Author Archives: legallysociable

How much fun should one have at work?

Posted on by

Schumpeter at The Economist takes a look at the idea of having fun at work:

ONE of the many pleasures of watching “Mad Men”, a television drama about the advertising industry in the early 1960s, is examining the ways in which office life has changed over the years. One obvious change makes people feel good about themselves: they no longer treat women as second-class citizens. But the other obvious change makes them feel a bit more uneasy: they have lost the art of enjoying themselves at work…

This cult of fun is driven by three of the most popular management fads of the moment: empowerment, engagement and creativity. Many companies pride themselves on devolving power to front-line workers. But surveys show that only 20% of workers are “fully engaged with their job”. Even fewer are creative. Managers hope that “fun” will magically make workers more engaged and creative. But the problem is that as soon as fun becomes part of a corporate strategy it ceases to be fun and becomes its opposite—at best an empty shell and at worst a tiresome imposition.

A good point: forced “fun” is hardly fun at all.

A question: what really makes work satisfying for people? Having fun? Collegial relationships? Meaningful tasks? Praise from bosses and higher-ups?

Another question: what can’t this “fun time” at work be left up to the employee’s discretion? One might prefer a half hour to quietly read a book while another might prefer a volleyball game. While this means managers may not be able to rave about how their group came together in an activity, it might provide even higher levels of productivity.

How to measure “success” of movements like the Tea Party

Posted on by

In the midst of an opinion piece about the Tea Party, E.J. Dionne Jr. of the Washington Post touches on an interesting social movements question: what makes a social movement successful?

Before you dismiss the question, note that word “successful.” Judge the Tea Party purely on the grounds of effectiveness and you have to admire how a very small group has shaken American political life and seized the microphone offered by the media, including the so-called liberal media.

But it’s equally important to recognize that the Tea Party constitutes a sliver of opinion on the extreme end of politics receiving attention out of all proportion with its numbers.

In this excerpt (and by the end of the article), Dionne suggests two markers of success for the Tea Party:

1. Getting the attention of the media and political leaders. (Dionne says this has been a success.)

2. Having a majority (or perhaps just a large enough critical mass?) of Americans on its side or as constituents. (Dionne suggests this is not the case.)

There also could be other measuring sticks for success:

1. How many Tea Party candidates reach political office. This could be for the 2010 election cycle or for elections beyond that.

2. How long the movement lasts. Is it here just for this election cycle or longer? Is it going to be a permanent party or will it fade away?

3. How much money can be raised in support.

I’m not sure I’ve read that the Tea Party itself has defined what “success” looks like.

Why add this line in interview about Netflix in Canada: “Americans are somewhat self-absorbed”

Posted on by

In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, the Netflix CEO (and co-founder) discussed the company’s new foray into the Canadian market. Netflix prices in Canada will be one dollar cheaper: $7.99 vs. $8.99 in the United States. But the CEO added another line that seems superfluous to the discussion and may not be helpful to his company’s efforts in the American market:

THR: American services when they enter the Canadian market typically charge the locals more than they charge stateside. Why the discount for Canadians?

Hastings: We want to provide an incredible value for Canadians, and it’s the lowest price we have anywhere in the world for unlimited screenings. And anyone can try it for free for a month. It’s pretty addictive.

THR: Are you concerned that American Netflix subscribers will look north and ask for the same discount Canadians get at $7.99?

Hastings: How much has it been your experience that Americans follow what happens in the world? It’s something we’ll monitor, but Americans are somewhat self-absorbed.

I’m guessing more Americans will pay attention now to this than would have before. Whether he is right or wrong about Americans being self-absorbed, why potentially hurt a large market when he didn’t have to?

Making art out of sprawl

Posted on by

The Infrastructurist comments on a story about an artist who uses sprawl and suburbia as his subject. The Infrastructurist and the story commentator suggest these images are alienating and ultimately, tragic:

The suburbs are totally self-contained, labyrinthine, and generally terrifying. The Times describes them as “static, crystalline and inorganic. Indeed, some of these streets frame retirement communities: places to move to once you’ve already been what you’ve set out to be.” We couldn’t have said it better ourselves.

I don’t think one has to see these images as tragic. A couple of possible defenses of such images (and the one The Infrastructurist has on the story is a good one):

1. These can be seen as very ordered places. Not ordered in the sense of traditional city grid ordered but they still have a logic. The streets may be more winding but these communities seem to be centered around retail centers or parks. They may even have their own kind of beauty.

2. If one already thinks sprawl is bad, then viewing these overhead shots may just be throwing fuel on the fire. However, these images can be read as the American manifestation of particular social and cultural values: individualism and privacy as built in single-family homes and suburban streets for our cars. In America, the particular expression of these values may be best exhibited in suburbs. There are other ways suburbs/sprawl could be structured to still support those values – or perhaps these commentators would suggest these values themselves should just be done away with. But that is not a problem with these images; it is an underlying issue with sprawl and suburbs.

