Alternatives to a “Mental Health Day”

For the first time in years, I have a lull in my work load. With the slow economy I’ve had the luxury of working ahead. I’m between deadlines plus, waiting for my boss to finish his portion of a project before I can proceed. I can’t help but think this would be the perfect time to take a sick day. In the past, I’ve had difficulty calling in sick when I was actually sick. My job revolves around deadlines many of which the company can be fined for if not met. I don’t have anyone who can easily cover for me, so If a tax return is due or commissions need to be calculated I go to work even if sick.

At a previous job, one of my co-workers accused me of making her look bad; I never called in sick while she repeatedly used all of her sick days. She called them “mental health days.” I once asked her what she did on these mental health days. Mostly she read and caught up with her family’s laundry being careful not to leave the house fearing she would be caught. She often reminded me sick days are a benefit you lose if you don’t use.

I don’t want to use a vacation day, but a day of reading and blogging sounds pretty attractive right now compared to sitting at my desk trying to make myself look busy. My friend Bob grew so tired of watching his employees trying to look busy he instituted a furlough policy. Friday would be my day; I will call in sick and have a three day weekend. Then the guilt and my farm girl work ethic came into play:

My boss and my bosses boss know I’m not busy even asking me what I was working on while I was unsuccessfully trying to cut and paste a picture out of a newsletter onto my blog (it was technically lunchtime). They are going to know I’m faking it if I call in. I will then be lumped in with all the other employees with poor attitudes. Then it came to me -- what if I used this slow period to become a better employee. I’ve always been reactive rather than proactive and there are all those interview questions about self-initiative accomplishments I stumble through. Now is the time to update my work skills and our department. I came up with the following list:

Resolve all those little bugs in our systems and procedures:
Debug spreadsheets. Set up query reports for spreadsheets we now prepare manually. Update procedure manuals. Clean and organize my desk. Organize and delete old emails.

Create in-house computer accessible expense report; saving money on forms.

Interview outside payroll companies in search of a cheaper, more service oriented, less cumbersome system than we use now (ADP).

Offer to assist my overworked boss with his portion of the project we are working on. Ask him for additional work.

Talk to my boss’s boss. What would he like me to do to take our department to the next level? What would he like to receive from our department that he is not currently receiving?

Thursday night's episode of "The Office" only confirmed my decision not to call in sick. Kathy Bate’s character Jo says the following to Michael who wants to leave for the day:

"If you can put your name on this day and are proud of the work you’ve done by all means go home."

Do you take “Mental Health Days” when you’re not busy? If not, what do you do to keep busy?

"In the Name of Honor" is an important book that deserves to be read

Mukhtar Mai’s book In the Name of Honor: A Memoir is on my list of non-fiction books every woman should read and also counts towards the Women Unbound Challenge.

It is the story of Muktar Mai, a poor, uneducated peasant woman from the small village of Meerwala, Pakistan. Her life is turned upside down when she is gang-raped on the order of a council of elders as punishment for her brother’s alleged affair with a woman of a higher clan. Instead of committing suicide, as many Pakistani rape victims do, Mukhtar Mai decides to fight for justice and report the incident to the police. She experiences opposition (the police are controlled by the upper castes) and it was not until her story was picked up by the media that an investigation was conducted and her attackers were arrested. Ultimately, she was awarded the equivalent of 8,500 U.S. dollars which she used along with international donations to start the first school for girls in her village. Her goal is to ensure that future generations do not suffer, as she had, from illiteracy.

For me, this book was eye opening. Prior to reading, I had known Pakistani women were mostly uneducated and had few rights, but I had no idea barbaric practices such as “Honor Crimes” were still in existence. Mukhtar Mai informs us:

A woman is nothing more than an object of exchange, from birth to marriage. According to custom she has no rights.

And:

Naseem says we’re less important than goats, or even worse, less important than the slippers a man throws away when he decides they are worn out.

I admire her extraordinary courage and strength:

When I begin this journey into the legal system, a path from which there is no turning back, I’m hampered by my illiteracy and my status as a woman. Aside from my family, I have only one strength to call upon: my outrage.”

She was fortunate to have been born into a family whose men supported her; without it she would never have been able to seek justice:

Her father and her imam and her uncles supported her through the worst of it. They encouraged her to seek legal redress and their encouragement wrought a miracle beyond their imagining. Their tribeswoman — daughter, niece, cousin — became an international heroine.

In the Name of Honor is a short book that can be a bit dry at times, but is an important book that deserves to be read. Not to mention the fact that Mukhtar’s case against her attackers remains pending.

What to do when you are unhappy with job offer?

Marcie asks about a recent job offer:
My company closed last summer putting me out of work for the first time in eighteen years. I recently interviewed for a position that was almost identical to the job I held at my previous company. The interview went well and I was given a job offer. Unfortunately, the offer was not for the position I applied for, but for a lower-level position. The recruiting firm I worked with told me the company decided not to fill the original position opting to create this new position instead.

I don’t understand why a company would do this? The company will still need the work completed for the position I applied for. Why didn’t they hire me for the appropriate position?

This is an easy one:
The company didn’t want to pay you what the original position was worth, so they created a scaled down version of that job. This new position probably includes many of the duties from the original opening, but pays less.

Did the company think I was so desperate I’d settle for a lower-level position?
Apparently they did. In the current economy, the main objective for most companies is a positive bottom line. They know if you turn down this offer there is another qualified candidate out there who will be desperate enough to accept it.

What happened?
Marcie decided to take the lower-level job and then continue searching for a more appropriate position. When she called the agency to inform them of her decision she was told the company had rescinded their offer; they thought she would leave at her first opportunity.

What really occurred here?
A recruiter is not an employment counselor. Their loyalties lie with the hiring company who pays their fees. To entice customers, many recruiting agencies are currently offering additional guarantees on their placements. This means if you accept a position only to resign after working a couple of months, the agency will lose all or a portion of their commission. When Marcie entrusted her true plans with her recruiter they no longer wanted to place her and are probably responsible for the rescinded job offer.

My opinion:
If you are unhappy with a job offer and are in a position where you can be picky you should turn it down. You lose credibility when you accept an offer only to resign a couple of months later. Plus, it’s difficult to continue a job search once you have started a new job. Instead of taking a lower-level permanent position, consider temporary or contract work until the job market improves. If you are not in a position to turn down a job offer, accept it immediately and keep all plans of a continued job search to yourself; you may end up working there longer than you anticipate.

Packaging Girlhood; a book I wanted to like

I wanted to like Sharon Lamb and Lyn Mikel Brown’s book, Packaging Girlhood: Rescuing Our Daughters from Marketers' Schemes. I really did. I mentioned previously, I am working on a series of posts called "Getting a Clue" where I attempt to disclose aggressive marketing techniques. I was hoping this book would provide insight into the marketing schemes that target young girls. Unfortunately, after about 150 pages I can’t bring myself to read another page. For me, this book is too focused on gender stereotyping, mired in detail and repetitious. I can no longer sift through example after example of gender bias in search of the actual marketing scheme.

This is a shame because I do believe the authors had important information to share; before abandoning I came across these interesting points:

-Until about the age of six, children can’t separate TV shows from commercials. To them it’s all the same and it’s all reality. Your young child can’t distinguish between a TV show's positive message and a commercial selling them a happy meal.

