Adonis Diaries

Archive for October 23rd, 2011

What is your job? Housewife or…?

You are submitting to an interview, again, for a job opening, a voluntary work…You are at a social gathering, schmoozing, or… Are you ready for the inevitable question: “What is your job”?

Is you job:

On what you spend most of your waking time? Like having fun, surfing the net, chatting on social platforms, jogging, biking, commuting, shambling amateur, ambulant pacifier, baby wrangler, chased out of the house perimeter…?

Is your job what generate most income by the end of the day, the week, the month, the year, after you retire…?

Is your job the collective activities that generate income, higher than the “main bread earner”…?

Is your job taking care of the daily house chores, maintaining life of the family, sustaining the existence of the potential members of the household, who will ultimately generate plenty of income so that you are paid a certain percentage on other people earnings, like the government?

Is your job inspiring your community for actions that should better the community standard for a good and happy life?

Is your job collecting donations for a certain politician who promised heaven and richness…?

Lucy Mangan published a piece in the The Guardian.  A survey by Mothercare revealed that housewives much prefer to be identified as “Stay-at-home mums”. Why?

Why, if a man is taking care of the internal chores of the housekeeping, should he submit to the “mums” things and be brutalized and beaten on the head as the wife comes home?

Mangan wrote: “Housewife” recalls strongly the wasp-waisted 50’s figure outwardly thrilling to the latest advances in domestic technology, while necking tranquilizers to dull the pain of frustrated ambition…

Stay-at-home mums does limit the insinuation of servitude to your offspring…” How your offspring observe in the behavior of the parent is how they limit their objectives as they grow up”?

Are Stay-at-home journalist, writer,…be referred to as househusbands?

Stay-at-home mums might generate yards-stares such as one of the following interpretations, or all of them:

Here, I give-you-simple-facts;

I have chosen not to work-and feel pity-contempt for those who have not chosen likewise;

I’m telling you upfront that I am not currently a productive economic unit, so stop judging me…

If you want to satisfy the community perception of you, you cannot win, unless you are in a position to extend profitable referrals, by a simple phone call, or sending a SMS to the targeted influential boss…

Efficient PowerPoint presentation: And no bullet points?

Why do we have to “atomize” a task to its basic elements, if we are ultimately bound to resurrect the task as a whole entity? For example, let us consider the general method of Seth Godin, a remnant of what is used to be labelled Task Analysis in the 80’s for breaking down tasks and allocating what are satisfactory to man and what are more advantageous to relegate to automation.

Seth posted his method for creating a  PowerPoint presentation without using the useless and unnerving bullet points.  Here it goes:

“The typical person speaks 10 or 12 sentences a minute.  The atomic method requires to create a slide for each sentence. For a five-minute talk, that’s 50 slides.

Each slide must have either a single word, a single image or a single idea.  Make all 50 slides.

Force yourself to break each concept into the smallest possible atom. If it’s not worthy of a slide, don’t say it.

Once you have 50 slides, do the talk in practice. Remove slides and sentences that add no value or don’t move you forward.

Now (and only now), start consolidating slides. If two or three or four slides work together as one, then go ahead and make them one. You’ve got molecules now, not atoms.

At this point, you can either get rid of slides altogether, keep them as is or lump them one more time into bigger ideas.” End of quote.

Have you been asked to submit a  PowerPoint presentation? This is the main job of high ranked military officers, and chairmen of corporations…If they did the job themselves, instead of relegating it to subordinates, maybe the salary is worth the undertaking.

“Atomizing” a talk, a presentation, a political speech, a scientific concept, a research proposal…is an excellent exercise and worth the time and effort invested. The trick is to doing it once, alone, whatever time it might take, diligently, stubbornly. Just once: You have demonstrated that you have the potential to be a Hard Working individual, and you proved it to yourself.  Trying to arrange your thought in a rational system is hard work and a process required from productive and smart employees…Remember: Imagination is a byproduct of smart, hard working habits, with the ability of resolving problems from diverse perspectives and angles…

I suggest that, after reconstructing your talk from the various elements, hide the talk in a drawer for a couple of days, try to forget that you have written a “rational” paper…After a few days, rewrite the speech from scratch: Don’t cheat and take a peek at the rational work.  What you have missed is not within your conviction and you will not apply it, and you don’t believe in it…

People strongest advantage over automated machines and algorithms is that they are very sensitive to faked talks and presentations…You cannot inspire and convince if you include parts that do not describe your strongest passions, your sincerest potentials, and willingness to apply what you disseminated.

I dare you and challenge you to brake down your job into basic elements, at least once, and then rearrange it into a tight meaningful resurrected job.  Remember: A few redundancies are necessary for the main idea to be absorbed: Here is imagination at work, putting yourself in the “audience skin”…




October 2011

Blog Stats

  • 1,516,362 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 822 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: