Efficient lifts make us less sociable

My company building recently revamped the lift system to make it more efficient. The new lift system comes with 'smart' features such as assigning you a lift when you tap your access card at the gantry, and ensuring the lift only stops at 4 floors per direction of travel. The lifts are also equipped with tv screens showing Channel News Asia.

These new features meant shorter waiting times at the lobby, shorter travel times in the elevator (since the max number of stops it makes before yours is 3), and access to news updates. Ultimately, it lets you get to your work desk more quickly than before. 

Aside from improving efficiency, I have also observed that the new lift system has altered the social dynamics in the organisation. The 1st floor lift lobby that used to be bustling with people during morning peak hours is now much emptier. Staff used to spend time at the lift lobby catching up with one another, but now everyone is busy catching the lift assigned to them at the gantry. 

When I was new to the organisation, I was advised to always have an elevator pitch ready as you never know who you may meet in the lift. However, with the strict cap of 4 destination floors per lift, the probability of meeting the big boss in the lift is significantly reduced. Even if you did beat the odds, the shorter time for travel meant that you probably cannot cover much of your pitch anyway. In view of this, most spend the time commenting on the news update on the TV screen. 

It's a shame that lifts, which can bind people together (i.e. in enclosed spaces like the lift lobby or the lift itself), are typically not recognized as social enablers, unlike the more common water cooler or printer. 

Drop the Pink Elephant - Dump the baggage and create clarity

The latest book I'm reading is called "Drop the Pink Elephant", by Bill McFarlan. Lifting off the synopsis, the book "reveals how to avoid the deadly trap of allowing poor communication skills to obscure your meaning and reduce your effectiveness".

This blog post gives a summary of Section 1: Dump the Baggage and Create Clarity.

If I said to you now 'Don't think of a Pink Elephant', does a clear picture of a pink elephant appear in your mind?

The author defines a Pink Elephant to be an "unnecessary, and normally vivid, negative". It usually pops up unprompted ( I'm doing this not because.../ It's not that we're afraid .../ No offence, but ...), because we're worried that somebody is thinking negatively, so we say it before they do.

Unfortunately, Pink Elephants only draw attention to the very thing you want to avoid.

Also, phrasing statements using negatives don't tell you much. Putting a sign outside your shop that says "Open 7am - 7pm" would be more useful than one that says "Not Open 24 hours".

Tip: Describe what is happening, rather than deny what you believe is someone else's perception of events. Stick to the positive point.

Tip: Another way to create clarity is to allow the audience to paint a picture with your words. Analogies should also be used to turn abstract concepts and jargon into bright pictures. When using analogies, find appropriate ones that everyone can relate to.

Panda Diplomacy

Today I came across a book titled "The Way of The Panda: The Curious History of China's Political Animal". It had a cute cover and intriguing title, which prompted me to learn more about the "Panda Diplomacy" (I didn't buy the book though).

Here's what I found out online:

• China is the only native home of pandas.
• China has been using giant pandas as diplomatic gifts to other countries since the Tang Dynasty, when Empress Wu Zetian sent a pair of pandas to the Japanese emperor.
• The face of panda diplomacy has changed over the years.
• 1950s: The communist party saw the opportunity to give pandas as a gift to build strategic friendships. Russia and North Korea were recipients of the gifts.
• 1972-1984: Pandas used as gifts to the west, starting with the US, followed by Japan, France, UK, Germany and Mexico.
• 1984-1998: Pandas were available for a ten-year loan period. The cost of renting a panda is $1 million a year, to be payable to China's Wildlife Conservation Association. In addition, any cubs born to loaned-out pandas are to be returned to China.
• 2008-Present: Panda loans are based on mutual need where nations supply China with valuable resources and technology. The pandas do not form the deal; rather, they represent the "seal" of approval and intent for a long and prosperous working relationship.

2008 Sichuan Earthquake

The devastating earthquake severely damaged a considerable proportion of panda habitat and the conservation & breeding centres. Repairs to the nature reserve were expected to take at least 4 years - in the meantime these "refugee" pandas needed a place to stay.

China's response? To offer panda gift-loans to a new group of nations with which China was negotiating important trade agreements, i.e. Japan, Scotland, Canada, France, Singapore and Malaysia (arriving in 2014).

The Panda "Signal"
One can also read the signals from the panda gifts to decipher China's direction or agenda.