-Advertisers are aware of TIVO and the option that DVD movies provide of skipping trailers and ads; it is the reason that immersive advertising and product placement in kids shows are on the rise.

-Despite the movie Shrek's anti-fairy-tale message: “looks don’t matter,” Fiona the princessis featured over Fiona the ogre in most merchandising campaigns. Why? The human princess Fiona has a product selling face and marketers always choose pretty over ugly, ignoring the story line. Changing beloved movie characters slightly in order to sell products happens all the time.

What could the authors have done to make this book more readable?

I recommend beginning with a strong paragraph similar to this one found in Anne Lamott’s book Grace (Eventually): Thoughts on Faith:

This culture’s pursuit of beauty is a crazy, sick, losing game for women, men, teenagers and with the need to increase advertising revenues, now for pre-adolescents, too. We’re starting to see more and more anorexic eight-and nine-year olds. It’s a game we cannot win. Every time we agree to play another round, and step out onto the court to try again, we’ve already lost. The only way to win is to stay off the court. No matter how much of our time is spent in pursuit of physical beauty, even to great success, the Mirror on the Wall will always say, “Snow White lives,” and this is in fact a lie ~ Snow White is a fairy tale. Lies cannot nourish or protect you. Only freedom from fear, freedom from lies, can make us beautiful, and keep us safe.

Follow this paragraph with actual concrete marketing schemes, including only "one" good example. Close with (what I consider the strongest feature of the book) the lists of alternative books, Web sites, movies and magazines that provide positive role models that help both parents and daughters make better choices.

Perhaps, if I had a daughter of my own I would have found this book more readable. Have you read this book? What were your thoughts?

Target’s Elimination of Farmed Salmon is a Smart PR Decision

Target announced last week it has eliminated all farmed salmon from its fresh, frozen, and smoked seafood offerings in Target stores nationwide. This announcement includes Target owned brands – Archer Farms
and Market Pantry – and national brands. All salmon sold under Target owned brands will now be wild-caught Alaskan salmon.  Target is taking this important step to ensure that its salmon offerings are sourced in a sustainable way that helps to preserve abundance, species health and doesn’t harm local habitats.

Why is this important?

I became aware of the realities of salmon farming while reading Charles Fishman’s book The Wal-Mart Effect: How the World's Most Powerful Company Really Works--and How It's Transforming the American Economy. Fishman writes Wal-Mart, whose company sells more salmon than any other store in the country, buys all its salmon from Chile:

“Atlantic salmon are not native to Chile (its coastline runs along the Pacific). It's an exotic species that is literally farmed and processed by thousands of Chileans. The labor conditions are certainly a concern (long hours, low pay, processing of salmon with razor-sharp filleting instruments).

Another concern is the environment. Salmon farming is already transforming the ecology of southern Chile "with tens of millions of salmon living in vast ocean corrals, their excess food and feces settling to the ocean floor beneath the pens, and dozens of salmon processing plants dumping untreated salmon entrails directly into the ocean."

He then asks:

"Does it matter that salmon for $4.84 a pound leaves a layer of toxic sludge on the ocean bottoms of the Pacific fjords of southern Chile? After all, these salmon are raised in pens (with as many as one million per farm). They are fed antibiotics to prevent disease. As a result, you have quite a mess. One million salmon produce about the same amount of waste as 65,000 people. And add to that additional waste from unconsumed food and antibiotic residue. In essence, the current method of salmon farming creates a toxic seabed.

So how do we change this? His answer is simple: by changing consumer behavior. If shoppers won't buy salmon until Wal-Mart insists on higher standards, Wal-Mart will insist on them. The same company that created this huge market for salmon can also change it. But this will only happen if consumers voice their concerns and back it up with their behavior."

I have never been a fan of Wal-Mart always preferring to shop at the more sophisticated higher priced Target.* Family members who are fans of Wal-Mart loved to bait me with statements such as “Target’s business practices are no better than Wal-Mart's.” “What’s wrong with you; don’t you like to save money?” This latest move clearly places Target ahead of Wal-Mart and many other retailers in the environmentally conscious arena.

* In actuality, I’m really not much of a Target shopper either, but after reading "The Wal-Mart Effect" I will defend almost any store against Wal-Mart.

Did your sweetie have a star named after you this Valentines Day? If so, was he or she scammed?

Prior to each gift giving holiday, International Star Registry advertises heavily on Milwaukee radio stations:

This Valentines Day give the most romantic gift ever received. Name a star after them.

According to their website, they offer gift packages starting at $54:

• Dedicate a star to someone special. We offer a Gift Package where we select a special star in the sky and record your Star Name and Star Date. The Gift Package includes a beautiful parchment Certificate, a Sky Chart with your name and the star's coordinates and an informative booklet on astronomy. We publish all names in the astronomical compendium Your Place in the Cosmos©, which is registered in the U.S. Copyright Office.

Personally, I have always thought naming a star after someone was a pretty lame gift, plus after digging deeper I realized your star’s name means nothing to the scientific community. Also on their website:

Will the scientific community recognize my star name?

• A: No. We are a private company that provides Gift Packages. Astronomers will not recognize your name because your name is published only in our Star catalog. We periodically print a book called Your Place in the Cosmos © which lists the stars that we have named.

So for $54 to $489, you receive a fancy certificate with your star’s name, a booklet on astronomy and a locater chart with your star’s coordinates.

Was your sweetie scammed?

According to Tammy Plotner's post "name a star:"
When you buy a star for someone, you are paying for the entertainment you will receive for learning a little about the night sky. If the agency is misleading about what you're getting in any way, then you should rightly feel that you're being scammed. But if they're up front that the name isn't official, and is only kept in their own catalog, you can know what you're getting.

This post is part of a new series I’m working on called “Getting a Clue” where I attempt to dissect aggressive advertising and marketing campaigns to understand exactly what we’re purchasing.

If you liked this post you may also like: Duped by Pottery Barn's aggresive marketing campaign

Is a book about Marie Antoinette’s fashion choices really a book every woman should read?

I recently read both Antonia Fraser's Marie Antoinette: The Journey and Caroline Weber’s Queen of Fashion: What Marie Antoinette Wore to the Revolution for the Women Unbound Challenge.

Motivation for reading:
I’ve always been intrigued with all things French, had a vague recollection of Marie Antoinette from my French classes (she was the Queen guillotined for saying “Let them eat cake” right) and was curious to learn more about the French Revolution, so when I saw Queen of Fashion: What Marie Antoinette Wore to the Revolution listed as one of the non-fiction books every woman should read I decided to give it a try. Prior to reading, I read a review recommending readers begin with a more thorough biography such as Antonia Fraser's Marie Antoinette: The Journey because Queen of Fashion is not a definitive biography. Despite fears that reading two books on Marie Antoinette might be a bit much, I decided to tackle them both and was ultimately glad I did.

Marie Antoinette: The Journey is a comprehensive biography of Marie Antoinette’s life from birth ‘til death whereas Queen of Fashion chronicles her life through her fashion choices upon her arrival in France ‘til her death. By becoming familiar with her upbringing in Austria, the intricate details of her life at court and those who surrounded her, along with learning the politics of the time I came away with a better understanding of who she really was and what caused her downfall; she was more a naïve victim of circumstance (a scapegoat) than the spendthrift, heartless queen she was accused of being.

