Working Up

by Dwayne Phillips

Start at the beginning and build from there. That sure is boring. That is the standard configuration. If, however, resources are scarce and the desire to accomplish new work is high, it is a good place to start.

I recently restarted a new job. That is a long story for another day. Part of that story was the “onboarding” process. That is the stuff you do the first week on a new job. New insurance, new email, new computer (if you are lucky or unlucky depending on how you look at it), and relearning all the usual things. If you are really unlucky (as I was), the onboarding took over a month. Yikes.

Now we come to the standard configuration. “Ah, you are new. Your job has unique traits, but it also fits into the same old stuff that most jobs have. Let’s apply the standard configuration to you and then modify it to fit your uniqueness.”

That was simple to write. Somehow, however, it seems difficult to do because it wasn’t done for me in this restarted new job. Everything onboarded for me was unique to start and unique to modify and unique to struggle and … I don’t like being unique. It is too frustrating for me. That is especially true as others felt I should be accomplishing real work.

The standard configuration comes from the standard operating procedure.

Step 1: reset the system to the standard configuration.

Step 2: see the flowchart on page 2 of the standard operating procedure.

Step 3: decide where you want to go on the flowchart.

Step 4: change the standard configuration to fit your needs.

Boring? Yes, it is boring. It does, however, work well. It is an old, old, and even older procedure that worked way back then and still works today. After the first week, you are accomplishing real work.

All these “standard” things (standard operating procedure, standard configuration, standard standards, etc.) come from lessons learned. And we all want to be part of a “learning organization,” right? Isn’t that still something that is bandied about these days? Just more standard stuff (that works).

By Dwayne Phillips

We all have a less-than-perfect memory. Let us admit that and use little gadgets that help us remember to do what we know we should do.

I keep noticing professional and other high-level athletes wearing giant wrist bands. I guess ”wrist band” is incorrect as these things cover the entire forearm of the person wearing them.

Those wrist bands are the athletic and rugged outdoor version of the teleprompter. The teleprompter is that machine used by broadcasters and public speakers that shows them what they are supposed to say.

These gadgets remind persons what they are supposed to do and say. Their jobs are complicated, they want to do the job well, so they use gadgets to help them.

Sounds like a pretty good idea. Difficult situation; use a gadget to help.

Now and then I advise people on how to conduct meetings and interviews and such. “Keep some 3×5 cards in your hand. Flip through them. They will remind you of what to say at a crucial moment.”

People rarely follow that advice. They don’t want to ”look weak” or something in front of everyone. They believe that they should have it ”all upstairs” in their brain and have instant recall.

Remember those professional athletes—some of whom are paid $40 million a year—who wear those giant wrist bands. They don’t remember everything and they are paid much more money than anyone I have ever advised. They don’t mind admitting to less-than-perfect memory. If they can admit that, the rest of us can admit that.

Whether we us 3×5 cards, wrist bands, necklaces (yes, there is a way to bring notes on a necklace), or make dots on our knuckles with a Sharpie, let us admit to a less-than-perfect memory and bring something that helps us remember to do what we know we should do.

By Dwayne Phillips

A buddy is someone who is standing next to me whom I assume knows what they are doing. They are carrying me. Then I learn otherwise.

We all need a buddy. We all need someone standing next to us for support, advice, know how, etc.

One problem with having a buddy in many situations is that I assume that anyone standing next to me fulfills the definition and capabilities of this definition of a buddy. I sure am glad they are there with me. Otherwise, I would be lost. When something happens, they will know what to do.

Then I discover that the situation and the person standing next to me don’t fit my ideals. They don’t know what they are doing here and now.

What is worse, I learn that they have applied the definition of ”buddy” to me and are awaiting my knowledge to step forward and handle the situation.

We are both left standing next to each other waiting for the other to do something useful.

Yikes! This doesn’t work. Well, it shouldn’t work, but it does work the great majority of the time. Just having someone stand next to me facing the same direction I am facing makes all the difference for me. Just me standing next to the other person and facing the same direction they are facing makes all the difference for them.

I find it odd how this works. I find it ”odd-er” that this works a great majority of the time.

I must remember to bring a buddy with me and not wander away from that buddy.

By Dwayne Phillips

What is urgent and what is relevant often do not match. Should I balance them or is that not relevant?

What are you saying or doing today? Is that the most urgent thing you can say or do today?

No, but we have a plan. We are working towards something big, we cannot allow the urgent to rule us.

But what about relevance? Where are we today? What are we doing today? Are our actions serving our needs and situations today? What is relevant? Let’s be and do that.

And how do we balance these? There is something that is needful today, right now. It is both relevant and urgent. Let’s do it now. Or is it relevant? My teenager needs counseling on college and career and happiness. Our dinner is burning in the oven. My teenager’s life is more important, more relevant … sorry, gotta’ pull dinner out of the over and baste it and cool it and … what was I talking about? Was I talking to someone? I’m the only person in the kitchen. What just happened?

What is relevant and what is urgent often do not match. I can’t let dinner burn. The lives of my children are primary. Tonight’s ham is not, but I cannot let …

This should be simpler, right?

by Dwayne Phillips

The edge is that area between the center of two places. Things are different at the edge. Try to remember the difference.

I recently spent a few of strenuous days cleaning a fence row. A fence row comprises the ground a couple feet each side of a fence. In my case, the fence separated a lawn from a patch of woods.

There is brush, weeds, and overgrown weeds in a fence row. It is quite difficult to clear all this—especially at my age with the limited set of tools I had.

Brush doesn’t grow in the woods. There isn’t enough sunlight reaching the ground for that type of growth.

Brush doesn’t grow in the lawn. You mow the lawn regularly with a lawn mower and the brush doesn’t have a chance to take root and grow.

Brush grows in the edge—not in the center of either side.

The edge is not like the center. Things are different there. Lessons from the edge should not be applied to the center. I find it wise to know when I am at the center and when I am at the edge. The edge is not like the center. Things are different there. Lessons from the edge should not be applied to the center.

by Dwayne Phillips

We all make mistakes. Some of us learn from some of our mistakes some of the time. The choice is ours.

We all make mistakes. That is part of being imperfect humans. How many mistakes did I make this week? How about just this morning? (Forgot to bring my laptop’s power cord, sent an email to the wrong person, left off a person from the CC line of an email, pasted the wrong URL into a document, spent too much time on one document, etc.).

We learn from our mistakes.

Whoa! Let’s back up on sentence. We should learn from our mistakes (is that correct?). We usually learn from our mistakes (still not certain about that). How about

Some of us learn from some of our mistakes some of the time.

Perhaps that is a little closer to correct.

If we make mistakes, we are human. If we don’t learn from our mistakes, we are or may be wasteful humans.

Then again, not learning from a mistake is a mistake itself and shows that I am human.

by Dwayne Phillips

Automation and artificial intelligence promise to take away the bane of some work and make us free for more meaningful work. Do we want that?

Automation frees us from that old work that is just the same old same old. We will have time on our hands and be free for more meaningful work. This is the promise of automation. This is the promise of all that Artificial Intelligence. This is the promise of digital transformation. Really?

Consider each word: free, more, meaningful, and work.

The promise of a future “free” means I am enslaved by something. You are paying me to be your slave. I don’t want to work here if that is your attitude.

More? More more more… all you want is more more more from us. Have we ever satisfied you?

Meaningful. What I am doing now has no meaning? I like ensuring that all is in order. I like ensuring have enough sugar, flour, eggs, and cups to run the bakery. That brings me meaning and satisfaction. I am already meaningful. I am already doing meaningful work.

Work work work. All you talk about is work. I enjoy being here with these folks, and all you want to do is shape things the way you enjoy them. Please. Enough is enough.

Will automation remove the tasks that I don’t like? If so, I like automation. If automation removes the tasks that you don’t want me to do, well, let’s discuss that. Please don’t tell me what I find meaningful. Please don’t tell me that in the future I will do what you want, not what I want. If I am not doing what you want, tell me. Either I will do it or try to move to another job. Thank you.

by Dwayne Phillips

We have lots of work to do. We have people here to do the work. How many of these people can we waste?

I suppose we are still in “the great resignation.” Come back to the office building, now! (please) (pretty please)

We have lots of work to do. We have some people here to do the work. We wish we had more people here who know the work to be done and are competent and will work for the wages and benefits we offer.

How many of the people who are here now can I waste? I’m the manager. I’m responsible for accomplishing the work. Of course I utilize everyone to their fullest.

