Linux, finance, rants, politics

When an organization is still in the small, startup phase, it’s not hard to have employees that each feel like they have a stake in the company and are willing to rally behind it. As the company grows, however, subsequent employees get distanced from management and from company success, so it is easier for them to treat the job less like their own undertaking, and more like a paycheck. Too many employees treating their work as just a job will end up affecting company culture and ultimately, product. Identifying and rewarding torchbearers helps to ensure that the cultural message is effectively conveyed and carried out at all ranks.

Jotted down in a file I keep called “life rules”, I have a simple phrase. Create, don’t destroy. It sounds trite, and perhaps it is. But I firmly believe that the most successful people in the world follow this principle every day, whether or not they have specifically written it anywhere. While it may not make you rich and famous, if you spend your time creating instead of destroying, it will undoubtedly make your life far better.

What does it mean, “create, don’t destroy”? There are countless opportunities every day where we make decisions to add to or subtract from something. Projects at work started by an adversary that you’d rather see fail, cynical observations that don’t have any constructive benefit, favors that you could easily do for someone, but choose not to — these are all chances that we have to build on something, but instead choose to detract from it. There are all sorts of underlying roots — jealousy, political gain, personal grudges — but in each case the effort in the task is designed to undermine.

Instead, spend your time improving anything and everything you can. Even if you secretly want a project to fail, put that aside and contribute earnestly. It might feel good or be easy to criticize or be cynical, and often it is. Far more difficult is actually helping out and building. You’ll find, however, that those that build are far better rewarded and end up far happier than those that destroy. Creation itself is an additive process — the more you create, the more you’ll be able to create. Why waste effort in making something fail when you could have a hand in making it succeed?

Last week, while I was making sure my privacy settings were fined-tuned after reading all the buzz about Google Buzz, I stumbled onto a neat feature of Google Accounts that I hadn’t seen before. It’s called Dashboard, and it’s a great concept: most of the information that Google has accumulated about you is collected in one place, and you’re given options to manage how you share it all.

If you’re like me, you have almost a dozen Google services — Gmail, Picasa, Voice, Reader, Checkout, Alerts, Analytics, etc. Making sure that everything is set up correctly and not inadvertently exposed to the world is an otherwise painful task that is made easy with Dashboard. By scrolling down and glancing at the summaries of your various services, you can make sure that the pictures of Grandma’s birthday party aren’t visible to the world.

So, despite some other privacy setbacks (really what were they thinking with Buzz?), I think this is a leap forward for a company to expose the data they have about you and give you choices about what they do with it. Imagine the grocery store doing this with your preferred card or your phone company with the data they collect from your wireless bill (and location data they get from your GPS). It’s great when consumers have the choice about how their information is used, and kudos to Google for getting this one right. They still have some work to do given how much info we end up giving them, but definitely a step in the right direction.

The most successful companies are the ones that work every day toward building what I call a “culture of ideas”. Google is the prime example of this — if you work at Google, you’re encouraged to spend 20% of your work time on ideas that interest you. Think about this — Google “loses” one day a week of productivity from their workers while they pursue projects that they find interesting!

Dig a little deeper, however, and you’ll find that it is anything but losing for Google. In fact,

As legend has it, the humanities program at MIT was started by an MIT president who quipped “too many MIT graduates end up working for Harvard and Yale graduates”. The thinking then, which remains to this day, is
that engineering classes make a person narrowly focused whereas humanities classes help a student to see the full picture. Although I can see some truth in this, I would argue that a person is far better equipped to be a great manager having taken engineering than its “softer” alternatives.

The New York Times today has an article about how YouTube is transforming the nightly news. As more high-quality, user-generated content is uploaded to YouTube by professional news networks, semi-professional hobbyists and amateur aspiring Ron Burgundys, the potential for customized, localized news delivered directly to your computer whenever you want it becomes a reality. Google, which owns YouTube, has already built out Google News to deliver fresh and personalized news that they’ve harvested from news sites around the web, and YouTube video news is a logical next step.

No doubt, this is great. However, with smaller city newspapers failing across the country and even the venerable Times in trouble, the long-term sustainability of content providers is a serious question. Right now, Google News and YouTube news videos are fueled largely by professional journalism companies that make their money selling advertisements in print and video media. However, as Google steps in and uses the content without providing an adequate revenue stream back to the content creators, the prospects for professional journalism look dim.