It was interesting to note:
~ The Austrian court was much more informal than the French court and allowed young Marie Antonia to basically do whatever she pleased; she learned to play the harpsichord, dance ballet and enjoy games. She had an idyllic childhood with little formal education. When she was tagged to be the next queen of France it was discovered she could barely read or write. This lax of formal training did not adequately prepare her to be the Queen of France; she arrived politically ignorant and inept.

~ Marie Antoinette never really uttered the phrase “Let them eat cake!”

~France was governed by Salic law which banned widowed royal wives from succeeding their spouses on the throne. At the time of her arrival three things were important at Versailles – the King, his mistress and his court. A Queen was nothing.

While reading Queen of Fashion: What Marie Antoinette Wore to the Revolution, I couldn’t help but think is a book about Marie Antoinette’s fashion choices really an important read, if so why?

In making my decision I considered the following:

What she was trying to achieve?
She was attempting to make a statement and strengthen her position in a hostile court where as a foreigner and a woman she had no power. Not to mention the fact her husband, the future King of France Louis XVI refused to sleep with her for the first seven years of their marriage. The book describes how almost immediately upon arriving at Versailles M.A. began bucking the rigid court code of dress. She refused to wear the corset, introduced the English-style riding coat and wore trousers while riding. She dressed and played like a commoner at the Petit Trianon. It was only after the fall of the Bastille that she began dressing like a royal.

How radical her clothing choices really were:
If early American feminists were taunted and ridiculed for wearing bloomers in the19th century, can you imagine how shocking it must have been for the future queen of France to wear men’s riding clothes and to ride astride?

What was or wasn’t she thinking?
Her hairstyle of choice the pouf, a thickly powdered, teetering hairstyle that re-created elaborate scenes from current events, was coated with animal fat and a powder mixed from flour. Was she not aware France was undergoing a flour shortage? Her headdresses, when seen by the population on fashion engravings and newspapers, led to the flour wars after her subjects concluded the Queen was taking flour and bread from starving people’s mouths to use for her own adornment.

Also think of the inconveniences-
Carriage interiors were not high enough to accommodate the monstrous three feet high constructions, so women had to travel crunched over crumpling their full skirted silk gowns because their hair would not travel upright.

Not to mention the vermin-
Since the hairstyle was costly, women would keep them for a week or two. The animal fat and flour would become rancid and attract vermin.

By not dressing like a queen she gave her enemies fodder to conspire against her?
At the Petit Trianon - the private country retreat she received as a gift from her husband shortly after their accession - she adopted unstructured chemise dresses that facilitated distinctly nonroyal shenanigans such as picnics on the grass, blind man’s bluff, and frolics among pretty, perfumed flocks of sheep. Conservative courtiers protested that the dresses made their noble wearers indistinguishable from serving wenches. Furthermore, by allowing only a small close knit group of friends including a couple foreigners access to her private palace she alienated important members of the Court. Exaggerated, scandalous images of her life at the Petit Trainon became regular features in underground pamphlets and caricatures.

She maintained an aura of grace and self-possession right up to the end:
Reading the final chapters of her life was heartbreaking; the death of her first son, the murder of her friend Princess de Lamballe, the execution of her husband, her imprisonment, brainwashing her second son to testify against her, her trial whose outcome was decided before it began and finally her own death at the guillotine. Even at the end she controlled her image by wearing a radiant white ensemble.

Who is the Marie Antoinette of our time?
Queen of Fashion’s author Caroline Weber answers this question in an interview on Big Think:

We don’t have anybody like that nowadays because, again, the political context is very different. But I think that we could look at a figure like for instance, Madonna. Somebody who succeeds in capturing the world’s attention time, and time again by refashioning her body, by changing her hair styles, by changing her appearance, by changing her identity through clothes. This is how she sells records and we all know that Madonna has relatively little talent. I think it was the shoemaker, Manolo Blanic, said that he was shocked that somebody with as little of the singing voice as she has good sound harsh and enormous star, and stay such an enormous star. And I think that's a testament to her genius as a chameleon. And this is been talked about by a million people before me, but I link her to Marie Antoinette because Marie Antoinette similarly was able to manipulate the public and stay in the public eye by changing her costume and this really flamboyant way, and doing it constantly.

Which brings me back to my original question: Is a book about Marie Antoinette’s fashion choices really a book every woman should read, if so why?
The book did cause me to think about my own appearance, the clothing choices I make and about such things as:
How much power can you really wield through your appearance? I know it is important to consider the image you want to portray. We’ve all heard the advice: Look the part. Dress for the job you want to have, but in the long run if all you have is your appearance is it enough? Many of the best & brightest women I have worked with don’t care at all about their appearance. Does it hurt them in the long run?

Would I want my daughter (if I had one) to read this book and then emulate Marie Antoinette? Would I want her to emulate Madanna?

Or consider this passage from Sharon Lamb's Packaging Girlhood: Rescuing Our Daughters from Marketers' Schemes?

Image protects high school students by giving them a sense of belonging, but it also gave them a premature identity while they are insecure or struggling to forge something unique and personal. While this may be okay for someone who can move beyond image during or after the teen years, others become trapped and stuck in this superficial world. For those who can preserve a self apart from image, the divisions and unhappiness that come with focusing too much on image in the teen years creates too much stress and too much of a diversion from what they could be doing and creating for themselves.

What do you think? Is a book about Marie Antoinette’s fashion choices really a book every woman should read, if so why?

The Feminine Mystique

I recently finished reading Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique which I read for the Women Unbound Challenge.

Motivation for reading:
Grace of GRACEful Retirement inspired me to read this book when she left a comment on my blog post: Ten non-fiction books that help us understand the world stating this was the book that helped her better understand the world. It was also included on Caroline Benders list of 20 business books they expect you have read.

What is the Feminine Mystique?
Friedan begins with her discovery of women’s unhappiness in post-World War II middle-class suburbia which she calls “the problem that has no name.” She attributes this unhappiness to the loss of identity women experience from devoting their lives to housewifery and motherhood. “The Feminine Mystique” was the phony bill of goods society sold women leaving them financially, intellectually and emotionally dependent on their husbands.

My thoughts:
For me, this book was a difficult read. I found it to be long and repetitious. I understand Friedan needed to hammer in her points to get woman to take notice, but if I had attempted to read this book when I was younger I am sure I never would have finished it. Despite the books difficulty, it did leave me with several valuable insights I would like to share:

Women abandoned their careers, so they could buy the latest carpet sweeper and cleaning cleanser:

The important role woman served as housewives was to buy more things for the house. The real business of America is business. The perpetuation of the mystique makes sense (and dollars) when one realizes that women are the chief consumers of American business. Somehow, someone must have figured out that women will buy more things if they are kept in the underused, nameless yearning, energy-to-get rid of state of being a housewife.

Magazine editors perpetuated “The Feminine Mystique” by restricting the topics and advertisements portrayed in their magazines:

Friedman had studied women’s magazines for decades and found the editorial decisions were made by men who enforced “occupation housewife.” Articles and advertisements only portrayed women as housewives. They didn’t want them to have any other ambitions than to be housewives.

A perceptive social psychologist showed Friedman statistics which seemed to prove American women under 35 are not interested in politics. “If you write a political piece they won’t read it. You have to translate it into issues they can understand – romance, pregnancy, nursing, home furnishings and clothes. Run an article on the economy, or the race question, civil rights, and you’d think that women never heard of them.”

