The collider has to be some of the coolest science to come down the road in quite a while. But what I really loved was a collateral happening that goes along way to proving that science and the people practicing it are cool, too.
Meet Katie McAlpine, a Millennial whose efforts and interests have led her in a very short time to a fabulous job.
Katie graduated Michigan State University in 2007 with dual BAs in physics (with honors) and professional writing.
She has been the ATLAS E-News Journalist/Webmaster for ATLAS Collaboration, CERN since May.
Katie says, “I am an adventurer in the realm of ideas, and I have pitched my camp at a crossroads: the intersection of science and writing.” She also thinks that “science itself should be fun.”
More than that, Katie walks her talk as her well received Hadron rap video proves.
See more of Katie’s raps. Better yet, show/send them to all the kids you know.
Rhetoric is interesting; tell people the same thing for enough years and they’ll believe it’s true no matter the facts. This is especially true when it comes to political rhetoric.
For instance, everybody knows that Democrats are “tax and spend liberals,” whereas Republicans are “fiscal conservatives.” Right?
Oops, the numbers don’t seem to back that up.
First the deficit…
George W. Bush – $482 billion
Bill Clinton – $200+ billion
George Bush – $300 billion
Ronald Reagan – $200 billion
The other thing that everybody knows is that the economy does better under a Republican Administration than a Democratic one. Right?
In his new book Unequal Democracy, Princeton political science professor Larry M. Bartels analyzes the post-World War II era economy.
It will probably come as a surprise to many that “the United States economy has grown faster, on average, under Democratic presidents than under Republicans.”
Here are some pertinent snippets.
Data for the whole period from 1948 to 2007, during which Republicans occupied the White House for 34 years and Democrats for 26, show average annual growth of real gross national product of
“Over the entire 60-year period, income inequality trended substantially upward under Republican presidents but slightly downward under Democrats, thus accounting for the widening income gaps over all.
…families at the 95th percentile fared almost as well under Republican presidents as under Democrats (1.90 percent growth per year, versus 2.12 percent), giving them little stake, economically, in election outcomes. But the stakes were enormous for the less well-to-do. Families at the 20th percentile fared much worse under Republicans than under Democrats (0.43 percent versus 2.64 percent). Eight years of growth at an annual rate of 0.43 percent increases a family’s income by just 3.5 percent, while eight years of growth at 2.64 percent raises it by 23.2 percent.”
Although rhetoric and spin often fly in the face of facts they still take on a life of their own.
The lesson to be learned from all this, and the reason I brought it to your attention, is that you shouldn’t believe what ‘everybody’ knows, AKA, popular wisdom—not in politics, not in your company, not in advertising or anywhere else.
In the wake of current economic problems, if you do only one thing differently in the future than in the past, I hope that you’ll question rhetoric, check the facts and think for yourself.
In other words, if it walks like a goose and honks like a goose, it probably is a goose—even if “everybody” says it’s a duck.
Today is International Talk Like a Pirate Day with the goal to “unleash your inner buccaneer.”Black humor indeed, considering the financial headlines this week.
Wall Street not only unleashed its inner buccaneer, it walked the pirate talk to financially rape and pillage with nary a thought to the consequences.
Not that I think regulation always works, nor that Congress crafts good regulation, since it’s heavily influenced by lobbyists, PACs, and other special interests.
But assuming that “leaders” will act in the best interests of all is way beyond stupidity.
Moreover, we see it as we are on that particular day, at that particular minute, and it changes even as our MAP changes, minute to minute.
But those changes aren’t forced upon us—we have free choice regarding what to accept and what to reject.
Choosing means being aware, but by setting up three basic filters you can automate the process.
Life happens, people react and act out, but that doesn’t mean you have to let their act in.
Consider the source of the comment before considering the comment, then let its effect on you be in direct proportion to your respect for that source.
Use mental imagery to defuse someone’s effect on you. This is especially useful against intimidation. Do it by having your mental image of the person be one that strips power symbols and adds amusement—one that works well and that I’ve shared with many people over the years is to picture the person perched, straining, on the throne.
CandidProf is dealing with the aftermath of Ike—he’s fine, but has family in Houston; hopefully he’ll be back with us next week. (Read all of CandidProf here.) In the meantime…Last week, CandidProf cited new rules by the Dallas School District that, essentially, eliminated accountability from the classroom—“…students who flunk tests, blow off homework and miss assignment deadlines can make up the work without penalty…”
Hilariously, an article yesterday on the dismal state of grammar and spelling said “the State Board of Education in May adopted new curriculum standards, including greater emphasis on grammar instruction in Texas schools.” I wonder how that will match up with Dallas’ no accountability standard.
The article focuses on the spelling in signs, “cheep gas, No in-and-out priviliges,” and student writing.
“There is nothing wrong with my writing, maybe it is her that doesn’t know what she is doing.”
“After writing numerous papers I feel I have improved existentially.”
“He should not have taken that for granite.”
But don’t sit there and smugly assume that this is a Dallas or even a Texas problem, it’s global.
