An Bui, Spelled An With 1 N

About a year ago, Richard Thompson Ford published The Race Card: How Bluffing About Bias Makes Race Relations Worse. It’s definitely worth reading and thinking about. Ford makes the distinction that accusations of racial discrimination (1) distracts from serious racial injustices, and (2) confuses social conflict with bigotry, diminishing the meaning behind charges of bigotry. 

This morning, I read an article, “Pretty Women Can Be Hard to be Friends With” that got me thinking about Ford again:

That stuff made me feel terrible most of the time and I don’t want anyone knowing what that’s like. Instead, I try to be kind to every person, regardless of how popular/attractive/smart they are, and not be a brownnoser, ever.

It’s striking to me, though, how not being a kiss-up has ruined my friendships with some very pretty women. In fact, my only friendship Titanics have happened when I’ve stood up to extraordinarily beautiful women and lost out. “The Pretty Girl” wanted me to play by her rules; I didn’t want to do it, so Pretty Girl read me the friendship riot act and ditched me. Forever.

Um, REALLY?!? The author offers up only anecdotal evidence. Correlation does not imply causation and statements such as these only serve to reinforce stereotypes. After I read the article, I realized that sometimes, people act entitled, are rude, self absorbed or narcissistic. 

Why be friends with people who treat you badly? Each individual can only control him or herself, not anyone else. Just flip the bit and get rid of those who don’t add to your life. If Ms. Pretty treats people poorly and you don’t tolerate it, you don’t need to have Ms. Pretty in your life. That’s ok. Those who allow Ms. Pretty to treat them terribly - that’s their choice. It doesn’t affect you. 

Focusing on looks detracts from the actual problem - rude behavior. It’s not about the pretty. Focusing on the superficial detracts from the actual substantive issue at hand.

Recently, Oxygen aired back-to-back episodes of America’s Next Top Model, Cycle 11. From 14 contestants, one would become America’s Next Top Model.

Great background noise to do chores to, I thought. Turns out, ANTM provides lessons applicable in wider contexts, beyond fashion.

Three Lessons on Being Fierce

1. Own Your Awkwardness

The ability to own one of her personal characteristics helped Marjorie go fairly far into the competition. By taking charge of her physical awkwardness, Marjorie turned it into something beautiful.

Understanding and working with your weaknesses can help  you get closer to your goals.

2. Go with the Flow

Episode after episode, the judges gave Elina feedback about having too much control. They wanted to see her let go a bit more. She was eventually eliminated because of her control issues - her photos, while beautiful, didn’t really improve, in part because she didn’t listen to feedback.

Going with the flow requires you to be open to experiences as they present themselves. These experiences lead to growth if you’re willing to learn, evolve, and change. If you’re controlling every experience, your opportunities to learn are limited, since you’re setting reasonable expectations around outcomes.

3. Complacency can mean the End of the Road

Clarke went from having the top photo one week to being eliminated the next. How did this happen? She said she only needed one good photo - she went through most of her shots and at the end, her best photo just wasn’t good enough.

Falling into the complacent mindset caps one’s growth and can lead to being left back on JV when the rest of the team makes Varsity.

The NYT’s “The Choice” blog recently posted some advice entitled: “Free Fashion Advice for College Inverviews, From a $15,000 Consultant” and my first thought? Seriously?!? You’ve got to be KIDDING me. A “free” fashion show modeling looks from Greenwich’s Rugby by Ralph Lauren store?

I have nothing against college admissions consulting and nothing against college admissions consulting at that price point.  I do, however, balk at advice given by admissions consultants that add very little value to parents and kids already worried about the college admissions process. With my experience helping kids get into college from my years with The Princeton Review and as a Swarthmore College Alumni Interviewer, I present to you…

“Free Admissions Interview Advice From an $100/hour Consultant”

1. Play up your assets. This does not mean cleavage, legs, or broad shoulders. This means highlight parts of who you are that you think are important. This can be lessons you’ve learned from leadership roles, participation in groups or communities, or classes you found interesting and why. Regarding dress, wear what you’re comfortable in and something that communicates how seriously you’re taking the interview. If that’s a suit, that’s a suit. If it’s a cute, knee length skirt with a modest top, then skirt and top it is.

