Archive for the ‘Archive’ Category

I read this online this morning. The findings are intuitively attractive, though should also be taken with a grain of salt. If these results were the outcome of an experiment or direct observation, they would have more weight. However, I am always incredibly cautious with survey results. When answering a survey on behaviour, a couple of assumptions are implied. First, the person accurately reports their behaviour which is often not the case due to inaccurate recall, or they describe how they think they should answer. Second, asking “why” questions makes the assumption that people understand the variables that operate on their behaviour  – simply, in most cases, they do not.  This is evident in the article below where people answer why they kept to the speed limit and the reply was “due to safety.” Here we have the nominal fallacy of the description of behaviour (driving safely – keeping to the speed limit) used as the explanation of behaviour (keeping to the speed limit – driving safely) – nothing in this explanation adds to our knowledge of the variables operating on our driving behaviour.

Male motorists take more risks

Last updated 10:01 19/05/2010

Male motorists take more risks than women at drink-driving and speeding, an AA Insurance survey has found.

The survey of 4336 drivers aged 18-65 found men were more likely to drink and drive than women, with 32 percent of men and 24 percent of women saying they had driven when they were probably over the limit.

Nineteen percent of men said it was OK to drive after a few drinks as long as they felt capable, compared with 9 percent of women.

The same percentage of men said they sometimes altered their driving route to avoid being breathalysed after drinking, compared with 11 percent of women.

Nearly a quarter of men (24 percent) said they broke the speed limit ”most of the time”, compared with 16 percent of women, but 90 percent of those breaking the limit said they exceeded it by only 5-10kmh.

When asked why they kept to the speed limit, 47 percent of women and 36 percent of men said it was due to safety.

AA Insurance deputy general manager Martin Fox said men were more confident than women in their driving abilities and took more risks, but they also spent more time behind the wheel.

Men were also more confident in their ability to teach others to drive.

The drink-driving figures were “cause for real concern,” and the survey results suggested risk-taking behaviours could be passed on to the next generation of drivers, he said.

I saw Fisher and Paykel on Close Up talking about their offshore factories. Andrew Paykel stated he was “quite concerned” about the quality issues of some of the products. I am experiencing cognitive dissonance because what I see (an executive state he is quite concerned about a problem) and what I have experienced (see my blogs 9 and 14 February where my dishdrawer broke down and my email to the customer care centre has not been responded to) are completely different. And why is an executive only “quite” concerned? Shouldn’t he be “very” concerned? Wouldn’t it be better to be on the tv sharing your great products (Apple with the Ipad) rather than to try and justify that problems are being sorted. And … still waiting for a reply to my email from the Customer Care Centre – fortunately I didn’t hold my breath.

The stupidity at times, amazes even me.

I stay in a particular hotel in Auckland (which I won’t name as a client books it for me) about one week a month, so approximately 50-60 days a year. Now, that is a pretty good occupancy for them.

I leave my toothbrush charger in the bathroom. Imagine if the next day I received it in the post from the hotel with a note. Imagine how pleased I would have been, and how much I would have appreciated their service and thoughtfulness. Simple stuff, but of course, that is not what happened.

Four days later my toothbrush needs charging and, upon looking for the charger, I realise that I left it in the hotel. I email them and, here is the good part, they respond within 24 hours saying, that indeed, they have it. Now, my immediate reaction is, why on earth did no one contact me given that they had my contact details and must have known it was mine? Why was it up to me to email them and, if I hadn’t realised that is where I left it, would have spent about $200 buying another one? Absolutely bewildering. It gets worse – they are charging me to post it back! Fifty to sixty nights a year and they are going to charge me $10 (I hope no more) to post it back. It gets even worse. They won’t post it unless I send authorisation to debit my credit card (clearly high bureaucracy and zero trust for a regular guest). So, now I have to fill in a form, scan it and email it back, a whole 10 minutes of activity to rub salt into the wound.

Here is a hotel with posters about their service and values plastered all over the lifts, not telling me I have left something behind and waiting for me to phone them (presumably throwing it out if I don’t), charging me $10 to post it back, and making me fill in a form. Would you recommend this hotel to anyone? I certainly won’t be. Textbook dumb arse management!

Back in May, Andy Haden made some egregious comments. Earlier this week, he made more egregious comments. This time he went, and voluntarily at that. This was 2 months too late. Where was the leadership to swiftly act on this? Serious values digressions are rarely one-offs and are usually indicative of a pattern of responding (we only heard two public comments – goodness knows what was said elsewhere). If you don’t deal with values digressions swiftly, they’ll end up being just propaganda on the office walls – and we all know places where this occurs. Values are not just about winning the game, they are about how you win the game. How are you winning yours?

Was again at Eden Park. Jeff kindly took me for another look around. These photos were taken from the coaching box.

You may be aware of the tunnel being built in Victoria Park in Auckland (http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/news/council/200908/23/a04.asp) . Last year when I was there it was a large paddock with a few trucks and several guys – slightly different now!