Or do I? Am I wasting some of the people who are here to do the work? Do I assume some people cannot do or cannot learn? Do I assume that only I can do this or that task? Have I created a situation where only I have access to the information needed to do something? Have I created a situation where only I can decide on most of the things that happen here?

And then we can delve into all the ways that I cause people to back away from the work because I am…well, how can we politely say that I am a jerk and no one wants to be around me let alone work.

There are many ways that I can waste people. There are a few ways that I can encourage, inspire, and enable people. I should focus on those few things and practice them daily. Say “hello” to each person each day. Call them by their name. Talk about the weather and the little things on their desk. Sure this is all more difficult now that we all work from home or hybrid-ize this or that, but I can still do it. I don’t have any people to waste.

Many years ago, a wise person told me that the workplace should be pleasant and productive. I have yet to find a better description or goal.

by Dwayne Phillips

This discusses a technique that helps move “decision meetings” in a favorable direction. You spend time to save time. It works more often than not.

I have been assigned the task of presenting an idea to a meeting of decision makers. Yes, many organizations still have groups of decision makers, and they still decide in regularly scheduled meetings.

The goal is to present the idea and receive approval from the decision makers.

I was pushed into and finally recognized the benefit of a technique that requires more time and effort before the infamous decision-making meeting. It works far more often than it fails.

The procedure:

1. Meet with each decision maker in their place (office if you still have those) before the decision-making meeting.
2. Discuss the idea that you are to present.
3. Answer questions.
4. Take suggestions.

Next up is the formal decision-making meeting. In every instance where I used the above procedure, the decision makers in their meeting approved the idea.

Why? Here are several reasons (there are others):

1. Location: the first meeting is in the decision maker’s place. They are comfortable their. New ideas are not as threatening in their place.
2. Conversation: the first meeting is a conversation, not a lecture. It goes back and forth. People like to talk more than they like to be dictated.
3. Time: each decision maker has time to consider the idea. That time falls between the one-on-one conversation and the decision-making meeting.
4. Participation: each decision maker will suggest ideas to help boost the idea under consideration. During the decision-making meeting, each decision maker will recognize their suggestion, i.e., their contribution to the idea. People like to approve their own ideas.

This is a lot of work and requires a lot of time.

Why can’t the decision makers see the brilliance of the idea in the one meeting and decide? Because they are people. People need time and people like to contribute. Sorry for that, but that is life. Besides, I am being paid for work and time. That is my job.

by Dwayne Phillips

“Machine Learning” is one of the biggest misuses of the English language I have seen. The machine isn’t learning. Let’s try to remember what is happening.

Data science is a big deal these days. Well, it is until you read the fine print in the Help Wanted ads about data science jobs. The fine print says AI/ML or artificial intelligence and machine learning. Employers want persons who can “build models” and know all the tool kits to do such.

And the term “artificial intelligence” has lost almost all of its meaning. It now means one thing: machine learning. We have machines that learn to solve all our problems.

Really? No, not really. The machine isn’t “learning” anything. The “model” isn’t a model of anything, either.

We have a set of equations. We add a few things together and see if the answer is “correct.” If it isn’t, we try again and again until the answer is correct. Each thing we add together has a number that multiplies it. Those are coefficients. The coefficients allow us to double one thing, halve another thing, take a third of another, and so one. Each time through our attempt at guessing the answer, we adjust these coefficients.

When we finally reach the correct answer, we take all these coefficients and store them on the computer disk. Those numbers we stored are the “model.” Huh? Why do we call it a “model” when it is just a bunch of numbers? Well, someone thought that was a good idea about 60 years ago.

Anyways, all this machine learning comes to to a situation where we create a loop in our logic. Each time we pass through this loop we multiply and add and see if we are correct. If not correct, we adjust all the coefficients, try again, and again, and again until the coefficients produce a correct answer. Viola’. We are there. By the way, the computer software to do this is quite simple.

At one time we did this with 10 numbers, then 100, then 1,000, and now with some arbitrary large number in the billions or trillions.

And we are more clever in how we do this than we were 60 years ago. And we have much, much, much better computers now that we did 60 years ago. Time produced computers that would work the solutions we created 60 years ago. Okay.

Still, let’s not kid ourselves. The machine isn’t learning. We are looping and adjusting coefficients until we have the result we want. That is pretty good stuff, but it isn’t “learning.”