I d not know why I do it, but I did it again. I picked up an economics books and read it. I have thoroughly enjoyed Friedman's books. It seems like others should be able to write compelling texts on economic theory. Stan J. Liebowitz and Stephen E. Margolis's book, Winners, Losers and Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology, is a two decade old book that found its way to my shelf and then my hands for reading. The authors were clearly penning for tenure. The book is somewhat patronizing, "Parts of the next three chapters may be a bit difficult..." (p. 47). It is very dry and loaded with economic theory.
The premise of the book is that the best products win. Best products are determined by the blending of quality, information and price. They passionately disabuse the reader of the concepts of monopolies protecting inferior products. Some of their theories ring true in the years since the publication. VHS tapes have been replaced with DVDs and streaming. MCI gave way to free long distance on cellular platforms.
In technology where new developments are constantly appearing, the existence of serial natural monopolies exist. They would argue that on-going concern about Microsoft in the marketplace is misplaced. As soon as a better product comes along they will be displaced.
I am not fully bought in to a system where the market best presents products to the people. The Flint, Michigan water story is a clear indicator that without checks and balances, a monopoly can do irreversible harm to the community. Does the size of Microsoft lead it to dominate the market in such a way that competitors are ineffective? Apple still offers strong competition. Open source browsing are still options for all. If people want, they can use alternative resources. For some reason we choose not to. Often it is because the big names are the perceived best.
If you can get through it, an interesting theory. Certainly thought provoking. I might dig out my 150 year old book on the merits of free market society versus protectionism. It is a series of essays touting one side or the other by many illustrious people including Adam Smith and Henry Clay.
Monday, August 31, 2020
Friday, August 28, 2020
First, Break all the Rules
I love audiobooks and yet, they are so challenging to digest content rich material from. (Perhaps that is due to the fact that I listen to them while doing something else.) Marcus Buckingham, Curt Coffman and Jim Harter book First, Break All the Rules: What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently, summarizes decades of research from Gallop about what makes a company, or the division of a company great. They found that there were four items that mark the difference and the largest contributor was the supervisor of the people.
After focus group analysis, they were able to identify twelve questions whose answers differentiate great managers from others. Much of it comes down to employee engagement. Two of these telling questions were: Do you have the materials you need to accomplish your job and do you know what you are expected to be doing? When there is a perceived absence of resources and people feel guideless, they tend to be less engaged and less effective at their jobs. They do not help a company excel. Two other questions of note were: Do you have a best friend at work and do you receive feedback every week about how you are doing? These questions hint at the atmosphere that is created- are you around people you like and do you know what you do well.
Overall the best managers commented that people don't change. You can teach new skills, but the basic talents cannot be changed. If someone is highly empathetic they will be a better nurse than someone who is not. If you are excellent at taking responsibility, you will excel at jobs where independent work is essential. These are talents that describe who a person is at their core. They are the traits that should be used by hiring managers to fill positions. People without talents in the necessary areas should be let go.
People can learn skills. How to use a new computer program, the protocol for administering a new medication, how to run the new washing machines. These are things that are trainable. Employers and managers should totally put training in the hands of those that need it. Deciding what is a skill versus a talent is essential. The book's appendix provides a list of a dozen talents that a person can have.
The best managers identify the strengths of their team members and leverage them. If someone is excellent at completing paperwork, they might do more paperwork than someone who struggles with getting jazzed about paperwork. If someone is excellent at cleaning a room in a hotel, they should moved up to management, they should be offered advancement in the role they excel at. Creating overlapping zones of pay is one way to demonstrate that even "low level" skills are valued. In a hotel chain, the best housekeeping staff do not move to management, but get paid more than their direct manager (at least at the low end of the supervision chain). In order to not cap people out of jobs, they suggest such a plan so that management is not the natural next step. Not everyone has the talents to be a good manager. People should be allowed to grow in areas where they excel, not be shuffled off to management areas where they do not get to do the things they are great at.
When I think about teaching, I see lots of areas for improvement. If a teacher has to wait between annual observations to be told how they are doing, they will not be able to maximize their skill sets. This is where walk throughs have value. This is also were team teaching and co-teaching provide opportunities for staff development. Teachers should be eligible for special opportunities in their areas of excellence. Perhaps that is mentoring other teachers, writing curriculum or managing restorative justice. All these areas need to be done and valued. The participants should receive feedback so that they know how things are going and support in growing in these areas. If you just focus on weaknesses, growth will be stunted. This is a lesson that we know about our students, but sometimes forget about our staff.
An interesting book. I wish I had a hard copy for paging through.
After focus group analysis, they were able to identify twelve questions whose answers differentiate great managers from others. Much of it comes down to employee engagement. Two of these telling questions were: Do you have the materials you need to accomplish your job and do you know what you are expected to be doing? When there is a perceived absence of resources and people feel guideless, they tend to be less engaged and less effective at their jobs. They do not help a company excel. Two other questions of note were: Do you have a best friend at work and do you receive feedback every week about how you are doing? These questions hint at the atmosphere that is created- are you around people you like and do you know what you do well.
Overall the best managers commented that people don't change. You can teach new skills, but the basic talents cannot be changed. If someone is highly empathetic they will be a better nurse than someone who is not. If you are excellent at taking responsibility, you will excel at jobs where independent work is essential. These are talents that describe who a person is at their core. They are the traits that should be used by hiring managers to fill positions. People without talents in the necessary areas should be let go.
People can learn skills. How to use a new computer program, the protocol for administering a new medication, how to run the new washing machines. These are things that are trainable. Employers and managers should totally put training in the hands of those that need it. Deciding what is a skill versus a talent is essential. The book's appendix provides a list of a dozen talents that a person can have.
The best managers identify the strengths of their team members and leverage them. If someone is excellent at completing paperwork, they might do more paperwork than someone who struggles with getting jazzed about paperwork. If someone is excellent at cleaning a room in a hotel, they should moved up to management, they should be offered advancement in the role they excel at. Creating overlapping zones of pay is one way to demonstrate that even "low level" skills are valued. In a hotel chain, the best housekeeping staff do not move to management, but get paid more than their direct manager (at least at the low end of the supervision chain). In order to not cap people out of jobs, they suggest such a plan so that management is not the natural next step. Not everyone has the talents to be a good manager. People should be allowed to grow in areas where they excel, not be shuffled off to management areas where they do not get to do the things they are great at.
When I think about teaching, I see lots of areas for improvement. If a teacher has to wait between annual observations to be told how they are doing, they will not be able to maximize their skill sets. This is where walk throughs have value. This is also were team teaching and co-teaching provide opportunities for staff development. Teachers should be eligible for special opportunities in their areas of excellence. Perhaps that is mentoring other teachers, writing curriculum or managing restorative justice. All these areas need to be done and valued. The participants should receive feedback so that they know how things are going and support in growing in these areas. If you just focus on weaknesses, growth will be stunted. This is a lesson that we know about our students, but sometimes forget about our staff.
An interesting book. I wish I had a hard copy for paging through.
Tuesday, August 11, 2020
Education of the gifted and talented
Sylvia B. Rimm, Del Seigle and Gary Davis' book, Education of the Gifted and Talented, is a textbook. I started reading it with some others who were not very familiar with G/T information and they were overwhelmed. For those with little knowledge of the subject when they pick it up, plan extra processing time. It is very information dense.
Each chapter begins with a list of objectives, continues with the informational section and ends with a comprehensive summary. A chapters contain an appendix with forms discussed in the chapter. 49 pages of references demonstrate the thorough research that went into the writing. This comprehensive text covers issues from identification to types of interventions for G/T students to special topics (ex. underachievement, gender issues, and 2e) to parenting, counseling and program evaluation.
Snippets of the text would be good to share with stakeholders to garner buy in for a program, to develop or improve a program, and to help parents and teachers better deal with the challenges that G/T brings to the equation. As a textbook, it is expensive and suggesting stakeholders purchase individual copies may be unreasonable.
One important note the authors make is that evaluation should include more than standardized tests on which "culturally different learners … tend to score, on average, about one standard deviation... lower than middle-class students" (p. 43). While IQ and achievement tests should be used as a definite in, they should not be used as a definite barrier to G/T programing. Other tests, like creativity assessments, as well as teacher and parent referrals should also be included in determining who to provide services to.
The authors do a wonderful job of highlighting a variety assessments, programs and evaluations that can be looked at when building a program.
Overall a text with a wealth of information that was a slow read and an useful resource.
Each chapter begins with a list of objectives, continues with the informational section and ends with a comprehensive summary. A chapters contain an appendix with forms discussed in the chapter. 49 pages of references demonstrate the thorough research that went into the writing. This comprehensive text covers issues from identification to types of interventions for G/T students to special topics (ex. underachievement, gender issues, and 2e) to parenting, counseling and program evaluation.
Snippets of the text would be good to share with stakeholders to garner buy in for a program, to develop or improve a program, and to help parents and teachers better deal with the challenges that G/T brings to the equation. As a textbook, it is expensive and suggesting stakeholders purchase individual copies may be unreasonable.
One important note the authors make is that evaluation should include more than standardized tests on which "culturally different learners … tend to score, on average, about one standard deviation... lower than middle-class students" (p. 43). While IQ and achievement tests should be used as a definite in, they should not be used as a definite barrier to G/T programing. Other tests, like creativity assessments, as well as teacher and parent referrals should also be included in determining who to provide services to.
The authors do a wonderful job of highlighting a variety assessments, programs and evaluations that can be looked at when building a program.
Overall a text with a wealth of information that was a slow read and an useful resource.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)