Maybe they hadn’t heard of them. Ideas are not like instincts of the blood that spring into the mind intact. They are communicated by education, by the printed word. The new young house-wives who leave high school or college to marry, do not read magazines. Magazines today assume women are not interested in ideas.

Nineteenth-century feminists fought a ferocious battle:

Friedan recalled the battles faced by nineteenth-century feminists in the United States. As in her own time, nineteenth-century society attempted to restrict women to the roles of wife and mother and slandered women who challenged this gentle image. However, despite harsh resistance, early feminists held their ground, and women were ultimately given many opportunities men enjoyed, including education, the right to pursue their own careers, and, most important, the right to vote. With this last major goal fulfilled, Friedan says, the early women's movement died.

The Feminine Mystique was still prevalent in my community in the late 70’s:
Less than ten percent of the females in my graduating class went on to earn college degrees immediately after graduation. They either married, found a job or took secretarial courses to bide time until they got married and had children. My father didn’t support my college education decision thinking I wouldn’t use it once I got married. My Aunt advised me to find a man who would take care of me.

Then there was my mother’s unhappiness in her role as a housewife. We lived in the country and she did not have her driver’s license. She had to ask my father for every penny she needed (not to mention a ride to the store); justifying each purchase whether it was a card for a sick friend, a birthday present for one of her six children or a tube of lipstick for herself. She fondly reminisced about her life before she was married; her friends, her job and apartment in the city and her own money.

What can women do to break "The Feminine Mystique?"

Women need creative work of their own equal to her actual capacity. The only way for a woman, as for a man to find herself, to know herself as a person, is by creative work of her own. There is no other way. But a job any job, is not the answer-in fact, it can be part of the trap. Women who do not look for jobs equal to their capacity, who do not let themselves develop the lifetime interests and goals which require serious education and training, who take a job at twenty or forty to “help out at home: or just to kill extra time, are walking, almost as surely as the ones who stay inside the housewife trap, to a nonexistent future.

Is The Feminine Mystique a non-fiction book every woman should read?
The subject matter of this book is certainly relevant today. Many Americans both male and female are currently trapped by their circumstances; underemployment, housework, child rearing and caring for their aging parents. Advertisers and marketing schemes continue to influence us to make poor decisions; purchasing huge Mc Mansions we can’t afford with money we don’t have comes to mind. Despite these circumstances, the book will not be making the list. I foresee my list as a list of books that not only teach, but inspire women to read additional non-fiction and I don’t think The Feminine Mystique is up to that task.

For a case study of “The Feminine Mystique,” I recommend reading Life List: A Woman's Quest for the World's Most Amazing Birds by Olivia Gentile. The book details the life of Phoebe Snetsinger an overeducated, bored, depressed and underutilized suburban housewife before she took up birding as an excuse to get out of the house.

Cheap laptop not always a deal

I would like a wireless laptop. I don’t need a laptop; my desktop computer works fine. I just like the idea of blogging from my couch. I wouldn’t need anything fancy only wireless internet, a good battery, and a new version of office. Oh and of course I don’t want to spend a lot of money.

My co-worker’s son who has a small home-based computer business offered me the following deal:

Hi Savvy:
I was talking with my mom the other day and she mentioned you may be interested in a laptop. I hate to sound like a salesperson, but I do distribute a formerly corporate owned refurbished laptop. It is an AWESOME laptop for anything outside of video gaming. I carry them for $320, but for you I’d be happy to let one go for $280. This would come ready to use out of the box, with office 07 and full antivirus/anti-spyware.

What a deal! I can almost picture myself sitting in front of the TV blogging away.

Fortunately, I stumbled across Mr. Credit Card's  guest post "Not all deals are created equal" on Simply Forties.

He writes about electronic retailers who sell cheap out-of-date products on Black Friday:

There is nothing inherently wrong in selling old models, but one of the problems I have encountered is buying an old laptop that had "new software" installed on it. If you looked at Black Friday 2009, there were a lot of laptops going for under $200. Yes, under $200. But the problem was they had Windows 7 installed on them! Unfortunately, there wasn't enough memory in those laptops to really run Windows 7. Folks who bought those laptops would be shocked that they took so long to boot! When they add Microsoft Office and a Norton Security Suite, they will find their new laptop runs like a snail! Additionally, many Black Friday deals lure you to buy a product and then the product does not work until you buy additional software!

Thank you Mr. Credit Card! You’ve just prevented me from making a $280 mistake.

Unethical Boss Behavior

Everyone is talking about the embezzlement that occurred at Koss Corp. If you are not familiar with the story JS Online reports:

Sue Sachdeva allegedly misappropriated funds to the tune of $31 million while working as Vice president of finance at Koss Corp., a Milwaukee maker of headphones.

Sachdeva's alleged scheme which goes back to at least 2004 came to light in December when American Express notified Michael J. Koss, chief executive officer at Koss, that money was being transferred from Koss accounts to pay for Sachdeva's luxury shopping bills.

According to her indictment:

Sachdeva had fraudulently authorized transfers from Koss accounts to pay her American Express bills and also transferred money from Koss accounts to fund cashier's checks that she used to pay for her personal expenses. She also issued checks payable to petty cash, and then she told employees to cash the checks and get cash, which Sachdeva used for her personal expenses. Sachdeva also converted traveler's checks that Koss purchased for its employees who were traveling on Koss business for her own use and the use of others.

She concealed the fraud by making and directing others to make many fraudulent entries in Koss' books and records, to make it appear that her transfers were legitimate business expenses. Sachdeva concealed and directed others to conceal the fake entries from Koss management and its auditors.

In addition to firing Sachdeva, Koss also suspended without pay two members of the accounting staff who served under her pending further investigation.

The question I was asked this week was not, “Why would she steal 31million to just piddle it away on clothes and luxury items” or “How could Michael Koss have been so oblivious?” or “Why didn’t Grant Thornton discover the fraud?”

I was asked:

Why didn’t her subordinates turn her in?

Tracey Coenen says Sachdeva may have coerced or tricked them.

I think it could have been possible for Sachdeva to have tricked them for awhile; the assistants may have been inexperienced, didn’t have an adequate knowledge of accounting, or were inept, but I’m having a hard time believing that over time they didn’t have an inkling something was amiss. Come on, any semi-competent accountant would have thought at least once during the five year period, ISN’T IT ODD SHE NEVER HAS A RECEIPT, as they handed over cash from the petty cash box or wired company money to pay her personal credit card.

I think they had suspicions or maybe even knew exactly what she was doing, but choose to look the other way. She was well known and respected in the community and they may not have wanted to be the one to bring her down; I guess this could be considered coercion, but I also read the rumor the lady at Koss was selling designer clothes to Koss employees with the tag on them originally for hundreds of dollars for as little as $10 per item.

We may never know why they didn’t report Sachdeva, but we do know they owed it to their company and their career to tell someone what she was doing. Even if it is determined they were not her collaborators, I highly doubt they will retain their jobs at Koss and can guarantee they will have a difficult time finding future employment in Milwaukee.

It is never easy to report your boss. What is a subordinate to do if they witness suspicious boss behavior?

- The easiest thing to do would be to collaborate with your colleagues. You’ve heard the phrase "safety in numbers."

-Approach your boss’s boss or HR with solid evidence. We think Mr. Jones is stealing from the till doesn’t cut it. Present emails and written documentation. In the absence of documentation, keep a log of conversations pertaining to the unethical activity as evidence.

-Stick to the facts. Saying, “And besides we don’t like him,” is irrelevant.

-Pick the most significant unethical behavior when reporting. I have a colleague whose boss asked her to issue him $40,000 of unapproved payroll advances. She chose to report a $4 questionable parking ticket to his boss. Needless to say, she accomplished nothing except appearing petty and further deteriorating the already strained relationship she had with her boss

-Is there more to the story than you realize? Donna my company’s accounts payable clerk confronted a manager about a salesman she thought was eating donuts on the company every day. He’s not eating them he’s giving them to prospective customers.

-Don’t be afraid to suggest your own internal controls if you see a deficiency or ask your audit firm for assistance in implementing stricter controls. My colleague above should have said, “I’m sorry Mr. Jones, but I can’t issue the $40,000 advance without our owner’s approval.”

-If you are not comfortable talking to your boss’s boss you could alert your outside Accounting firm of abuse and have them deal with it. If you go this route, it is imperative you have your facts in order. You do not want to subject your company and boss to unnecessary scrutiny when the situation could have easily been resolved in house.

-And finally you may have to quit. I know an accountant whose boss (the owner of the company) asked her to underreport the company’s payroll taxes. My advice to her was you need to get out now.

How about you; have you ever reported unethical boss behavior?

Why would struggling company reinstate benefits?

Rob writes:

My company, an architectural firm, had a difficult 2009. Thirty percent of my co-workers lost their jobs and those who remained had salary and benefit reductions. Effective January 1st, 2010, our company reinstated the 401(k) company match. Employees took this as a sign the company’s financial status had improved. Then last Friday, three employees were laid-off; one worked in marketing and the other two were administrative employees. One had been with the company 30 years! What is going on? Why would my company reinstate benefits then turn around and let three employees go?

From my experience working for an engineering firm, engineering and architectural firms compete aggressively for top talent and feel they need attractive benefit and salary plans to attract and keep employees. You write your company laid-off 30% of their workforce. In doing so, they most likely lost talented employees and feel they can’t afford to lose anymore of their professional staff. Your company’s management reinstated the company match to increase confidence and improve moral. Also, they have to be confident in the company’s future financial outlook or they wouldn’t have bothered with the match.

As to the three employees who were let go, I think all companies who experienced tough times in 2009 will continue to look for ways to cut costs well into 2010. Perhaps your company has decided to outsource their marketing. My own company has done so and reduced our marketing expense by 65%. Improved technology, reduced workloads due to poor sales and job combinations could all have contributed to your co-workers losing their jobs. I realize it is sad to see them go, but a company in a fragile industry such as yours has is to remove every unnecessary cost in order to remain viable in 2010. The worst is over, but it is still going to be a bumpy ride.

According to msnbc.com, Architects saw more job losses in 2009 than any other profession. They attribute these losses to tough times in the construction industry. They also sight the BLS most recent Labor Review that looks at employment projections through 2018 which shows that architecture and engineering occupations will grow by about 10 percent.

As an interesting side note, msnbc.com sites health care as the only industry that added jobs last year. Other professions losing the most jobs in 2009 were:

Carpenters

Production supervisors and assembly workers

Pilots

Computer software engineers

Mechanical engineers

Construction workers

Tellers

Bookkeeping, accounting and auditing clerks

Non-Fiction Books Every Woman Should Read

I was so pleased with the comments I received on my post, "Ten non-fiction books that help us understand the world," I began searching the web for additional book recommendations; preferably a list of non-fiction books every woman should read. I must say, I was disappointed with my non-fiction findings. I found several lists of “fiction” books every woman should read. My favorite is:

75 Books Every Woman Should Read: The Complete List

Unable to find an adequate list of non-fiction books for women, I decided to come up with my own. I discussed my new project with the reference librarian at my local library who offered to provide a list to get me started.

Here is what she came up with:

Women Don't Ask: The High Cost of Avoiding Negotiation--and Positive Strategies for Change by Linda Babcock

Our Bodies, Ourselves: A New Edition for a New Era by Boston Women's Health Collective

I Feel Bad about My Neck: And Other Thoughts on Being a Woman by Nora Ephron

How She Does It: How Women Entrepreneurs Are Changing the Rules of Business Success by Margaret Heffernan

If They Only Listened to Us: What Women Voters Want Politicians to Hear by Melinda Henneberger

Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide by Nicholas Kristof

In the Name of Honor: A Memoir by Mukhtar Mai

Confessions of an Eco-Sinner: Tracking Down the Sources of My Stuff by Fred Pearce

Do Gentlemen Really Prefer Blondes?: Bodies, Behavior, and Brains--The Science Behind Sex, Love, & Attraction by Jena Pincott

Millionaire Women Next Door: The Many Journeys of Successful American Businesswomen by Thomas Stanley

On My Own Two Feet: A Modern Girl's Guide to Personal Finance by Manisha Thakor

Queen of Fashion: What Marie Antoinette Wore to the Revolution by Caroline Weber

A History of the Wife by Marilyn Yalom

I am pleased with the above selections, most of which I haven't read previously and was happy to see Men are from Mars not on the list. Prior to receiving this list, I had read a review of:

 - Bibliotherapy: The Girl's Guide to Books for Every Phase of Our Lives on Celia's Goodread's account where she wrote:

 I don't think Men from Mars, etc, should be included in anyone's must-read book list (at least, not someone whom I want to take book recommendations from).

I was also pleased to see Eat, Pray, Love (Gilbert lost me with all the crying) and Nickel and Dimed (I still haven't forgiven Ehrenreich for Bait and Switch) were not on the list. Plus, it was interesting to see On My Own Two Feet: A Modern Girl's Guide to Personal Finance by Manisha Thak was recommended instead of Suse Orman's Women and Money. One book that needs to be added to the list is:

Natalie Angier’s Woman: An Intimate Geography Eva at A Striped Armchair writes this is the one book every single woman should read.

So, this is my project for 2010; I am going to read all of the books on the above list, plus the books I’ve selected to read for the Women Unbound Challenge with the intention of coming up with a final list of non-fiction books every woman should read at the end of the year.

Do you have any non-fiction suggestions I should consider for my list? If so, please write them in the comments.

Also, it you have a list of non-fiction books on your site you would like to share, I'd be happy to include the link below:

Other non-fiction book lists to consider:
The Business Women's Social Club: 20 Business Books They Expect You Have Read

Please Note, I am an Amazon Affiliate

How to increase your earnings; read more non-fiction

I came across an interesting statistic in an Institute of Management Accountants (IMA) publication:

People who read seven non-fiction books a year earn more than twice as much money as people who read only one.
Non-fiction includes biography, history, self-help or business books.

 Okay I read probably twenty non-fiction books a year and I certainly don’t think I make twice as much as people who only read one; maybe it’s all those memoirs…

Duped by Pottery Barn's aggressive marketing campaign

I like to think of myself as a smart consumer, but I believe I was duped by an aggressive marketing campaign when I purchased Pottery Barn’s "Sausalito" dinnerware:

Approximately five years ago, I drove to the mall in search of a decent set of dinnerware for an upcoming dinner party I was hosting. I came home with 12 place settings of Pottery Barn’s "Sausalito" dinnerware in natural. A friend had received a similar set as a wedding gift and I had loved the simple modern style. I was sure the heavy earthenware was durable and would last for years. It cost more than I normally would have spent, but it was Pottery Barn so the quality had to be good. I soon added a gravy bowl, 3-piece serving bowl set and a serving platter to my collection.

