A Bit of Pollyanna

Written by Nan S. Russell


"Stop being such a Pollyanna," a trusted, more experienced colleague counseled as we tookrepparttar long route back to my office. He had just witnessed my project idea annihilated as co-workers eagerly argued why my idea wouldn't work, where it was flawed and why it shouldn't be funded. Despite naysayers inrepparttar 107088 room that day, I believed it was worth pursuing. Ultimately, it did receive funding and became, in time, a successful endeavor. A bit of Pollyannaism got me though.

Everyday, in meetings just like this one, ideas are gutted before they're allowed to evolve. It's becoming a workplace ritual to poke pinholes inrepparttar 107089 balloon of an idea until enough air leaks out to drop it torepparttar 107090 ground. We look first forrepparttar 107091 reasons why something can't be done; why it won't work; why it's too difficult; why it's a bad idea. We've become so good at burning idea bridges that might lead to new business, new procedures, or new products that we don't even have to try to buildrepparttar 107092 bridges first.

But, people who are winning at working take a different approach. They pump air into idea-balloons by offering suggestions, brainstorming possibilities and encouraging input. They point out problems by offering solutions that makerepparttar 107093 idea more viable. They're curious and intrigued, looking at how one idea might fit with another, or weaving two small ideas into one bigger one. Instead of asking why should we do this, they're encouraging people to give it a try.

Understandingrepparttar 107094 fragile nature of emerging ideas, they help protect, nurture and green-house ideas (their own and others) until they have a chance to take root. They get excited about new possibilities. Often it's their optimism, vision, and positive approach that watersrepparttar 107095 seed until it grows and blooms. They have a bit of Pollyanna in them. But they probably won't call it that. You see, Pollyanna's gotten a bad rap in business circles as naïve and unrealistic.

Success at Work : Techniques : Computer Literacy

Written by Stephen Bucaro


---------------------------------------------------------- Permission is granted forrepparttar below article to forward, reprint, distribute, use for ezine, newsletter, website, offer as free bonus or part of a product for sale as long as no changes are made andrepparttar 107087 byline, copyright, andrepparttar 107088 resource box below is included. ----------------------------------------------------------

Success at Work : Techniques : Computer Literacy

By Stephen Bucaro

It's hard to believe that there are people in today's workforce who don't know how to use a computer. In today's society, being computer illiterate is equivalent to being functionally illiterate. Obviously no one reading this article is computer illiterate, but maybe you know someone who thinks they can avoid computers and still be successful at work.

Let me tell you a story about a good friend of mine back when I worked at Motorola. The company movedrepparttar 107089 manufacturing of automobile alternators offshore, resulting in his transfer to my department. Although he had about 20 years withrepparttar 107090 company, this was to be his last stop before being booted outrepparttar 107091 door.

He was assigned to me as an Electronics Technician, andrepparttar 107092 first assignment that I gave him was to lay out a small printed circuit (pc) board. It was a tiny circuit for a tester, so computer drafting was not required. He could just sketch it out on paper. After several days, he came back to me explaining that he didn't haverepparttar 107093 technical ability to lay out a pc board.

An Electronics Technician that couldn't lay out a simple pc board? Don't all Electronics Technicians make little hobby circuits at home? At least allrepparttar 107094 technicians I knew did.

I explained that he needed to draw outlines ofrepparttar 107095 components and then userepparttar 107096 schematic to draw lines betweenrepparttar 107097 components connections. Then, maybe rearrangerepparttar 107098 components if that would result in fewer crossing paths. I also explained something much more profound, how to deal withrepparttar 107099 complexity of technology.

Many people, when they come into contact with technology, consider themselves too stupid to deal with it. Technology is only for geniuses and geeks. Sometimes technology is too complex, but it's not because people are stupid, it's becauserepparttar 107100 technology is poorly designed.

For example, take software, like a graphics program, spreadsheet or database. Isrepparttar 107101 intended user ofrepparttar 107102 software a computer programmer, or an average person? These applications are intended for use by an average person. If an application is too complex forrepparttar 107103 average person,repparttar 107104 application is at fault - notrepparttar 107105 user.

Why are most computers and software applications too complex forrepparttar 107106 average person? Because they are designed by programmers who are under pressure to getrepparttar 107107 product outrepparttar 107108 door. Doesrepparttar 107109 application have simple, easy-to-use help files? Software developers consider help files even less important than application usability.

- The bottom line is, people are not stupid - computers and software applications ARE too complex.

In today's world, where workers are required to use computers and technology, how can they deal withrepparttar 107110 complexity? Back torepparttar 107111 story about my friend at Motorola.

Cont'd on page 2 ==>
 
ImproveHomeLife.com © 2005
Terms of Use