Apparently, I have a couple of friends who cyberstalk me, particularly through this blog. (They're close friends, one of whom I've known for 20 years, so they have full cyberstalking rights.) But I got mixed reviews from them, in person, about my previous post about confidence/competence/self-assuredness. So I should ask my dear friends who cyberstalk me (you know who you are): While I do appreciate your comments in person as we're eating lunch, I have to ask, nay beg, even, that you post comments here, too. (Carol is very good at this. Thank you, Carol!)
AND this brings us to our next topic: Online Identity Creation.
Recently, I've been conducting informal research on how people present themselves online. While word-of-mouth is one way to build a reputation, another way is to deliberately shape online one's identity in whatever light one wishes to do so. For instance, someone who wants to find "Ana Krahmer" online, can pretty easily verify where I work, what I do in my job, and what topics of discussion interest me. But, out of all this information, in reality, the only thing that is verifiable is where I work because I'm listed in the staff directory there. My worlds sometimes merge, as I describe in the first paragraph, where a close friend will poke around my blog out of curiosity about what I'm discussing, but sometimes, I'll get an email inquiry about something I've discussed in the blog. But what I find interesting is, I have never received questions in email based off of the staff directory at work.
I don't really know what that says, beyond that you have to be very deliberate about what goes up online about yourself. Do you want to set out to establish yourself as a software developer? A system engineer? A graphic designer? Then make for darned sure that everything on the Internet that pertains to you relates, also, in some way to how you want your identity to be represented.
I mean, I don't care if people know that I consume any kind of book as some people consume candy, or that I can be a complete grammar snob, but these aren't things I'm really developing my online identity around. And, although I'm using myself as the example for this discussion, this topic arose from talking to another friend who has done a great job of professional self-promotion through his career interests; it's in fact a very skillful use of Web 2.0 and 3.0.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
Women in Male-Dominated Professions?
I'm not sure if this is something all women do, or if I just have a lack of confidence in my own abilities--or if this is something that I'll slowly grow out of. (This isn't to say I'm a spring chicken; rather, I'm saying that I'm not as young as I used to be nor as old as I hope to one day achieve.)
But I have a constant lack of confidence in my abilities. I don't think that what I'm doing is "good enough"; instead I think what I'm doing is, in fact, barely enough. I've had friends point this out to me. I recently asked a friend about a professor whose course I will be taking over the summer, saying to him that I'm terrified of screwing it up, that I'm really afraid I won't be good enough to do well in the course.
He replied to me, "Whatever academic failings you seem to think you have, you don't. You'll do just fine." Which was a very nice way of him to point out my tremendous lack of confidence.
And then, recently, I was given tremendous compliments by two different people, neither of whom knows the other, but both of whom seem to think well of me. They both admire what I do, and the compliments are those that I can't just shake off as meaningless. I have a lot, a ton of respect for these two people, and all I can do when they express their compliments is panic, worried that I'll disappoint them.
Is this all women? I was recently speaking to Carol, of CarolsLib fame, with whom I'd also had the humor discussion. She said that she always focuses on the negative in her workshop evaluations, that if there is one thing that is negative, she wonders what the problem was. Do men do this? I've got a lot of male friends, and although they have their confidence shaken on a regular basis, it seems as if they started from a high point of confidence, and if it has been shaken, it drops. It seems like women, or at least I, build confidence from the ground up; I sort of feel like I'm working from the base of nothing, and I have to make something out of nothing. (Which sounds negative, I know, but it really does produce good professional results.)
Is this all women who work in male-dominated professions? I'm not sure. It actually may be. Is there an endemic sense in women who work in these professions that screams at them, "I don't belong here." I know that there have been times when I've discussed complex technological issues (often BSD or Linux-related) with people, and it's taken them a few minutes to realize that I really do know what I'm talking about. It's not only men who commit this error, and maybe it's because I use flowery, grammatically-correct language to discuss things, but I do know that there is doubt at first--usually easily dispelled.
And it could just be that, since I grew up in a family where, when I received a 98 on an essay, my mother would ask, "Why wasn't it 100%?" I'm just constantly in search of improvement, of perfection. While it's something that hurt my feelings at the time, I do believe that my mother really improved my job performance and the quality of what I put my mind to.
