elizabeth grigg - the other fourth meal

A classic conundrum for someone with a liberal arts degree:
Option 1: Shoot the moon. Use your innate gifts to make a big contribution to the world without compromise. J.K.Rowling, Peter Jackson, Steve Jobs.
Option 2: Split personality. Deliver mail, or pizza, or recently uprooted organ tissue by day, and make your big contribution in your off hours.
Option 3: Go subterranean. Get a great, ordinary, substantial line of work going that you're not embarrassed to talk about and might one day lead to a 1 bedroom apartment. Every chance you get within the system, apply your brilliance, as much as will fit into the small chinks exposed.

Many people pick option 3. Lots of us are bloggers, because it can be valuable to express something here online when no other place will do. But after a few years the job seems less like a choice you made, and more like the thing you settled for. In fact, it may be the thing you bring up as blocking any meaningful progress in portraying your highest and best use.

Here's the thing that might make you happier about picking option 3. Good jobs are nothing to sneeze at. The thing you think you are brilliant at may not in fact be the most practical to apply in the world. You might be better at something random that has huge value to others, that you don't value at all. For example, I'm great at scoping a problem. Fast, insightful, cut through the noise like buttah. It matters to people that I'm good at this. It doesn't really matter to people that I have a well-developed philosophy about rhyming couplets. Nope, no response. All that aside, the best thing about picking option 3 is:

It's not your job's fault, so you might as well have one.

Say for example you're incredibly brilliant at 5 things, and you've never had a chance to prove it. My 5 things are: directing movies, welding together artistic yet functional barbecues that serve as ornamental sculpture, foreign languages, stand-up comedy, and decorating. Say I'm in option number three, as a sysadmin (hypothetical), and occasionally I get to weld something, translate something from geek-speak, or adjust the feng-shui of the server closet. Filling the cracks. Before this new realization (above), I would maybe sigh while getting to do these things, thinking if it weren't for the job I would reach whatever definition of success in those areas I had in mind.

But here's the thing. Excellence is all-consuming. So you drop your job, fine, but that still means you have 5 incredibly consuming activities to devour your day. Pretty soon you'll be complaining about the welding and how it's interfering with your movie. The whole thing splinters at the same rate, no matter how many feet are stomping on it.

So, this was helpful to me at least. For those of you who occasionally blame your job as blocking your route to other things, the good news is you can keep your paycheck. The bad news is it's such a short short life.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 12:38 AM | Permalink

Two more votes for something like my e-mail bankruptcy feature I posted about here. First, here is Joel, and then Julie. I would link to Robert, but he complains about his in-box every post so you might as well get his home page. And then there's everybody in my vanpool wants it too.

I was thinking I should refine it, where you could select Chapter 13 bankruptcy where you would commit to reading a certain number of e-mails a day, or full out Chapter 7 where you're throwing the whole mess in the trash. As they say, "It's for people who deserve a fresh start in life."

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 08:15 AM | Permalink

The posting has been tough lately. Too many private battles going on. I could work hard to make a blog entry out of them, the steps being:
1) Have the courage to face up to the things that are really happening. each in turn, and
2) Somehow generalize the situation without diluting its meaning or relevancy, and
3) Spin it in a way that addresses the continuous search for happiness that this blog is dedicated to
4) Not be incessantly boring or self involved while doing so...
... and I'd be a better person if I did all that, but it's been far more important to sleep.

I have been dwelling on Joel's new book, just the idea of it is career altering. I'm afraid to actually read it. On the opposite pole is the Steve Jobs commencement speech, which would be interesting coming from anyone. From him, it's a heavy push off the diving board. Right now I can barely stand to cut my little "girl's" hair. Not the best time for jumping, perhaps.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 01:02 PM | Permalink

The house almost had a party last night, but it never quite happened. So we're chock full of beer, chips, onion dip, not to mention all the bread I defrosted to make room for the ice cream. Then there's the ice cream. Lots of brown colors to put on top too. The pantry and fridge are the exact opposite of where they need to be for me (high quality protein and produce). I look at all the bags and bottles on the countertop. They grin back at me with their polished branding. (Well, all except for the cactus guacamole. That stuff doesn't grin). Then after they are done grinning it's either fight or flight. Either I give up, watch football or whatever and have this stuff as my primary caloric intake, or I take a hatchet to the whole thing in a blaze of glory. Because it would be too petty to return food to the store, right? Nobody does that, do they?

