On working on multidisciplinary teams

Most of us like to work (and play) with people like ourselves.  People with similar interests, similar backgrounds.

I worked on my first interdisciplinary team in 1975 at Xerox Corporation with artists (Ansel Adams), cognitive psychologists (Roger Dooley, Bob Springer, Chuck Dvorak), and physicists (Marty Maltz) among others. Our objectives were to understand the physical and psychological aspects of images that would enable Xerox to build world-class consumer imaging systems of all types (paper, displays, etc.).  We had a very diverse team.

Ansel Adams (yes, the famous photographer) was my source of ultra-high resolution camera film (he shot mostly 8 x 10 negatives) and an artist in capturing light.  He is the author of one of my most treasured books, "Yosemite and the Range of Light".  Regrettably, our research had to switch to other artists, as New York Graphic Society owned all of the works of Ansel and we could not publish the use of his art in our refereed publications.  I still recall receiving his first negative in the mail, alarmed that it had been insured for $50,000.  My grandson's middle name is Ansel.

Roger and Bob understood and introduced me to the concepts of multidimensional scaling.  And with Chuck, the very significant details of the difference between lightness, whiteness, and brightness.  Also the differences between darkness and blackness. Ansel understood those very clearly, but not from a psychophysical point-of-view.

And Marty studied and developed models of how light scattered in paper, how photons entered, travelled through the lengthy paper fibers, and where they could be expected to exit to eventually enter the eye of the viewer.

All of these enabled us to construct concrete models of the visual perception tied back to physical properties of ink, toner, and paper and the lighting environment.  We had completely different training, perspectives, and we disagreed a lot, but we achieved what I believe was the best understanding of image quality - because of our multidisciplinary approach.  We also published a lot of papers, many of which are still in use today.

I've done hundreds of multidisciplinary projects since then, attempting to learn from those who think differently that I do. I really like multidisciplinary teams.

So, have a sticky problem?  Or an irritating colleague that is different than you? Maybe even me?  Give it a try.

Writing Effective Resumes

"I am talented, give me a job where I can grow."  But its not about you.

I critique quite a few graduating senior college resumes. The major problem I see in most is leading with the “self”, rather than leading with benefit to the employer.  So, in your Job Objective, start with (a) what you will do for the company first, then (b) how you will accomplish it. 

For example, instead of:

“ I am seeking a product sales position with a company that can take advantage of my broad-based business education and diverse skills.”

Write something like:

"Seeking a sales position where I can significantly increase sales productivity and revenue for the company utilizing my broad-based business education and diverse skills.”  

     

In Job History, once again start with (a) benefit to company followed by (b) what you did.  And numbers significantly help strengthen  the “benefit” statement.  It should be about the benefit to the company, not about you.  Most resumes are written exactly backwards. 

For example, instead of:

“Armed with my knowledge of surveys and focus groups, ran online surveys, did extensive market research on effectiveness of company advertising.  Results were used to modify advertising strategy.”

Write something like:

“Advertising effectiveness increased 35%.  Increase a result of recommendations drawn from online surveys and market research on effectiveness of company advertising.”

Or instead of:

“I used my quantitative and excellent analytical skills to provide cost estimates in response to work order requests.  I conducted on-line and data base searches for new business potential.”

Write something like:    

"Increased sell-through by 50% of products new bid projects. Identified fifteen to twenty qualified sales opportunities per month through on-line and data base searches for new business."

It’s always good to demonstrate first real value, quantitatively if possible, to the company followed by what you did.

Getting a job: How to reduce "friction"

Lots of students are discouraged finding a good job.  Employers that want to hire are often reluctant to take a chance on someone who is not exceptional, or proven.  I know, I've hired hundreds, if not thousands, in my career.  So here's some advice I've offered to many students, from an employer's point-of-view, and I can now claim that today's award of the Nobel Prize in Economics to Peter Diamond of MIT, Dale  Mortensen, and Christopher Pissarides supports it.

 

It's all about "friction".  An employer hiring you is taking at least a 12 month risk and cost or more.  If six months in, you're not a good fit, it will take at least another six months to get you out.  Much, much more importantly, and rarely mentioned, in the collateral damage and indirect cost you cause on your fellow employees when this unfortunate sequence plays out.  That's part of the "friction" in hiring.

 

Here's a simple solution.  When you find a position you feel you are qualified for, a trustworthy firm,  and it's attractive to you (i.e. it's in your "passion" zone), make the following offer: I will work for you in this position for 2 weeks/2 months/pick-your-interval for FREE and, at the end of that work interval, we will sit down and assess my performance. I agree that, if for any reason, you wish to let me go, I will do so without retribution, and simply leave, quietly.  If you decide to make me an offer, I can accept, and reserve the right to refuse the offer, or negotiate. Often, you can negotiate full back pay for that starter interval, or you can build that into the agreement upfront.

 

It costs you several weeks/months of work, but you get a good look at a job you think is a good one.  You get a chance to prove that you really are up to the task.  The employer gets a good look at you. He/she would be stupid not to hire you if you are as good as you think you are.  Meanwhile, the HR people and legal folks  are pulling their hair out because of this arrangement.