But I have a constant lack of confidence in my abilities. I don't think that what I'm doing is "good enough"; instead I think what I'm doing is, in fact, barely enough. I've had friends point this out to me. I recently asked a friend about a professor whose course I will be taking over the summer, saying to him that I'm terrified of screwing it up, that I'm really afraid I won't be good enough to do well in the course.
He replied to me, "Whatever academic failings you seem to think you have, you don't. You'll do just fine." Which was a very nice way of him to point out my tremendous lack of confidence.
And then, recently, I was given tremendous compliments by two different people, neither of whom knows the other, but both of whom seem to think well of me. They both admire what I do, and the compliments are those that I can't just shake off as meaningless. I have a lot, a ton of respect for these two people, and all I can do when they express their compliments is panic, worried that I'll disappoint them.
Is this all women? I was recently speaking to Carol, of CarolsLib fame, with whom I'd also had the humor discussion. She said that she always focuses on the negative in her workshop evaluations, that if there is one thing that is negative, she wonders what the problem was. Do men do this? I've got a lot of male friends, and although they have their confidence shaken on a regular basis, it seems as if they started from a high point of confidence, and if it has been shaken, it drops. It seems like women, or at least I, build confidence from the ground up; I sort of feel like I'm working from the base of nothing, and I have to make something out of nothing. (Which sounds negative, I know, but it really does produce good professional results.)
Is this all women who work in male-dominated professions? I'm not sure. It actually may be. Is there an endemic sense in women who work in these professions that screams at them, "I don't belong here." I know that there have been times when I've discussed complex technological issues (often BSD or Linux-related) with people, and it's taken them a few minutes to realize that I really do know what I'm talking about. It's not only men who commit this error, and maybe it's because I use flowery, grammatically-correct language to discuss things, but I do know that there is doubt at first--usually easily dispelled.
And it could just be that, since I grew up in a family where, when I received a 98 on an essay, my mother would ask, "Why wasn't it 100%?" I'm just constantly in search of improvement, of perfection. While it's something that hurt my feelings at the time, I do believe that my mother really improved my job performance and the quality of what I put my mind to.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Where does humor fit into professional behavior?
Over the past few days, I've communicated and worked with a variety of people, each of whom has a different sense of humor. The work I've done with these folks has been serious work; the subject matters we discuss have been important, significant issues; the people's responses and demonstration to humor has been different each time.
I don't know where wit figures into work, but I find it to be interesting. On one project this week, I've been working with the woman who is a little younger than I am, who has a very deadpan demeanor, who told my boss and me the funniest story I've heard in a long time--without cracking a smile.
And then there's the person I find it fun to offset because I think he takes things too seriously though I also think he delights in the silliness. Though what we have been discussing is of great importance, sometimes I find a good opportunity to make a joke--sometimes, it's understood, other times not so much. (Of course, I do have a weird sense of humor--another friend of mine likes to apologize when I make jokes with, "Not everyone 'gets' Ana." Of course, he works for the State senate, so it could be that he has trouble with humor in general.)
Next is the person who gets angry if you laugh at something she says or does; even if it is endearingly funny, she takes it personally if you laugh.
There's the other friend who likes to say that the line is where he knows he needs to step across. Although he's never personally insulting in his humor, he can be quite...graphic...in it.
But how does humor work in the workplace? As a tool, it is useful in meetings to make an audience comfortable; at workshops or conferences--amongst a group of strangers--it helps you get to know other people and vice versa. In blogging online, it keeps your audience interested in what you're discussing, or it keeps your audience from growing too bored. It is helpful when you're trying to understand your professional relations, including what motivates them, what they find important, and where boundaries lie. A lot of the most charismatic people in history demonstrated an appropriate balance between wit and intelligence, between professionalism and levity. In some ways, I'd even argue that good humor should count as highly as a job qualification as, say, the ability to communicate effectively. Because, honestly, I've never worked in a job where I didn't use my sense of humor as a tool toward either cutting to the heart of a situation or understanding the people I was working with--and even toward improving team work and team investment on a project.
Of course, humor is also an adaptive instinct.