Inspired (de-spired) by this

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 02:07 PM | Permalink

If you are fortunate enough to get yourself knocked up, there are a lot of forms to fill out. Many health plans ask you, in the initial form, if this will be a high-risk pregnancy for any reason you are aware of, such as trouble in the past, or (gasp) the simple fact of being 35 or older. 35 is the cutoff. If this is your age, or higher, the pregnancy is high risk. Seems awful binary to me.

However now that I've spent some time at 35 it is obvious that a corner is turned. Things I thought would be maintenance-free (in truth, I never considered them at all) are now needing routine attention. And woe to me if I lapse back, it truly is harder to catch up from behind than simply do the maintenance in the first place.

Honestly it would be better if things fell apart a different year. 25 would be fine with me, actually, I was less encumbered and had more time to handle the maintenance. Plus I'd be on a roll by now. But no, the decay has to set in this year, when I have to hire an army of mercenaries to deflect my recurring commitments while I clip my nails. Did I mention encumbered?

OK, so this is happening to me, and not someone else. I can't outsource taking care of myself. So on with the doctor's appointments and the diagnostics. On with the 6:30 bedtime, complete with earplugs, facemask, and non-addictive pain medication. I went off caffeine on Tuesday, and felt mostly like I was dying until perhaps today. I also went off carbs on Tuesday. I'm not yet going for even the most basic walks, but I do haul the walk-wear around with me for any opportunity. Too early yet to say that anything is working, but I'm officially in high gear.

I have a mantra that when faced with a difficult question or decision, I refuse to make it unless I have the basics covered. Eat right, exercise, enough sleep. (I'm fortunate to never have other basics, like food, clothing, and physical safety called into question). Of course it's been a while since those conditions (the first three) have existed together, so most of my decisions are under duress. Just as it's as hard to be an ordinary person - someone who doesn't ask too much of the world - as it is to be an extraordinary person, it seems as hard to be simply healthy as it is to climb mt everest. The level of detail to be conscious of, the amount of perserverance. It's amazing that we even attempt it.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 08:12 AM | Permalink

I was just listening to Mike Daisey, of 21 dog years fame, on NPR. His new show is unscripted and talks about the week's events in his own life. With audience participation, it lasts 1 hour and he seems pretty comfortable about it. I know I would have to save up some good stories if I were to do the show myself. What am I saying, this is my show, right here in text form.

Mike's original show I saw at Bumbershoot in 2001. It must have been labor day weekend, end of August, beginning of September. I was getting over my large sense of entitlement with regard to a high paying technology career. This was just the show for me. Unfortunately, I had my kid with me, and he had other ideas. Kids are so forward looking, you can't get them to dwell in the past at all. There's no sense of empathy. He didn't care that this was the one thing at the whole festival that I wanted to see. He just wanted to scream and scream. I tried waiting in the wings with him, tried to not bother any of the childless dotcom survivors watching the show too. They were bothered anyway. Let's just say it wasn't my high point as a parent. And I was so self-absorbed. Perhaps this was the end of my youth for certain at 31. In a couple weeks my cousin would be waking up in my house to a cell-phone call from her mom, saying she was OK. Then we turned on the TV. And of course after that we earned the right, as a country, to discard the title of being self absorbed for a while. Certainly it was the end of our nation's youth.

So that's a story. Then there's the time the russian priest lit our apartment on fire. That's another story. All pre-blogging, so I can't link back to it. Sorry, your loss ;)

Blogging is amazing because text is such an easy format. Ideas get chronicled over time and, while I would love to link back to pre-911 and say what I was thinking, it was pre-blogging so you'll have to take my word for it. Text is an imperfect medium, it does not always capture truth or convey it well once captured. But at least for us bloggers there is occasionally that one moment of the day when the record button is on. That has to count for something later.

Thinking about the past has me remembering my idea to reconcile broken ties with others. I haven't made much progress with that yet, although I have made attempts. I thought of how I could recruit an old school group into doing Microsoft the Musical. This is the group I used to belong to myself. Perhaps it would amuse them, and be a big hit in Redmond. Just an idea. It feels nostalgic, really, like it already happened. That was easy.