• Scotland received the panda-loan for its supply of salmon meat, Land Rovers, and petrochemical and renewable technology. You may think, so what? For the past 2 decades, Norway has been China's salmon supplier until relations between both countries became strained following the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to jailed China dissident Liu Xiaobo. Woahhhh...I bet if Norway had pandas, China will ask for them back immediately.
• The panda loans to Canada and France coincide with their long-term contracts to supply China with uranium oxide. Uranium oxide is a major component in nuclear power...
• China presented a pair of pandas, Tuan Tuan and Yuan Yuan, as a "gift" to Taiwan. The fact that the pandas is a "gift" implies that China considers Taiwan a province, since the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species specifies China can only give pandas to domestic zoos (Foreign zoos can only receive the pandas as loans). In addition, the names of the pandas, coined by a mass vote in China, means "reunion". Needless to say, supporters of Taiwan's independence and the opposition party Democratic Progressive Party will not be visiting the pandas any time soon.

The "Elite Club"
The costs of keeping pandas are substantial. You will need to build and maintain the panda facilities, source for an adequate supply of bamboo, and there is this expectation to breed the pandas. Not to mention, the loan contracts contain fines of $500,000 if a panda dies and human error is involved.

Yet, countries desire to join the elite club of panda-renting nations. China must be doing something right here...

==========================

Sources:

LA Times - http://articles.latimes.com/2006/mar/21/world/fg-pandas21

Business Insider - http://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-panda-diplomacy-is-more-significant-than-ever-2013-11

Time - http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1736273,00.html; http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1868376,00.html

Global Post - http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/the-rice-bowl/china-panda-diplomacy
Academia.edu - http://www.academia.edu/4289360/ENVIRONMENTAL_REVIEWS_AND_CASE_STUDIES_Diplomats_and_Refugees_Panda_Diplomacy_Soft_Cuddly_Power_and_the_New_Trajectory_in_Panda_Conservation

Lamb shoulder chops with my Rangemate Microwave Cooker

Step 1: Coat the base of the pan with 2 tablespoons of oil.

Step 2: Place lamb shoulder chops flat on pan. 

Step 3: Dress lightly with salt, rosemary & pepper. 

Step 4: Cover, and place cooker in microwave. 

Step 5: Set microwave on high for 2 minutes. 

Step 6: Take out pan & flip the chops. 

Step 7: Cover, and put in microwave on high for another 2 minutes.

Step 8: Remove from microwave. 

Step 9: Remove chops from pan to serve. 

P/s: The sunny side ups were also cooked using the Rangemate cooker (2mins on High). 

Cameras, photos & album-ing

During those days when we had to use films in our camera, there is always this conscious effort to ration the film for fear that you run out of film at a location you would like to take a photo of. Also, as there was no way to check your photos, a number of them would turn out bad which would leave you with no photos (since you only took 1 or 2 at each spot). 

Then came the digital camera. My family's first digital camera was a Canon Powershot. My father consciously chose to buy a camera which did not come with those rechargeable lithium type batteries. In his words, "those batteries cannot last and will spoil faster than the camera". You must remember that this was more than 10 years ago, and replacement lithium batteries are not as cheap and easy to find as compared to the variety of "replica" models we have today. The camera is still working today - but has become too cumbersome to carry around, especially the spare AA batteries.

With the SD card, we can take more photos at each location and delete the bad ones immediately. Storage capacity has become less of an issue nowadays as you can easily afford a 4/8GB SD card - which allows you to store more than 500 photos taken with a compact camera.

In the 2000s digital cameras became affordable for the mass market. Brands competed with one another to produce the trendiest, slimmest, lightest and smallest digital camera. It was convenient to bring the camera with you to town as you can slip it in your purse or pocket. Shops that used to develop the film negatives have also innovated with kiosks for you to browse and select the photos you wish to print. Most likely you will end up selecting a lot of photos, making album-"ing" them a chore, and you end up leaving them in their original stack, somewhere on the shelf. 

Around 2010, prices for the DSLR dropped significantly, paving the way for mass market consumers. Though their prices still double the compact cameras, photography enthusiasts see the value in owning them. The added features include high-resolution photos, wide lens, great zoom, etc. The community is also growing, making resales and rental of equipment very accessible. 

More recently, when I was on holiday, I noticed the increase in the number of smartphone/tablet-camera users. I can think of some reasons for this: 

1) Convenience. Your phone is likely to be in some place more accessible than the camera 

2) Quick set up time. For iPhone users, you can even take a photo when your phone is locked.

