Effect of What You Do

In the last two weeks, I have received some positive reinforcement for what I did years ago. It was nice. I am not naming names because neither of them gave me permission.

The first was someone who was in a library school class I spoke to back in my Connecticut days. I was a guest speaker (I did it many times) and talked about professional associations (ALA, CLA, NELA), about the cooperatives in the state, and what it was like to be a public library director. He now works in an academic library, but contacted me (and a number of others) to talk about some of the issues facing library administrators.

The second was someone I met when I interviewed for a job. As part of the casual conversation, I talked about how to get involved in ALA. It was fairly soon after I had served on the ALA Executive Board, and is something that I both care about, and know a little bit about. She took the advice and is now involved in several different parts of the Association.

You never know when you are in the process of "paying it forward." In both cases, they expressed their appreciation. It made for a great day!

Conversational twists and turns

I was in a work meeting today. All of the people in the meeting were colleagues whose commonality was that we deliver continuing education opportunities. We were talking about some of our experiences in delivering web sessions, and what participants think we can and cannot hear. The conversation, among a sub-set of us, took this series of interesting turns.

• Love that the web presentation software has a "Mute All" button. XXX is the Queen of Muting.
• Looks like they have really created a "cone of silence."
• Several of us commented that we enjoyed the old TV show Get Smart
• "You know, they really could make a shoe phone now..."
• But who wants to put their shoe up to their face....etc.
• What we need now is an "iFlop" -- You know, a flip flop with an iPad built in.

If Apple really does create an "iFlop," I am claiming credit!

Majority rules or Majority Rules!

ALA-Anaheim 2012 is now over. Just before the conference, I received an email from the ALA Parliamentarian (Eli Mina) not in that role, but in his "day job" role as a professional parliamentarian. First, you can find his web site here. If you are interested in group dynamics and in procedure, Eli has some great words of wisdom.

In his recent e-newsletter he had the following to say:

"Is the Majority Always Right?"

At a recent workshop, a newly elected municipal official said this: "A wise person taught me that, with a Council of seven members, the most important number is four. With four votes you can change policy. With four votes you can provide exceptional leadership. With four votes you are at liberty to govern however you wish. "

On the surface, this seems like good practical advice. After all, in parliamentary democracies, a fundamental principle of decision making is: The majority rules. In order to adopt a proposal or enforce a measure, a voting body requires that more members vote yes than vote no. If not, the proposal is defeated. With this in mind, the numbers are "the only thing that matters." Right? Not so. Something significant is missing.

Here is the problem: Have you ever observed an aggressive and impatient majority forcing its will on a helpless minority by cutting off debate prematurely? Ever witnessed a majority being stubbornly entrenched and unwilling to tolerate new data that might lead to enlightened and thoughtful decisions? In such cases, there may very well be enough votes in the affirmative, but this does not change the fact that the decision-making process is flawed, possibly leading to bad decisions that the majority may live to regret.

Yes, the numbers are important. But if the group focuses exclusively on the number of votes, it may end up making its collective decisions on the basis of ignorance, self interest, emotion, and loud and aggressive voices, instead of making them on the basis of objectivity, full knowledge, and a careful analysis of the issues at hand.

With numbers-based democracies, the end (getting enough votes) justifies the means, which may prompt some people to make pre-meeting deals on how they'll vote. On the other hand, with knowledge-based democracies, members refuse to commit their votes in advance of a meeting. Instead, they arrive at meetings with fully open minds, listen to everyone, and treat "minorities" as partners in decision-making.

With numbers-based democracies, assertive and persuasive advocates tend to prevail. With knowledge-based democracies, the people with the most relevant information and the most astute analysis are listened to. The group has a culture that promotes learning, inquiry and excellence in decision-making.

Ultimately, democracies that are primarily focused on the number of votes are more likely to produce flawed and risk-prone decisions. On the other hand, knowledge-based democracies are more likely to produce informed decisions that increase opportunities and minimize risks for the affected organizations.

Looking at this from another angle: Democratic decision-making bodies often use rules of order in meetings. The core premise should be that rules (relating to quorum, voting, motions, amendments, etc.) should be used as a means to an end and not as an end in themselves. Rules should advance knowledge-based decision-making, rather than manipulate the flow of a meeting and overpower minorities. A flawed proposal should not win solely because its advocates are capable of using rules to advance it. And a good proposal should not be defeated solely because its proponents do not know how to use the rules to pass it.

So, is the majority always right? Is four the most important number on a Council of seven? Only if the four have knowledge on their side; only if members come to meetings with open minds and are prepared to learn from the discussions; and only if the meeting environment is kept safe. Yes, the numbers are important, but they should be backed by objectivity and knowledge.

Sign up for his newsletters, buy his books. If you are in that kind of position, hire him. He is good. I am not being paid to say any of this, and if it were not true I would not say it.

Google SUCKS!!

I am pissed.

Google has decided that they do not like the interfaces that we use, and that we must change. Even if it is not broken, and that we do not want it.

For more months that than I can remember, they have been asking if I want the "new look." I tried it, decided I don't want it, and declined, and declined for month after month. They asked why, and I told them. Middle of the day today...I got the new look.

There is NO way to contact them and complain.

And then...I logged in here, and I have been thrust into a new interface which I never asked for, do not like, and I am pissed.

I am about to change everything to another provider!!

Google, notice to you: "Do no evil" does not mean, piss off your users...

Addition 4/23: The forwarding function for Gmail does not work as you would expect. I apparently does nothing but let you think you are forwarding you gmail to another account.

Random thoughts about travel and travel in Panama

I have been thinking about our most recent trip, and the past one.

On both trips, I had the experience of driving in a place I did not know well, where the road signs were in a language which is not my strength. It made me think about what it must be like for the tourists who visit the US. One good think is the movement towards a universal system of symbols for use on road signs. That was a plus. But then there are the "construction zone" signs. They are bad enough in English, but they are even harder in an unfamiliar language. I managed through a detour, but partly because the map function worked so well on my cell phone. (Yes, we had signed up for the international data plan to be activated.)

I most certainly appreciate some of the road signage that I used to take for granted. One of them is route numbers, and signs to cities. On our most recent adventure, I drove from Changuinola to David. The first part of the trip was on a fairly major road from Changuinola to Chirquiri Grande. On the way the road goes through and by several large-ish communities. Only once was there a road sign pointing to one of the towns (Almirante), to which we had already been, and wanted to get past.