Twitter: Too much info

After reading an article on fastcompany.com on Monday, April 20, 2009 about people and their twitter accounts, I am still laughing. I always knew there were a lot of dumb people in the world but seriously. I think twitter is a great social media outlet and I think it is cool to let people know what you are doing throughout the day, but limit what the general public can see. Who in his right mind would go on a website that his boss just caught him on, and post a remark about him on the same day? Do you not think that he will log on and check on your status again? Duh! The reality is that the majority of the business world is familiarizing themselves with social media and it has proven to be a useful tool in business; therefore, it should be used with business manners. It is not necessary to put all of your personal business out in the open. Is it really worth losing your job over. The answer is simple, when you twitter at work, keep it clean!

Can Newspapers Be Saved?

Cliff Kuang published an article on fastcompany.com on April 15, 2009 pertaining to the question of whether or not newspapers can be saved by simply redesigning the layout. Past studies have illustrated success of a circulation increase from a Great Britain paper who recently changed its design aspect. Many people tend to think magazines will far outlast newspapers because it is appealing, something you can hold in your hand and relate to. So it should make sense for newspapers to follow magazine format, right? The downfall of the idea of a layout change comes down to cost issues. A layout change for the newspapers would be very expensive. Not to mention the increase of costs in color printing on every page, but is the expense not worth it. If the changes are not made, what price is going to be paid? Will we lose newspapers forever? Can a price really be put on such a staple in American History? Well some suggestions I can think of would be to move the entire source of paper to electronic versions. This way, printing would not even be a factor. If the buyer wants to print a hard copy, it would be his/her cost, not the papers. Also, if newspapers are not fully ready to let go of the printing of newspapers, they could have the staff on hand, or hire interns to redesign the papers. This would dramatically cut down on the costs of the papers. I personally think redesigning the paper is worth a shot, what does the industry have to lose? There is only room for improvement, so go for it!

Trend Alert... Plastic is the New Black!

What's next? I recently read an article on fastcompany.com entitled "Armani Meets Dasani." I think my mouth is still wide open. What in the world will people come up with next. I am all for saving the environment and recycling and researching new energy-efficient methods to apply in our daily lives, but a plastic suit? Until I read this article I wasn't even aware there was a suit for men that was made of recycled PET bottles! I cannot imagine that it is a popular selling item. Plastic bottles? A suit from plastic bottles? Lol!!! I consider myself to be a very trendy woman, but I am not certain that I can say I would ever purchase a clothing item made from plastic bottles. Accessories, maybe, but not clothing. I am in agreement with the author of the article, Ariel Schwartz; although this may be recycling, how is the elaborate process cutting down on energy emissions? Bettering the environment does not consist of fixing one problem but contributing to another in the process. I think Debenham's needs to go back to the drawing board on this one. I appreciate the effort and it was a nice thought, but I am definitely not a fan of this idea and don't think I can be convinced otherwise.

The Cost of Stylish Yoga...

After reading Luluemon's Cult of Selling in Fast Company's April 2009 issue, I learned of a brand of clothing specifically targeted to yoga participants. I have never taken a yoga class, but I am an avid gym goer. Having never heard of this brand, I am intrigued by its supporters. The owner of this company has not just made a label of clothing, but a whole society, out of a tank top. It starts with purchasing clothes and ends in taking seminars to better your life. I definitely see the emergence of a cult via this brand, but who's to say its a bad thing? At least the goal of the company is to better the life of its followers. No harm is being done by luring people into a lifestyle that makes them feel good about themselves, as long as the company stays honest about its intentions.
I don't know that I agree with the company's intentions of branching out to swimwear and running wear. I think the company found its niche with yoga wear and it is sending the message that they are more interested in adding profits than to staying loyal to its yoga market. This aspect has the possibility to turn some of its followers off and shedding a negative light on the company. My advice, stick with what you know.

Where Does the Buck Stop?

Dan and Chip Heath composed an article entitled Why Customers Will Pay You to Restrain Them on Wed Mar 18, 2009. I found this article rather interesting on a couple of notes. I myself LOVE to spend money on wants and needs, but more so on wants. On one hand, I feel offering a service to lead people in living the life they desire is a great thing. If someone wants to lose weight, sure it would be easier to have restaurants deny them certain foods. But what are we teaching people? One problem in today's society is that things are too easy on some people. So if we start charging people to help them keep from doing certain things in their lives, we are sending the message of "if you have money, then you can be worry free." But in making life easier on some people, we are making life harder for those that are going to have to cater to them. So where does it end? When are we going to take responsibility and develop will power? Our society needs to learn things are not always easy and hard work eventually (and hopefully) will pay off.

Just 1 More Version Please!

I read an article on fastcompany.com written by Kit Eaton on Thu Mar 19, 2009 pertaining to and upgrade of Internet Explorer.
It seems that every time I get onto the Internet there is some new version of some program available! When is enough, enough? I think it is good to make improvements and software, I just think the creators take it and run! Not to mention that every time a new version of software is introduced I have to stop and take the time to find a compatibility package just to view a document or a window of the Internet. In my opinion, these are just ways to cause consumers, who honestly pay for the packages of software we use, to have to come out of pocket every month and its ridiculous! I always vow to abstain from buying new programs or uploading newer versions of software but in the end I am somewhat forced to do so in order to keep communication up. Leave it alone already!! Once every few years is ample for updates!!

