2920 Selling it

Thursday, April 1, 2010

"Love is an irresistible desire to be irresistibly desired."
-- Robert Frost --


I don't agree with that, but I suppose it is true for some people.
---------------------------------------

I went shopping today. Bought a lightweight backpack to use as a carryon, a tiny Sharp travel alarm clock that's easy to set and carry, but which will have to lie on the pillow with me or I'll never hear it, an inflatable pillow to help preserve my back on the plane and tour buses, and tiny packets of shampoo, sun block, moisturizer, toothpaste, and so on. Also another card for my camera.

On the car radio, an administrator from Boston University was being interviewed, and the subject of tenure came up. The man was asked whether A) a candidate's record was examined, and then he or she, if refused tenure, was told why, or B) it was entirely up to the candidate to convince the committee, to prove that he or she had earned tenure. The argument for the former is that there's less of a chance for hidden favoritism, and more of a chance to rectify. The latter method puts enormous pressure on the candidate, and if they are refused, they never really know why.

The answer was that in most large universities it's B). The tenure committee does no research, and the refused candidate is never (or rarely) told why they were refused. It's up to them to convince the committee, and for all they know, refusal was a personality thing.

I just shrugged at that, and then I wondered why. With my liberal slant and management style, you'd think I'd be all for A), look at everything, check off the boxes, and tell the candidate exactly what's right and what's wrong.

But then I realized that was never my employee style.

Most people slog away in the job, hoping that management will notice how wonderful they are, hoping that their turn for a raise or promotion will come up, in due time. If they are ambitious, and they're a Level 1 Grunt, they try to be the best Level 1 Grunt possible, to shine as a Level 1 Grunt.

I figure that's a good way to stay a Level 1 Grunt forever. Why should you be promoted to Level 2 when you're so good at Level 1?

When you're a Level 1, as soon as you are comfortable in these tasks and responsibilities, you should start picking up Level 2 duties and responsibilities. Get good at them. Make sure those responsible for raises and promotions know what you're doing. Provide weekly reports outlining what you have accomplished, and pointing out exposures and concerns. Pretty soon, you will be assigned Level 2 stuff as a matter of course. Then you go to management and say, "Hey, I'm doing a Level 2 job. Let's make it official. Promote me."

That's how I got six promotions in my first three years with The Company. I got a "step in grade" raise every six months. The usual is two to four years in grade, one small raise a year.

So, no, I don't find proving oneself to a tenure committee all that onerous.

----------------------------------

Nowadays, as an old lady retiree, I absolutely refuse to prove myself to anyone. I don't have to do anything that doesn't interest me. You don't like what I'm doing, or how I'm doing it, or when? Go away.

That's why I quit volunteering at the maritime museum. I told them over and over that I didn't want to do anything that involved schedules, or that anyone was depending on. All I wanted to do was clean the showrooms, paint railings, weed flowerbeds, stock shelves in the gift shop, just one-day drop-in stuff. But they kept giving me ongoing responsibilities - because I could handle it where other volunteers could not, and I knew that, and I felt coerced.

So I walked away.

----------------------------------

There's a guy on trial up north. He has been found guilty of arson (burned down a coworker's (empty, I think) house), vandalism (spray painted houses and cars of people he argued with), and a few other things. He was found guilty of something like 18 or 20 of 22 charges. But what really gets me is that one of the charges was "terrorism", which carries a life sentence.

Terrorism? I don't get it. Yeah, he's a nasty person, probably a bit sick, but a terrorist? Isn't part of terrorism the attempt to cause a change in people's attitudes or actions? To coerce? They didn't even know it was him. By the court's definition, kids who batter mailboxes with baseball bats from cars are terrorists. Someone who puts a dead fish in a rival's car is a terrorist?

The other thing I don't get is the pronunciation of his name, "Raucci". It seems like an Italian name. I'd pronounce it "Raw-chi". The Italian double C is usually pronounced CH. The news readers consistently pronounce his name "Rossi". Anyone can pronounce their own name any way they want, but wouldn't you usually use the common rules, so you don't have to correct everyone all the time?
.