3) Social media. You can upload your photo to Facebook or Instagram at the next Starbucks. Not to mention you can enhance the photos using the apps on your phone. 

4) Cool features like panaroma and the new Samsung one that can add your face in the pic you are taking. 

5) My iPhone 5 takes better nightshots than my Lumix Fx-5. (Or maybe it's just me)

6) Selfies. Unless you have those expensive cameras that come with the big screen at the front, the phone or tablet is the best tool available. 

To build on an earlier point about album-"ing", Facebook becomes a convenient location to house and share your photos. You can upload the photos when you get back to your hotel at night to tell your friends what you have been up to for the day. I have even come across this status update on Facebook: "Will be traveling to XXX for the next few days. I don't think I'll have Internet access so you won't hear from me. Pls don't think I've gone missing. However, please send a search & rescue team if you don't see me back online in 3 days."

So what can we expect from the future? Compact camera manufacturers have already begun to innovate. We can now find wifi-enabled cameras (that lets you upload your photos to Facebook or share with your friends) and compact-DSLRs (for those who find the traditional DSLRs too bulky). The smartphone/tablet camera will still continue to innovate (higher resolution?) and can possibly replace the standard compact cameras that we have today. Only time will tell...

Here's some photos using my iPhone 5. I have more photos in my camera, but it's just too inconvenient to transfer them to the PC especially since I'm blogging from my phone...

Selfie - evidence that I climbed all the way up to the pedestal and had no one to take a photo of me. 

Panaromic shot on board the Chicago Architecture Cruise. 

Night shot of the Empire State Building from Top of the Rock

Photo collage of sightings at the American Museum of Natural History. 

Why do wives/girlfriends ask for opinion but don't take them?

If this happens a lot in your relationship, don't fret. My husband and I have a fair share of such conversations which got me thinking why my response was such. I can think of 1 reason to justify why such scenarios happen - and it is nothing personal. Perhaps this can help to explain why your wife or girlfriend behaves this way as well.

A typical scenario goes something like this:

Husband: Where to for dinner?

Wife: Hmmm no preference, you decide?

Husband: Japanese or Western food?

Wife: Hmmm no preference. You decide?

Husband: Japanese?

Wife: How about Western?

Husband: ok...

So what happened here? At the point when Japanese or Western is proposed, the wife is likely to not have a clear favourite. We can say that the preference for either option is 50/50 or deviating by a very small margin, i.e 49/51. When the husband made the selection to go with Japanese, it occurred to the wife that she won't be eating Western food for dinner, and thus this "loss" is thrown into the evaluation process. When this happens, if the thought of forgoing Western causes more "pain" than the thought of forgoing Japanese, we will see the wife making the decision to go with Western instead.

The decision-making process had shifted from the thought of "how much I want to eat Japanese vs how much I want to eat Western" to "how much I have to forgo if eat Japanese vs how much I have to forgo if I eat Western". This shift is substantive as additional thoughts may come to play, such as, "if I don't eat Western today, the next time we eat it could be 2 months later since it's not always we are in the area".

With all these thoughts rushing through the wife's mind in that short span of a few seconds, it's no wonder that she will jump to the alternate option.

An interesting insight of what people in NYC and SG do when commuting to work

This was an observation I made during my week-long-holiday in NYC recently. This observation was made from my daily peak hour commute on the 1-2-3 subways.

Observation 1: A good number of NYC commuters are "book readers". In Singapore, you can hardly find commuters who still read actual physical books on the MRT. In fact, the number of e-book readers is also quite small. 

Observation 2: NYC commuters are not engrossed with their phone or electronic device. The "engagement" is usually limited to listening to music from the iPod / phone. Singapore commuters spend much more time on their phones or tablets - either browsing Facebook, playing games, and/or watching videos - which bring me to the next point. 

Observation 3: No one watches downloaded videos on their phone in NYC. In Singapore, a large number of commuters have HK, Korean, US dramas loaded on their phone. NYC residents must be fulfilling their TV time at home I guess.

Observation 4: The New York subways are loud because of the old infrastructure it is running on. However the noise helps to eliminate other common noises we hear while commuting in Singapore - such as people's conversations on the phone & each other, as well as the irritating ear phones that unnecessarily project (usually) techno music to everyone else in the carriage. 

Observation 5: There are less "sleepers" in the NYC subways compared to in the Singapore MRT. Perhaps their commute time is shorter? Or perhaps it's in their nature to keep alert for safety reasons?