Archive for August, 2009

Email etiquette

August 26th, 2009 Posted by: Julie Mrowicki

I don’t know about you but I have unusual sleep patterns. In fact, I cannot remember the last time I was in bed by 10pm and had a full eight hours.  Quite often I feel at my best and most alert at 4 or 5 am and find myself producing my best work then to.  For me, there is something quite special about those few hours first thing in the morning before the rest of the world is awake. 

Why then, do I feel that I need to hide my early morning starts from my working life?  I have a fear that if I send someone an email at 4.23am then it may be seen as unprofessional, bordering on insane.  So, I quite often find myself typing away in these early hours and saving my emails to draft ready to press send at what I deem to be a more acceptable time of day, i.e. from 8.30 onwards.  I have been known to send the occasional email before 8am but if I am honest, only to someone who I know really well!

We live in a society where depending on where you live, you can shop at 3am and drink in pubs around the clock, yet it is frowned upon to send work emails after 8.00pm and before 8.00am.  Or is it?  Maybe it is just my own perception?  As a culture we are bound by the 9 to 5, Monday to Friday working life although I cannot help but feel that the introduction of  flexible working hours in many organisations and the emphasis on work life balance, are slowly changing the look of the 9 to 5 working life.  It may however, be quite some time before I feel comfortable sending an email at 4.23am!

Differences in dress code

August 19th, 2009 Posted by: Julie Mrowicki

I read an article last weekend about dress code in the workplace and selecting on the basis of difference and wanted to share my own experience of wearing the wrong clothes.    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8187689.stm

My first particularly gruelling experience of dressing inappropriately was at the tender age of 19 and was only my second job interview ever.  I was a “first jobber” with good A levels results and had managed to get myself an interview for an admin position in an investment bank in the Docklands.  When I turned up in a bright turquoise jacket and turquoise flowery skirt, soaked from head to toe, (it had been raining heavily and I didn’t have an umbrella) no one had told me about appropriate interview dress.  I thought that I had done well to wear a nice jacket and smart skirt.  Admittedly, the soaked through look didn’t help but by that point it was too late.  The interview itself seemed to go very well although the two girls interviewing me were wearing black fitted skirt suits and crisp white shirts and I did feel a little out of place!   Anyway, needless to say I didn’t get the job and after feedback from my recruitment consultant, I went straight out and bought a navy interview suit and promptly secured my first job in the City.

As a naive “first jobber” doing the interview rounds, I was shocked at how shallow these people were.  I was still a bright school leaver with good “A” level results and a host of skills waiting to be tapped into.  I still had the same personality and I was smartly dressed (if a little damp and flowery).  I realised very early on in my working life that image is more important than anything else.  If you have two candidates who present equally well on paper and have identical qualifications for the job, it can be a hard lesson to learn that the dark interview suit will get the job over the flowery skirt and bright coloured jacket.  Or do they?

It could be that I also support difference when recruiting as I tend to be drawn towards the bright flowers rather than the plain suits.  I looked nothing like the two “suits” that interviewed me and I didn’t get the job. However, if I had to choose then I would go for the flower over the suit every time, which ironically makes me the same as everyone else -  I too prefer people who are more like me. Maybe I just see myself as more of a flower than a suit?!

A little self deception makes the world go round.

August 3rd, 2009 Posted by: Norman Buckley

Ross Gittins is a columnist with the Sydney Morning Herald. I find he often makes a lot of sense. On June 8, 2009 he wrote an article talking about the effect of personality on markets. He cites research by Bruno Frey in Zurich that suggests that happiness is often based on “unrealistic optimism and unrealistic perceptions of control”. People with these traits are better able to adjust to difficult situations often by just ignoring evidence that is contrary to their view. Sound familiar? It will to anybody who’s ever put together a business plan or maybe even those who’ve applied for a mortgage that’s a bit bigger than they can manage.
In fact most of the advances in a capitalist market system are based on somebody’s unrealistic expectations. Such people are optimistic, have high self-esteem, welcome change and are enthusiastic. And the usual culprits are the Extraverts with low Emotionality. Go into the Mergers and Acquisitions specialists. They are full of people like this. They can always see (and explain with conviction) that merging Company A with Company B is the most obviously brilliant idea in a century. Can’t go wrong! Look at the synergies!
So how come so many mergers fail? They hardly ever deliver what was promised and in many cases the organisations would have delivered higher returns had the companies been left separate. Run a Google search for it – it makes interesting reading. And keep it in mind the next time you have a brainwave. Are your projections sensible or are they underpinned by a large chunk of wishful thinking? If you’re an Introvert with a healthy chunk of Emotionality then you might be more worth listening to than the super confident Extravert. Trouble is – he tells it and sells it better!