Losing Internet connection like going back to prehistoric days?

Posted on by

This was my thought last night when the Internet was unavailable at home: this is like going back to a prehistoric era. While this is hyperbolic, it’s a reminder of how common the Internet is in our everyday lives. Choosing to not have it for a while for another worthy cause (like a vacation) is one thing; not having it when you want to us it is another thing.

My second thought: it might be nice to have a smart phone so that I would never (or rarely) have to deal with an outage.

“Is the American Dream dead?”

Posted on by

President Obama was at a town hall meeting earlier this week where he fielded questions about some difficult topics. One question came from a law school graduate who is struggling at age 30: “Is the American dream dead?”

This is an interesting question. One response to this guy, which I don’t think would really placate him or be charitable, would be to say that one personal case of difficulties does not mean the American Dream has disappeared. On the other hand, this question could lead to the question of whether the American Dream will be redefined in the future because of present economic and social realities.

One part of the American Dream that could complicate the future definition is that Americans tend to want better things for their children. It is fascinating to go back to community studies like Middletown and see in the 1920s how parents wanted their wanted their children to get ahead, primarily through education. What if this is no longer feasible for many? Perhaps the American Dream will simply level off for a while rather than continue to expand. But this would mean parents (and children) would need to change their expectations about what the future might hold.

Vested interests in the telling of history

Posted on by

In a recent class, we were discussing an article that talked about a number of issues of doing research after an event has happened. One of the main concerns was the vested interests of the respondents. Particularly, if the respondent were socially near to the event or phenomenon, their retelling is filtered through their own personal interests.

A classic example of this came across the news wires today: some new information that sheds light on why the Titantic hit an iceberg and then sank so quickly. A brief part of the story:

The Titanic hit an iceberg in 1912 because of a basic steering error, and only sank as fast as it did because an official persuaded the captain to continue sailing, an author said in an interview published on Wednesday.

Louise Patten, a writer and granddaughter of Titanic second officer Charles Lightoller, said the truth about what happened nearly 100 years ago had been hidden for fear of tarnishing the reputation of her grandfather, who later became a war hero.

Lightoller, the most senior officer to have survived the disaster, covered up the error in two inquiries on both sides of the Atlantic because he was worried it would bankrupt the ill-fated liner’s owners and put his colleagues out of a job.

I’ll be curious to see how quickly this new information can (or cannot) be corroborated.

The online “mega-reviewers”

Posted on by

One of the innovations of online stores is the ability for users to rate what they like and then for other users to base decisions or comment on those previous ratings. A site like Amazon.com is amazing in this regard; within a few minutes, a reader can get a much better idea about a product.

But statistics from Netflix, another site that allows user reviews, indicate that many users don’t rate anything while there is a small percentage of people who might be called “mega-reviewers”:

About a tenth of one percent (0.07%) of Netflix users — more than 10,000 people —  have rated more than 20,000 items. And a full one percent, or nearly 150,000 Netflixers, have rated more than 5,000 movies. By contrast, only 60 percent of Netflix users rate any movies at all, and the typical person only gives out 200 starred grades.

This rating pattern might fit a Poisson or a negative binomial regression where many people rate none or very few movies while there is a smaller percentage who rate a lot. (A useful statistic in helping to figure out the shape of the curve: while there is 40% that doesn’t rate anything, of the 60 percent who rate any movies at all, what is that median?)

The Atlantic talks to two of mega-reviewers who seem to motivated by seeing what the system would recommend to them after having all of their input. Interestingly, they suggest Netflix still recommends movies to them that they don’t like after watching them.

Examining the backlash against LeBron James through the prism of race

Posted on by

After making “The Decision” to join the Miami Heat, LeBron James has suffered a backlash from many fans and pundits. This backlash has led to a lower “Q score,” a rating that compares the public’s favorable versus unfavorable image of a public figure.

However, how much his Q score dropped is dependent on race: overall, whites were moved more to think negatively about LeBron after what happened this summer. Henry Abbott at Truehoop argues that something deeper, fear, might explain why whites reacted as they did. Also at ESPN, Vincent Thomas argues that James’  relatively unchanged Q scores among blacks is the result of “black protectionism.”

Searching for good colleges in the suburbs

Posted on by

Newsweek recently put together a list of desirable colleges. One of the lists is the “25 most desirable suburban schools.” A couple of questions:

1. Are there people who specifically search for a college because it is located in a suburb? I can see the appeal to many of applying to a college in a big city – but I doubt being located in a suburb tops many lists of what people are looking for in a college.

2. I would take issue with whether several of these schools are suburban schools. The University of Notre Dame? It may have its own address and zip code but it is basically surrounded by South Bend. The real suburbs of the area, a place like Granger, are miles away. The University of Virginia is located in Charlottesville, roughly 70 miles from Richmond. For these two cases, this is a very loose definition of a suburb.