I have a post on the topic of microsophist that I had to stop myself from posting, becuase it was too close to the flames of doom. I may post it later, no harm in a delay. I have learned when your finger starts talking to you as it hovers over the publish button, if it says "noooo don't publish" then you should listen. Storytelling is not a blank check.

File this under:
- talking body parts
- time distortion
- inability to discern reality from imagination
- arson

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 03:09 PM | Permalink

I just finished watching Bob Dylan on 60 minutes. The interviewer pointed out that this week he had, what, 12 songs on Rolling Stone's 500 best songs of all time list. Including the top slot. Isn't that a pat on the back? Yeah, Bob said, this week.

Now, I don't know anything about his music and don't understand his fan base. The first I heard of the man was in a David Bowie song that was too old for me anyway. But here is a man who has every right to feel comfortable in his craft, and here he is on TV prolonging his ability to exercise his craft by manufacturing humility instead of pride. Believe the newspapers, but only when they're negative. Deny all talent. Attribute all success to the other, the unknowable. This forced discomfort will (no question, no percentages, it simply WILL) generate extraordinary art.

Because this is the same in software, which is such a different world than songwriting, I can only assume this dynamic is the same in all professions and endeavors. Stay hungry, stay needy, stay small and irrelevant. The excellence is worth more than your own pride in the work. It's fine to trick yourself into this, but do it well and don't get caught.

It's not a world for big egos, it never has.

How big an ego does your company / do you have? And how much has that held you back?

That's what I'm talking about.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 08:04 PM | Permalink

So I came home yesterday, from what I thought was a pretty good week, and found that I don't have anything to wear that's relaxing, except jammies, and they're fairly tattered. Either I have an entirely new category of items to acquire, or I need to stop the old Mr Rogers thing when I get home from work and just wear that stuff full time. I'll have to get some aprons.

Shopping - I'm so tired of it - makes me look at the size of my waist and the size of my wallet at the same time. One is too small, the other too big, you figure it out. I work all week to solve the wallet problem, but the waist? Ne'er a finger lifted.

Interruption by dh: Can you get the laundry going while I make breakfast for the kids?
Me: Sure. I have no underwear today, so I'm going to do my load first. Otherwise I have to wear pantyhose instead. Do you have something more urgent than that?
dh: I assume we'll get to more than one load
Me: Yep

Anyway, I've veen voyeuring on bloggers who have lost weight, starting with Jeff Sandquist and the bloggers who link to him. Actually I think it started with Jeremy Zadowny. It's interesting to me because, like the hacker's diet, there is the theory that you're a larger size than you would like because of an accounting problem. Failure to keep track of input versus output, therefore input exceeds output and it all just kinda piles up. Stack and heap. Metrics is an oddball thing, sometimes just tracking data will indeed generate transformative change. it's a principle I'm basing my current position on at MS. Schroedinger's cat and all that.

However, the metrics thing doesn't work on me with regard to eating. The problem is not that I forget that I had lunch, and somehow eat two lunches. My caloric intake is not an accident. It's a deliberate gesture against my fear of scarcity, or to look at the converse, the joy I take in abundance. We can call that an "issue" if we like. I don't think it's very serious, but I do have to take it apart in order to live up to my closet (photo is not of my closet, but you can see how a closet can be something to live up to).

Speaking of metrics, yesterday I pulled open EasyTimeTracker which, as long as you are sitting at your desk, allows you to keep track of how much time you spend on a particular task. That thing scares me to death. What if I spend half my billable hours on nothing at all? What if I have nobody to compare this to, and therefore no context in which to put the results? I quickly closed the window, thinking perhaps that I would only be interested in these figures if they accounted for my entire existence and not just the desk-bound one.

More on the weight loss topic from another source. Here is Slate talking about Karl's weight loss book. Also the source of the title of this post.

And you would think this other link was unrelated, but as a reader of Ben's weblog I know he runs marathons. I wonder what compulses the rest of us to lose weight and then we simply must "run a marathon" as a sort of dessert. It seems pretty common and who knows, one day I will understand. This is the first picture I've ever seen of Ben. Is that bespoke he's wearing? Cute slides, too. And don't worry girls, that's not sideburns, it's a madonna-phone.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 04:27 PM | Permalink

Dear Recruiters,

First of all, thank you for your efforts in helping people, including me, find their next opportunities. There is a space for all of you in an awards show, complete with red carpets, evening gowns, and little statues. Let this thank-you suffice until that show gets produced.

Active candidates are not usually the ones holding the power in the stage of the job seeking process. Often it is up to the recruiter, the phone screener, or the hiring manager to say "no" and the active candidate can work to convince them otherwise. Having been in the position of being an active candidate, I would agree with several current operating principles of the recruiting industry. When an active candidate goes the extra mile to prepare a portfolio, or to send a thank-you, or to attend public events related to the work they are seeking, this is very much by the book and the recruiting industry reflects that. The target companies and their open positions are the customers, the candidate is the salesperson who either has their foot in the door or not. It is the candidate's job to do the maximum amount of footwork, references, typing, and talking to put themselves out there. In the active candidate arrangement, the customer can always say no, and often does.

I am writing this letter because I have noticed some recruiters wanting to go the extra mile and recruit passive candidates as well. The theory is perhaps passive candidates have more skills to offer, as they might be currently employed and therefore in more demand. Certainly the passive candidates, once reached, are individuals who are not barraged with other recruiters currently aware of them, and might be in more of a position to consider your new position more thoughtfully. After seemingly many long stretches as an active candidate, I have recently transitioned to a passive candidate. I have taken my resume off of monster. And over the past few weeks I have learned that the recruiting industry is not agile and receptive to this transition. If you want me so much, if you want me to listen to you so badly, then why do you treat me like the man banging a cup on the sidewalk? The fact is, the position of power has changed. But the good news is, you can respond to it and perhaps still find me a fruitful candidate.

Side note: That's me, full of fruit, sitting on the sidewalk with a metal cup. Need to work on the imagery here. Oh heck, I'm a passive candidate, finesse is a luxury.

All that background is to prep you for the following list. If you are interested in specifically recruiting ME, recruiters who follow these rules will get better results. Perhaps they can be extrapolated to all passive candidates, perhaps not. But it would be interesting to start seeing yourself, the recruiter, not as the customer but rather as the vendor with something to sell. As a passive candidate, I am the customer. Minimally, you can think about how many of your current practices are aligned to the reverse.

