Encounters With The Past: The Finale

Growing up in school teachers begrudgingly liked my octagon ("circle" has been overused) of friends. I say this because while we were capable of impressing them, our grades were terrible. We were, in addition, disruptive through an assortment of mad soliloquies designed to excite and make laugh through thought provoking commentaries. Students like Eric and me always tested the boundaries of the education system that was ill-equipped to deal with scatter brains like us.

There are no manuals to deal with people like that. You just have to hope you have a teacher that plays along.

Grades never impressed me. Ever. I've met too many jackasses who knew how to work and manipulate the education system in their favour. Me? I couldn't be bothered. Besides, in order to succeed meant understanding the thinking and rationale of that system.

I was never able to figure it out. Bat-Man detective skill I don't possess. I simply had my own thoughts and ideas on how, like, everything should work. And this was going to have a massive effect on my work life as the corporate environment simply did not resonate with me. More on this in a moment.

Eric was a natural in science - physics, chemistry, math etc. All the subjects God decided to omit from my DNA. I've always admired people who grasp these subjects.

As for me, I'm writing this entry. Meh. Click on an ad. Help me out a little.

The original purpose of this post - which has since turned into a three post mini-epic - was about something I said in high school. It was about a rant I made in class about the irrelevance of 9 to 5 jobs and structures and Eric recalled this.

I admit it. I didn't and still don't get the whole rigid 9 to 5 thing in its present construct. It seems so antiquated. Be forewarned long-windedness on the horizon.

Believe it or not, a company is an extension of your philosophy on life. Laugh but I feel this way.

Too many times I've seen people open a store and run it like a lousy assembly line using cookie cutter strategies. How many generic reference letters, job descriptions etc. were downloaded and dropped on my desk over the years that were so mind-numbingly pointless it was almost comical. I say almost because it was also pathetic. It was rare, if ever, to have one actually tailored to the peculiarities that define their business.

I can't stress the importance of having and following a clear organizational standard from the beginning. If you're running a growing company and winging it as you go along you're missing a chance to create a truly enlightened company. Good luck getting that in order down the road. By then the rot will probably have set in and you'll have to hire consultants charging five thousand bucks to state the obvious. Not only that, the patients will have overrun the asylum. The lousy worker will obsess about useless things that only cause trouble in the work place.

And if you're sending out "raw, raw, raw" material about team work without a proper structure that defines and executes your values flawlessly the joke is on you. That's all superficial stuff. Workers aren't stupid. How many times has your company proclaim in words something at the Christmas dinner only to have forgotten it by the new year?

I think many companies have their hearts in the right place but they have no clue on how to effectively express this. Some know how to make money but have the slightest idea on how to manage a growing business. Learning to manage is an entirely different ball game and it's not easy. An Ivy League degree won't necessarily help you either. Anti-social people with a degree in Management who are barely able to take decisions do exist you know.

Some companies do actually start on the right track only to revert to draconian measure thanks to some putzes in the office. As usual, the dicks in the office prevail and everyone else pays. In my opinion, I would never give such power to a troublesome worker. And you shouldn't either.

Operating on such a passe system of 9 to 5 (as Dolly Parton and her blessed, erm, voice once said: it's not a way to learn a living) is for mature companies in old, stable industries - like a paper mill or something. Now that there's anything wrong with it. Indeed, it's honest work but the reality is that in the 21st century there's a whole new sub-culture of people who can't and won't relate to it.

One of the most corrosive aspects of the 9 to 5 company is one where micro-management becomes the normal means to control employees. Of course, this only gives power to gossiping dead beats and middling middle-management minds that only wreck the creative and productive individual and their ability to truly contribute to a company. Speaking of human resources, if you're an owner AND running human resources cut that shit out if you can afford additional staff. It's called a conflict of interest.

Performance appraisals? What about them? Yeah, they're alright provided the company is actually organized and run by people who can interpret all those frivolous ratings. When used right it's a tool to make sure all values, goals and objectives are on course.

Other than that, they should be scrapped. Half the questions in such appraisals are plain stupid and deserve the N/A notation.

Resumes? To me they're just words. I also always wonder about the person siphoning through them. Think of it. What if the person entrusted with such things is an a-hole or lacks imagination? That's a lot of power to give someone who can potentially cost you some talented people.

Sure, some people have amassed impressive CV's and there's no doubt some of them are obvious and coveted choices but these things are nevertheless dicey. Just because the CV is substantial doesn't mean I should ignore the one that isn't. I'd rather meet people up front. I like to look at people in the eyes. Resumes are necessary so you can't scrap this though you can rework how you treat them.

Asking for experience in a job posting is another thing I take with a grain of salt. 4-6 years experience? What the heck does this mean? Nothing except you don't have to spend to train someone. It's entirely possible a person with far less "experience" could be better for the job, no?

Personally, I want a shot at getting the best. You're damn straight I'm going to interview the young kid with no experience. It's called scouting.

In the end, there are ways to build a successful model that optimizes worker performance. One key place to start is understanding how the modern worker thinks. For example, if they meet and exceed all expectations in four hours of work what do you care if they leave for a two-hour lunch? Your concern is not to worry about them sitting their asses on a desk. It should be about making sure they a) justify their existence and salary and b) make you money. That's it and that's all.

Easier said than done? It may not be easy but I would say no.

One of the biggest psychological problems today is the claustrophobic nature of the impersonal workplace.

Respect and autonomy is key. Woe to the company incapable of understanding all this.

It was great seeing Eric.

He gave me three posts.