Unfortunately, this set has brought me nothing but problems. During my five years of ownership, I’ve replaced cracked dinner plates so frequently my local Pottery Barn store suggested I upgrade to their porcelain dinnerware and use the Sausalito plates for display purposes only. One plate cracked, making an explosive popping sound, during a dinner party while a guest was serving himself a plate of food. Also, recent plate replacements are so abnormally large I am no longer able to close the cupboard door tightly. Prior to the recent holiday season, I attempted once again to replace a cracked dinner plate only to discover Pottery Barn has discontinued making the Sausalito dinnerware in “natural” my color. After scouring the countryside, I was able to locate eleven plates in Miami, but ended up ordering only one. I have had enough; the next time a plate cracks I am replacing the entire set with a standard size durable set of dinnerware.

What I don’t understand is if Pottery Barn’s Sausalito dinnerware is so fragile why do customers continue purchasing it?

I think the answer can be found on the Solas Web Design blog where they write:

For $139.00, Pottery Barn offers their Sausalito dinnerware setting for 4. Yes, Pottery Barn’s pottery has become vastly popular, due to an aggressive, well-funded marketing campaign, but what is the actual value of the end product that shoppers receive? Though colorful, their dinnerware, serving ware, etc. is a mass-produced, made in Asia product. It feels machine-made, and frankly, doesn’t strike me as a cut above the place settings you might find at K-Mart for 1/3 of the price. My feeling would be that Pottery Barn can set a value like the above on their products because their advertising has created a mystique or buzz about their brand name. But the Martha Stewart products Kmart stocks, also mass-produced, have been slated as being for folks who live on a budget, because, after all, they are being sold at Kmart. Perhaps Pottery Barn consumers feel that they are spending their earnings on the finer things in life, because the corporation is slating themselves as such.

Yet, in the end, Pottery Barn customers are purchasing fast-food-quality pieces for their home, at a high price tag. This isn’t Blue Willow China. They won’t be passing it onto their grandchildren. Economists call us a throw-away culture and I’d say both the items manufactured by Pottery Barn and Martha Stewart’s factories in Asia fall into this category.

How was Pottery Barn able to create this mystique or buzz about their brand name?
In an old Reveries Magazine Hillary Billings Pottery Barn’s former vice president of product design and development says:

In the early nineties, nobody in the specialty retail world was addressing home furnishings. The only consumer choices were to go to mass-market retailers, like department stores or to an Ethan Allen, most of which weren't providing stylish furniture. They were presenting assortments that were very mainstream and weren't very interesting. Or you had to hire an interior designer and spend exorbitant amounts to enter the stylish arena of home furnishings.

There was nothing for the consumer who didn't want to hire an interior designer or didn't have the money to, but had an interest in style that was more sophisticated than what the department stores were selling. It offered a clear path for Pottery Barn to build a business.

So how was I duped?
I have mentioned previously I am decorating challenged, plus when I bought my dinnerware I was in a hurry looking for a quick purchase. Pottery Barn made shopping for dinnerware easy. They didn’t have numerous styles and patterns to choose from and the Sausalito with its hand glazing and visible brush strokes looked so sophisticated; little did I know it was mass-produced in Asia. Also, I didn’t realize buying good dinnerware isn’t as simple as just walking into a store and picking out the first set of dishes that catches my eye. There is actually a lot to consider. Instead of purchasing a quality set of dinnerware, I was purchasing the great “Pottery Barn name.

How about you, have you ever been duped by an aggressive marketing campaign?

Working with a “Master Manipulator”

I recently came across Miss Minchin’s fascinating post Manipulative people in the Workplace and was amazed how closely the personality traits of the “master manipulator” resemble that of the “hostile HR manager” who works at my company. I was especially intrigued to read:

The most dangerous of all workplace dangers, the manipulative coworker has mastered the art of aggression disguised as helpfulness, good intentions, or working "for the good of the company". These people are brilliant at hiding their true motives, while making you look incompetent, uncooperative, or self-centered. They can make you lose your job, do their job for them, or even get you to apologize to *them* for trying to confront them about their own bad behavior.

Over at Business Women's and Finishing School I talk about my experience working with a "Master Manipulator". Please check it out.

The value of “face time”

In a couple of recent posts, I mentioned Kate an employee of a local manufacturing firm. She was originally hired as the Controller of her company’s engineering division which is located in a separate building from the company's main office. During a recent downsizing, Kate’s controllership position was eliminated resulting in her being transferred to an administrative job in the corporate building. Yes, she is fortunate to still be employed, but she hates her new administrative role and has become discouraged watching her male colleagues be promoted to positions she wasn’t aware were open. Perplexed, she sought out a male colleague asking him “What do you have to do to get promoted around here?" He responded with: “You need to be a male who puts in a lot of face time.”

Both Kate and I interpreted “face time” to mean working late nights and weekends “at the office” to project an image of a committed hardworking employee.

After discussions with my mentor, I’ve concluded Kate's male colleague actually gave her some very good advice. Kate doesn’t necessarily need to work long hours and weekends to achieve face time, but she does need to be visible and to build a rapport with her colleagues. To be promoted, Kate’s managers need to know who she is and be familiar with her work. By working in a separate building, she didn’t gain the visibility needed for a promotion; most likely her company's hiring managers have not worked with her whereas they have worked with her male colleagues.

It is important to get face time throughout the organization especially in the operations area.

How to get face time when you’re stuck in a back office job:
Volunteer for projects even if it is not your area of expertise and then do whatever you need to gain the knowledge needed to be successful. Apply for open positions even if it may not be your dream job. It helps to get interview experience and get your name out there. Volunteer to work on teams and on committees – some companies have opportunities for internally promoting the United Way.

-Do remain open to working late nights and weekends “at the office” if you need to complete special projects or to maintain deadline credibility.

-Think twice about telecommuting:
Telecommuting puts you at an immediate disadvantage; by not being in the office you will have a difficult time achieving adequate face time with managers outside of your department.

To be promoted Kate needs to be credible, experienced and visible.

Is less prestigious job not worthy of respect?

Citizen Reader left a comment on my last post that I’ve been thinking about all week, she writes:

"But just because a certain job might be less prestigious or less well-paid, does that make it unworthy of respect? I never thought so."

First a couple of misconceptions about less prestigious employment:

- It’s a fallacy to think employees who perform “grunt work” don’t work as hard or put in as many hours as employees who have more prestigious positions. It has been my experience that these employees are sometimes the hardest working and most conscientious employees in the company.

-In spite of working and getting paid for part-time work, some part-time employees are still expected to complete a full-time work load. They take work home to complete after their kids are asleep while also being accessible through email and via phone throughout the day.

-This is despite my company’s HR Director’s belief that employees who work long hours do so because they don’t manage their time well.

The first person I thought of upon reading CR's comment was Donna my company’s Accounts Payable Clerk (she is also the employee responsible for completing our company’s 1099’s). She is by far one of the most diligent employees in our company with an incredible attention to detail. In her seven years of employment, I doubt if she’s made even five mistakes. She is also pleasant with employees and vendors and much more patient with them I could ever be. One of our company owners feels she is the best employee our company has.