Elizabeth Grigg's "Passive Candidate" Rules for Recruiters:
1) Give up your addiction to the telephone. If you use telephone as the initial contact, know that I do not have the job description in hand, and am likely reviewing your message outside business hours. The only thing I can do is call you back at 7pm and leave a message saying "send me the job description."
2) E-mail is a real method of communication. It counts. You would never leave someone two voicemail messages, right? Similarly, don't leave a phone message if you have already sent an e-mail. This makes me think that working together will be harder than it needs to be.
3) Follow the rules of contact. If you contact me by a certain method, I will reply to you via that method or else specifically request a switch to another method. If I send you an e-mail it is bad form to answer that using the telephone. I would never do this in an office setting, and you should be aware of those conventions as well.
4) I need a job description in order to determine whether your opportunity is a match. This is written text. It is not a list of guesses you give me verbally on the answering machine. If your hiring manager won't write you one, then use boilerplate and write it yourself, including the guesses you would have told me about over the phone. Send it to the hiring manager with a "reply if changes needed" request. Then, the next day, send it to me.
5) My resume is available on the internet. It doesn't make any sense that your initial contact is for a resume. After all, you got my phone number or e-mail off of my resume in the first place.
6) Be aware if you have a very thick accent. I have no problem working with you, and I don't care what country you are based in. But please, understand that this will be a challenge if you only view telephone conversations as valuable.
7) Do not make me research my current nondisclosure before sending me the job description.
8) Do not ask me to fill out a form online, or over the phone, or go through some other profiling step without sending me the job description.
9) Look at my resume. Read it. Think to yourself, what would she be interested in. It's pretty obvious from my resume that I'd be interested in a FTE position at a software company, and/or a contract position at the PM3 level. Why would you send me bizdev? Why send me manager of IT? This just isn't thoughtful. I'm not asking you to read minds, I'm asking you to get out of the keyword search mode.
10) Honestly I'm so happy to get the job description via e-mail from a person that I hate to pick on this, but word to the wise: look into using RSS. Just think about it. If it's scary, then fine, but understand you will have to go the extra mile to get passive candidates like us.
11) Turns out I am pretty good at self-selecting jobs I can actually land from a big stack of descriptions. I have yet to find a website / keyword search arrangement that generated a decent list. After all, if that worked, I wouldn't be getting manager of IT garbage requests on a daily basis. If you want me to seriously consider your jobs, then send them to me. All jobs in the PM3 level will work fine.
12) Why would you automatically assume that I would be delighted to relocate for your 2 month contract position? Please think before sending. Remember that I am the customer. You do not want to inspire a special e-mail filter.
UPDATED 8/16: Due to recent events - namely my transition into active candidate status, I have some new experiences to share:
13) Say you're a recruiter attempting to make first contact with a certain list of people. Do not put all of our addresses on the To: line, and send us all a "personally" worded e-mail. We value our privacy and hope you will too.
14) Never recall an e-mail message you send. Similarly, never ask for a receipt. Just because you can, doesn't make it right.
15) Please keep buzzwords to a minimum. Don't say "networking" when you mean "phone call."
16) It is presumptuous to ask for the names of my friends if you don't even have a rapport with me first. Do you really want the names of friends of people who do not value their privacy? Not a very good reference.
17) If your client is looking for something broad, such as "Anyone with C#," then this looks really bad for them, as if they are looking for a warm body. Consider: what would the job description actually look like? Then write it, and send it to the candidate. Don't make the client look like a flake.
18) If I have "present position" on my resume, there is no point in asking "What am I up to these days."
19) Do not send an attachment. You are not yet a trusted source.
20) One of the magic things about e-mail is your name is built RIGHT IN. So you don't have to spend all those pixels telling me what your name is.
21) Do not send the same e-mail message twice. But if you do send the same message twice, don't recall it.
(end of update)

I hope this is not too snotty, and is actually a helpful list. Most recruiters don't know how to transition into a sales role, they don't know how to treat the candidate as a customer. Now that I have been in the role of being a customer for new jobs, I just thought you'd like to know.

Best,

- Elizabeth Grigg
http://www.egrigg9000.com/resume

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 08:25 AM | Permalink

All I can say is, Will Wheaton for Congress. Just a suggestion.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 03:30 PM | Permalink

Welcome to the first annual coal-raker's award, where certain tv commercials you have seen before are raked through the coals.

1) Currently there is a commercial for a satellite dish company where a little boy shoots the cable guy in the head, and then also gives him a powerful kick in the twins. That I have no problem with, but the boy has a tarantino-like scowl while he does it, and an intensity george lucas could not manufacture. For that reason a simple ad gets really creepy really fast.
2) I know they desperately want this to become a meme, so I hesitate to write, but has anyone ever seen Jack in the Box's CEO's wife? And why Joe Employee would be wanting to "win a night with her?" I wonder if she has the pointy nose or anything similar. Yes, it's a misogynist ad. But those new chicken bruschettas rock. What's a PC girl to do.
3) This is subtle and therefore much more infuriating. Wal-mart has an ad series focusing on families which proceed to define themselves, and why this self definition sound bite leads them to wal-mart. The worst by far is little bourgeoisie gal who starts the episode off talking about her husband. "He's a gadgets guy," she says. Like ha-ha, we all have our flaws. Hubby has nothing else to do with his money, and two sons to raise knowing about "technology" so as a self empowering and practically educational exercise, he takes the family credit card (I hope) and buys up little non-extensible DVD players and such. Wife goes jogging and this is how she centers herself, she has her own gadgets for this too. Now, you can say a lot of things about wal-mart. Personally I believe the economics of what they are doing are complicated, and I'm going to withhold judgment on all that until I am able to look at it more deeply. I knew someone who would never do business with that company, almost as his last standing chess piece of morality, because certainly he would do everything else. I also know someone else who wal-mart is his biggest customer. Those 8 characters can certainly spell success.