2. Highlight FIT, not HAIR. Ok, highlights in your hair can be super cute as well as make you look polished and professional, which is always appreciated. More important that great hair is highlighting how you fit in with the college culture. Prospective students can divine a bit of college culture from admissions brochures, online resources like the Princeton Review, and connections w/ current students via Facebook.

As an interviewer, I’m asking myself “Is this student one I see at Swarthmore, and one I see being successful at Swarthmore?” I find that students answer that question in the natural course of the conversation.

3. Make it easy for admissions officers to want you for the class. Think about how you’ve been contributing to your school, community, and other organizations. Think in terms of measurable impacts you’ve made. Be REALLY clear about what you’re looking to get out of a college experience, even if it’s “I’m looking to learn about what I want to learn about.” Connect the experiences you’ve had with how you see yourself contributing to the college community.

If you’re looking to have a fairly active social (read: partying, drinking, etc.) life, think about what you’re willing to do when you’re not partying, drinking, etc. You might want to consider taking a gap year if you consider college a four year party. At $200k/BA at a private school, that’s a pretty pricey cover charge.

Last words of advice:

Remember, college admissions committees are putting together a well-rounded class, not necessarily a class of well-rounded individuals. They want a group who can bring out the best in each other and contribute to the academic, athletic, artistic, etc community and culture of the college. If you’re an all-around rock star in all of the above, continue to be so. If you’re all-around mediocre in all of the above, you might want to think about spending your time going deep and being amazing at the one you’re most passionate about, be it school, a volunteer program, a sport, or an activity.

Yes, college admissions is getting more competitive each year. However, if you focus on the fundamentals: doing well in classes and standardized tests, contributing in class and the community, and genuinely being interested in finding a great fit for college, then you’ll be fine in the process.

One of my favorite professors once said:

Focus on the process. You can control the process. The minute you start thinking about the outcome, you’re screwed.

Columbia University, Rodin's Thinker, via flickr user wallyg

Yesterday, Mark C. Taylor, chair of Columbia’s religion department, wrote in a NYT Op-Ed piece, End the University as We Know It:

GRADUATE education is the Detroit of higher learning. Most graduate programs in American universities produce a product for which there is no market (candidates for teaching positions that do not exist) and develop skills for which there is diminishing demand (research in subfields within subfields and publication in journals read by no one other than a few like-minded colleagues), all at a rapidly rising cost (sometimes well over $100,000 in student loans).

From this controversial opening, Professor Taylor argues for a hgher education system that follows an interdisciplinary, collaborative model that mobilizes scholars around problems and produces scholarship in a more consumable fashion. 

Social media applications/tools have enabled its users to do what Professor Taylor is advocating. Twitter enables the rapid mobilization to address problems. Wikis result in information in a consumable fashion via real time collaboration. All of this consumer generated media (CGM) creates a body of knowledge whose value comes from the integration of various perspectives. Holding the appropriate context and understanding how the various pieces fit should be a driving force in these collaborative processes.

Do graduate students and scholars miss the point if they think that their training prepares them only for the profession of their graduate degree, be it academia, journalism, law, planning, business, etc.?

Yes. Absolutely yes if they cannot connect what they know and what they are learning to value creation and problem solving. Thinking about the process of learning, what is being learned and what that means are some of the values of a liberal arts education. Does this create students who can apply their skills in different contexts?  Will these students have more options than those who cannot?

Professor Taylor leaves us with valuable advice: 

“Do not do what I do; rather, take whatever I have to offer and do with it what I could never imagine doing and then come back and tell me about it.” 

Applying this entrepreneurial perspective higher ed will enable it to evolve with society.

Shannon Paul brought up some great points about how Twitter helps her be effective. In a nutshell, Twitter helps Shannon (and many of us) by helping us connect the dots to solve problems/address issues by allowing access to socially vetted information. 

In other words, collaborate in a distributed fashion.

Why is this important? Because geography is a less of a barrier to information acquisition. 

You should read Shannon’s original post - she’s spot on in the ways Twitter aids professional productivity and effectiveness and her commentors are pretty smart as well. 

um, except me. From my comment on Shannon’s blog:

Blocking access to Twitter and other social networks /definitely/ inhibits an employee’s ability to be effective.

Blocking Twitter and other social networks is about limiting risk and liability… all employees are a liability… the question is to what degree?

There are arguments for and against open communication into and out of an organization…

I had marked <corporate hat> around my comment about limiting risk and liability, but it got stripped out. Understanding why leadership may take a certain policy view can help us communicate with them why tools like Twitter can enable not inhibit professional productivity. 

However, I have yet to crack the nut on how to minimize data/information leakage, especially concerning sensitive, confidential information. This problem likely limits collaboration with external parties.  

Does anyone have any ideas?

  

Robert Matsui United States Federal Courthouse by flickr user Rojer

IMO, blog policies R 2 make legal dept feel better, the style guide is more important 2 me when comes 2 work blog #blogchat 

The above comment came out of last night’s #blogchat, hosted by Mack Collier. Later that night, I read an article in the WSJ, entitled “Corporate Blogs and ‘Tweets’ Must Keep SEC in Mind: Social Media Offer Immediacy and Spontaneity to Communications but Risk Running Afoul of Regulations.” From the article:

Blogs and tweets can run afoul of Securities and Exchange Commission regulations on corporate communications. But sanitizing such posts risks hurting credibility with online audiences.

Hrm. blog policies and post sanitation aren’t just to make legal departments feel better (although they probably do) - they protect the organization and its employees. Because organizations are held to different standards than consumers and those standards depend on the type of organization, I understand why companies take their time regarding social media adoption. 

That said, organizations like Dell, EBay and Comcast have done an amazing job adopting a social media strategy.

What About Startups?

Startups have a unique advantage when it comes to blogging - they aren’t publicly traded so they aren’t subject to the same SEC regulations on corporate communications. 

Startups can be scrappy, making much out of very little, figuring out how to get more for their money. The runway is only so long and business considerations like user acquisition, monetization, scalability and revenue generation tend to be high priority. 

Blogging, while time intensive, consistently generates fresh content for search engines while sharing the organization’s story, thoughts, opinion and values. That said, startup bloggers should also watch what they say… litigation ties up resources, such as time & capital, and can distract from progress on user acquisition, revenue generation, etc.

Keep the style guide in one hand and your legal-approved blog policy in the other. Be bold, yet thoughtful.

If your online audience is turned off by you protecting yourself, use your blog and your tweets to explain to them why you need to include the un-fun* language. Alternatively, you can take a page from Virgin America’s book and figure out how to add the fun back.

*as used here, fun refers to unsantitized content. Your brand personality may or may not be fun. Write in your own brand voice, as it makes sense for you.

Annually, US News publishes its rankings of higher ed institutions and programs. In its online content about graduate programs, I discovered an article by Frank H. Wu, entitled Why Law School Is for Everyone.

Within the article, Wu disabuses readers of the idea that the legal profession reflects the picture painted by Boston Legal or LA Law. A more accurate picture includes document review, research, deal making, ethical questions and billing clients - a more accurate and much less glamourous picture. 

Dean Wu writes: 

[I]n reality, legal reasoning demonstrates the power of rational thought…Professors are realizing that they ought to cultivate multiple intelligences, not limited to the technical logic of analogizing and distinguishing precedent and hypothetical fact patterns. They see that the Juris Doctor program at its best continues the well-rounded liberal arts curriculum, presenting an array of intellectual challenges…Whether [law-schooled individuals] ever appear in court or draft a will, they will have been well served by learning how to stand up and speak out. They have been inspired by a sense of civil rights as well as civic responsibilities. They are ready to become leaders.

Courtesy of the NYT:

For a sixth-year associate at a New York law firm, $80,000 isn’t exactly competitive pay. But for someone cruising around the world, doing good wherever she sees fit and, let’s face it, probably hitting a beach or two, the pay is excellent.

Only in a financial world turned upside down would an arrangement like this one make sense. Looking to cut costs like everyone else, but not prepared to lay off employees, Skadden has chosen instead to offer all of its associates — about 1,300 worldwide — the option of accepting a third of their base pay to not show up for work for a year. (So far, the partners have no equivalent arrangement.)

The company is helping associates find pro bono work, and is encouraging them to do so.

Um, wow. This is an excellent opportunity for Skadden’s associates to try and to learn new things. International pro bono work sounds fantastic. 

from flickr user edgeplot

I wonder how many others are taking the opportunity to explore new things that they previously put off? What about other industries or verticals? How many of us are taking advantage of the opportunities we have to push ourselves and grow? 

Granted, not all of us will draw 1/3 of our base salary to travel the world and do pro bono. For those of us lucky enough to have the flexibility to pursue a less traditional path, embrace it.