Scammish: C.P.S. Letter/Mail for Annual Report Instruction Form

Just received a letter addressed to my company that looked like an official letter to submit an annual report. By looking official, I just mean that it looks professional. It does not look like the one that you get from the state. 

Be careful. They do not provide any additional service because the information you provide them is essentially the same information that you submit to the state. For me, they charged way more than filing myself. The state filing is pretty simple and this form already looks more work.

This is not a scam per se, but I almost mistaken it for the actual annual report. It can still be potentially a scam as I do not know if they do submit on your behalf. I imagine they do because why take the risk for easy money already? I wouldn't be surprised if this is still legit with all the crazy stupid law stuff that can happen.

Any case, if you run a simple business, this is not worth the extra cost. I also assume that you will not get your money back if you already sent it. They'll claim they do and they will likely claim that it is in the mail. Be additionally careful if they request more information for them to return your money, as there is a scam for that too. 

The return money scam basically has you pay more money to get your money back.

Job Search: Does PMP Correlate with Being A Good Project Manager (PM)? (My Super Limited Personal View)

While I search for jobs, I often see that many project management jobs require or prefer people with a PM (Project Management) certification. This some times causes me to think of all the project managers that I have worked with in the past.

In summary, I really do not feel like there is any correlation with a good project manager and being a PMP (Project Management Professional). My opinion could be flawed in what qualifies as a good project manager, but I think some of the qualities of the project manager far outweighs certain biases.

For starters, a good project manager should be able to handle a project well (not necessarily to completion/deployment). I specifically want to avoid saying successful because there are too many external factors on why a project could "fail" that is out of the PM's control. If anything, I feel that a good project manager really shines when a project is failing.

I have probably worked with over 50+ project managers with about half PMP (an extremely rough estimate). Most do the bare minimum; some do a decent job; and, very few do a good job. Bare minimum to me is just to keep their job. I often have to follow up with these PM; they often "lose" emails, notes, etc. on a consistent basis. Decent job to me is doing what is needed when things are not ideal. They will help out a little or upon request, but not more. Good job is when they don't need to be told multiple times to do their job.

By doing their job, I mean that they tell resources when their project is going to be delivered, the status of their projects, things I think a PM should know. So, I suppose I fail to see how a PM certification helps identify good project managers. What is it that they do that is so difficult? I practically do at least half the job of poor performers. I don't have a PMP. Those with PMP is about the same distribution across each quality of project managers.

To me, a company really only needs one person with a PMP and that should be whoever is managing the PMs. The other PMs just follows directions because almost all companies have their own variations so it is nearly impossible to really transfer one company process with another. Those who are more pro-active are able to figure it out, and those who are less or non-active are able to figure out how to fly under the radar. Yet, the company continues which seems to me that PMP really is rather useless, waste of money, and time.

Does PMP title mean a good project manager? To me, easily a no. Is it worth getting one anyways? Yes. Why? Because companies think PMP title means a good project manager which means they are willing to pay for it, therefore PM certificate is of value (unless I am the hiring manager, which I am not, so you are safe).

Interview: Have You Experienced Something (When You Haven't)

I had an interview when the interviewer asked me to describe an experience when I had direct influence in pushing an agenda in a release last minute for a role in release management.

I am paraphrasing the question as I cannot remember the exact wording of the question, and also that he repeated the question a couple more times with different words.

My Response

My response was on the line that I had never had to step-in to "force" a deliverable to be in a release. The reason I believe that I do not have these situations in my 8 years as release management is due to my ability to bring people together to re-evaluate the situation and re-prioritize the work. Development team can only do so much in 24 hour days, and there is a limit to how much can actually be done no matter how many people you throw into the issue within a short period of time (ie last minute). Both teams have had little issue with my methods. I manage the most applications on the release management team, so I handle a lot of different teams. I have had good reviews, and no one has complained of my methods.

I wish I responded that eloquently on the interview, but the bulk of the message is there.