I don't know where wit figures into work, but I find it to be interesting. On one project this week, I've been working with the woman who is a little younger than I am, who has a very deadpan demeanor, who told my boss and me the funniest story I've heard in a long time--without cracking a smile.
And then there's the person I find it fun to offset because I think he takes things too seriously though I also think he delights in the silliness. Though what we have been discussing is of great importance, sometimes I find a good opportunity to make a joke--sometimes, it's understood, other times not so much. (Of course, I do have a weird sense of humor--another friend of mine likes to apologize when I make jokes with, "Not everyone 'gets' Ana." Of course, he works for the State senate, so it could be that he has trouble with humor in general.)
Next is the person who gets angry if you laugh at something she says or does; even if it is endearingly funny, she takes it personally if you laugh.
There's the other friend who likes to say that the line is where he knows he needs to step across. Although he's never personally insulting in his humor, he can be quite...graphic...in it.
But how does humor work in the workplace? As a tool, it is useful in meetings to make an audience comfortable; at workshops or conferences--amongst a group of strangers--it helps you get to know other people and vice versa. In blogging online, it keeps your audience interested in what you're discussing, or it keeps your audience from growing too bored. It is helpful when you're trying to understand your professional relations, including what motivates them, what they find important, and where boundaries lie. A lot of the most charismatic people in history demonstrated an appropriate balance between wit and intelligence, between professionalism and levity. In some ways, I'd even argue that good humor should count as highly as a job qualification as, say, the ability to communicate effectively. Because, honestly, I've never worked in a job where I didn't use my sense of humor as a tool toward either cutting to the heart of a situation or understanding the people I was working with--and even toward improving team work and team investment on a project.
Of course, humor is also an adaptive instinct.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Web 3.0, Collaboration, and Metadata?
Web 2.0 is fading, Google is the core of Web 2.0. If you consider where the predictive web is going to take us next, consider how we get online. Something like 70% (this is my rough guess from memory, not a certain, assured percentage) of users access the Internet on mobile devices. How often on a mobile device is something like Google used? How often on a mobile device would it be more useful, more applicable to medium of web access, for necessary information to be provided to a person on his/her device, without use of Google? For example if Jane Doe is walking down a sidewalk in Minnesota, heading toward a coffee shop, it would make perfect sense for her GPS to locate where she is, and then to offer ads for coffee that is sold in that shop. (Then also to offer ads for new releases of books that are sold say, in the shop next door.) This is Web 3.0, and this type of thing is already starting.
Metadata, then, becomes critical, and providing metadata in as many formats as possible is critical. Keeping metadata librarian knowledge as current as possible is also important, primarily so that the metadata librarian (or cataloger, or even the simple web developer) can add new formats in which to provide metadata. Also, all of this metadata must somehow return back to the sender, so to speak--how/where does a consumer of information find the physical object for which s/he has seen the digital avatar?
Where does a technical communicator come into the game? Technical communicators specialize in recognizing communication gaps and barriers. TC also is a top field in usability test design.
Metadata, then, becomes critical, and providing metadata in as many formats as possible is critical. Keeping metadata librarian knowledge as current as possible is also important, primarily so that the metadata librarian (or cataloger, or even the simple web developer) can add new formats in which to provide metadata. Also, all of this metadata must somehow return back to the sender, so to speak--how/where does a consumer of information find the physical object for which s/he has seen the digital avatar?
Where does a technical communicator come into the game? Technical communicators specialize in recognizing communication gaps and barriers. TC also is a top field in usability test design.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Metadata at the Core of Web 3.0
About a month ago, I met with my dissertation committee for my first year review in the Technical Communication and Rhetoric PhD program. When they asked me what topics of research interest me, I responded with two things, the first a "first" choice, and the second as a secondary research field.
The first: A study of how the capitalist economic system and Western legal systems will have to change to accommodate a Web 3.0 world. The committee expressed boredom and skepticism with this topic.
The second: A study of how metadata affects consumption of digital materials; more important, an examination into how metadata will not only be key to what shapes Web 3.0, but also about how different disciplines should combine to improve metadata creation practices. One of the committee members jumped out of her chair in excitement, proclaiming, "THAT'S web 3.0!"
So the second topic it is.
It's taken me a month to write about this because I've been thinking it over. I'm reading up on information architecture, and I'd like to know why metadata to a cataloger is so much more important than, say, metadata to a web designer, when, in reality, it should be of utmost importance to both.
And usability and metadata. My dissertation director has mentioned a few times now about how he'd like to conduct some sort of usability study on metadata. How should that be shaped? Where does usability fit into metadata, aside from the obvious, "I was able to find it, therefore it's usable."
But what makes me think of all this now is that I often hear people discuss how there are no metadata standards, or few metadata standards, or the standards aren't very good, or how there need to be grant-funded programs to create metadata standards. What exists right now? Why is it broken? What do we do to fix it? Who should write it to begin with--and who should be fixing what exists? How do we go about preserving it? These are important questions to ask because, if standards is a state- and nation-wide issue, then obviously, the metadata we're seeing right now isn't sufficient. What more must be done?
Thank you, Carol, for making me type some of these questions up here.
The first: A study of how the capitalist economic system and Western legal systems will have to change to accommodate a Web 3.0 world. The committee expressed boredom and skepticism with this topic.
The second: A study of how metadata affects consumption of digital materials; more important, an examination into how metadata will not only be key to what shapes Web 3.0, but also about how different disciplines should combine to improve metadata creation practices. One of the committee members jumped out of her chair in excitement, proclaiming, "THAT'S web 3.0!"
So the second topic it is.
It's taken me a month to write about this because I've been thinking it over. I'm reading up on information architecture, and I'd like to know why metadata to a cataloger is so much more important than, say, metadata to a web designer, when, in reality, it should be of utmost importance to both.
And usability and metadata. My dissertation director has mentioned a few times now about how he'd like to conduct some sort of usability study on metadata. How should that be shaped? Where does usability fit into metadata, aside from the obvious, "I was able to find it, therefore it's usable."
But what makes me think of all this now is that I often hear people discuss how there are no metadata standards, or few metadata standards, or the standards aren't very good, or how there need to be grant-funded programs to create metadata standards. What exists right now? Why is it broken? What do we do to fix it? Who should write it to begin with--and who should be fixing what exists? How do we go about preserving it? These are important questions to ask because, if standards is a state- and nation-wide issue, then obviously, the metadata we're seeing right now isn't sufficient. What more must be done?
Thank you, Carol, for making me type some of these questions up here.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
For What It's Worth
As I discussed Liz Bishoff's article, I got to thinking about how good teamwork at an institution-level contributes to digitization. Every person at an institution is a stakeholder in digitization, whether s/he is the subject matter expert (SME), the metadata librarian, the digitization coordinator, the student assistant who scans, or the colleague of any of these people. Each person has a role to play.
It is important for each member of a team to recognize his/her role.
I have begun creating workflows for each unit that will be participating in the digitization process. (I got this process started with Dr. Warner, and now I've kind of taken it and run.) These are very basic checklists that give stakeholders a place to say, "I've done this part of the the project."
Here is the digital department workflow:
Workflow Checksheet for TTU SWC/SCL Digitization Projects
1. __________ Select item
a. Name of item ________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. __________ Notify Digitization Staff member and Student Assistant
3. __________ Raw scans done
4. __________ Quality control (Student Assistant)
5. __________ Quality control (Digitization Staff Member)
6. __________ Quality control (Subject Matter Expert)
7. __________ OCR
a. Deskew ______
b. Resize ______
8. __________ Subject Matter Expert and Cataloger notified that metadata needs to be added.
9. __________ Cataloger adds metadata.
10. __________ Item ready to upload.
11. __________ Upload complete
This is very, very basic stuff. Not anything earth-shaking. But I've started creating things like this to assist with project management, to keep the ball rolling, so to speak. This way, any time an object is first scanned, for instance, a checksheet travels with the object at every step.
