The LifeMaven

I tried to see Avatar in Imax 3D this morning with my girlfriend, and was disappointed that the entire day’s worth of showings were sold out. Apparently many other folks thought like we did and thought they’d try to catch the movie on a free day off.

Some thoughts about this:

1)      If you’re going to make a spectacular movie, you should reduce the limits to those who want to see it. Make it widespread, make it easy to see. I know Avatar is showing in non-Imax and non 3D locations, but that wasn’t the intention of the movie. The intention was to spend a lot of money on CGI special effects and post production, and that would be essentially wasted in a non-Imax setting.

2)      There is the eternal debate between effects vs. storytelling. Should a movie focus on the appearance and the visual aspect? Or should they focus on the emotional story? From what I’ve heard, Avatar is in the former, making it all the more important that it be available in its intended format. This is especially true since it’s unlikely that the movie’s story would be able to hold it on its own in a traditional theater. At least, that’s what I think of it now.

3)      An even more personal gripe. My girlfriend and I went to abnormal lengths (for us anyway) to try and see Avatar today. To be unable to is so frustrating, that I am unwilling to give them a chance again. I told her, “I’ll probably just forget about seeing it now. It’s too much of a hassle and I don’t want to waste my time again.” Is this the reaction you want your customers to have? I know moviemakers may not have full control over the availability of Imax theaters, but then why make a movie that is only at its best in Imax? Either spend your effort making the graphics good looking in a regular theater, or focus on the story and make a movie memorable that way.

That’s my venting on today’s Avatar experience.

PS: We saw Sherlock Holmes instead and were sufficiently entertained by that to not have ruined the day completely.

(I started writing this post Friday night after i got home. But to use a term from the book, The Resistance kicked in and stopped me from posting it. NO MORE!)

I saw Seth Godin at The Linchpin Session at FIT this morning. To me it was well worth it, just like all of his other talks. (Even though I never paid for those.)

He talked about the new economy and how we don’t have to be cogs if we don’t want to. Instead, we are artists. Every positive aspect of our actions that isn’t defined by a job description is our art.

He talked about how we need to be generous with our gifts, and share them with the world. And how school forces us and endoctrinates us into taking orders and not showing initiative.

All in all, another life changing talk. I saw someone recording it from the front row so i’m hoping it’ll end up on TED or Youtube, because there was just so much good stuff there (like there always is) that I don’t think I truly absorbed all of it at once.

I had my book signed by Seth, (swoons) and he left me with a simple message.

Make something happen.

That’s the true essence of the entire book and speech. Be like Nike and Just Do It. Share your gifts with the world and worry about the results later. Just get them out there! Change someone’s life! (For the better.)

PS: Seth is compiling a list of posts and interviews on the book here. Check it out for another look.

Is it wrong to apply to multiple jobs that you have no real interest in?

This is a question I’ve thought about recently. I went on a job interview with several other candidates and found myself making small talk with a few as we went to college together.

One person said “I have like 5 or 6 offers.”

My thoughts are: what are you doing here then?

I know the importance of having multiple options, leveraging different offers, and so forth.

On the other hand, as one of the other potential applicants, it seems rather selfish to be hoarding offers like that.

Surely with 5 or 6 offers, one of those must have a strong appeal to you. You must have some feeling as to whether or not you’re going to accept.

So, if you have little to no intention of accepting the job, then why do you bother to apply? You’re taking up a spot that could be used for someone just as qualified who really needs the job.

This is especially true if the company views several candidates equally and only chooses one essentially at random.

What do you think? Should there be a limit on the number of offers an applicant has before they are interviewed? Or is it true survival of the fittest, and you need to take care of yourself first, fairness be damned?

A quick post to start the day. Seth posted this morning on career fairs and their, well, lack of fairness.

As usual, Seth says what I’ve had inkling to all along. That career fairs don’t really work. Everyone there is so eager (read desperate) for a job, that we kiss so much ass our lips hurt.