 

So let's congratulate Mssrs.Diamond, Mortensen, and Pissarides and reduce the friction.  Give it a try and let me know.

A part-time business idea for the entrepreneurially-minded individual

Students often come to me and ask "how can I start my own business that can be part-time, earn me money, and accommodate my fractured time schedule?" Ten years ago I suggested installing wireless routers in homes in Rancho Sante Fe as wireless became popular; the average charge was $1,000 for less than 4 hours of effort and word-of-mouth grew the business. Most good ideas in this category have a lifetime of a few years, and sell themselves because they are need-driven.

Which brings us to today. SDG&E is installing smart meters throughout San Diego County, and will be done by 2011. Once that is completed, you'll see Time-Of-Use (TOU) pricing (we already have tiered pricing) likely put in place (PUC-willing) which means customers will be paying much more during peak-usage times and consumers will be shocked by the bill increases, sort of what is happening on a smaller scale today with water usage.

Consumers are clueless today and its going to get much, much worse. (see here for an earlier note on consumer knowledge). They'll be looking for help and I've used all of SDG&E's energy monitors and trust me, they're clueless. Just try reading your bill. Seriously. If your brain is not scrambled trying to understand your bill, read their proposed TOU schedule.

So here's the idea: Offer to do a whole house electric energy audit for, say, $250-500 if you can't wait for the moola or, better yet, for $100 plus 50% of the cost savings for the first year. Schedule a time to spend about 60 minutes capturing the meter reading, last month's bill, and installing usage monitors at critical points of the home (see here for a sample monitor that costs less than $20). Come back 24 hours later, pick up your readings and monitors, do a quick Excel spreadsheet and auto-generate a report from within Excel, with recommendations. There's lots more details I won't go into here, as well as many more sophisticated options, but you can start this business with 10 monitors for less than $250, business cards included. Of course, it will open doors to things like installing solar panels (a reference sell, get paid $500 for every installed referral, etc.). See here. What you learn will be priceless. And for those of you that want a political affiliation with my good buddy Al (of green-washing fame), you'll be a hero.

So what are you waiting for?

Numbers, numbers, numbers...

Let's say you make $20 an hour at your job. And you spend $40 for every hour worked hour out of pocket. Not just for a day, but every day. For the indefinite future. First, can it be done? And second, does it possibly make any sense? Fortunately for you, you can't do that very long, as your credit will run out very quickly, perhaps after six months or so.

The federal government is now spending twice what it earns (actually twice what we give them in taxes) with no end in sight. The debt limit of $14.3 trillion is not understood by most, and doesn't even include unfunded liabilities -- future obligations to pay Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and interest on that debt -- which brings the total closer to $80 trillion.

However, unlike you, they can continue to borrow, and borrow, and borrow. At least that's what most people are led to believe. And, they can ask the Federal Reserve, a private bank owned and operated for profit to, in effect, print more money.

If all money owned by you, all businesses, and the money in all American banks was sent to the federal government, there would not be enough to pay off the $14 trillion let alone the 80 trillion.

So I think you'd better plan to see inflation in your future as the feds ask the Federal Reserve banks to print more money. That's probably more important than trying to figure out how big a number a trillion really is.

The demise of the earth #2: Two lies and a truth

From President Obama's State of the Union Speech, January 2010:
"...overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change..." [see below]
"...it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America..."

"We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement...there is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the earth."
Petition signed by Dr. Edward Teller, Ph.D. Physics, 9,000 other Ph.D.'s and over 31,000 American scientists.

Climate change advocates are regrettably alienating the general population, causing misdirected debate on the climate when the root cause - our energy policies - get less attention or economically distorted solutions such as cap and trade, the Waxman-Markey Bill (H.R. 2454), and policy dis-incentives such as the California Solar initiative.

In the meanwhile, private market efforts for the creation of new energy generation initiatives suffer from federal and state dis-incentives to discover and develop non-carbon-based energy solutions.

Jim Hamerly
member, Board of Directors, cleanventure.org
http://cleanventure.org/board.html

On Job Creation

According to a research study conducted for the U.S. Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration, business incubators provide communities with significantly greater results at less cost than do any other type of public works infrastructure project. This is a government report by a government agency responsible for economic development.

Researchers found that business incubators are the most effective means of creating jobs – more effective than roads and bridges, industrial parks, commercial buildings, and sewer and water projects. Incubators provide up to 20 times more jobs than community infrastructure projects at a cost of $144 to $216 per job.
Compare that to what is reported by recovery.gov for the state of California:
-- cost per job via grants: $154,000
-- cost per job via contracts: $508,000
-- cost per job via loans: $4,100,000
[Ref: http://www.recovery.gov/transparency/pages/home.aspx?State=CA]

Business incubators also increase the likelihood of success on a new business by 5X [nbia.org].

At a time when I believe California has a unemployment rate close to 20%, should we be spending federal dollars on "job creation" or should we incentivize businesses to do the same?