Beth n Rod

Winter: reading, movies, workingout enough to keep in shape for spring, holiday cooking, hot tubbing if we can stand the temps between the door and the tub. Grilling out if we can stand the temps between the door and the grill. Spring: gardening, cooking out on the grill, hot tubbing Summer: gardening, cooking out on the grill, hot tubbing, rading a book in the sunshine Fall: a little gardening, outdoor holiday decorating, occasional cooking on the grill or in the outdoor deepfryer, hot tubbing Beth :groovy: :groovy2: :groovy3: p.s. the bar is between the grill and the hot tub....

The death toll is at 115,000 now. This is horrible. It's going to take global efforts to help these areas and the people in them to recover and rebuild. This is nothing short of catastrophic. Beth

I have seen us work 60-75 hours a week I think is average during peak season in the office & field.20-25 hours more for estimates We work pretty much 7 days/week in peak season just to keep up with the demand. Rod~

I'm still thinking about how to respond to this one. There is a seasonal difference. Off season we are working normal hours. Peak season we are working from ..... roughly 6:30 am till about 11pm most days plus 8 hour days on the weekends. Beth p.s our employees work fewer hours (closer to normal), and unless they are scheduled for weekend work, they are off weekends.

I can't even immagine how people here with family overseas are feeling right now. Beth

Water will always travel the path of least resistance, and due to its molecular size (very similar to air in many ways) it can find its way into lots of places. Windows and doorways come to mind. Beth

http://peregrinos.us/dysfunction.htm#publicethics Dysfunction: Organizations That Fail Expectations Truthful information flows in high-functioning organizations. This enables managers and thereby their organizations to make choices and, later, to deal with their consequences. Bad information, on the other hand, often leads to unintended results, as happened with Enron and WorldCom/MCI, among other recent examples. This is more than organization theory in business school. A private company cannot rest on its laurels--the constantly changing marketplace will force it to adapt or go out of business. Thus, for-profit companies get rid of (or demote) bad managers. Else, the company fails and the (mis)managers (and their subordinates) are pounding the pavement again. Bankruptcy forces reorganization. Government, on the other hand, does not go out of business. Government accountability is tested through electoral and judicial and media channels. These are very different alternatives to market discipline as ways to weed out dysfunction. Dysfunction and its Consequences Dysfunctional systems often include a scapegoat or black sheep. That person has dared mention whatever craziness is going on (shades of the Emperor's New Clothes). Blame rather than thanks or reform ensues. Since literally killing the messenger of bad news has gone out of fashion, harassment may continue until the scapegoat cracks or moves on. Then, a new scapegoat is found. Coworkers disassociate from the scapegoat in hopes of avoiding that fate themselves. Meanwhile, either the problems continue to worsen, or misadvised fixes fail. Leadership is a vacuum. Morale plummets, particularly where the "troublemaker" who cared enough about the organization to report the problem leaves. By contrast, more functional organizations might consider the same individuals valuable troubleshooters, recognizing that problems are easier to correct while still minor. Public Sector Ethics Because a democratic country like ours does not go out and fire its government, even a change in administration usually only affects the topmost officials. Talk about reinventing government usually remains just that. On the other hand, the public interest is what government is really about after all. No one likes corruption, illegal activities or gross mismanagement in their government, unless it directly benefits them. Government ethics address these issues. The Constitution also matters. Our American system works by checks and balances, by disseminating information and power among the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches and the citizenry. Bully Bosses and Leadership Failures Unfortunately, bureaucracies often protect problem bosses. In 1999, the MSPB recognized that "tough" managers can also have problems, calling it a "bull in a china shop" phenomenon. Employees may call them "bully bosses." Autocratic managers rule through fear, intimidation and retaliation, rather than efficient information flow. Other problem bosses are more subtle backstabbers, but with similar cover-up goals. Management gurus since Abraham Lincoln invariably advise both talking with and listening to subordinates. Information must flow upward as policies flow down for implementation. Yet many problem bosses and their own managers prefer a "don't ask/don't tell" attitude (a/k/a ostrich philosophy). Double talk is bureaucratically protective--classic mixed messages frustrate or confuse outsiders (or employees). Leadership, on the other hand, involves two-way communications. The Problem Personnel Officer Too many personnel officers consider employee-protective laws obstacles to be avoided, rather than moral or ethical guideposts. Cynics consider the personnel officer's real job as protecting management. If so, employees reporting problems (even internally) become anathema. While compliance with laws and regulations may be somewhere in many job descriptions, placing them in a wide-ranging category and as only one of many "critical elements" invites problems. Many performance evaluation forms ignore government ethics; others disassociate law and ethics. Thus, "human resources" officers may blindly help bosses get rid of "troublemakers" rather than implement federal personnel laws. Plus, more complicated laws can protect less. Federal managers can get away with even worse tactics against whistleblowers than against employees complaining about discrimination (although harassment in that area is far from unknown either, the EEOC also being understaffed) because of the MSPB's and Federal Circuit's choices toward hyper-technicality or complexity. As civil service protections become nominal, federal managers may even retaliate more freely than their private counterparts.