But this is not about that. It could have been earth hippy organics natural pc gadgets co-op putting out this commercial, I would have the same reaction. In random order:
* Technology is a means to an end, and not an end. If you don't teach your sons this, you will have failed to teach them about technology.
* If you are defined by your recharge station you graze at as you prepare to leave the house, DEFINED as in "he's a ____ guy," this should alert you that this is a BIG PROBLEM and perhaps you would prefer to be defined by your honesty, or your talents, or pretty much anything.
* Worse, if your wife defines herself by being married to you, being of course the gadget guy's wife, then this as well is a big problem, and please keep running dear.
* And then, she thinks this is funny or cute, when either a) money is rapidly escaping their grasp in search of these gadgets, or b) perhaps you have so much money that 3rd world issues should be considered at point of purchase.

There I've said it. Perhaps people aren't starving in China anymore, but do we, as Americans, have to be so blatant about living off the cream of the planet? And they're starving lots of places, if you're looking for an incentive to eat your vegetables. (Just not China, they're getting a wal-mart soon).

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 08:01 AM | Permalink

Sign me up!

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 07:29 AM | Permalink

I finally cracked open my "proudly serving" node to check out what's been happening. Lots of interesting writing, I recommend subscribing. Particularly of interest is this description of the various ironies and multiple namespaces it is possible to inhabit during discussions at Microsoft.

It would be incredible if instead of having a culture of speed, we had a culture of thoughtfulness.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 04:18 PM | Permalink

And then here, there is this excellent observation which applies to any artistic output including "writing online:"

"You're not going to write about riding in open cars with teenage girls. If you want to have subject matter which is convincing, you have to sing about your life."

Full article at http://www.sptimes.ru/archive/times/1075/features/a_15894.htm

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 03:43 PM | Permalink

This is what I am listening to now

(from the nervenet mailing list available at nervenet@topica.com)

Brian Eno Interviewed on KPFA's Ode to Gravity, 1980

February 2nd, 1980

Charles Amirkhanian and Brian Eno discuss Phonetic Poetry, how Brian
writes his lyrics, and the spirit of inquisitiveness at KPFA Radio on
Saturday February 2, 1980. Listen to some of Brian Eno’s pieces;
“After the Heat”, “Everything Merges With the Night”, “Another Green
World”, “Spirits Drifting” and sections of other pieces. Brian Eno
also discusses the artist Peter Schmidt and their work on the Oblique
Strategies Cards, being a producer, Process vs Product and looping.
Reel I ends with some thoughts on Steve Reich and his music.

Reel II starts with “the history of the recording studio as a
compositional tool;" and collaboration with David Byrne on album ‘My
Life in the Bush of Ghosts’. Eno also talks about and listens to
Elvis, The Supremes, Sly Stone, Lee Perry and Jimmy Hendrix. Then he
offers some unfinished pieces from his upcoming album with David Byrne.

http://www.archive.org/download/BrianEno/BrianEnoOTGR1.473_vbr.mp3
http://www.archive.org/download/BrianEno/BrianEnoOTGR2.472_vbr.mp3

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 03:36 PM | Permalink

Super-big yay to Gretchen for having the guts to tell us the truth when something is bothering her. This is great. Yahoo posts guidelines for blogging which essentially recommend pausing to consider the effects before posting, and other usual playground rules. And then Microsoft follows suit here on jobsblog from the grassroots. Nobody asked Gretchen to develop a certain sensitivity that will benefit her internal customers (hiring managers) and external customers (us recruits). She just did it because becoming sensitive and yelling loudly about it is often the right thing to do.

Did I mention I'm working on becoming less opinionated, and having better impulse control? That I considered these characteristics "flaws" ??? Who was I kidding?

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 03:27 PM | Permalink

Here's a question. An employee who used to work with you on an old project contacts you after a couple of years. The former employee says that a reporter has contacted them. The old project is still on their resume, and the employee wants to know from you if they can answer any of the reporter's questions. More precisely, the former employee is asking if it would be appropriate to answer any questions anonymously and over e-mail, forwarding that mail through you of course. The employee has not answered any questions so far.

What do you do, as the former manager of this project and this employee?
A) Look at this as an opportunity to get exposure on current related efforts, and allow some sort of exchange via your e-mail account.
B) Do not allow any contact. The former employee should respond to the reporter by requesting that they contact PR, and the former employee should also take the project off their resume to prevent this happening again.

