Archives for the Month of November 2006 on Christopher Lambert's Online Journal
Is this my last one, already, but they're all so much fun to write
The title is inappropriate, but I'm bored of writing blogs. I know we get graded on relating back to class but, I find that boring too. Most of what we learn in class isn't ground breaking enough, or so previously unknown that I feel enlightened after hearing about it, for me to write an actual response.
If I tried, it'd be a cheesy, we-all-know-this-is-B.S. post. I could write a boring but honest okay-so-what-do-you-want-me-to-say-about-this post, but that isn't fun.
I end up torn among writing what "I should" write to get the grade, writing my honest opinion which probably wouldn't score me any points, babbling, or writing a mixture of the three along with the creative, personal flare that blogs are supposed to incorporate.
Yes, this is prep work for the "real world", but if the real world can't handle words like "nope", I don't want to write for it.
(Here comes my relating to class. Nothing concrete, but it talks about class.)
The grading for this class has been harsh, but not for the sake of harshness. We're graded this way because the people with experience, that are teaching and preparing us, feel we need to understand how proper and strict the profession is.
For me, it's been deflating. I don't want to be a machine. Yes, the assignment says relate to class, but what if I don't want to? The grade isn't enough to motivate me. If it was "write blog entries and try to relate them to class, but the more important thing is to be writing professionally in terms of grammar and word choice, so if you don't talk about class, it's no big deal, just remember your audience and what we're looking for" I wouldn't have a problem. Even if only one entry had to relate to class, I'd accept that. I just hate the rigidness, the constraint, of it.
I hope the business world isn't as terminator-esque as it's been made to seem at times.
Bloggin'
I think it'd be nice if the blogging assignment didn't have to deal just with what we learn in class or talk about in class. If I could write a faux-letter to a company about a business proposal, or a memo to a boss about an idea, or anything else that is a fake business thing but business related, that'd be amazing. Only writing about class or in response to something we went over in class, I feel, is limiting and, after a while, boring. Yes, I can write a nice, fake letter to Jonah Creighton as a change of pace, but why? As it is, I wrote about Jonah enough.
Maybe I'm unaware and I could write a letter to the editor of Maxim asking him to publish an article I write, and Meredith would grade it and give me feedback on structure and diction.
I guess after writing this, I'll find out.
Directory Assistant
When we broke up into teams to discuss proper training for newly hired directory assistants, I never imagined what we'd discover.
See, our group planned out a training regiment based on what we'd learned in class about the learning styles. Each employee would be lectured on all aspects of his or her job, then allowed to ask questions, would pick up a step-by-step sheet for future reference, and would go through a simulation call before taking a live call. We felt that covered everything (assimilator, converger, diverger and accommodator).
I decided that it'd be good to call in an outside source to see how accurate we were and to make any necessary revisions, so I took out my cell phone and called 411. The lady that answered had an amiable, clear voice. I told her that I was in my management class and that we were planning out a training program for a directory assistance positions and wondered if she could highlight some of the things she did in her training.
Little did I know that, "that information is secret." I didn't know Cingular's Directory Assistance Training Program was so high-profile that it had to be guarded like the recipe for KFC.
But, we did learn something else our program had to include: A confidentiality contract.
Feedback
The feedback lecture was well-timed and, I'm assuming, runs parallel to the current situation with the HR simulation. Team leaders are to be formulating ways to give feedback to their team members.
The lecture was good, and the points were all viable and effective, but I can't help but feel a majority of the "tools" we're learning are common sense. I don't even remember what SAFE means because after hearing about it I thought, "Ya don't say," and promptly forgot.
There was also the method where you say something positive to butter them up for the uppercut punch, then, after you've dropped them and the ref's counted to 10, you tell them that they fought well and to keep working hard. That's cheesy and amateur. Bad movies use that technique to be funny.
It's the little things Professor Piderit tells us, what she's gleaned from her own experience, that are the things to really take home. For instance, by making sure everything is clear and understood, the feedback process can be much less painful and stressful for both parties. The right questions (Is there anything I can do to help? Do you have any questions? Are we clear?), if offered at the proper time and answered honestly, can be relaxing.
I'm sure the skills we listned about were helpful and will be put to good use by many people, but I still think they're basis is in tact and being understanding, and that if you have those skills already, you should be fine.