The passenger headlight was no longer working.  When I went in to get the oil changed, one of the technicians informed me that it was out.  I asked if they changed light bulbs.  He said they do, but not on this vehicle as they did not stock the bulb.  What he said made sense and I knew he wasn’t lying, but something about the way he said it bothered me.  A couple days later, my Mazda was at Canadian Tire getting the brakes done and the summer tires put on.  I asked the mechanic if they could replace a light bulb on a 2007 Equinox.  He said they could but it would be at least an hour in labor charges.   How hard could this be I thought to myself?  So I purchased the light bulb for $10.00 and thought I could put it in myself.  The manual had a single page with 3 diagrams and 4 steps each a single sentence.  With instruction manual, light bulb and required tools I was Clear to go …. or so I thought.

In order to get at the light bulb to change it, I had to remove 11 screws, one of which is way down through a tiny hole that you can barely get your arm in, let alone the ratchet tool needed to undo it. The first 8 screws loosen the front grill, so you can bend it back, so you can get at the light.  You have to loosen and pull the light unit out to replace the bulbs.  The actual bulb replacement was easy, took 2 minutes.  Then you get to put everything back together.  Needless to say I was happy I accomplished it, but frustrated it was so much work.  I now understand why mechanics charge an hour of labour to replace a headlight.

I think something went wrong during the design of the Equinox, they lost the perspective of the end user.  I expect to have to do certain tasks to maintain my vehicle in good working condition.  The end user will have to put gas in it, check the oil level, check the washer level, check the tire pressure, change light bulbs. When designing a vehicle these things should be easy to do.  Removal of an entire front grill, reaching to find screws in small confined places to remove a headlight assembly are just silly.  Where was the person that during the design process said “Wait a moment.  The end user will not be able to replace a burnt out light easily. We need to re-think this.”?

This whole situation reminds me of the security industry I am a part of.  So many of us are paranoid, constantly trying to ‘lock’ things down, create multiple steps that a user has to go through to get access or maintain access to networks and data, often to the point of inconvenience and annoyance.  One of my first managers, now retired constantly complained about this type of behaviour.  He was a very smart person and I learned a lot from him technically.  I also learned a lot from him about large financial institutions and people.  One example was the password requirements.  It was required that every 3 or 4 weeks, you had to change your password.  The password had to have so many characters, including a numerical as well as a ’symbol’ character or two.  He kept changing between two passwords.  Then someone in security got the brilliant idea that in order to increase security, they would remember the last 30 passwords so that users would be forced to create new ones.  That would increase security right?  He was so annoyed that he changed his two passwords to a single password with the month and year on the end.  Every time he needed a new password he would simply change the month and year.  Problem solved.  It was unique and predictable.

If we are designing vehicles, applications, network security, or procedures it is important to include in the design the answers to typical human behaviour.  How will end users will respond and react to design decisions?  Is this response what we wish?  What ways could it be mis-used?  If you are not satisfied with the answers, you should re-consider the design.  In the case of security, it is important to accurately assess what you are protecting and design security accordingly.  By attempting to enforce more security than is necessary, you may actually increase and not decrease the risk of what you are trying to protect.

One thing for sure, the next time I purchase vehicle, I will be checking how much work it is to change a headlight.

Tiger was upset about the media probing his family and following his daughter to her school.  He made statements such as:

“what we say will remain between the two of us”

“everyone one of these questions and answers is a matter between Elin and me”

“these are issues between a husband and wife”

I have seen this many times before and here is the thing; when you choose a path which moves you more in the public eye, you loose some of your private life, period, full-stop.  It has always been this way.  More specifically, if you choose to become a politician, police officer, actor, sports professional, appear on a reality TV show, CEO of a major company, popular blogger or anything else where you increase your exposure in the public eye, you choose to sacrifice some if not all of your private life.  This choice extends in different degrees to your family, friends and anyone else connected to you.  Grasp, think about, and understand this concept.   Seriously consider it and the possible repercussions.  Now make your decision.  Choose wisely, because you, your family, and everyone involved with you will live with this decision.

While I understand the frustration this probably causes these people to feel, and I personally feel bad for Tiger’s daughter, I do, Tiger made that choice.  Consciously or not, when Tiger decided to pursue a career as a golf professional he made that choice for himself, his family, his daughter and anyone else involved in his private life.  Right or wrong that is what happened.