And the interviewers? They really don’t care whether you’re qualified or not. It only matters to them if you make a personal connection with them and they like you. It’s all personality.

I love Seth’s analogy. “You wouldn’t look for your soulmate at a single’s bar or nightclub. Why would you look for your ideal job at a career fair?”

But the key question Seth leaves unanswered is “what then is the best way to find your ideal job?”

Some hints/tips that I believe in:

1)      Be remarkable

2)      Do things worthwhile

3)      Make a difference

4)      Improve a skill

5)      Be different

I don’t have all the answers. Just look at where I am!

Do you have any alternatives to the career fair? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments.

It’s been two months since I lasted posted here.

And of course, life can teach you a lot in two months.

For starters, I’ve reaffirmed my distaste for traditional, big corporate America. I’m tired of working hard, being positive, bringing a good attitude, going above and beyond the call of duty and not being adequately compensated for it.

This doesn’t mean I’ll stop doing those things. No, not yet.

But I’m just dissatisfied with the whole experience. That if you work hard and don’t make too much noise, maybe upper management won’t notice you and will instead force you to work from a space the size of a single desk.

My co-workers know how hard I work. They know how good my attitude is and how much better I make their work lives. And yet, I am still an intern, graduated from college, no benefits, a passing wage and minimal hours.

But hey, at least I have a lot of time to myself still. :-/

I’ve learned how much I agree with Seth Godin and dislike the traditional interview process.

Speaking to big corporate America:

Skills are learn-able and teachable, why not focus on personality like you secretly are anyway. Why not just take five minutes to make a judgment about a person and then decide to give them a shot?

No, not a job for life, but a shot!

An internship, a true internship, where we’ll do real work, with real teams and make real contributions. And if we’ve done a good job during that time, why not bring us on full time? Not just leave us to rot under a minimal salary while you benefit from our hard work, with the ever constant and false promise of “temp to full time.”

On a more positive note, one great thing about living in New York City is the library. I am a new, huge fan of the New York Public Library. Prior to this, I had only had a Queens Library card.

(Queens public library is a separate entity from New York’s, don’t ask me why, I have no idea. Separate libraries, separate library cards, etc.)

I finally fully activated my NYPL card and have been astounded with the variety of choices and wealth of knowledge at my disposal. I can place books on hold and pick them up at the nearest branch, a convenient one block walk from my job. I can access a fairly decent array of WMA audiobooks for free download online. Great authors such as Seth and Malcolm Gladwell fill my ears and intellect instead of my traditional rock music commute.

Wow! My thirst for knowledge and greater mental stimulation has returned!

And so, I return to you once again dear reader, from another long hiatus. Hopefully, I’ll be able to regain some momentum and keep the words, ideas, and posts coming. In the meantime, thanks for listening. And enjoy!

A simple epiphany for me.

One of the reasons for my current situation is my disdain for corporate life and traditional jobs.

I had felt that I would be happier if I had more free time and tried to build my own business on the side. It would allow me to both enjoy myself and create my future.

The past few months have taught me a lot:

1) It is difficult to start a business that your heart is not entirely in.

(Follow your passions)

You have to really love what you’re doing. If you spend hours working on your business/project and forget to eat or wonder where the time went, then you know you’re on the right track.

2) Just as hard, is finding a business model that works with your passions.

(How will your passion make you money, who will pay and how much.)

3) Set your own goals for what you want in life.

(Your list of things to do before you die. )

Make sure these are your goals and not just what society or your peers think should be your goals. They should speak to you on an emotional, deeper level. Your heart should race with excitement as you think about them!

4) Based on those goals, how will you achieve or finance them.

(Small business or corporate?)

The last point brings me to my intentions for this post. I realized that by working part time and trying to force myself to come up with a business, I was not getting any closer to my goals.

Much to my disbelief, taking one of those traditional corporate jobs would give me the funds much faster and make it much easier to get started on my goals. The only problem would be if I fall too into the other extreme and forget my goals entirely. Otherwise, a job will simply be another means to my ends.

On my list there are some things that I want to experience before I die. Things like drive on the Laguna Seca or the Nurburgring. These are both very achievable if I only had the finances. It is not something that I need an overwhelming amount of time for. A week maybe? I could use vacation time from said corporate job to do it.

Am I selling out? Vaguely.

It depends on the corporate culture that I join. If the values are right, and the environment is good, then I won’t have a problem.

But I won’t get stuck in another unhealthy corporation, just for the money.

(Disclaimer: The company I’m at now wasn’t always this bad. But in the year and half I’ve been there, I’ve seen it go bad. Firing good people, under paying others, all in the name of cutting costs and maintaining profitability and the salaries of those in managerial positions, while the front line staff are marginalized and forgotten.)

The corporation I join has to do their part. They need to reward their employees’ efforts and truly practice the cliche that employees are their best asset.

If they do that, then I can join in peace.

The media does so little to hold our government and corporations accountable for their spending.

Very seldom do we hear about these ridiculous situations in the mainstream media.

Things like the postmaster general making 800k in salary and bonuses or that ex-AIG CEO Edward Liddy didn’t really work for 1 dollar after all.

Instead we hear about these sensationalized crimes that, while certainly very unfortunate, have little affect on our day to day lives.

So little of this kind of governmental waste is revealed to the voters. Instead, we get everything the political campaigns want us to hear. Vague, general statements about how these politicians will be different and change things in Washington. Well, how are they changing things in Washington if you’re too busy campaigning and giving this speech here?

Going back to the AIG bailout fatigue, recently little has been made in the news about the multi MILLION dollar salary and bonus the new CEO will receive.

Are we, as the American public, resigned to just accept such behavior from corporate CEOs and government officials? That CEOs and politicians will always engage in such backscratching and paybacks?

“You donate to my campaign and I’ll make sure you get favorable legislation” or between CEOs, “you serve on my board of directors and back me up and ill do the same for you.”

Please, someone prove me wrong. Show me evidence that this is not the case in our fair nation.

PS: I haven’t even talked about the same kind of waste that occurs in our colleges and universities. Presidents pocket ridiculous salaries and fret over waning endowments instead of the best ways to serve our students. A waning endowment may be a problem, but not if you’re Harvard and already have MILLIONS saved.

PPS: I credit Gregg Easterbrook of ESPN’s Tuesday Morning Quarterback column for bringing these issues to light in the first place. Without him, I would never have heard of such atrocities. His affiliations and other places of contribution are also listed in the link above.

Here’s the scenario:

Person S and T are good friends. They are both members of the same career network. Person V is a manager at a company and also a member of that network. V has a possible job opportunity. V and S have worked together before and have previous experience together. T has worked on a project for V in their career network, but aside from that, have had little contact together.

V offers S the opportunity and does not tell T about said opportunity. Is this fair?

My take:

It is not fair, but it is simply a given when relying on an underdeveloped network for opportunities.

It is difficult to expect your network to remember you and keep you in the loop when you have little contact or previous experience with them. Especially if the only time you’re in contact is when you need help.

Meanwhile a fellow network member has been much more outgoing, and has made more of an effort keep in contact. Is it any mystery that they get the opportunities?

Furthermore, should T feel wronged that they were not given the opportunity to interview and compete when the very essence of their career network is to hear of job opportunities before the rest of the common population do?

Again, my take is: no.

If you’re a member of an exclusive network,  should you be surprised when there is another exclusive group within that network that you are not a part of?

It is all a part of networking. The sword cuts both ways as it were. Sometimes it helps and sometimes it doesnt.

At the very least you’re still in the same position as you were before. Still looking.

As Scott Young says, its a win/neutral situation. Not a win/lose. You don’t lose anything, you just merely remain the same.

What do you think? Was it wrong for V to favor S? Was it unfair? Surprising? Where does T go from here?