At one time, talk at Microsoft was that nothing would get you promoted as fast as a failed project. This is because, typically, people learn from failures and are that much more incentivised to build successes. I don't think current corporate culture is this lenient, but it should be. Imagine your project has fallen through the cracks somehow. You are looking around for a new internal position (Gretchen has written about this recently ). You submit your resume, but wonder: will the hiring manager know that Project X has fallen through the cracks? Will my resume be the first they hear about it? Will this hiring manager hold it against me as I look for new work, or will it be an asset? Looking for work is not often a position of power, and feeling like the cards are stacked against you takes away more.

What if our relationship with the press was as benevolent as the old Microsoft saying about failures. As subjects of reporter interest, we might think we hold zero cards. The reporter, like the hiring manager, is there to uncover the failure in a way that makes a story, allows them or others to make a decision. But the current situation might in fact be more benevolent. What if reporters were there to keep the mission alive, to generate a public and credible reference that the company had good intentions and may very well succeed in this area if they keep trying. What if the attitude was, there is no better way to get press for project B than first be completely transparent with project A. The Macintosh was built on the Lisa, and the Lisa is far more interesting story.

The benevolence I'm talking about is a closely related concept to the "cluetrain." The conversation is good, and should not be stifled through PR channels. People don't want sugar-coated anything anymore, not advertisements, not press releases. It's just that any company big enough to employ in-house legal and PR staff would universally support option B above, and thus blocking progress, thus losing credibility with customers, thus not allowing employees to be the public company voice.

I hope this is changing.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 07:51 AM | Permalink

OK, weekend's over. Tax project went fine, sewing project gets a C+. Need to call in the cavalry with that one.

I've been thinking about the over-used term "evolved" when it comes to personal development. It's a great term with too much airplay. The image it evokes is perfect. Much of this blog recently is on the topic of personal evolution, because that's where my interest is, that's what's on my mind, and that's what I find interesting to write about anyway. The word "evolved" is so vivid it practically dictates all form of thought on the topic, though, once you get it stuck in your head.

A couple of milestones on the "evolution" gantt chart:
- How open are you about your character flaws?
There are people who think they are open, insisting that they are just lazy, or just perfectionists, or just anything. The insisting is supposed to invoke a certain type of personal freedom: you can have whatever character you want, flawed or no, it's your right. But this is not the same as being open about your flaws. The true openness comes from having heightened recognition in the part of your mind that learns. Having the flaw on the "front burner" as it were. Myself I know I am still looking for that front burner. I will find it someday. I do know, as of last weekend, that at least two of my own flaws are there. *

- Are you sure what's bothering you is the thing that's bothering you?
Lots of time folks stumble around pissed off at everything and attributing the cause to whatever's nearby. I have realized one thing that will make me into a giver is to eliminate any old crap lying around in a deeper place, not necessarily in front of my face. It's too easy to pick on the laundry or the operating system. It's hard to look at the past or any present awkwardness (the "insta-past" due to the fact that everyone wants to forget about it right away) and solve problems there. You don't have to sweep, but you do have to look under the rug, and assign blame to that for your sneezing. **

(footnotes)
* On character flaws. I finished reading these 35 rules again. The two character flaws I am picking on at the moment for myself are being opinionated, and having poor impulse control. It looks like having these flaws makes for good blogging, but perhaps not the safest blogging. Certainly there are times I wish I had an override switch, in lieu of a time machine, it would be nice occasionally to not insist on a certain type of behavior and instead evolve for the better. Lots of override switches in this list.

** On dealing with old crap. Becoming a giver is hard - people don't always want your help, and not in the way you feel like offering it. This is not about brownie badges. It has to really matter, and the threshold for generating that type of generosity-related event is rather high. I do know that since I decided to let go of old stuff - without really taking any action on it yet, just even mentally - it has become easier to be relaxed, to have the attitude that time is for enjoyment and not for investing in the future. And that's just a few hours. Wonder what would happen with the old stuff truly dealt with? For me, how I know the bothersome thing is dealt with correctly is the level of resistance I have to doing it. That's the old "you get what you pay for" department.

Posted by Elizabeth Grigg at 12:43 AM | Permalink