Read this online earlier this morning – somewhat interesting. If you have a bullying issue, then you have a values issue and, as I stated a couple of posts earlier, they do not go away by themselves.

Banish Bullies from Work

Last updated 10:30 02/08/2010

Bullying is a major problem in New Zealand workplaces and it’s time employers woke up to it, says one employment law specialist.

Barbara Buckett, of Wellington firm Barbara Buckett and Associates, says bullying can sometimes be considered part of the culture of an organisation and deemed to be acceptable behaviour.

But Ms Buckett says a recent case in Australia where a cafe owner was fined A$220,000 (NZ$270,470) for failing to provide a safe working environment is also a warning to New Zealand employers.

“While the level of fines may not be as high here, it is a wake-up call for employers,” she says.

Many employers may not be aware they can be fined up to $250,000 under New Zealand health and safety in employment legislation for unsafe workplaces and hazards in the workplace. Bullying can also be considered as harassment under the Human Rights Act, and could cost an employer a maximum $200,000 fine.

And it could also be considered as a breach of contract where the contract specifies the right to a safe working environment. An employee has the right to refuse to work where there is a health and safety issue, Ms Buckett says.

“Apart from the potential fines and penalties, there is no doubt bullying is costly – it affects health, demoralises, negatively affects productivity, staff morale, staff turnover and employee satisfaction, causes absenteeism and generally has a negative impact on the organisation and its business. It is insidious and unacceptable.”

Recent figures from a university survey, commissioned by the Department of Labour, show nearly one in five New Zealand workers are bullied at work, one of the worst rates in the world.

A joint research team from Auckland, Waikato, Massey and London polled more than 1700 workers from the health, education, hospitality and travel sectors asking how often they were exposed to “negative acts” at work.

Overall, 17.5 per cent of respondents were identified as victims of bullying. The range was five to 20 per cent.

In the Australian case, persistent bullying at work led to the suicide of a waitress and resulted in a successful prosecution of not only the cafe owner, but the company and its three employees.

The bullying consisted of both mental and physical abuse of the waitress by co- workers. They called her fat, ugly, stupid and a whore. They spat on her, gossiped about her, taunted her about a failed earlier suicide attempt and poured fish oil on her bag and clothes.

The owner was aware but did nothing to prevent it happening. Under the Australian Health and Safety legislation the cafe owner was fined A$220,000 while the three employees were each fined between $10,000 and $45,000.

Though the Australian case is extreme, Ms Buckett says a similar situation could present itself here if employers don’t stamp it out.

“Recent tragic consequences from schoolyard bullying are a testimony to how fatal and severe the consequences can be.” Whether employers realise it or not, Ms Buckett says they, as an organisation, bear the responsibility for the systematic destruction of another.

She encourages employers to use the helpline 0800 0 BULLY, specifically set up to offer advice to organisations seeking to provide a bully-free workplace.

Under New Zealand law employers must provide a safe and healthy workplace and all complaints about bullying should be taken seriously and investigated, she says.

All workplaces should also have policies identifying unacceptable behaviours and should specifically target bullying.

What constitutes bullying is not defined and is a matter of fact and degree – what is acceptable in one case may not be in another and workplace banter or strident management normally won’t come within the definition, Ms Buckett says.

A one-off situation won’t usually constitute bullying – what is generally accepted as bullying is repeated unwanted and unwarranted behaviour which has the effect of humiliating, intimidating and degrading a person, she says.

Bullying can be verbal or physical abuse, such as name calling, offensive language, unflattering names, blaming, unjust treatment, shouting, cursing, slamming, throwing, rudeness, dishonesty, threats of violence, unfair and different treatment, unfair and constant criticism, alienation, unreasonable, refusing leave, work overload, publicly humiliating and belittling remarks, teasing, cruel and intentionally hurtful remarks and hostility.

It was about 36˚ when I was away, and this is what I have returned to.

I bought a Fisher and Paykel Dishdrawer in January which I couldn’t use until two weeks after purchase. One week for delivery, and another week to replace it as it was broken before it was even out of  the box. Two weeks later it has broken down (well at least I got to use it this time). Now the interesting part isn’t that it has broken twice within a few weeks, as bad as that is. What is interesting (and highly annoying) is that it can’t be fixed for three days because the technician won’t be over this side of town until then. I have clients (yes, that is plural) that will be at someone’s house in under an hour if there is a problem. Here however, I have to work around the technician’s schedule (and of course I don’t even know the time so will be waiting around home) because it isn’t convenient to drive here until three days time. Why is this? Is there only a horse and cart available? I doubt it. I think it is because the focus is on the input of what suits the organisation (have the technicians in one area) rather than on the output of serving the customer. So, hand washing dishes for me – mind you, am getting good at it ever since I bought this dishdrawer.

And … hasn’t Fisher and Paykel had some problems over the last year? Hmmm, I have a suggestion or two for areas of improvement.