrived.
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups
Chicago, "Just You 'N Me"