Interesting that you should say that Everett... http://www.pwnabbs.org/showthread.php?p=19275#post19275 Rod~

So....share with everyone here how you remove them... ;) Beth

JD, Exhaust systems are easy to install to divert the exhaust out of the van. This can be done by directing it out the back or side of the van (depends on how you situate the machine) or having an exhaust port installed in the roof or side of the van. (less desirable) Rod~

Your points are controversial, but I am open minded. Tell us how you do it Henry. Rod~

Ice dam removal is a good money maker if you dont mind working in the cold and have a hot water unit. Rod~

May I add that you may need an 14'-24' extension pole to reach high windows and sunroom type glass ceilings. I noted rags, but if I may take it a bit further to sugggest window duty towels. They are designed to be more absorbent. Beware of tempered glass. The process leaves micro fragments of glass that are temporarily bonded to the glass but, by the use of a scraper, you may actually create an even worse condition as it will cause scratches. http://www.iwca.org/industry/glass_bulletin.htm Rod~

Since vinegar is an acid, it will neutralize a caustic. So will a coke or pepsi. If you have an acid burn you need a base to neutralize with. Hand soaps tend to be alkaline. But rinse, rinse, rinse....and seek emergency medical help if it is serious. Beth

I have a burn (minor, fortunately) from the point where my gauntlet glove ended on my arm. I found that when working on vertical surfaces, the cleaning chem solution was running 'up' the glove where it would get on me. I finally decided that it had to stop and turned up the glove ends and made a cuff to keep it from traveling onto my skin. quick tip. Rod~

I am sure that many of us feel this way too. These articles are for the benefit of awareness and continuing education. Rod~

Well, why not look at the traits of an entrepreneur as well? Creative Risk Takers Strengths in planning and implementing creative thought or vision into a functional business. Financial backing These are a few traits I would associate with an entrepreneur. Beth

Very true, Alan. History alone is a wonderful illustrator of that. We (US) have had strong opposition during war (pick any war, I'm not speaking of a specific war), but each country had a leader that the citizens would follow. The opposing countries may not have followed our leader, but they did follow a leader. And as we have discussed, there are various types of leaders and also of leadership styles. Also not all entrepreneurs are suited to becoming leaders, in fact many entrepreneurs start up a business and will sell it off right away because they recognize they are not leaders. Beth

It's time to do this again...what are your resolutions this year?

How would a leader do this effectively? How would such a leader know who among many candidates for example, would be best suited to perform the tasks that need to be performed without some basic idea or knowledge regarding the area of expertise? All leaders, at all levels, should have a basic understanding of the products produced or services performed. The smaller the company, the greater the understanding by the leader. As the company grows, it suggests that the leader will hire other managers to assume a more functional role, thus allowing the leader to step into a role more suited to planning. This is the course of normal growth and leadership roles. Beth

Bill Gates has publically stated that the time he spent at Harvard was helpful to him. So, you are saying the blind can lead the sighted, speaking metaphorically... I disagree here. If someone who doesn't know how to lead tries to lead others who do have a clear understanding of how to do something, the leader will not be effective if the message contradicts the expereince of those who have the "know how". Beth :groovy2:

I would like to add the distinction of an entrepreneuer to the discussion. Entrepreneuer's find a need and fill it. They are the creativeness and the drive behind business today. Their imagination and insight have created huge corporations and multi-million dollar business ventures. They are the initiators. Leaders however are not always entrepreneuers. In this case in particular, they are the ones who are given charge to take over and fulfill the objectives of the entrepreneuer who has other areas of responsibility to manage. While I do not intend to lessen either one here, the point is that each has its place in business today and less often are the two one and the same. Rod~

This is an excellent article which seemed timely, and in my opinion is well worth reading. Enjoy! ========================================================== Human Resources - Managing Diversity Fairly Research By Michael W. Morris Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior Stanford Graduate School of Business Kwok Leung Professor of Management City University of Hong Kong Steven Su Assistant Professor of Organizational Behavior INSEAD Managing diversity is everybody's business these days. Diverse work teams bring high value to contemporary organizations. Just as cross-functional task forces have long been used to reach decisions that better represent the whole organization, so diverse cultural teams and organizations offer the potential to design products and policies with broad applicability to the global economy. With increasing national and ethnic diversity in organizations, the challenge of managing fairly becomes more complex. A supervisor who interprets the actions of employees from different cultural groups without awareness of their cultural norms can miss or misread important signals in their communication. Yet, at the other extreme, a constant emphasis on employees' cultural backgrounds can often create just as many problems. Either way there may be complaints about fairness along cultural lines. What's a manager to do? Cultural training programs have long been used to prepare managers for expatriate positions and are used increasingly for managers in ethnically diverse organizations at home. Some programs specifically aspire to teach managers to simulate how people from another culture interpret events. "It is unrealistic to expect complete success in this regard," says Stanford Graduate School of Business faculty member Michael Morris. "But training can succeed in heightening managers' awareness of the specific ways that norms of workplace behavior differ, so that the newly arrived American manager abroad won't read special meanings into employee behaviors that are culturally normal (such as siestas, kissing on the cheek, indirect eye contact, or whatever the case may be)." Another realistic goal is to remind managers that their perceptions of employees are not direct readings of objective reality but constructed interpretations— sometimes largely shaped by their cultural beliefs. The good news is that if there is diversity in an organization, then the seeds of a more comprehensive solution are also present in that organization. The best protection against cultural misinterpretations is to implement procedures that allow managers to check their interpretations against those of culturally different others. Example: putting members of different groups into key performance-appraising positions and encouraging managers to call on those with cultural expertise much as they would call on those with technical expertise for an information technology problem. Morris, who is an associate professor of organizational behavior at the Business School, is one of the few researchers looking at how justice can be maintained in a culturally diverse workforce. Perceptions regarding fairness have important implications for employees' respect for leaders and their willingness to contribute extra effort. "If justice issues are not well managed in a diverse workplace, detrimental consequences ranging from poor morale and high turnover to inter-group rivalry and balkanization may result," says Morris, who has collaborated on several studies in this area with Kwok Leung, professor of management at City University of Hong Kong, and Steven Su, assistant professor of organizational behavior at INSEAD, as well as Daniel Ames, adjunct professor, Columbia Business School Executive MBA Program, and Brian Lickel, assistant professor of psychology at the University of Southern California. Morris and his colleagues have paid attention to the two extremes that often guide managers in diverse work settings. They describe these extremes as the "universalist" approach to fairness (treat all employees the same) and the "particularist" approach (adjust your treatment according to the employee's cultural background). In one recent article, they demonstrate the problems that accrue with one extreme stance or the other. They also outline how a flexible stance enables solutions to a number of the challenges in maintaining perceived fairness in culturally diverse organizations. For example, Morris says one of the critical tasks for an organization is to help employees progress and develop, especially employees who are culturally different from the prevailing management culture. "In many subtle ways, we tend to favor people who are similar to us," says Morris. "This is one of the strongest patterns in social science research." Even well-intentioned managers