I am more of a person
and less of a person.
Someone I know
and someone I don't know.
A best friend
and an enemy.
Self sufficient
and helpless.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Can't Get it Done? Yes!
I have been noticing a disturbing trend in our society. I'm going to call this trend, enthusiastic failure. In fairness, it may have always been there and I'm just becoming more cynical. But it is hitting my radar now.
Enthusiastic Failure; the tendency to find reasons why you can't complete a task or assignment, and the total acceptance of this state.
The simplest example of this is when you are ready to make a purchase at a store and they can't take your money because their computer is "down".
Me: "Well, pick it up, open your hand, and take my 50 cents for this paper. When your computer is 'up' you can hit the 'paper' button and put my 50 cents in your auto-opening cash drawer."
Clerk: Good-naturedly and politely - "I'm sorry. I won't be able to sell you anything until the computer is up.
Me: "Seriously? I mean, the paper is 50 cents. And here's 50 cents".
Clerk: "It would not be ethical of me to take a bribe."
Me: "I'm not offering you a 50 cent bribe to give me a paper. I want to buy it!
Clerk: "But if I have no way for accounting for it, it would be like you stole the paper".
Me: "You could write it down so you don't forget it".
Clerk: "No. My training was very clear regarding that. No manual processes are permitted. If you could come back in an hour, the computer will probably be up."
Me: "I'll give you 5 bucks for that paper."
Clerk: "Why would you pay 5 dollars for a 50 cent paper?"
Unfortunately, enthusiastic failure is too often present in the workplace, and it is most often wrapped in the following phrase: "that's not in my job description".
Me: "Why aren't there any welcome binders going out for today's arriving customers?"
EFA: (EFA = enthusiastic failure associate) "We're out of binders."
Me: "Why didn't you order more when you saw we were getting low?"
EFA: "It's not my job to order new binders."
Me: "OK, it may not be written specifically in your job description, but you have ordered them in the past and because you are the person who puts the binders together, you are the person that would see we are running out."
EFA: Confident and secure in their righteousness - "You had EEA (EEA = enthusiastic and effective associate) order them last month when he noticed we were running low."
Me: "Yes. When alerted that supplies were running low, I gave the executive order to order more supplies."
EFA: "Then why don't you have EEA do it from now on."
Me: "Because he is not directly involved in the process. He just happened to notice we were getting low last month. I need you to at least alert me when supplies are getting low because you are the only one using these supplies every day."
EFA: "Well, I see your point. But it's not in my job description. And by the way, I'm still offended that you only gave me a "meets expectations" on my annual review.
An offshoot to the enthusiastic failure is the over-proceduralized-mush-brain effect, best demonstrated when paying cash and trying to minimize the bills in my wallet and coins in my pocket. To see this effect demonstrated, go to a fast food establishment, and order food that puts you somewhere between 5 and 10 dollars. Be armed with a twenty, four ones, and a decent amount of change, but no five or ten dollar bills. For example, for a $7.73 ticket, present a twenty, three ones, and twenty-three cents - thus minimizing your change to a ten, a five and two quarters. The truly acclimatized individual won't bat an eye. They'll give a quizzical look and punch $23.23 into their computer and let it tell them what change to give you - not even noticing that it is a neat and tidy sum. But as often as not, they will stare at the money you have presented, and try to just take your twenty, wondering why you have tried to give them more.
There are three distinctive looks/reactions that seem most present in this situation and I have outlined them below:
1. Disdain - "you are so stoopid to give me all that money for a $7.73 order".
2. Skepticism - "I think there is probably a reason you are giving me all this money for this $7.73 order. I think you are up to something."
3. Confusion - "Why are you giving me all this money? Do you not understand this is only a $7.73 order?"
Much of the enthusiastic failure effect is brought upon by misguided motivations. For example:
I have 7 places I have to stop today. At each there is a task distinctive to that stop. For instance, deliver a toaster at the first stop, fix internet at the second, switch out a vacuum at the third, etc.. At the first stop it seemed no one was home and the deadbolt was on. At the second, internet didn't work even with the my laptop. And at the third, a piece of the vacuum to be delivered was missing.... In each case extra effort will accomplish the task but threaten to set me back, endangering my ability to address all seven tasks. What do I do? Too often, I see someone who makes all seven stops, yet fails to complete many of the tasks. Their motivation is to complete their rounds, thus checking off each box, yet often achieving nothing. When they can't complete a task, they sigh with relief because they can now move on to the next task. Thus giving the perception of efficiency.
The shortcomings from all these examples can all be over come with one simple concept, often put forth by intellectuals and success magnets everywhere, such as Larry the Cable Guy, when he says: "Git-R-Done!!"
Please. Take my 50 cents. Just git-r-done.
Enthusiastic Failure; the tendency to find reasons why you can't complete a task or assignment, and the total acceptance of this state.
The simplest example of this is when you are ready to make a purchase at a store and they can't take your money because their computer is "down".
Me: "Well, pick it up, open your hand, and take my 50 cents for this paper. When your computer is 'up' you can hit the 'paper' button and put my 50 cents in your auto-opening cash drawer."
