Search Groups on LinkedIn

It was announced a few days ago that beginning today people would be able to search for groups on LinkedIn.  This has been one of the most important features that has been lacking (until today).  Up until now, a person could suggest a group (school alumni, employer groups, etc.) and the people at LinkedIn would approve or disapprove of it.  As a member of several groups, I know they do serve a useful purpose by keeping everyone together.

By implementing search for groups, LinkedIn has exposed that they evidently didn’t search for duplicate groups during the approval process.  What this has done (as I noticed as soon as I did a search) was to allow people to establish multiple groups for the exact same purpose.  I did a search for “Norwich” to see if my school had any alumni groups.  I found three or four (in addition to the one I had previously established).

By not doing any QA on the approval/submission process, LinkedIn has essentially caused a divide among people who want to join a group.  Unless the leaders of these groups get together to consolidate the lists, I believe that the usefulness of LinkedIn has just been diminished.   I can’t see how anyone would want to be a member of three different groups with the same purpose.  As a result, I deleted my group and will spend some time deciding which one to join.

I think LinkedIn now has to work to consolidate some of these groups in order to restore utility and functionality to the whole purpose and goal of having groups in the first place.  If they don’t, the divide created by the unearthing of multiple groups will cause the whole “group concept” to lose its appeal and functionality.

The ball is in your court, LinkedIn.

Wolf Camera

Two months ago, I felt the need to upgrade my camera gear. I went to the Wolf Camera store at 40th and North Lamar in Austin, Texas. I knew which camera I wanted. The Sony Alpha A100 was at the top of my list after seeing the quality images my old friend Jay takes on a weekly basis with his Sony Alpha A100. To make a long story short, I bought that camera and a couple of lenses. I was (and still am) in heaven with this camera.

Now it’s two months later. I am seeing a streak in the bottom left quarter of all my photos. It looks like someone with oily fingers has tried finger-painting on my pictures. Perhaps there was something on the lens.

After cleaning both lenses very well and taking some test shots, the streak is still there. After consulting with a friend who knows a hell of a lot more about cameras than I do, he tells me that the streak is probably on the CCD, and under no circumstances should I attempt to take the thing apart and fix it myself. That probably means that I send it back to Sony, right? Not so fast.

I called the store where I bought it and described the problem. They agreed that it was probably the CCD, and if it was just some condensation or a piece of lint or debris stuck to the CCD, they can probably take care of it. I took the camera to them at lunch in hopes of getting it fixed.

Not only did they not charge me for a service that is normally $99.00, but they got my camera working like new again. The pictures are as crisp and clear as they were when I first got the camera. Granted they did nothing more than blow some compressed air into the camera to dislodge the debris, but the level of concern and customer service was excellent.

I found this camera for $50.00 less at a different store a couple days after I bought it. They told me they’d refund the difference, but I never had time to go do that. In the end, I am glad. Good customer service is still worth something. On top of that, I don’t have to send my camera to Sony where it will spend two or three weeks getting a 10 second repair

Journalistic Hack Outs Online MBA Programs

I read a lot of stuff on the web every day. Education is a big topic I tend to troll for, for obvious reasons. Yesterday, I came across an article on American Consumer News written by Matthew Paulson. Just by reading the article, I’d be willing to bet this guy has never attended an accredited online university.

The title of the post is “Don’t Get Your MBA Online”, and it is filled with inaccuracies and generalizations that not only put online MBA programs in a bad light, but is factually inaccurate. If anyone was actually doing research on how or why to get an online MBA, this is one article that I hope they would miss.

The “meat” of the story is based on a Wall Street Journal / Harris Survey that polled recruiters to see how effective an online MBA program actually is. I have several problems with this.

“What the survey found was rather shocking. They had asked a number of corporate recruiters what they found when looking at candidates who were full time versus those who were part time. 80% of the recruiters said that online degree programs are not nearly as effective at building and developing business skills as traditional full time programs. 40% of the recruiters actually said the programs were not effective at all!”