Especially in todays world of the Internet, blogging, twitter and other social media, the expectation of a private life that remains private is just silly.  Loosing some or all of your private life is part of the choice when you decide to do something that puts you more in the public eye, and it is not negotiable.   If you have made a choice to be in the public eye then when you apologize to the public, don’t expect a private life.  To me it shows a lack accepting responsibility for your choice and maybe a little bit of stupidity.  Instead, consider the public eye a risk factor when making decisions and give it the appropriate weight because it is a factor and this factor is not in your control.  Deciding where to go with your wife for dinner, where to take your family for vacation, what dentist to use, what school to send your daughter to, purchasing your son that Iphone, having an affair, or whatever the decision is, all require a risk assessment of the public eye factor.  Assess the risk and decide accordingly.  Yes, that probably sucks, but you chose that when you chose to be in the public eye.   Ignoring, downplaying, pleading or trying to control it won’t make it go away.  When you use your credit card, you accept the terms of service.  Even if you didn’t read them, they don’t go away.  The credit card company will still hold you to them.  It is the same when you choose something that will knowingly or not put you and your loved ones in the public eye.

I personally do not care about Tiger Woods’ private life.  I have enough trouble keeping up with my family and friends lives.  I typically don’t read gossip articles or posts.   I have no real interest in private lives of people that I do not have a relationship with.  I do feel bad for his daughter.  For her that must really suck.  I dislike the paparazzi and could never do that job and feel good about myself.  I hope Tiger as her dad has learned to factor his daughter into his decisions in the future.  But don’t expect a private life when you make a choice that puts you more in the public eye.  That is just silly and history shows that it never works.

photo credit

The staff have different reactions to her.  Some actively listen to her instructions to appease her, but you can tell by their facial expression they already know what to do and think her directions are unnecessary.  Other staff roll their eyes behind her back ensuring that their colleagues and sometimes even patrons can see their reaction.  Overall, my sense it is not a good environment to work in.  I went in one evening to work when she was not there.  It was a completely different environment, a much better one.  Staff was more relaxed, were in better moods, appeared to be enjoying their work.  They were talking amongst themselves and customers more, still being attentive to the customers requests and getting done what needed to get done.  Overall, they were more organized and on top of things. The atmosphere was completely different, much happier, more enjoyable.

I wonder what the criteria for a manager at Starbucks is and what their training program is like?  She also might be the owner which makes her ‘in charge’ by default.  Unfortunately, owning a business does not make you a good or effective manager.

At my company they offer training to managers.  It is not a one time thing, but rather an on-going training that happens every few months.  It is optional to attend.  I have attended many of these over the last 2 years and I find them invaluable.  Sure, some of it I already know, do innately or in my opinion is common sense, but it is still a great refresher and I always come out learning something useful.  We have managers that choose not to partake in this opportunity and that is unfortunate.  Many of them make mistakes that are costly and completely avoidable.  Employees leave meetings with the manager where they feeling bad, upset, where they should have been positive.  In some cases they don’t ever communicate it to the manager, and in many cases unfortunately it wouldn’t matter if they did.

If you have thse opportunities at your place of employment, I would suggest taking them.  They don’t hurt and can only help.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ceekay/2115530628/

Most that know me, know that I have as much interest in people as I do networks and systems.  I am usually always watching and asking myself questions. Why did he suddenly choose this option as it is not his normal choice? Why in the meeting did she have a moment of anger on her face as soon as he spoke, yet appeared and acted perfectly happy? And many other questions, but you get the idea.  I took a psychology course in University out of interest.   I made it through the course, but it was tough.  I am not good with memorization and that course required almost 100% memorization and regurgitation.

Here are two interesting posts on groups and group mentality. I feel they are very applicable to work environments where there are departments and teams. The first is called “10 Rules That Govern Groups”.   It discusses how much of our time is spent in groups of people and some of the dynamics around groups.   The second one is entitled “Why Group Norms Kill Creativity“.  It asserts that creativity is less when people are in groups and contains links to studies that support this assertion.

A Thank you to Rob Tyrie, for pointing me to the first article.