Clerk: Good-naturedly and politely - "I'm sorry. I won't be able to sell you anything until the computer is up.
Me: "Seriously? I mean, the paper is 50 cents. And here's 50 cents".
Clerk: "It would not be ethical of me to take a bribe."
Me: "I'm not offering you a 50 cent bribe to give me a paper. I want to buy it!
Clerk: "But if I have no way for accounting for it, it would be like you stole the paper".
Me: "You could write it down so you don't forget it".
Clerk: "No. My training was very clear regarding that. No manual processes are permitted. If you could come back in an hour, the computer will probably be up."
Me: "I'll give you 5 bucks for that paper."
Clerk: "Why would you pay 5 dollars for a 50 cent paper?"
Unfortunately, enthusiastic failure is too often present in the workplace, and it is most often wrapped in the following phrase: "that's not in my job description".
Me: "Why aren't there any welcome binders going out for today's arriving customers?"
EFA: (EFA = enthusiastic failure associate) "We're out of binders."
Me: "Why didn't you order more when you saw we were getting low?"
EFA: "It's not my job to order new binders."
Me: "OK, it may not be written specifically in your job description, but you have ordered them in the past and because you are the person who puts the binders together, you are the person that would see we are running out."
EFA: Confident and secure in their righteousness - "You had EEA (EEA = enthusiastic and effective associate) order them last month when he noticed we were running low."
Me: "Yes. When alerted that supplies were running low, I gave the executive order to order more supplies."
EFA: "Then why don't you have EEA do it from now on."
Me: "Because he is not directly involved in the process. He just happened to notice we were getting low last month. I need you to at least alert me when supplies are getting low because you are the only one using these supplies every day."
EFA: "Well, I see your point. But it's not in my job description. And by the way, I'm still offended that you only gave me a "meets expectations" on my annual review.
An offshoot to the enthusiastic failure is the over-proceduralized-mush-brain effect, best demonstrated when paying cash and trying to minimize the bills in my wallet and coins in my pocket. To see this effect demonstrated, go to a fast food establishment, and order food that puts you somewhere between 5 and 10 dollars. Be armed with a twenty, four ones, and a decent amount of change, but no five or ten dollar bills. For example, for a $7.73 ticket, present a twenty, three ones, and twenty-three cents - thus minimizing your change to a ten, a five and two quarters. The truly acclimatized individual won't bat an eye. They'll give a quizzical look and punch $23.23 into their computer and let it tell them what change to give you - not even noticing that it is a neat and tidy sum. But as often as not, they will stare at the money you have presented, and try to just take your twenty, wondering why you have tried to give them more.
There are three distinctive looks/reactions that seem most present in this situation and I have outlined them below:
1. Disdain - "you are so stoopid to give me all that money for a $7.73 order".
2. Skepticism - "I think there is probably a reason you are giving me all this money for this $7.73 order. I think you are up to something."
3. Confusion - "Why are you giving me all this money? Do you not understand this is only a $7.73 order?"
Much of the enthusiastic failure effect is brought upon by misguided motivations. For example:
I have 7 places I have to stop today. At each there is a task distinctive to that stop. For instance, deliver a toaster at the first stop, fix internet at the second, switch out a vacuum at the third, etc.. At the first stop it seemed no one was home and the deadbolt was on. At the second, internet didn't work even with the my laptop. And at the third, a piece of the vacuum to be delivered was missing.... In each case extra effort will accomplish the task but threaten to set me back, endangering my ability to address all seven tasks. What do I do? Too often, I see someone who makes all seven stops, yet fails to complete many of the tasks. Their motivation is to complete their rounds, thus checking off each box, yet often achieving nothing. When they can't complete a task, they sigh with relief because they can now move on to the next task. Thus giving the perception of efficiency.
The shortcomings from all these examples can all be over come with one simple concept, often put forth by intellectuals and success magnets everywhere, such as Larry the Cable Guy, when he says: "Git-R-Done!!"
Please. Take my 50 cents. Just git-r-done.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Family Operated For Four Generations!
In an effort to stretch the monthly budget, I allowed my 10 year old to pick out any two 5 pound bags of breakfast cereal from the off-brand cereal section. I already have a general rule about not spending more than $2.50 on a box of cereal; as there are always on-sale options in that range among the ubiquitous staples: Cheerios, Rice Crispies, etc.
This morning I had a bowl of one of the items Clark picked out – “something-er-other Malteys”, aka “Lucky Charms”. Yummy! As is the tradition, I read the packaging while consuming the packages’ contents. What do you know! The “off brand” was Malt-O-Meal. I know Malt-O-Meal!! What ever happened to Malt-O-Meal? You know - that chocolate hot breakfast stuff. Now they make huge bags of knock off cereal!?
In large print, following the “Malt-O-Meal” moniker is the marketing slogan, “Family Run for Four Generations”. After reading this morning that Castro has resigned and his brother is officially now the leader of Cuba – but no substantial changes are expected - the family-run marketing slogan seems dubious. “Cuba! Family Owned and Operated since 1959!!” Buy Cuban bonds!