In my many years in the corporate world, I have found that “recruiters” are usually the lowest common denominator in the equation of business. External recruiters are focused on the dollar signs, as finding potentially qualified referrals is how they make their money. They are going to recommend the candidate they think will be the best fit.

Internal recruiters are usually nowhere near in touch with the actual job that the potential employee will be performing, and thus are in no better position to make a decision based on any of the accomplishments of the candidate. How can anyone with a conscience allow others to recruit for jobs that the recruiter has never done themselves? Seems like a waste of resources to me.

A recruiter has no more knowledge or authority to determine how effective a degree program is that I have the knowledge to tell someone the best method to do a heart transplant. The sole purpose of a recruiter is to locate and facilitate the hiring process of talented people. Period. As a manager in my company, I permit our recruiters to accept applications and resumes, and then forward them to me for review. When I decide who I want to hire, I allow them to make the offer. That’s it. Recruiters have no business telling me who is qualified for a job in my group.

A more effective way to determine how good a degree is might be to ask the supervisors and managers of the person who holds the degree. One might ask if that degreed employee actually seems to apply what he or she learned in the program. What do the performance reviews of that employee look like? How did they score on the GMAT? There is a ton of criteria from which to measure.

Determining the effectiveness of a program only by the method in which it was delivered is asinine.

Another fallacy promoted by the recruiters was “Others say that When you’re working for 8 hours a day at a job and working on an MBA for another 4, it can often be very difficult to put a large amount of focus on your pursuance of a masters in business administration.”

Sure, it can be difficult, but online degree programs of all types are designed for highly disciplined people who can manage the workload of a job, school, and family on top of that. Not everyone is cut out for it. And no matter how many hours a day one spends at work and on school, if the student is able to complete the curriculum and keep up with the class, then there isn’t a recruiter in existence that has the ability to accurately judge the quality of anything related to any individual’s educational pursuits.

Another misleading, blanket statement found in the article was, “A lot of the online MBA programs are not accredited, and often taught by professors and instructors who are less qualified than full time universities.”

Yet more proof that the writer has not done any research into online MBA programs. I guess what bothers me about this is that we have a journalistic hack who is propagating false information about online MBA programs. The best way to expose them is to do what I’m doing now.

What the writer failed to mention is that any online MBA program worth anything at all IS accredited by a regional agency, AACSB, or ACBSP.  So to say “A lot of the online MBA programs are not accredited” is blatantly false and reflects on the lack of research done for this article.

Needless to say, it does get me fired up when someone not only writes about a topic which they are obviously uninformed, but also propagates disingenuous information about that topic.  This article is a classic case.

Who is That Dean Keeton Guy?

Do you live in a city that has a major street that is obviously named after someone, but you’ve never heard of that person? Austin has a street like that. And if you aren’t a Texas historian, or a graduate of UT Law, you might have made the same observation. For years, I’ve wondered who “Dean Keeton” was.

Previous searches came up fruitless, and now I know why. “Dean” wasn’t a name. It was his title. Werdner Page Keeton is the name of the man I was looking for.

Recently I was able to solve the personal mystery of Dean Keeton. First, I read about a prominent oil and gas attorney passing away. I learned that he worked with long-time UT law school Dean (A title, not a name) Page Keeton. After a quick look-up on Wikipedia, I found him.

“Dean” was just a title he held for over a quarter of a century. I guess at some point, it took the place of his first name. He also has some political lineage in him. W. Page Keeton was the father of former Texas Comptroller and gubernatorial candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn. He’s the grandfather of Scott McClellan, former White House Press Secretary, and Mark McClellan, current Medicare director and former Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration.

I will sleep better tonight knowing this, and the next time I get on that death trap known as I-35, I’ll look up at the sign that bears his name and wonder no more.

Why Being Beautiful Is So Important

Because if it weren’t for good looks, some people would have absolutely nothing going for them.