Too bad she doesn’t think so:
Donna regrets not earning her four year degree and hates that she is a clerical worker. So much so, she refused to attend her high school reunion not wanting her former classmates to know she was just an Accounts Payable Clerk. We have offered to change her title to Accounts Payable Associate, but she doesn’t like that either. Unfortunately, she is also one of our lowest paid employees and is aware of this through her payroll responsibilities. I have also noticed our HR Director treats her with disrespect, but she is not alone our HR Director treats all of our clerical employees with disrespect.*

I think it’s important to realize not everyone can be the CFO, if everyone aspired to do so there wouldn’t be anyone available to do the work. There is a lot to be said about having a stable job you enjoy and in which you can be the expert. Too bad not everyone including the employees themselves feel this way. All jobs including the less prestigious and the lowest paid should be worthy of respect.

*Note our HR employee gave herself the title of HR Director.

If you would like to read more about Donna I also wrote about her here.

Culture of Patriarchy Observation

I had the pleasure of attending two CPE seminars within the past 30 days; both sponsored by the same organization:

The first, a tax planning and wealth preservation seminar, was strongly attended; with 70% of the attendees male. Almost all of the attendees regardless of gender were wearing a business suit.

The second, a 1099 and W2 preparation seminar, was sparsely attended with at least 70% of the attendees female. The only attendees wearing a business suit at this event were the seminar sponsors and me. (No it was not a Friday.)

Conclusion:
In the eighties, my friend Laura earned a masters degree in tax. She likes to tell stories about being the only woman in her tax classes and subsequently at CPE tax seminars. (She is also the first person to say that the glass ceiling still exists.) I must say, I was surprised and disappointed to see how few women attended the tax planning and wealth preservation seminar. Obviously, males donning a power suit continue to manage the money and wealth in the Milwaukee area while the women continue to perform the grunt work.

Using humor during phone interview

Abby writes:
I have a phone interview scheduled for a tenured teaching position with a private college. My husband has advised me against using humor during my interview. He said, "You are funny. I think you are funny, all of your friends think you are funny, but don't be funny during this interview." But funny is who I am. I want to show the interviewer I have a personality. Wouldn’t humor make me more memorable? What do you think?

I agree with your husband on this one; save the humor for the face to face interview or better yet 'til after you are hired. There is such a large margin for misinterpretation of humor; I wouldn’t take the risk. Not everyone has a sense of humor. Plus, because it is a phone interview you will miss any visual cues indicating your interviewer did not realize you were joking. A phone interview is serious business especially in the current job market where there are more qualified candidates than positions available. The purpose of your phone interview should be to get an in-person interview; focus on promoting your job qualifications and teaching ability not your sense of humor.

The culture of patriarchy continues to be an obstacle for women

Last week, when I answered the question for the women unbound challenge meme: What do you consider the biggest obstacle women face in the world today? I went with the first answer that came to mind. I did this because I wanted to see how my views evolved as the challenge progressed. I’ve subsequently came across a blog post that so truly captures the essence of my beliefs I must share. Ann Daly, who describes herself as a fem-evangelist, devoted to the success and advancement of women, wrote in an article for more.com:

First she provides the statistics:
The glass ceiling remains firmly in place: Although women hold 50.8% of managerial positions in the labor market, they represent only 3% of Fortune 500 CEOs. Women remain grossly underpaid, taking home 78% that men do.

Then she answers the questions:
Why, then, are women still lagging behind? Why are women’s success stories still the exceptions that prove the rule?
Because beyond laws and regulations and attitude is the deepest, most pervasive, most unconscious and ingrained layer of our lives: culture. All of our laws and all of our diversity training won’t close the gender gap, because it’s the culture, sweetheart.

It’s the culture that insists on coding babies as blue or pink. It’s the culture that assumes men in the public sphere and women in the domestic sphere. It’s the culture that defines active qualities as “masculine” and passive qualities as “feminine.” It’s the culture of patriarchy, in which power and privilege accrue to the men.

If you doubt that male privilege endures, just replay to Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy.

This is exactly what I was alluding to when I wrote:
Just last week my friend Kate, who works for a Milwaukee manufacturing firm, asked a male colleague, "What do you have to do to get promoted around here?" She was told you need to be a male who puts in a lot of face time. Kate was describing “the good ole boys club”.

She then lists:  The Top Ten Hidden Rules That Can Sabotage Your Career

Here are two I find pertinent to my situation:
- Actually, it is personal. In mid-career, at the point where everyone brings comparable talent to the table, it’s who you know, not what you know, that gets you promoted. As HR pros will tell you, you don’t push yourself to the top, you get pulled there. Men knew what they were doing when they invented the old boys’ club. From the get-go, women need to be just as savvy, cultivating loose ties, close ties, mentors, allies, and champions.

- Men are bred for self-confidence. From Little League to fraternities to the golf course, men’s lives emphasize competition. By the time they get to the workplace, they are seasoned competitors, with all of the self-confidence that comes from having successfully weathered both the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. Consider the consequences: one internal corporate study showed that women will apply for an open job only if they meet 100% of the criteria listed, while men will apply if they meet just 60%. In order to assume that same level of self-possession (and entitlement), you have to design your own path to self-confidence.

I've been thinking about this quite a bit lately, if I continue to hold off applying for jobs because I don’t have 100% of the criteria I will never get where I want to be.

I am not a financial advisor and no information found on this site should be construed as financial advice.

Getting a Clue about Feminism

I originally concluded, I needed to read more books about woman and feminism after reading  Kim at Sophisticated Dorkiness claim Susan Jane Gilman's book Hypocrite in a Pouffy White Dress: Tales of Growing Up Groovy and Clueless inspired her to meditate on what it means to be a feminist and whether she could consider herself one. It has been a long time since I considered my own views of feminism, and am intrigued with the idea of renewing my feminist meditations through reading.

I was again reminded of this goal when Grace of GRACEful Retirement commented on my blog post: Ten non-fiction books that help us understand the world, that Betty Friedan's book "The Feminine Mystique" helped her better understand the world.

Now, I may have finally stumbled upon the motivation to actually fulfill this goal; I’ve discovered the reading challenge Women Unbound. The challenge runs from November 1, 2009-November 30, 2010. Participants are encouraged to read nonfiction and fiction books related to the rather broad idea of ‘women’s studies.’ I am signing up at the Suffragette level: which requires I read at least eight books, including at least three nonfiction ones.

The challenge begins with the following meme:
1. What does feminism mean to you? Does it have to do with the work sphere? The social sphere? How you dress? How you act?
2. Do you consider yourself a feminist? Why or why not?
3. What do you consider the biggest obstacle women face in the world today? Has that obstacle changed over time, or does it basically remain the same?

What does feminism mean to me?
I grew up in a household where my dad controlled my mother’s every move. She was a housewife living in the country without a driver’s license. She had to ask for every penny she needed (not to mention a ride to the store); justifying each purchase whether it was a card for a sick friend, a birthday present for one of her six children or a tube of lipstick for herself. I vowed at a young age my life was going to be different; I was going to have my own money and control my own destiny. As I’ve gotten older, my feminist ideals have broadened to include all women; no woman should have to live a life of oppression.