There are many examples of companies turning the reigns over to immediate family members, or the next generation, with mixed results. On the plus side I would say Marriott did it pretty well, although I think there are issues finding a third generation member with enough brains or initiative to keep that one going. Hugh Heffner has turned Playboy over to his daughter. Ewe. Didn’t see THAT one coming. And Tommy Boy – well, Dan Akroyd, Rob Low and Bo Derick tried to stop that one, but it ended OK.
But back to questionable marketing slogans: “Developed by a 3rd Grade Teacher!!” This is one of my favorites. Since Airborne is a product ostensibly produced for my health, it is curious to me that they by-passed medical or technical expertise for “Developed by a 3rd Grade Teacher!!” Am I supposed to feel good about that? Does it have Ritalin in it?
And going back to the family run thing – makes sense if the company is family oriented. “Reunions R’US – family run since 1950!” I guess cereal is sort of family-like - at least at my house. Now, “The Divorce Store – Family Run since November!” See – it doesn’t work well there. But really, how often do you see generation after generation step up, being visionary and effective like their predecessors. Look at the Hilton family. Yikes! And the Bush’s and Clinton’s. When did it become a good idea for political nepotism? OK, most of world history – but I think we all agree now that it is not necessarily a good succession of leadership in a democracy. At the very least, it’s confusing.
It is true, however, that we need a marketing campaign for the our proud country since the world is really annoyed with us. If Hillary were to win, we could try:
“United States of America – Family Owned and Operated since 1989!”
Not as impressive as Cuba. But give us some time.
This morning I had a bowl of one of the items Clark picked out – “something-er-other Malteys”, aka “Lucky Charms”. Yummy! As is the tradition, I read the packaging while consuming the packages’ contents. What do you know! The “off brand” was Malt-O-Meal. I know Malt-O-Meal!! What ever happened to Malt-O-Meal? You know - that chocolate hot breakfast stuff. Now they make huge bags of knock off cereal!?
In large print, following the “Malt-O-Meal” moniker is the marketing slogan, “Family Run for Four Generations”. After reading this morning that Castro has resigned and his brother is officially now the leader of Cuba – but no substantial changes are expected - the family-run marketing slogan seems dubious. “Cuba! Family Owned and Operated since 1959!!” Buy Cuban bonds!
There are many examples of companies turning the reigns over to immediate family members, or the next generation, with mixed results. On the plus side I would say Marriott did it pretty well, although I think there are issues finding a third generation member with enough brains or initiative to keep that one going. Hugh Heffner has turned Playboy over to his daughter. Ewe. Didn’t see THAT one coming. And Tommy Boy – well, Dan Akroyd, Rob Low and Bo Derick tried to stop that one, but it ended OK.
But back to questionable marketing slogans: “Developed by a 3rd Grade Teacher!!” This is one of my favorites. Since Airborne is a product ostensibly produced for my health, it is curious to me that they by-passed medical or technical expertise for “Developed by a 3rd Grade Teacher!!” Am I supposed to feel good about that? Does it have Ritalin in it?
And going back to the family run thing – makes sense if the company is family oriented. “Reunions R’US – family run since 1950!” I guess cereal is sort of family-like - at least at my house. Now, “The Divorce Store – Family Run since November!” See – it doesn’t work well there. But really, how often do you see generation after generation step up, being visionary and effective like their predecessors. Look at the Hilton family. Yikes! And the Bush’s and Clinton’s. When did it become a good idea for political nepotism? OK, most of world history – but I think we all agree now that it is not necessarily a good succession of leadership in a democracy. At the very least, it’s confusing.
It is true, however, that we need a marketing campaign for the our proud country since the world is really annoyed with us. If Hillary were to win, we could try:
“United States of America – Family Owned and Operated since 1989!”
Not as impressive as Cuba. But give us some time.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Heart, Mind and Trust
I have a history of throwing my vote away in presidential elections. I like to stick to my origional candidate, even if they don't win their primary. "Go Gary Anderson!!" So during the first few presidential elections I was able to participate in, I exercised my free will and voted for the best candidate! Wether or not they stuck with their party.
This changed after moving to Washington D.C.. A few years in the beltway is a sobering electoral and democratic experience. Getting the Washington Post thrown on your driveway each morning is both joyess and depressing; depending on the day and which section of the paper you are reading. I really miss that paper, though. Great paper.
And this uber-journalistic paper provided a great day-to-day view of our federal government in action; providing equal parts insight, awe, and disgust.
So, after preparing myself to be inspired by a better understanding of our two party system, I found myself, instead, dissillussioned by it. An unrealistic idealist such as myself had always wanted to beieve the best candidate is the best person running for office. The most honest, credible, and moral candidate. "Atticus Finch for President!!" But what did I learn? Hey, I lived in D.C. during the Clinton administration. What do YOU think I learned?
Well, after begrudgingly admitting the two party system really does create a unifying plurality that is better than other systems (see "France" and the jokes about 5 guys in a phone booth - new party - blah blah blah), I turned my learning insight to a newfound respect for the structure of our three branches of government. The system that minimizes the damage any one Bush president can inflict on the planet. (Oops! Did that thought come out of my mouth?)
It is the manipulation of this system that often makes a great president. And it tends to get done in one of two ways - but rarely in both. One way is to be charasmatic enough to sway public opinion with such inertia toward your goals that the public itself pressures all three branches to enact change. (In recent history - see "Reagan" and "Clinton". Bill, that is. Swimming pools. Movie stars.) Obama has the potential to be this guy.
The other way is by working the system from the inside. Knowing the players - having the credibility and experience to get what is needed from the inside. Hillary and McCain both could be effective presidents from this perspective.
Finally, though, there is a factor that is more ellusive; and that generally becomes apparent only in retrospect. I'll call it the "Right Guy At The Right Time" factor. (See Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt - either one - JFK, and Gerald Ford - maybe even Bill Clinton - to site just a few.)
So with this splintered frame work, let's look at the race today - Hillary, Obama and McCain. Not at the issues - that's too easy and there are already web sites for matching your concerns with the right candidates. (Who, by the way, have mostly dropped out of the race by now) But with the factors people actually tend to take into account when they vote for a Presidential candidate. Emotional, personality-type, looks, photographic images - you know - People magazine factors.
Hillary - Hillary has the potential to be the most effective of the three candidates from the inside. Knows how to work the system. Cold, calculating bitc@ that I think will go after many issues I believe need to be gone after, and will kick as# and take names along the way. I just hope my name is never on her list. The "ewe" factor may not be something she can overcome, however, and I don't think she has the ability to win over the hearts and trust of the American people. Allthough, interestingly, she would probably be more popular across the rest of the globe. (Allthough I can't remember why I have that impression. Probably read it in people magazine.) I believe she can capture the "minds" of americans - yes. Intillectually, she seems a good choice. Heart and trust, no. Being female has no negative connotation associated with any of the things I've pointed out - in fact, we're so far overdue on the female and minority fronts that there is a guilt vote to be had by either democratic candidate.
Supposition - Hillary could be an effective president; unlikely to be popular, and the candidate I would least like to meet in a dark alley if they are pissed at me.
Obama - Obama is the guy that could win the hearts of americans, and maybe the world. And then again, so was Jimmy Carter. And Obama seems very smart and very moral. And then again, so was Jimmy Carter. We have heard other potential comparisons, however, to give much more hope. Chiefly among them, Reagan and JFK. Heady stuff! There is both a heartfelt following and the potential of the "Right Guy At The Right Time". But Obama's candidacy also seems a little fuzzy and unsure. Which kind of makes it all the more exciting!!
Supposition - bigger risk than Hillary - with potential for bigger reward - or bigger loss. Feels a little like gambling. And the guy I least want to have around me in a dark alley, because I'd have to stick up for him and I'd probably get my as@ kicked defending him. But my friend, non-the-less.
McCain - "Hutt hutt!!" Since I live in Arizona, I have a pretty good impression of this guy, and I trust him. I trust him right now; and I don't wonder so much if I will still trust him next year. The problem is I don't always agree with him. But of the three candidates, I trust him to cross party lines to do the "right" things when push comes to shove. And given our current international presence and state of war, there is a strong feeling of the "Right Guy At The Right Time". He's not that polished and get's caught in it at times, (economics is not his strong suit??) but that sort of reminds me of someone else who was the "Right Guy At The Right Time" who I admired greatly - Gerald Ford. Hardly some big, dynamic presidency - but a guy that knew how to prioritize.
Supposition - McCain doesn't always have the same priorities I do, but maybe has the best potential to improve and stabalize our country and the globe - and global politics are quickly becoming a priority - though you can't tell that from our current presidents' priorities. The rest of this planet HATES us right now. And, McCain is the guy I most want in a dark alley, by my side.
Conclussion - unlike past presidential elections of my life, I don't feel we can lose. They all are actually good candidates. It is quite refreshing. To summarize this blog's observations:
Hillary -Mind
Obama - Heart
McCain - Trust
This changed after moving to Washington D.C.. A few years in the beltway is a sobering electoral and democratic experience. Getting the Washington Post thrown on your driveway each morning is both joyess and depressing; depending on the day and which section of the paper you are reading. I really miss that paper, though. Great paper.
And this uber-journalistic paper provided a great day-to-day view of our federal government in action; providing equal parts insight, awe, and disgust.
So, after preparing myself to be inspired by a better understanding of our two party system, I found myself, instead, dissillussioned by it. An unrealistic idealist such as myself had always wanted to beieve the best candidate is the best person running for office. The most honest, credible, and moral candidate. "Atticus Finch for President!!" But what did I learn? Hey, I lived in D.C. during the Clinton administration. What do YOU think I learned?
Well, after begrudgingly admitting the two party system really does create a unifying plurality that is better than other systems (see "France" and the jokes about 5 guys in a phone booth - new party - blah blah blah), I turned my learning insight to a newfound respect for the structure of our three branches of government. The system that minimizes the damage any one Bush president can inflict on the planet. (Oops! Did that thought come out of my mouth?)
It is the manipulation of this system that often makes a great president. And it tends to get done in one of two ways - but rarely in both. One way is to be charasmatic enough to sway public opinion with such inertia toward your goals that the public itself pressures all three branches to enact change. (In recent history - see "Reagan" and "Clinton". Bill, that is. Swimming pools. Movie stars.) Obama has the potential to be this guy.
The other way is by working the system from the inside. Knowing the players - having the credibility and experience to get what is needed from the inside. Hillary and McCain both could be effective presidents from this perspective.
Finally, though, there is a factor that is more ellusive; and that generally becomes apparent only in retrospect. I'll call it the "Right Guy At The Right Time" factor. (See Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt - either one - JFK, and Gerald Ford - maybe even Bill Clinton - to site just a few.)
So with this splintered frame work, let's look at the race today - Hillary, Obama and McCain. Not at the issues - that's too easy and there are already web sites for matching your concerns with the right candidates. (Who, by the way, have mostly dropped out of the race by now) But with the factors people actually tend to take into account when they vote for a Presidential candidate. Emotional, personality-type, looks, photographic images - you know - People magazine factors.
Hillary - Hillary has the potential to be the most effective of the three candidates from the inside. Knows how to work the system. Cold, calculating bitc@ that I think will go after many issues I believe need to be gone after, and will kick as# and take names along the way. I just hope my name is never on her list. The "ewe" factor may not be something she can overcome, however, and I don't think she has the ability to win over the hearts and trust of the American people. Allthough, interestingly, she would probably be more popular across the rest of the globe. (Allthough I can't remember why I have that impression. Probably read it in people magazine.) I believe she can capture the "minds" of americans - yes. Intillectually, she seems a good choice. Heart and trust, no. Being female has no negative connotation associated with any of the things I've pointed out - in fact, we're so far overdue on the female and minority fronts that there is a guilt vote to be had by either democratic candidate.
Supposition - Hillary could be an effective president; unlikely to be popular, and the candidate I would least like to meet in a dark alley if they are pissed at me.
Obama - Obama is the guy that could win the hearts of americans, and maybe the world. And then again, so was Jimmy Carter. And Obama seems very smart and very moral. And then again, so was Jimmy Carter. We have heard other potential comparisons, however, to give much more hope. Chiefly among them, Reagan and JFK. Heady stuff! There is both a heartfelt following and the potential of the "Right Guy At The Right Time". But Obama's candidacy also seems a little fuzzy and unsure. Which kind of makes it all the more exciting!!
Supposition - bigger risk than Hillary - with potential for bigger reward - or bigger loss. Feels a little like gambling. And the guy I least want to have around me in a dark alley, because I'd have to stick up for him and I'd probably get my as@ kicked defending him. But my friend, non-the-less.
McCain - "Hutt hutt!!" Since I live in Arizona, I have a pretty good impression of this guy, and I trust him. I trust him right now; and I don't wonder so much if I will still trust him next year. The problem is I don't always agree with him. But of the three candidates, I trust him to cross party lines to do the "right" things when push comes to shove. And given our current international presence and state of war, there is a strong feeling of the "Right Guy At The Right Time". He's not that polished and get's caught in it at times, (economics is not his strong suit??) but that sort of reminds me of someone else who was the "Right Guy At The Right Time" who I admired greatly - Gerald Ford. Hardly some big, dynamic presidency - but a guy that knew how to prioritize.
Supposition - McCain doesn't always have the same priorities I do, but maybe has the best potential to improve and stabalize our country and the globe - and global politics are quickly becoming a priority - though you can't tell that from our current presidents' priorities. The rest of this planet HATES us right now. And, McCain is the guy I most want in a dark alley, by my side.
Conclussion - unlike past presidential elections of my life, I don't feel we can lose. They all are actually good candidates. It is quite refreshing. To summarize this blog's observations:
Hillary -Mind
Obama - Heart
McCain - Trust
Friday, January 11, 2008
My Last Visit to Starbucks?
Starbucks - a coffee shop - has succeeded in creating a product of great appeal. Great Music. Appealing colors. Warm decor. Comfortable setting overall. Oh - and they have good coffee.
The other day, I went in to Starbucks for the two-hundred twenty first time. Despite this frequency, I don't know the language. I don't know the language, because I always order one of three things: a small coffee, a medium sized coffee, or a large coffee. I also don't know the language because it's not logical to me. "Vente", "grande" & "tall" all sound like "large" to me. So I just order a coffee - whatever size I want - small, medium or large.
First thing in the morning, my choice will generally be a "large coffee". One of the advantages of this order is that it works at Starbucks, 7-11, Circle K , Dunkin Donuts, and virtually all restaurants in North America. Nevermind that when I order a "large coffee" at Starbucks, the barrista** turns around and says, "one vente sumatra without a shot and hold the syrup, no whip cream - with room!" Or something like that.
On this particular visit, however, I ran into a snag. I ordered a large coffee. The response I received surprised me. Instead of turning around to give the baristess the secret code for a large coffee, I was informed that their brewer was not working. So they had no coffee. The staff did not seem overly concerned that the coffee house could not make coffee. Nor did the customers.
As I turned to go, the Barista made a suggestion. The Americana. "What's that?" I asked, pleedingly. I really wanted a cup of coffee. "It's espresso with water. A lot like a coffee."
"O.K. - I'll have a big one of those, then," I said.
"Thank you", said the barista. "That will be $3.15."
Huh?? I want a one dollar cup of coffee from the coffee shop. But because you can't make me a coffee, my option is to buy a facximilie of what I want for three times the cost?
I must be getting persnickity as I age; because this stuck in my craw. Of course, the very fact I used the terms "persnickity" and "craw" indicate I'm not a young hipster. Anyway, I'm sure if I pitched a fit about the price of the "Americana", I would not have had to pay more. But I'm just not that guy. I'm the guy who just doesn't come back.
So where do I go from here? First of all, I exsagerated. Starbucks' large coffee was about $1.50. I went to the Starbucks at the grocery store because i was irritated with the other store. And my large coffee was $2.00!! AND I sat by the meat counter and read the paper. No comfy chair. No nice music. But there was some comfort in having all that meat around. Not sure why, and that is surely a whole different topic.
So back to my Starbucks 3/4 of a mile from my house. Because even though they aren't perfect, they have become "my" coffee shop. Which not only get's me a cup of coffee, but get's me a mile and a half morning walk.
I wonder if there's any traction to the idea of a partnership with a butcher and Starbucks? You know, like Kansas Beef and Starbucks. "Calf and Caffeign". Or, "Hot Coffee and Hot Dogs".
Comfy chair; nice music; and Sam the butcher slicing and dicing tonights dinner. How very comforting that would be.
The other day, I went in to Starbucks for the two-hundred twenty first time. Despite this frequency, I don't know the language. I don't know the language, because I always order one of three things: a small coffee, a medium sized coffee, or a large coffee. I also don't know the language because it's not logical to me. "Vente", "grande" & "tall" all sound like "large" to me. So I just order a coffee - whatever size I want - small, medium or large.
First thing in the morning, my choice will generally be a "large coffee". One of the advantages of this order is that it works at Starbucks, 7-11, Circle K , Dunkin Donuts, and virtually all restaurants in North America. Nevermind that when I order a "large coffee" at Starbucks, the barrista** turns around and says, "one vente sumatra without a shot and hold the syrup, no whip cream - with room!" Or something like that.
On this particular visit, however, I ran into a snag. I ordered a large coffee. The response I received surprised me. Instead of turning around to give the baristess the secret code for a large coffee, I was informed that their brewer was not working. So they had no coffee. The staff did not seem overly concerned that the coffee house could not make coffee. Nor did the customers.
As I turned to go, the Barista made a suggestion. The Americana. "What's that?" I asked, pleedingly. I really wanted a cup of coffee. "It's espresso with water. A lot like a coffee."
"O.K. - I'll have a big one of those, then," I said.
"Thank you", said the barista. "That will be $3.15."
Huh?? I want a one dollar cup of coffee from the coffee shop. But because you can't make me a coffee, my option is to buy a facximilie of what I want for three times the cost?
I must be getting persnickity as I age; because this stuck in my craw. Of course, the very fact I used the terms "persnickity" and "craw" indicate I'm not a young hipster. Anyway, I'm sure if I pitched a fit about the price of the "Americana", I would not have had to pay more. But I'm just not that guy. I'm the guy who just doesn't come back.
So where do I go from here? First of all, I exsagerated. Starbucks' large coffee was about $1.50. I went to the Starbucks at the grocery store because i was irritated with the other store. And my large coffee was $2.00!! AND I sat by the meat counter and read the paper. No comfy chair. No nice music. But there was some comfort in having all that meat around. Not sure why, and that is surely a whole different topic.
So back to my Starbucks 3/4 of a mile from my house. Because even though they aren't perfect, they have become "my" coffee shop. Which not only get's me a cup of coffee, but get's me a mile and a half morning walk.
I wonder if there's any traction to the idea of a partnership with a butcher and Starbucks? You know, like Kansas Beef and Starbucks. "Calf and Caffeign". Or, "Hot Coffee and Hot Dogs".
Comfy chair; nice music; and Sam the butcher slicing and dicing tonights dinner. How very comforting that would be.
**Barista - from Urban Dictionary - 1) A person trained in the art of preparing and serving espresso. 2) Anyone who prepares and serves coffee products in a coffee shop.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Starship Testosterone
While in a locker room at a health club many years ago with my x-brother in-law (squared), I learned a great parenting tip. We were with our young boys, and I heard Tim's boys start swearing like sailors. Before I could ask where this foul verbal discourse originated, Tim turned to his boys and said, "Good job guys - locker room talk! Say anything you want in here. But remember it stays in here. When we leave the locker room, no more foul language."
This parenting lesson is a great basic rule for boys, (and I suspect for girls, but I don't really want to know, and in fact I am slightly afraid, of those details) that there are appropriate outlets for certain, otherwise-inappropriate, behaviors. This reality is the basic reason why sports continue in society. Sports are a socially acceptable outlet for aggression. And locker room talk is now called "locker room talk", no longer talking "like a sailor", because sailors aren't pressed into service anymore; so they aren't as angry. Also, their jobs have largely been automated, so there are less of them. So, in our modern world, more people are swearing in locker rooms than on ships. If locker rooms start fading away like sailors, soon it may be called "golf course talk".
I drove four 15 year old boys from their hockey practice to their high school at 7am this morning. Because I am a Dad, and not a Mom, there is a certain latitude afforded how the boys are allowed to speak and act. So, yes, we were essentially a locker-room on wheels. Don't get me wrong. There are still boundaries. But they tend to get stretched and tested by raging hormones and testosterone.
So the conversation in the car went something like this:
Frank: Hey! Guys! Look at my school I.D.. I look like a pedophile!
Austin: Look at mine! I look like a rapist!
Max: (silent - grinning)
Dad: How does a pedophile and a rapist look any different? (I can't believe I was trying to logically follow this conversation)
Frank: The rapist would have, like, a mullet.
Austin: Which scares away the kids.
Max: (grinning - silent)
Matt: Dudes! You won't believe who's texting me!
Frank: Austin has the longest tongue. Dad! Check out Austin's huge tongue!
Dad: (Ewe) That's OK, I'll take your word for i.... Er, that's a big tongue, Austin. Congratulations.
Matt: Fu@#..!
Dad: HEY!
Matt: Sorry, Mr. Zimmerman. Frank, it's your girlfriend!
Frank: Shut up! She's not my girlfriend! You are so gay!
Dad: How does that make him gay? (I'm still applying logic - which is totally illogical. I'm on the Starship Testosterone and I am Spock.)
Max: (silent - grinning)
Frank: Dad. Drive through Xavier (girls school) and, oh, I need $5 for lunch. And another $5 that I borrowed from Austin.
.............................................. And so it went.
Parenting is so very rewarding that we parents are all glad we do it. Either that, or we all say we're glad, because once started, you can't exactly yell "do-over!". So we may as well enjoy it. But - no, I really DO enjoy it. And I'm also glad there are other parents to help show the way. Because let's face it: you need a license to operate a boat, but you can spray children all over the planet with no permission, training or direction.** So we need all the help we can get.
I hope Tim is doing well. He's a good guy, and being divorced twice-removed makes keeping in touch difficult.
**See "Wilt Chamberlain", "George Foreman"; and "Catholic birth-control 101".
This parenting lesson is a great basic rule for boys, (and I suspect for girls, but I don't really want to know, and in fact I am slightly afraid, of those details) that there are appropriate outlets for certain, otherwise-inappropriate, behaviors. This reality is the basic reason why sports continue in society. Sports are a socially acceptable outlet for aggression. And locker room talk is now called "locker room talk", no longer talking "like a sailor", because sailors aren't pressed into service anymore; so they aren't as angry. Also, their jobs have largely been automated, so there are less of them. So, in our modern world, more people are swearing in locker rooms than on ships. If locker rooms start fading away like sailors, soon it may be called "golf course talk".
I drove four 15 year old boys from their hockey practice to their high school at 7am this morning. Because I am a Dad, and not a Mom, there is a certain latitude afforded how the boys are allowed to speak and act. So, yes, we were essentially a locker-room on wheels. Don't get me wrong. There are still boundaries. But they tend to get stretched and tested by raging hormones and testosterone.
So the conversation in the car went something like this:
Frank: Hey! Guys! Look at my school I.D.. I look like a pedophile!
Austin: Look at mine! I look like a rapist!
Max: (silent - grinning)
Dad: How does a pedophile and a rapist look any different? (I can't believe I was trying to logically follow this conversation)
Frank: The rapist would have, like, a mullet.
Austin: Which scares away the kids.
Max: (grinning - silent)
Matt: Dudes! You won't believe who's texting me!
Frank: Austin has the longest tongue. Dad! Check out Austin's huge tongue!
Dad: (Ewe) That's OK, I'll take your word for i.... Er, that's a big tongue, Austin. Congratulations.
Matt: Fu@#..!
Dad: HEY!
Matt: Sorry, Mr. Zimmerman. Frank, it's your girlfriend!
Frank: Shut up! She's not my girlfriend! You are so gay!
Dad: How does that make him gay? (I'm still applying logic - which is totally illogical. I'm on the Starship Testosterone and I am Spock.)
Max: (silent - grinning)
Frank: Dad. Drive through Xavier (girls school) and, oh, I need $5 for lunch. And another $5 that I borrowed from Austin.
.............................................. And so it went.
Parenting is so very rewarding that we parents are all glad we do it. Either that, or we all say we're glad, because once started, you can't exactly yell "do-over!". So we may as well enjoy it. But - no, I really DO enjoy it. And I'm also glad there are other parents to help show the way. Because let's face it: you need a license to operate a boat, but you can spray children all over the planet with no permission, training or direction.** So we need all the help we can get.
I hope Tim is doing well. He's a good guy, and being divorced twice-removed makes keeping in touch difficult.
**See "Wilt Chamberlain", "George Foreman"; and "Catholic birth-control 101".
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
To Really Laugh, You Have to Cry
It is a well trod-upon topic. No good without bad. No ups without downs. No heaven without hell. But regardless of how one has to periodically get sucker-punched to remind one of this inevitable balance in the world of emotions, the reality of this law has to reassert itself; less we forget.
I ended up in management very early in my career because of my demeanor. I have typically been described as good natured, unflappable, and someone who doesn't overreact. Yet this same trait has been my biggest weakness as well. Sometimes I don't react fast enough when movement is necessary.
Of course, this is as relevant to my just-ended marriage as it is to my career. Having had a spouse that reacts strongly to virtually any situation, it was inevitable that a husband who is much less reactionary would come up short in her mind. Amazing, really, that it took 20 years. But that length of time is also indicative of the fact that I probably didn't react fast enough.
Last week I was sitting outside on my balcony looking up at the sky, and realized I had a big grin on my face. Life is good. Sunshine is good. Seeing shapes in the clouds is good. My son Clark is particularly good at seeing shapes in clouds. Moments like that have been mostly absent from my life for many years. But they are coming back with more frequency.
The non-stop way I allowed life to proceed is changing - for the better, for sure. But I was reminded how far I still have to go in a recent phone conversation with my new friend Laurie.
Me: What are you up to?
Laurie: Not much. Just sitting here on the couch.
Me: Working?
Laurie: Nope.
Me: Watching T.V.?
Laurie: Nope.
Me: Reading a book?
Laurie: Nope.
Me: Then what are you doing?
Laurie: Nothing. Just thinking.
Me: (silence)
I was so jealous. What a concept. The over whelming revelation resulting from this short conversation was, of course, that I have this need to fill up my time - this realization made me want re-read Thoreau. See - it's still there. Maybe move to Waldon Pond instead of read it.
The best part of my new life is in the realization that the things I most desire are the things that are best for me and those around me. Uncomplicated time with the people I love: walks in the park, reading a book outdoors, cooking, laughing, playing my guitar at church - and now a little blogging.
These are activities that have a growing presence in my life, and are emerging from reacting to my own expectations as opposed to the expectations of someone else. I like this guy. And although I had to make the hardest decision of my life to start down this path, laughter now comes from deeper down in my gut. Smiles come more often to my face. I'm healthier. I drink less. And I feel more loved, both by others and myself.
So for now I am content to see some extra shapes in the clouds. As I look in the sky right now, I think I see a divorce attorney in one cloud, but the one that looks like a judge's gavel is starting to dissipate. To the right of that, I think I see a bunny!
Better. Much Better.
I ended up in management very early in my career because of my demeanor. I have typically been described as good natured, unflappable, and someone who doesn't overreact. Yet this same trait has been my biggest weakness as well. Sometimes I don't react fast enough when movement is necessary.
Of course, this is as relevant to my just-ended marriage as it is to my career. Having had a spouse that reacts strongly to virtually any situation, it was inevitable that a husband who is much less reactionary would come up short in her mind. Amazing, really, that it took 20 years. But that length of time is also indicative of the fact that I probably didn't react fast enough.
Last week I was sitting outside on my balcony looking up at the sky, and realized I had a big grin on my face. Life is good. Sunshine is good. Seeing shapes in the clouds is good. My son Clark is particularly good at seeing shapes in clouds. Moments like that have been mostly absent from my life for many years. But they are coming back with more frequency.
The non-stop way I allowed life to proceed is changing - for the better, for sure. But I was reminded how far I still have to go in a recent phone conversation with my new friend Laurie.
Me: What are you up to?
Laurie: Not much. Just sitting here on the couch.
Me: Working?
Laurie: Nope.
Me: Watching T.V.?
Laurie: Nope.
Me: Reading a book?
Laurie: Nope.
Me: Then what are you doing?
Laurie: Nothing. Just thinking.
Me: (silence)
I was so jealous. What a concept. The over whelming revelation resulting from this short conversation was, of course, that I have this need to fill up my time - this realization made me want re-read Thoreau. See - it's still there. Maybe move to Waldon Pond instead of read it.
The best part of my new life is in the realization that the things I most desire are the things that are best for me and those around me. Uncomplicated time with the people I love: walks in the park, reading a book outdoors, cooking, laughing, playing my guitar at church - and now a little blogging.
These are activities that have a growing presence in my life, and are emerging from reacting to my own expectations as opposed to the expectations of someone else. I like this guy. And although I had to make the hardest decision of my life to start down this path, laughter now comes from deeper down in my gut. Smiles come more often to my face. I'm healthier. I drink less. And I feel more loved, both by others and myself.
So for now I am content to see some extra shapes in the clouds. As I look in the sky right now, I think I see a divorce attorney in one cloud, but the one that looks like a judge's gavel is starting to dissipate. To the right of that, I think I see a bunny!
Better. Much Better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