Are Incentives Really A Good Thing?

Incentives, in my opinion, cloud the goal in today's business world. Although they are meant to drive business upward and motivate employees to work harder to reach a set goal incentives cause people to cut corners and in turn cause less efficient work to be produced. The business world, much like the everyday world, has become greedy and money focused. Yes, I agree making money is key but no at the expense of quality work and customer satisfaction. When you are employed by a company that is your team and you all should be working towards a similar goal, not under handing one another in order to get your promised "bonus". I am not saying incentives never work but they should not be what causes employees to come to work everyday. Incentives, to me, are rewards for quality work and are not supposed to be the focus of your job. Businesses should reevaluate the entire system of incentives and look for alternatives so they are not the main focus of the company and the people who work for them. One possible way to achieve the desired result is to offer incentives only after the target has been met. Surprise your employees and reward them for their good work only after you have seen the finished product. This will cause them to focus on performing well and can make for better, more efficient business.

not-for-everyone

I read an article in the February 2009 issue of Fast Company written by Nancy Lublin called "No Vacancy". I completely agree that not-for-profit is not a second rate employment opportunity. As the economy worsens on an almost daily basis people are scrounging to locate jobs that they once would have never considered. Just because not-for-profits professionals make less of a salary than most top executive's doesn't mean they are any less skilled. Actually, the majority of the not-for-profit's are most likely better at their jobs because they are doing what they do because they have have a passion for it, not for the top dollars they are earning. So now that they "big dogs" are down and out they are turning to the "bottom of the totem pole" to help them climb back up. I think anyone who would not have considered a not-for-profit position prior to the economic downturn should be ashamed to cry to them for help now. Either way, I am sure there are not many, if any, positions available now.

Whirl of Green

I read an article in Fast Company magazine, February 2009 edition, by Melanie Warner called Gust of Hope. The article informed me of a town, Sweetwater, Texas, that runs power using the wind. I think this is so cool! I have heard of solar energy and going green but I was not aware an entire town could run just because the wind blows. Even better, the farmer that was interviewed, Jon Bergstrom, tells of how much of a tax break the residents within this town get due to the alternate form of electricity. Now that I know this is possible, I definitely feel that the government needs to start looking into implementing some alternate power sources. We are trying to make all these cuts and stimulate the economy but we continue to do what has already been tried and it never has worked and is not going to magically fix things. Alternate power sources would be a permanent fix to the problem. In saying all of this, I understand a plan such as this one would take a long period of time to completely implement but what is the harm in beginning to research how it could work, and how much money could be saved. Not to mention all the environmental problems that could be eliminated with such new developments. All I'm saying is that it's worth a shot.

Prioritize Your Inbox

Reengineer Your Inbox
By: Robert Scoble
Fast Company, February 2009 ed.

I have to say I am very excited to hear about this addition to outlook email. The most annoying thing of my day at work and even with my school email is to have to read all of the emails I get only to find it was all non-essential information. People have gone e-mail crazy within the past few years. Now everything people think is put into and message and sent to everyone on their contact list. It’s ridiculous! Oh, and those chain letters. I do not have enough time in a day to forward all these chain letters to so many people just so I won’t “be unlucky in life”, or whatever else those letters wish on the receiver. The addition of ClearContext, Gist and Xobni will definitely help “weed” out all of the unnecessary email and allow people who have business to attend to get to the important emails, and the idea of being able to pull up important phone numbers and the click of one button is genius. These programs are long overdue but I, for one, am just thankful to hear someone finally thought of this.

BPA

I find it very alarming that the government is more concerned with dollars than with human life. Until now, I have never heard of BPA but now that I have it certainly scares me. There is no telling how much of this I have consumed throughout my lifespan and to find out the substance can be related to cancer and other diseases, wow! I now have to not only worry about birth defects to my children by natural causes but by some chemical the government refuses to regulate. I don't understand why the people who are responsible for the safety of this country continue to ignore problems relating to chemicals. Do they not understand that regulating chemical use in substances that are being produced would save them money? It's obvious to people such as myself that cancers and diseases are up more than ever and I personally blame it on the way our food products and such related items are being produced. In the economy we are living in today, the government is paying for health care for an increased number of people, so it makes sense to me that they would want to keep the population as healthy as possible. To know that I may be hurting my body just by taking a drink from a soda can amazes me. Now I am aware that I do not just have to worry about the foods and drinks I'm consuming, but also about what they come in. As for babies, I cannot believe human kind is so dis-concerned with the way our children are harmed. I mean, drinking from a bottle can cause adverse side effects and nothing is being done to stop it. The scientists that are government employed put their integrity to the side to make extra money and I for one think that is appalling. Reading this article makes me angry and sad. People are willing to risk the lives of other to make a few thousand dollars and its sickening. The scientists that are responsible for the lies aren't the ones who are having to deal with the mess they are causing. They know from their research how harmful BPA is to the human body and therefore are able to avoid it. The public however takes the word of these same scientists and continue to use the products containing these toxins. As for the scientists that are working to prove the "crooked" ones wrong, good for you. I am glad to know there are still some decent people in the world that value human life.