Do you consider yourself a feminist? Why or why not?
I was a feminist from the moment I was exposed to the idea; I grew up in the 70’s in the midst of the “women’s movement.” I thought a lot about equal rights for women throughout high school and college. Actually I considered myself a feminist right up to the moment I was hired at my first “real” job which I attained only after I proved I could type. After that, all thoughts of feminism took a back seat to actually working, my marriage and just living life.

What do you consider the biggest obstacle women face in the world today? Has that obstacle changed over time, or does it basically remain the same?
Most recent media accounts list "lack of time" as the modern women’s biggest obstacle. Statistics have shown, not only do many women work outside of the home but continue, despite their male partner providing some assistance, to perform the majority of child rearing and housecleaning duties including staying home with sick children, leaving little time for themselves.

Despite Penelope Trunk’s claim the gender pay gap no longer exists, I think the reality is women still need to fight for equality in the work place. Just last week my friend Kate, who works for a Milwaukee manufacturing firm, asked a male colleague, "What do you have to do to get promoted around here?" She was told you need to be a male who puts in a lot of face time. And as to Penelope’s claim the pay gap no longer exists; check out this business week article, this article and this one.

I think part of the problem is most women; including myself, do not promote themselves and their abilities as confidently as their male co-workers do. If they do happen to be one of the rare women who does promote herself they are labeled a B----.

Footnotes to this post:
1. I titled this post "Getting a Clue about Feminism," after reading an interview where Susan Jane Gilman described her book, Hypocrite in a Pouffy White Dress, which is actually a collection of personal essays, as “getting a clue” on race, sex, injustice what makes other people who they are.
2. The Woman Unbound challenge is my first book challenge.
3. This post includes my first meme.
4. It will be interesting to see if my answers to the above meme questions are different at the end of the challenge.

Can you recommend a book that helped you meditate on feminism?

Are you a fan of LinkedIn?

I received my first invitation to connect on LinkedIn about a year ago from an insurance salesperson. My second invite came from a recruiter a couple of months later; curious to learn what this networking site was about I created a LinkedIn account and entered basic job information into my profile. To date my profile remains lacking; it consists only of my name, current company and job title.

Throughout the year, I received additional invites resulting in 12 connections. I also joined two groups affiliated with my profession, but I have not been convinced a LinkedIn account holds any real value for me. So far, the most useful LinkedIn message I received was a colleague recommending her interior designer.

Here is what Penelope Trunk writes about LinkedIn:
LinkedIn is great. I’m on LinkedIn. I have 650 connections. At first I wondered, why do I need this list of connections published on LinkedIn? What was the purpose of it? But now I get it. With LinkedIn, people can tell that I am a very connected person.

Potential employers like LinkedIn because they can glance at your LinkedIn profile and get a sense of how connected you are and how much money you make. (Yes, large networks correlate to large salaries.) That's the utility of the scorecard.

But what you cannot do on LinkedIn is build a network. Networks are built on relationships, which grow from conversation. LinkedIn is not for conversations. So you need to go somewhere else to build your network, and then, when it’s big, display it on LinkedIn so you’ll look great.

I recently attended a continuing education session titled, “New ways LinkedIn can benefit you.” After attending, I remain unimpressed. As a fellow seminar attendee stated, “This is basically a resume on steroids.” And to Penelope’s well connected comments, LinkedIn caps your public profile connections at "500+", meaning Penelope may have 650 contacts, but profile viewers only see she has 500+. I think the value of a large number of contacts is profession specific, it is important for someone who is promoting their business or works in sales, but for a bean counter like me I think future employers would prefer to see quality contacts over quantity.

Then there is the LinkedIn message I received from a contact asking me to endorse him. I was a little taken aback; I don't know this person well enough to endorse him. As a viewer, I don't see value in reading pumped up recommendations written by acquaintances.

And here is a bit of caution for employers found on Anita Bruzzese's blog:
She quotes Shanti Atkins who says "Even LinkedIn, which is considered the “professional” online networking site, could get managers in trouble because of the feature that allows you to “recommend” someone."

“Ninety-nine percent of companies have a policy that says you can’t give a letter of recommendation for an employee because it’s a liability and a risk if the employee doesn’t work out for the other employer,” Atkins says. “But if you recommend someone on LinkedIn, you’ve just published one.”

Thoughts on LinkedIn from others:
A colleague working in the recruiting industry tells me LinkedIn was initially designed as a tool for recruiters. She became disenchanted with it when a fellow recruiter offered to share her network if my colleague shared hers. After doing so, she felt it was an unfair trade; the connections she received were sub par in both quantity and quality to her own.

From an overtaxed friend and fellow seminar attendee:
Having a LinkedIn account would mean I’d have one more thing that needed to be maintained. Plus, LinkedIn seems like an on-line popularity contest, I thought high school ended a long time ago, no thank you.

What am I going to do?
The worst impression I can give is to continue portraying a LinkedIn account with a weak profile; it screams I don’t care about this. Since I've gone to the trouble of creating an account and accept connections, I might as well put in the extra effort to create a quality profile. As to whether my account will incur any real value, it can’t hurt.

How about you, do you find value in LinkedIn?

Who are you meant to be?

A few years ago, a gal I know participated in a local beauty contest. During the pageant’s question and answer segment, she was asked if she could be anyone living or dead who would she be? She replied, “I would be myself. I’ve lived with myself my whole life and know myself better than anyone else. I wouldn’t want to be anyone other than myself.”

At the time I thought what an odd answer; I would have gone with Madame Curie or Eleanor Roosevelt, but I couldn't help admiring her self-knowledge; I had no idea who I was.

Perhaps I am not the only one lacking self-knowledge, George Thompson author of Verbal Judo writes:

"We know the least about our real selves. That's why we must deal with how we see ourselves. Our real selves may consist of where we came from, our beliefs and values, and the way we’re raised. But our selves as we see them will be bogus unless we make an effort to really be honest and introspective. If we don't we will always have an area that can be exploited and can make us less effective than we could be."

As my “"Getting my ducks in a row project," continues to evolve, I’ve come to realize the first step is to know myself. Everyone from Aristotle to Rilke to Drucker tout the advantages of self-knowledge. Here is my latest find from life coach Tracey Houston:

The whole idea of knowing yourself more deeply is to provide a competitive advantage. The most successful companies are ones in which the leaders have a greater understanding of themselves. When you don’t know yourself, you don’t know your limitations or your strengths. And today, the key economic resource is people.

This brings me to this month’s issue of Oprah's Magazine themed “Who are you meant to be?” The magazine includes a quiz developed by Anne Dranitsaris designed to help you figure out what really defines you. It is based on seven categories called “striving styles.” The premise is everyone is wired with all seven styles, but most people have one that dominates. When you are engaged in your particular style, you have the greatest chance to fulfill your potential. The best part is you don’t have to buy the magazine; you can take here for free.

Here are my results:

Dominant style:
You are striving to be secure

A strong 2nd:
You are striving to be knowledgeable.

There were no surprises here. What I found most informative were the tips on what to watch out for: For the security style, rapidly changing environments (like a shaky economy) are very hard for you. As a result of such instability, you can spiral into a state where everything seems catastrophic and you're sure life will only get worse. (I'm thinking Slump).

"Until you know who you are, you cannot know what you can become" - Neils Lindhard