“A university lecturer in England says teachers should accept their students’ errors – Febuary instead of February or speach instead of speech. “Either we go on beating ourselves and our students up over this problem, or we simply give everyone a break,” Ken Smith wrote last month in the Times Higher Education Supplement.”
That lecturer would feel right at home in Dallas.
“Educators say these bungled words are a symptom of a deeper problem: Students aren’t learning grammar.”
Duh. Based on the writing I’ve seen both in and out of business, they haven’t been learning it for decades.
I guess this is what’s meant by a pebble turning into an avalanche.
Do you think that the Federally mandated no child left behind and associated funding cuts are improving the situation or do they inspire “just so they pass” rules similar to those from the Dallas Board?
You know how things stick in your mind? Last week Steve Roesler wrote a great post on the importance of ‘why’. It really resonated because I am such a why person—as opposed to a who/what/where/when type.
Steve asked “Why” Does This Matter?
Purpose and Context. That’s why.
The human condition requires context for what’s being asked or done.
“Why” Brings You Clarity and Confidence
He also says, “If you and I are at all alike, one immediate reaction to “Why?” is often defensiveness. (“How dare you question my thinking?”)”
(All of you looking to make “employee engagement” more than a buzzword should read Steve’s post.)
In last week’s article we discussed the tsunami of changes engulfing the business world this year and the next. However, the real issue is not external changes, but rather the internal changes you will make in your business. How will you adjust your business to take advantage of the opportunities that these external pressures will create? Ironically, even though these changes are unique, your responses to each have many common aspects. Consider five specific elements of your business:
Customers
Products and services
Employees
Processes
Suppliers
Each element provides a distinct opportunity for restructuring and realignment with the changes which will buffet your business now and on into 2009.
1. Restructure your customers.
You have a loyal customer base, which has served you well for many years. But you know that each customer has a different value profile. Use this opportunity to upgrade your customer base. Be ruthless in your expectations of customers.
Fire your lowest 10% customers. The marginal costs to serve them may already exceed any profits they generate. Raise prices to cover the marginal costs to serve these customers, and simultaneously invite these customers to shift a web-based, self-service model. Let the low-value customers walk away.
Shift your mid-range customers to self-service. Move these customers to your web-based, self-service model. Charge for any special services not available from the website. Charge for human interactions, especially for services that are already available on a self-service basis.
Expand services to your top 20% customers. Increase your direct interactions with these customers. Learn more about their needs. These customers will lead you to new services and increased value.
2. Redefine your products and services.
Move the entire order/fulfillment cycle to a web-based, self-service model. Expand high-value services and eliminate low-value products. Customers want complete customization, self-service, and immediate fulfillment. Be ruthless in your expectations of your own products and services. Specifically, consider these adjustments to your products and prices.
Information is more valuable than physical product. Increase the information content of your products. Include more services and analysis with your products.
Move the entire order and fulfillment process to the web.
Redesign your services for self-service customization, fulfillment and delivery.
Provide automated reporting of production and fulfillment status.
Negotiate long-term contracts with built-in price adjustments.
Offer additional value or services in return for price increases.
Offer reduced services in exchange for fixed prices.
Use your high-value customers to identify and develop new services.
Use your mid-range customers to understand and implement self-service order and fulfillment models.
Use your lowest 10% customers to find new products for price-sensitive users.
3. Redesign your internal business operations. Move your entire business online.
Your internal business already operates online, but a few hold-out processes may still operate manually. Be ruthless in finding these laggard processes and drive them online.
Increase automation across every aspect of the operation. Automate every manual operation. Us the automation tools already built-in to your computerized business systems.
Eliminate paper. Pieces of paper are visible red flags that indicate manual processes and extra expenses. Production and storage of paper is a significant operational cost, especially considering the cost of manually finding and retrieving information on paper. Use automation to eliminate paper and reduce manual processes.
Eliminate exceptions. Each exception requires significant time from an employee. It’s no surprise that exceptions create considerable paper. Eliminate or automate exceptions to reduce costs.
Charge the user for every exception. Whenever a customer or supplier creates an exception, charge for the extra service. If an employee creates an exception, charge that department. Better yet, assign the employee to eliminate the exception.
Drive reports online. Investigate every report your business produces. Is it necessary? Is it generated automatically? Is it delivered by email? Does it go to a customer? Why not?
Reduce your IT department. Make each employee responsible for configuring the applications that employee uses. If an application is not configurable, replace it.
Increase the training budget. Use external courses wherever possible. Develop your own internal training courses to teach employees how your company works.
By Wes Ball. Wes is a strategic innovation consultant and author of The Alpha Factor – a revolutionary new look at what really creates market dominance and self-sustaining success (Westlyn Publishing, 2008) and writes for Leadership turn every Tuesday. See all his posts here. Wes can be reached at www.theballgroup.com.
Why can’t every innovation be “disruptive?” Why can’t more companies come up with disruptive innovations? And why is it that many innovations that are disruptive only lay the groundwork for another competitor to take control and become the leading innovator?