My Reaction to the Questions

Oddly enough because the interviewer was really stressing this question, I was suspecting there was so underlying issue at the company especially in the release management role. I tried to address this concern (unsure if that really is the case). I mentioned that specific task really lies on the product or program owner. I am not shy on taking on other responsibilities or going beyond the traditional bounds of the release management role to get things done. 

My Personal Thought on Result

I do not think I passed the interview, unless the line of questions was to try to incite some reaction from me by asking the same question differently. At the end of the interview, the interviewer also did not seem interested in answering my questions. I do not believe that I answered his question.

Post-Interview Thoughts

I spent too much time rewording my initial answer to answer his follow up questions. I should have redirected the question so that he gave me a scenario and I would then describe to him how I would have handled it. Thinking back on it, I think that would have been the best method to clarify the concern or at least in some way to side-step the initial question.

Ongoing Path to Management

Ongoing Path to Management is to discuss about my attempts to get a people management (for the sake of these series will just be shortened as manager) role. I have known this was not an easy path, but one I believe is beneficial to the company given my experience and my ability to connect with other employees.

I also do not have a need to be in management. I am well content to do my job at my current position and current pay. I would still prefer to have more responsibilities and/or more pay. That being said, if I were promoted to management, I believe I would do a good job and I am willing to do the extra work. The reason I want to do this because I believe in doing what is good for my group.

There are some other obstacles to my path due to my personal beliefs which I will address in another post. Today, I just want to address a more obvious problem for everyone that is interested in becoming a people manager.

Catch-22

One of the biggest obstacle to getting a management role is the need to have management experience. The follow up question is how many direct reports have you managed. But all managers must have had no experience or directs reports before they became a manager.

Opportunity

From my experience, the fastest way to become a manager is to know the right person. No experience, no skills, just being in the right place at the right time. I have seen fresh graduates promoted to management within a year of working. Even those who did not even want to be a manager. Majority of them have no idea how to lead a team: causing confused team members, setting unreasonable goals, creating many social impacts, etc. Simply by knowing the right person will get you promoted (for many different reasons).

And then there is the very long and difficult path that depends a lot on luck. The luck is primarily based on your work for a company that is mature enough to have a structured method of promoting. Although luck like knowing the right people is still important, but has less of an impact which could increase your chances. At these firms, you can work hard and work several years to eventually be promoted to management role. You will have a better chance if you work for someone that is in a volatile position.

By volatile position, I mean that the position (not necessarily the person but could be driven by the person) has a high potential to change. The simplest is that the person is going to retire. The person will leave and a gap needs to be filled. Next is the person that is ambitious or really skilled. Basically, the person needs to move out of the role so that it becomes available and you have to be the best option.

Leads

From my experience, I believe that most managers are more leads. They have the know-how, they delegate, they review the product, but most do not care for the person's growth, the person's career, or if very unlucky, do not care for you at all. They do not set you up for a raise or for a good review. They see annual reviews as a waste of time. They only want to lead and force you to follow, just as they have to follow their superiors.

Because most managers are leads in reality, this confuses the title of managers because that creates poor standards of what a manager should do. For those who are new to the workplace, expectations of a manager becomes much harder to maintain across the company.

Turnover

Perhaps I work in very unsafe work environments my entire career, but I see that there are very few good managers.

My speculation is that good managers rarely leave a company (or let go). So to me, most companies are hiring just bad managers. This is also my belief why I am unable to randomly find a good company to work for. Because good companies do not have turnover to have roles to fill. Good companies will have good managers who most likely have good references so there is no need to reach out to find random candidates.

Good employees leave bad companies. The silver-lining is that they learn why certain processes are in place or why certain good practices are done.

People, People, People

I was brought up that good work will eventually be promoted. I hated playing politics. I have had my work credit stolen. I have been passed by another with less experience who was later fired within months. I have been told that the company cannot afford to hire helpers but yet when I leave, they eventually have to back fill with multiple people. I have won contracts with clients who eventually canceled their contracts with my former company shortly after I left.

Sorry for all the negativity. So more positively, I have always been a go-to person for some people around me for advice on career, work, projects, or even very situational scenarios. I have always been the fastest to learn. Among my team, I have almost always had the most projects, most tasks with equal or better quality with no complaints.

But all this is not important at all to management (at least in today's corporate management). All that really matters is the people you know. Not just any person, the right person whether they work for a good or bad company. If you do not know the right person, you will never be promoted even if you are the star employee. Sadly, the "right" person typically is not someone who is a good manager (although possible).

If you work for a good company, time may be worth spending to achieve that goal. For a bad company, the expense of being promoted may not be worth the sacrifices. I do not just mean financially (or sexually). I mean sacrificing your morals.

I am unwilling to lie or cheat. I would rather work cheaply until I find the right place to work that truly appreciates their employees. My recommendation to all is to keep an eye out for good people. Do not be afraid to approach them. Connection is important in this world if you want to make an impact and have more control over your own life. Hard work can only get you so far individually in current workplace.

Leadership Pitfalls: Corporate Town Halls Lacking Message

Many times I wonder why I even bother going to town halls. I never seem to get much out of them. They always just seem a waste of time. Smaller companies have been ok, but then they aren't really town halls.

Know Your Audience

When a CEO, President, or Sr VP hosts an all-employee town hall, do you even realize who they are talking to or what they are trying to say? I feel like this is just a task they are trying to fulfill. "Just say some stuff, fill the time, let everyone praise me, check."

The most common issue I have is all the talks about corporate numbers:

• Double-digit growth
• Increased revenue
• New acquisitions

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Why should I care about these numbers? Oh, did you want to say that the company has hit record numbers, record profits, keeping all salaries stagnant so that I can maximize my year-end bonus? Seriously, how am I supposed to break down those numbers besides the only number that I know that matters to you?

Realize that I am at least 4 levels below you. I have a manager, then sometimes a director, then a vp, then maybe another senior vp. Or even structurally, I have my team, then application, then line of business, then department, then maybe a child-company. Is the growth in another group, another team, another app, just your wallet?

Drill Down

Fine, those numbers are important and you cannot drill it down. I do care about topics of training, compensation, social responsibility, retention but those are all too high level.

I do not expect you to provide the low level details that pertains directly to me. I do expect your directs to break it down appropriately, who then expects their directs to break it down, until it reaches me.

Fake Impacts or Real Impacts

Leadership never seems to hear my opinion. This makes me wonder if they even care about feedback. Personally, I do not think so. I also think this is 95% true. I write this blog for the 5% of those out there that are trying to understand and improve, hence why I gave up voicing my opinion.

I mean I am not surprised. I reached out. I tried. Basically if leadership's primary issue is communication, then no matter how loud my opinion is, it will never be heard until they are willing to open their mind by reading something like this blog.

At the Very Least

If you really do care, there is more appreciation when you reach out to the silent voices. There are many people who have opinions, not just me. Do not just listen, but also listen for the things they are not saying because they cannot say it.

Build trust by reaching out first. I feel that I stick my neck out. I am trying to help the company, but if leadership is the wrong type, I risk my job. That is why no one wants to say anything. The only reason I speak out is because I want to represent the people. But someday when I can no longer risk my employment, you will have another silent voice.

I have always been the last to leave. I know leadership in most corporate world do not care. I hope your smaller company will provide greater value. We really do not place a lot of value on salary. We really just want our fair share and know that our jobs are safe. People only say compensation is important when leadership is greedy, unfair, or ignorant/inexperienced. It is the safer and simpler method.

Paradox: Corporate Leadership Communication. Can it be fixed?

One of the most common issues with leadership from worker surveys is communication. I have been thinking how to resolve this issue, and feel this is somewhat of a paradox.

If leadership has communication issues with delivering and receiving communication, how would a worker communicate this properly to leadership to correct this action?

If leadership was capable of delivering and receiving communication, the workers would not be required to come up with a solution to correct fundamental communication issues.

I believe this can only be corrected by leadership on their own. Workers need to still voice their concern, but should not invest time to explain to leadership how to correct the problem. Because if leadership was able, workers do not need to explain. But if leadership was unable, no amount of explanation will fix the problem.

I am dumbfounded on why communication is so difficult with leadership. Is it because they have never worked at our level? Have they never been conned, cheated, or unfairly deprived of opportunities? Is it because of their personal greed to earn significantly more than their workers? Do they just not understand our plight?

Or is it because they have been in our position and is now taking their "fair" share to compensate for the life that we still live in? Is it an elite class where they now have to do that to fit in with the existing leadership?

Or is it that I do not understand? I suppose leadership is getting what they want out of this, so perhaps this is the real grand scheme of things. Just keep creating chaos faster than the workers' can cope with, while their value to the company is to swindle our efforts.

Then the question becomes, why can't a "fairer" company outperform a greedy company? Does power corrupt absolutely?

Leadership Pitfalls: Don't eat/take your subordinate's treats/food/etc

Do you have people at the office that have bowls of snacks or candies to share for the office?

It's a trap

This is not an intentional trap. This is not the intentions of the givers (unless it's me). But you will have people like me who witness those who take things.

The trap is not a single incident infraction. The problem is when you abuse the (unspoken) system... the peer judgment of others. The main problem starts when you take a larger portion of the goods.

Lack of Compassion

The goods are not free. Out of the goodness of the giver, they are sharing to help those around them. But when the taker starts to feel entitled, this just hits the wrong nerve in me.

For example, there is a lady who always keep a variety of sweets in her area. Several people enjoy the treats. But each day after she's gone, a group of people takes a noticeable amount of sweets from her desk. Because I am usually one of the last people out of the office, I notice this group.

Although she does not mind, this action by that group is just wrong to me. I have also heard the same from others. Some of them have also started to use more racial biases because of this.

So not only does this make it appear poorly for those who take too much, but it also also reflects poorly on whatever prejudicial group the observer makes.

Unfairness

I am one that occasionally leave sweets/snacks on my desk to share. As a person who has bought food to share and even though I am not poor, these foods are not cheap. 

Because I am further back in the office, I do not get as many visitors. I do regularly get a director who is very friendly with a colleague who sits next to me.

Although I am ok with those who take a treat each time they visit, his visits started to irk me when he said (somewhat playfully) that I need to restock my treats (when I haven't restocked for a while). Not only restock but a specific request of candy that I brought in once. I don't mind when someone at least at the same corporate level as me does this because they never do. Yes, that sounds odd but there is an unspoken understanding that these are treats, not entitlements.

I also know this director eats other's treats. And there are similar complaints from those people as I have in my mind. We are the bottom of the hierarchy. A director is 2-3 levels above us, so easily makes twice as much as us (which means he has the potential to save way more than double). Over 5 years, he has never given anything back... not even a thank you. 

If it were just me, I would just chalk it up to my bad luck. But for others, the very least he can do is do something nice (and something unselfish) in return. Even if we have poor directors (I work for a fortune 10 company so extremely unlikely), he could at the very least "promote" them in some ways. I do not even mean a professional promotion. A simple this is a great person, kind person, or if I even have to drudge the bottom of the barrel.... a very simple thank you. Or even, even lower.... at least do not criticize (like not enough plates, utensils, etc). 

Optics

Ultimately, there is nothing technically wrong with taking or even accepting treats. But because the visual is very subjective, this is just not worth the optics that this behavior projects for a manager or executive.

If anything, I even give back to those that share their kindness even if I do not take any or much. This does not have to be food or materials. I have assisted or aided in other ways, although food is the simplest way. 

People see, people judge, but they won't share their thoughts especially if you are in a leadership position. In my opinion, those who cannot even balance simple human compassion do not deserve my respect for there position. And if his peers cannot at least recognize this, I also have lowered respect for all of leadership.

Reference

Personal experience

Outlook 2013 - Change Start of Week

File > Options > Calendar > First day of week


I do not know why this changed from my settings from 2010. I tried to get used to this for almost a year, but I just could not take it anymore. I am also partially sad that I do not have the brain agility to just get used it, but I just cannot get the correct date when I schedule things for work. Perhaps it is because everything else outside of Outlook still starts on a Sunday. The biggest problem is when the date starts reaching the end of the month and the day of the week header is further from the dates, my brain just automatically assumes Wednesday is the fourth day of the week and not the third day of the week. Anyways, I could practice more if I actually needed a calendar in my person life but the risks are not worth it for work when you are trying to coordinate 30-100 people.

While I am griping about the new Outlook 2013, I also hate that I no longer can open Outlook while not connected to the work network.

Reference

How to change the calendar to start each week to Sunday?
Change which day to start the week?

https://support.office.com/en-nz/article/Change-your-Calendar-work-days-and-the-start-of-your-week-8eba4a97-20f8-477c-b121-f57934f613c6 - Outlook 2007

Guy Kawasaki Keynote - It's about meaning, not money - Business Innovation

Guy Kawasaki gives an interesting talk about business innovation.

Reference

http://www.tianow.org/videos/keynote-its-about-meaning-not-money-says-guy-kawasaki/13824

Interview: Basics by Lazlo Bock

A linkedin article that gives 6 basic points on how to do well in interviews.

Reference

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/win-every-interview-6-steps-laszlo-bock

Sharing Salary

Here's an interesting post on sharing salaries within a company.


Reference
http://evilhrlady.org/2015/03/my-boss-put-everyones-salaries-up-on-a-power-point-slide.html

New Employee Promoted Over Seniority

I just read an article about whether it was fair or legal for a company to promote a new employee over longer term employees. The article does a good job of explaining how to overcome this and does overlap with my ideology (albeit admittedly also not perfect) on how to manage my own life. I will be discussing more on the side of knowledge-skilled labor. Some could probably apply to other skilled labor or unskilled labor, but I am sure the dynamics would be slightly different.

In my experience and highly in my opinion, I find that companies typically promote an unqualified manager whether you choose to review their credentials or experience. This is the most demoralized feeling for the group.

I definitely know my share of people who have been in the role for a while who seek management promotions. Like the article states, there are some that just would not make good managers in general and others that would not be good for that company's culture.

I think the most common mistake is that company's tend to look at either the management skills or their technical skills. Here I use "technical" meaning specialized knowledge of the field (ie engineering, secretarial, waste management, accounting, etc.). Rarely, do they seek for both. Even rarer do they even bother reviewing their own employees of different talents that typically are not needed in the technical field.

I keep a reserve of people in my mind that would make great managers. I do this in hopes that one day I will have the opportunity to provide a recommendation. Maybe because I am very science/logic oriented profession, our roles typically do not require us to display managerial skills. As you work with people, you do see some soft skills that I think are signs of better managers.

Unfortunately, most of my world does not really work that way. And bottom line, the managers do not make or break the company. Plenty of companies have been able to get by with below-par managers. I've seen managers gone weeks at a time. I have met acquaintances who are managers who proudly state that they do not do anything most of the time (which is also pretty obvious by the amount of non-work related things they do like posts, on-line shopping, even watching videos/movies during work hours).


For example, I once worked for a company where I've been for about a year and a half. Seniority-wise, I was the youngest in the group. I also had a different skill set than most of my team so I was pretty confident I would never be promoted in that group. Within a few weeks from when I started, the company had promoted a person from another group as a manager within our group. She has been with the company only for a couple months. We had worked with her and respected that change since she had good managerial skills. A group of about 10 people who are at least at par with their roles. Some of them have good traits.

To keep up with company growth, our group hired a few new undergraduates. After four months, one of the new hires was promoted to supervisor role. This had a major shift within the group. To most of the group, she appeared to be the least experienced and least likely to manage. 5 of the original 10 people either quit or transferred within a month or two. I left after my first ever negative review. My review was that I was unable to anticipate all the changes she was unable to decide on. Probably also for the first time in my life did I actually stood up for myself on the quality of my work by stating how it was logically possible to build software if she could not make up her mind and very wishy-washy about what she wanted. I could not get the favor our original manager who became director, the manager of my current supervisor. The director didn't even counter argue and just remained quiet. On top of that, my applications were mostly build on my ideas while most of her ideas did not pan out. At the end of the day, I continued to provide good quality of work with more emphasis with some of her suggestions which was just to focus on her requirements which I kept and stored.

I eventually left for better opportunity not long after my review. I heard within a couple weeks, most of the remaining people had also left the group. The supervisor eventually "quit." The role was not filled. One of the remaining people tried to apply for the role but was told they were not going to make the same mistake again.

I would like to say that this was a win for fairness, but this really had no impact on the company. Business went on. The director is doing well. The manager is also still doing well. I have nothing against them (I consider the poor review as a minor incident... whatever). And the company as a whole is still growing and doing well.

As for the quality of work, they tried to get me to work on some of my other ideas. They even tried to get me to work on it without pay... can you even believe that! They may have paid for the work but I just did not care to return so quoted 2-3 times the going contracting rate. I may have done it for regular rate if they considered apologizing (but then how can they apologize if they don't even know they did wrong in the first place?). On second thought, I do not think I want to work with those kind of people anyways.

So, what is the lesson here? If you want to become a supervisor or manager, there are at least two paths to take. First is the one suggested by the article to learn relevant skill-sets and working with your manager on how to move up. Second is to play the system because the impact of a manager has very little impact (just see how frequently they change coaches and CEOs who you would imagine is the biggest cogs in the wheel).

If you think that you are a big part of the company too, think again. I had worked for a different company where the sales team sold a solution that we didn't have (not a surprise). They had quoted 80 hours, but the amount of requirements was clearly more than that. I was only given two weeks to finish and I spent 80 hours both weeks to finish that project. No post-integration problems or issues. Who won? The client because they were not charged the 80 hours (weak sales team who I even told them before I left that the project would take longer). My employer because he sold a solution and since I was an employee no over-time pay. The sales team because they get commission. I lost 80 hours of my time over two weeks which does not even include the travel time, lack of sleep, and my personal health (which is only realized later in life). You think an employee like that would be pretty invaluable to the company.

Nope! They just hired three people to do my work. Even then lower quality, then hired a couple more to support the lower quality. My coworkers also benefited because they got raises because now the company couldn't afford to lose them. And the company is still doing well and succeeding. When I was there we managed the work with 5-6 engineers for 4 years, now they have almost 15 within 2 years leaving. A company I recently left, they had replaced myself and coworker who left within the same period of time with 6 others.

Sooo...... sadly, you are replaceable. Your replacement may not be better or even make the company more money than you. The company may even regret losing you, but it will only be a small stumble. I hope this will inspire you to see the world differently and eventually change the world for the better... hopefully taking the high road.

Reference

http://humanresources.about.com/od/selectemployees/fl/new-employee-promoted.htm

Work: When did 50 miles become a local distance for new job opp?

I received a random recruiter call. After the introductions, he tells me that he is looking to fill a position. I responded that I am currently employed but willing to listen to the details. He says that it is local. After giving me the location, I said that it was a pretty far distance. He then states that it is local... 50 miles.

50 miles?! That's local? That would probably be a 2 hour commute... maybe 1.5 with no traffic but for work that will always be rush hour... so probably more like 2.5 hours and possibly even 3-4 if there is an accident. And this is my estimate just for standard places, but I have to cross a major city plus that area is known for its traffic jam. I quickly declined to save us both time.

And where do these people even get my information? This person has my mobile number and my latest work location. I do not post my mobile number, and my resume doesn't even have my current employment. This really makes me suspicious on what information some of these recruiting companies share. I doubt my current employer would share this information, so that would only leave the one recruiter company that got me my current job who would also have my mobile number.

I really hope legislation would someday force companies to report where they obtain personal information. Companies should not be making money from my information (which does not even include that this seems like some form of privacy invasion) without my consent. If they are unable to provide the proper trail of information, they should be fined and I should get a cut of the money for my troubles.

Companies sue other companies and even individuals just for using their name. Shouldn't there be some sort of copyright issue for companies distributing my resume especially if they are profiting from it either monetarily or valued data? While they are at it, they should make it illegal to waive your right to allow them to bypass it.