Another issue in teamwork that is less obvious, but just as critical, is communication. It is important that teams overcome any sort of personality disputes, and in particular that members in teams avoid backstabbing other members to the rest of the team; this can be just as detrimental to the process as not having all members involved. In a way, I'd argue that it's even worse because, once all members are ostensibly working as a team, and then one member starts Stabby McBackstabbersonning another member to the entire team, the whole team risks becoming defunct. This is, in essence, a communication problem, and these types of communication problems can be headed off when someone clearly expresses an intent to work professionally with each member of the group--no matter what--and when the rest of the group can at least recognize that and stifle backstabbing behavior of one or two members of the team.
I think of this example because I remember a conversation with a friend who now teaches out at Central Florida. (Buy her book; she's a famous author http://www.amazon.com/Hilltop-Native-Storiers-American-Narratives/dp/0803226349/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268863629&sr=8-1) We were talking about classroom dynamics and misbehaving students in class. She said that what she tries to do is to be a good enough leader to her students that the other students recognize bad behavior in a rowdy student to the point where they, rather than she, will correct the student's behavior. If a digitization team has a strong enough leader, that person can at least rely on the team to guide squeaky wheels along. In part I think it has to do with a leader recognizing that each person, no matter his/her behavior, has a skillset to contribute to digital projects; in addition to preventing the team leader from becoming overly frustrated or upset, it also gives other team members a sense of purpose and self-worth--to the point of defending the team as a whole when the squeaky wheel makes inaccurate statements about the project, the team, or the leader.
Observations on how people communicate.
It is important for each member of a team to recognize his/her role.
I have begun creating workflows for each unit that will be participating in the digitization process. (I got this process started with Dr. Warner, and now I've kind of taken it and run.) These are very basic checklists that give stakeholders a place to say, "I've done this part of the the project."
Here is the digital department workflow:
Workflow Checksheet for TTU SWC/SCL Digitization Projects
1. __________ Select item
a. Name of item ________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. __________ Notify Digitization Staff member and Student Assistant
3. __________ Raw scans done
4. __________ Quality control (Student Assistant)
5. __________ Quality control (Digitization Staff Member)
6. __________ Quality control (Subject Matter Expert)
7. __________ OCR
a. Deskew ______
b. Resize ______
8. __________ Subject Matter Expert and Cataloger notified that metadata needs to be added.
9. __________ Cataloger adds metadata.
10. __________ Item ready to upload.
11. __________ Upload complete
This is very, very basic stuff. Not anything earth-shaking. But I've started creating things like this to assist with project management, to keep the ball rolling, so to speak. This way, any time an object is first scanned, for instance, a checksheet travels with the object at every step.
Another issue in teamwork that is less obvious, but just as critical, is communication. It is important that teams overcome any sort of personality disputes, and in particular that members in teams avoid backstabbing other members to the rest of the team; this can be just as detrimental to the process as not having all members involved. In a way, I'd argue that it's even worse because, once all members are ostensibly working as a team, and then one member starts Stabby McBackstabbersonning another member to the entire team, the whole team risks becoming defunct. This is, in essence, a communication problem, and these types of communication problems can be headed off when someone clearly expresses an intent to work professionally with each member of the group--no matter what--and when the rest of the group can at least recognize that and stifle backstabbing behavior of one or two members of the team.
I think of this example because I remember a conversation with a friend who now teaches out at Central Florida. (Buy her book; she's a famous author http://www.amazon.com/Hilltop-Native-Storiers-American-Narratives/dp/0803226349/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268863629&sr=8-1) We were talking about classroom dynamics and misbehaving students in class. She said that what she tries to do is to be a good enough leader to her students that the other students recognize bad behavior in a rowdy student to the point where they, rather than she, will correct the student's behavior. If a digitization team has a strong enough leader, that person can at least rely on the team to guide squeaky wheels along. In part I think it has to do with a leader recognizing that each person, no matter his/her behavior, has a skillset to contribute to digital projects; in addition to preventing the team leader from becoming overly frustrated or upset, it also gives other team members a sense of purpose and self-worth--to the point of defending the team as a whole when the squeaky wheel makes inaccurate statements about the project, the team, or the leader.
Observations on how people communicate.
Sometimes, the world is a cool place to live in becuase of folks like this
URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/16/jobcentre_jedi/
Really, just read the article. It's fabulous.
Really, just read the article. It's fabulous.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