I believe the answer is in the focus we place upon innovation.
All useful innovation starts with an idea that addresses an unmet functional need. Without that initiative, the idea will have little value to customers. “Good” innovations also create future growth potential by pointing the way to a “thread” of future innovations — a logical progression of innovations that build upon and improve the original innovation. Those that change the way much of an industry works are considered to be “disruptive.” But the most desirable innovations also allow the original innovator to maintain control over the innovation “thread,” rather than just creating opportunities for many other competitors, who may take control and become the leading future innovator. Maintaining control ensures the innovation thread will be sustainable for the original innovator.
Harley-Davidson was able to achieve this—until recently, no other competitor was able to overcome the hold H-D had on customer aspirations.
Apple may have with its iPod and iPhone. In fact, Apple seems to be making its innovation thread expand to encompass its entire product line with new products like the MacBook Air that share many of the characteristics of both the iPhone and the iPod.
BMW and Mercedes have been able to do this, as well.
In fact, most companies I refer to as Alpha companies do this to some extent, although most could do it even better.
We are talking about much more than functional innovation or branding or advertising or new distribution models or any of the typical things innovators might think to use to expand attractiveness and build loyalty and longevity to their innovation threads. We are talking about things that go beyond the traditional factors addressed in innovation, yet create significant and dramatic shifts in loyalty, aspiration to purchase, and willingness to pay more to own.
Almost any smart group of people can come up with a potentially disruptive idea that addresses unmet functional needs. Customers are certainly under-satisfied in most categories. The key is in understanding how to make that innovation yours, and not something others can improve upon, taking the lad away from you.
Here’s the problem: innovation is almost always too focused upon functionality, price, and delivery of benefits rather than the real core factors that create long-term, sustainable success.
What if Apple had decided to introduce the iPod in a traditional way, using functional performance as the sole innovation criteria? It still would have been new. It still would have made getting and listening to music easier and more “personal.” It still would have had iTunes. It still would have been a breakthrough that changed the way people buy and listen to music. It still would have made Apple the initial leader, but almost any competitor could have come out with a cheaper and perhaps better performing product that would have put Apple on the defensive. And isn’t that what we see happening to too many “good” ideas?
Luckily, Apple did not stop there. It also made its product with visual and tactile appeal — a seemingly superfluous addition, but the key to generating ego-satisfaction: the real key to sustainability. With those ego-satisfaction factors, it has been able to hold off numerous attacks and charge significantly more.
The “intelligent” cell phone is another great example. Blackberry was really the disruptive leader. Apple, however, “improved” upon it with ego-satisfaction factors that gave them the real leading position. They now have the opportunity to control the innovation thread from this point forward, IF they protect what got them there. The iPhone’s functionality was different, but not really “better” than that of the Blackberry. It just appealed to the ego-satisfaction side better and more fully that RIMM’s Blackberry product did. Now Blackberry, the original innovation leader, is on the defensive.
Alpha learning shows that disruptive innovation is only of value to the originating innovator, if ego-satisfaction becomes part of what is “proven” by the functionality of the disruptive innovation.
Every human needs three sets of things: physical minimums (safety/security), a sense of being cared for and valued (affection), and a purpose for being. For purposes of innovation, the Alpha model breaks them into Function, Self-satisfaction, and Personal significance. The reality of life is that humans cannot fulfill the satisfaction and significance elements easily, because they are typically based upon how they feel about their interactions with other people.
By understanding and focusing upon fulfillment of emotional satisfaction and personal significance, however, once functional performance has reached at least the minimum level required, the Alpha innovator dramatically magnifies the impact and value of innovation.
The result? Control and dominance over the future thread of innovation. After all, what good would be a disruptive innovation that just gets taken over by a competitor?
Don’t misunderstand: this is not suggesting that functional innovation is a waste of investment. You cannot create sustainable innovation by only addressing ego-satisfaction. It is just the way you dramatically enhance whatever innovation you create. It is also the way to filter ideas to make sure they will be sustainable, whether they are truly disruptive or not.
Almost all of the disruptive innovations we can think of are most obviously functional innovations. But the innovations that will really make your company’s future (and do it at the lowest initial and on-going investment) will come from adding the ego-satisfaction element to them. Such innovation is truly disruptive, because it changes everything in your favor, while competitors wonder what happened. In fact, in most cases, competitors are caught flat-footed for months, because they can’t understand what you even did to create such successful change. They are looking at the functionality but miss the ego-satisfaction elements as the really critical ones.
It also doesn’t just create a new functional solution that everyone can copy or improve upon. It creates a highly-defensible platform from which you can control much or all of your category, while competitors scramble to even come in second.
Entrepreneurs face difficulties that are hard for most people to imagine, let alone understand. You can find anonymous help and connections that do understand at 7 cups of tea.
Crises never end.
$10 really does make a difference and you’ll never miss it,
Black humor indeed, considering the financial headlines this week.
Hilariously, an 
You know how things stick in your mind? Last week Steve Roesler wrote a 