may make it easier for employees similar to them to perform well, such as being quicker to praise when they have succeeded or more comfortable providing constructive criticism when they have not. A manager consciously intending to adopt the universalist stance may nonetheless treat employees differently as a function of their group because of non-conscious factors shaping his or her behavior. At the other extreme, a manager adopting the particularist stance may appear overly sympathetic toward employees from underrepresented groups. This can convey lower standards of performance expectation, which may inspire resentment from all groups. The solution, says Morris: Don't rely on good intentions. Implement policies such as a mentoring program to assure that all employees get the close relationships to managers that they need in order to access information and opportunities. Equally important is that no employees are denied the constructive critical feedback needed for learning because managers shy away from the challenge of appraising performance fairly across cultural divides. Unless managers are assigned, the employees who need mentors the most may never find one. Whereas the aforementioned issues arise within locally diverse work settings, different issues arise for global firms in maintaining a sense of justice across different units in different countries. There is a tradeoff between universalist policies that standardize (thereby enabling managerial rotation and a unified culture), on the one hand, and particularist policies in tune with local judgments of fairness, on the other. Morris and his colleagues suggest that understanding the ways culture enters a given kind of fairness judgment can clarify how a firm should respond. Recent papers by Morris and colleagues in the journals Academy of Management Review and Applied Psychology distinguish different ways culture enters particular kinds of fairness or justice judgments and the responses organizations can take to each. For example, judgments of "distributive justice" concern the allocation of rewards such as salary. One way that culture can enter such judgments is by determining which criterion or standard of fairness applies, such as dividing rewards in equal proportion, in proportion to "contributions," or in proportion to "needs." But even if cultures concur in their choice of criterion, differences can arise because cultures differ in how they construe contribution or need. Morris and his colleagues examine this issue with regard to an oft-noted difference in justice perceptions of American respondents as opposed to Japanese and Korean participants. They find that American respondents are more likely to judge as unfair distributions that weight employee seniority as the primary driver of salary. In evidence from many psychological measures, Morris and his coauthors find that this cultural difference arises from so-called construals, not from criteria. That is, East Asian respondents were no less wedded to the criterion of rewards proportional to contributions, it was just that they were more likely to construe seniority as a contribution. Given the nature of this difference, an organizational response could be to stress the criterion of rewards proportional to contributions in the global corporate culture, but to allow the definition of employee contribution to vary. In short, with regard to distributive justice, they should think globally, but act locally. Overall, it is paramount not only that all cultural groups be treated fairly, but that they perceive that they are treated fairly. It can be challenging to maintain perceptions of fairness in diverse work settings as culture can affect managers in their performance appraisals and their support of employees' career development. In international organizations, challenges arise in decisions over which policies and practices to standardize across national units. Purely universalist or particularist approaches to any of these challenges seem unlikely to succeed, so managing cultural diversity fairly will require a balancing act. The more we understand about the specific ways culture influences the psychology of fairness judgments, the easier it will be to strike a wise balance. August 2001 Justice in the Culturally Diverse Workplace: Problems of Over-Emphasis and Under-Emphasis of Cultural Differences, Kwok Leung, Steven K. Su, and Michael W. Morris, GSB Research Paper #1658, September 2000 Related Reading Views from Inside and Outside: Integrating Emic and Etic Insights About Culture and Justice Judgment, Michael W. Morris, Kwok Leung, Daniel Ames, and Brian Lickel, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, April 1999 Justice for All? Progress in Research on Cultural Variation in the Psychology of Distributive and Procedural Justice, Michael W. Morris and Kwok Leung, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 49, 1999 For more information, contact Helen K. Chang, 650-723-3358, Fax: 650-725-6750 To order a paper in the GSB Research Paper Series (numbered papers only), email research_papers@gsb.stanford.edu. http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/research/reports/2001/morris.html

Carlos, We all go thru this at some point. The important thing is you caught it. We devote time every year to process improvement in many facets, and have found it to be a fantastic way to avoid growth pitfalls and to manage new growth alike. Beth

Party at Celeste's house..... Beth :groovy: