State IT watchers will be interested in this: the President of the Hawai’i State Senate has tapped a senator to serve as the chamber’s Majority Technology Leader, a newly created role.
My understanding is that this would not be a policy position, but instead the Majority Technology Leader would likely serve as the internal subject-matter expert for the Hawai’i Senate’s legislative technology processes.
One of the challenges faced by all IT departments is communication with the end user (always exacerbated when the end user is also the executive decision-maker!). In this situation, where the end users are the state senators, they have been forward-thinking enough to appoint one of their own, as a technology thought leader and liaison. I suspect this will create an increasingly open and productive dialogue, which is always helpful in a complicated business environment like a state legislature.
If this ends up a trend that other state chambers elect to follow, it could contribute significantly to the overall effectiveness of state government technology. And in the meantime, it certainly will benefit the legislative IT team in the Hawai’i Senate.
Today, Seth Godin posted an idea about marketing that, at its core, is blindingly obvious (”it’s harder to change people’s minds than it is to sell them something they already want”)… and yet Godin’s packaging of the idea is quite clever. (Just the sort of thing you’d expect to see, really, from a chap who sells lots and lots of books based on his ability to tidily package marketing concepts into digestible ideas and images.)
The crux of the post is that gravity is something that people can see working immediately. They might not know how or why, just that it does… making it vastly easier to believe in (or to buy, if you will). Whereas evolution — the science of which most people do grasp and understand — takes milleniums to reveal itself. Therefore it’s a harder sell, and even susceptible to refutation. People have a hard time buying into that which they can’t see, even if they know intellectually that it’s correct or reasonable.
It’s a fine idea and I’m sure will make a fine book one day. But my argument is with Godin’s takeaway: “When in doubt, market gravity.”
Read more…
After all is said and done, downmarket American humorist Dave Barry nails the real true takeaway from the election:
In analyzing the results of Tuesday’s historic election, the question we must ask ourselves, first and foremost, is: what the heck were the results of Tuesday’s historic election?
I personally don’t know. The Miami Herald made me send in this analysis before the election was actually over, so that it could be printed in a timely manner…
…We are bitterly divided, because whoever wins, roughly half of us will despise the other half, and vice versa.
You know what I miss? I miss 1960. Not the part about my face turning overnight into the world’s most productive zit farm. What I miss is the way the grown-ups acted about the Kennedy-Nixon race. Like the McCain-Obama race, that was a big historic deal that aroused strong feelings in the voters. This included my parents and their friends, who were fairly evenly divided, and very passionate. They’d have these major honking arguments at their cocktail parties. But unlike today, when people wear out their upper lips sneering at those who disagree with them, the 1960s grown-ups of my memory, whoever they voted for, continued to respect each other and remain good friends.
What was their secret? Gin. On any given Saturday night they consumed enough martinis to fuel an assault helicopter. But also they were capable of understanding a concept that we seem to have lost, which is that people who disagree with you politically are not necessarily evil or stupid. My parents and their friends took it for granted that most people were fundamentally decent and wanted the best for the country. So they argued by sincerely (if loudly) trying to persuade each other. They did not argue by calling each other names, which is pointless and childish, and which constitutes I would estimate 97 percent of what passes for political debate today.
What I’m saying is: we, as a nation, need to drink more martinis.
No, you know what I’m saying. I’m saying, now that this election is over, whatever the hell happened, can we please grow up and stop being so nasty to each other? Please?
I try to make this point aloud when possible, but the opportunity doesn’t arise all that often. It’s disheartening that we’ve allowed partisanship to get in the way of friendly (even if spirited. Ahem) dialogue. We have to stop demonizing The Other Side, and we have to stop settling for the lowest common denominator in our conversations about politics, government and current events.
Also, more martinis. 
With the Texas Legislature just three months from convening its 81st Session, my thoughts turn to Austin, and what the legislative climate will be on January 13, 2009.
I assume that energy and the current state of the economy will both be a strong theme in bills filed; if John and Jane Doe are feeling the pain on Main Street, I guarantee you they’ll call their representatives and ask them to take action (regardless of how much a state official can affect national affairs).
But November 4 will matter as well. 15 Senate seats are up for re-election, and all 150 House seats are on the ballot as well.
I’m no longer in the business of handicapping legislative races (well, unless you’ve hired me to do so!)… but one thing’s certain: November 5 is going to be one chaotic morning in the City of the Violet Crown!
And I’ll tell you that one for free. 
On NPR’s Fresh Air program yesterday, there was a segment about the vast amount of data that consumers generate in this digital age, and how savvy number-crunchers can use it to control our very consumption. Supermarkets, for example, are seeking ways to identify the shoppers they call “barnacles” — those that only come in to avail of extreme discounts — in order to get rid of them, so they can focus on high-end purchasers.
The theory flies in the face of my style of marketing, which is driven by the core idea that relationships trump all — and that even if a customer or client isn’t the most financially productive in your stable… wouldn’t you usually rather have them in your stable, than your competitor’s?
Obviously, there are exceptions here; the 80-20 rule comes to mind… especially if it’s 20% of your customers using 80% of your resources. There are always “problem children” who end up creating a net deficit, and certainly implementing processes that help recruit a higher quality of customer is a fine strategy.
But overall, I guess what bothers me most about this data collection trend is that it glorifies the reduction of all consumers to spreadsheets, figures, forecasts and actuarial tables. It seems to completely eliminate the human aspect of the business relationship. And ultimately, wouldn’t that eliminate all notion of brand?
This has been a busy week for management of family (and friends that might as well be). Hurricane Ike did quite a number on Houston and Galveston (this is a very good photo gallery, if you haven’t seen pictures), and everyone I know down there has had some sort of property damage, and almost all have been without power and water.
Those who do have power and/or water still can’t get gasoline — lines at the stations are at a 2-hour wait now — so they are fairly house-bound. Those who do have gasoline can’t get bread or milk or fresh vegetables, as the shops are all out. Lots of hunkering down and making do going on down there right now. Those are all small problems to have compared to losing life, so I’ll take Ike over Katrina or Allison or even Alicia, any day!
Some of my people came up to Dallas, so having the time to help them out (actually being here in town!) has been a blessing. And there have been all manner of school meetings and activities as well… events I ordinarily would have missed at this time of year. Somehow, it just worked out that I’m right where I need to be.
Just got home from the NALIT Professional Development Seminar in Louisville. It was a good conference and a fun week, even if it was a little bittersweet — I was giving the news of my job change to many of the friends I’ve made during the last couple of years of my involvement with the NALIT community. I’m sure it’s not goodbye forever, though… legislative junkies always end up running in the same circles after all. Read more…
A few years ago Greg Brenneman was asked to give some advice to MBA students thinking about the next step in their careers. “If you have a chance of working for a healthy company or a sick one,” he wrote, “choose the sick one. The sickest ones need the best doctors and it’s a lot easier to stand out in a company that needs help.” He should know. Throughout his career, Mr Brenneman has gone looking for trouble—first as head of the corporate-turnaround practice at Bain, a consulting firm, and then in a succession of senior roles, including stints at Continental Airlines, Burger King and Quiznos, two American fast-food chains.
Each of these three businesses was going through a difficult time when Mr Brenneman came on board—he described Continental as “the world’s worst $6 billion company” before joining it—and at each he applied a similar approach to sorting out its problems. His tactics, which may provide inspiration for those managers whose firms are struggling in the economic downturn, have impressed private-equity partners. On August 19th Mr Brenneman stepped down as chief executive of Quiznos (though he has become its executive chairman) to take up a new role as chairman of CCMP Capital Advisors, a private-equity firm.
I read this Economist article about Greg Brenneman on the plane yesterday, and already have mentioned it to two people in conversations on wholly different subjects. The idea that we can not only acknowledge that business isn’t always a fairy tale, but that “doctors” can even specialize in curing the ailments, struck me as very refreshing — specifically Brenneman’s comment about the choice between a healthy company or a sick one. Problem solving as a career path… who knew?
(In the interest of telling both sides of this story: many Quiznos insiders don’t agree that Brenneman was the be-all end-all solution for this particular company — one with a long and well-documented history of unsatisfactory treatment of its franchisees. What interested me about Greg Brenneman was not his work specifically for Quiznos, but his reputation as a “corporate turnaround specialist.”)
The other night, the spouse and I were unwinding in our usual style: watching 38 commercial-free minutes of a pre-recorded “hour-long” network TV drama, him manning the remote control in order to skip through the ads. (He gets to “drive” because he’s faster on the trigger and has excellent timing.)
“Waitwaitwait. Can you rewind? I want to actually watch that commercial.”
“Which one?”
“Wal-Mart. I think they changed their logo.”
Read more…
[This is a post of mine from a now-defunct blog, used here as a test post. ~ Ed. 08-26-2008]
At Wired, Steven Johnson rebuts the idea that we are truly living in a snack culture, with “Snacklash: In Praise of the Full Meal“:
Snack culture is an illusion. We have more of everything now, both shorter and longer: one-minute movies and 12-hour epics; instant-gratification Web games and Sid Meiers Civilization IV. Freed from the time restrictions of traditional media, we’re developing a more nuanced awareness of the right length for different kinds of cultural experiences. You don’t need an hour and a half of Saturday Night Live when you can get two minutes of “Lazy Sunday” or “Dick in a Box.” For that kind of humor, the older, extended format turns out to be excessive. On the other hand, if you’re craving a really satisfying, complex crime narrative, two hours is too short. Yes, it sometimes seems as if we’re living off a cultural diet of blog posts and instant messages - until we find ourselves losing an entire weekend watching season three of The Wire. The truth is, we have more snacks now only because the menu itself has gotten longer.
The bold emphasis is mine, as its the clear takeaway for me: Find the right length and medium for the message… and don’t assume it’s always the shortest.
←Older Newer→
I make no promises about quantity or quality of posts... when real life gets busy, online goes quiet. All opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone. Don't hold them against anyone else!