Former McDonald’s executive Guy Russo had “retired” at 47. He had left his job managing the greater China region, had bought a house in Hong Kong and was doing some consulting. He had time to spend with his three children and work pro bono with his wife Deanne for a Chinese orphanage foundation. Then he got a call from Richard Goyder, chief executive of Perth-based conglomerate Wesfarmers, who persuaded him to return to Australia to revive the ailing discount retail chain Kmart in September 2008.

Russo knew all about the fast-food service industry but he’d never worked in retail …

From The Financial Review BOSS Magazine

According to his profile on LinkedIn he was at McDonald’s for 34 years, having started right at the bottom. His Wesfarmers profile says a bit more, with him attending the McDonald’s McUniversity and Macquarie University Graduate School of Management in Sydney.

So, that’s the secret sauce right there: Russo didn’t know didly squat about the retail industry, has bugger all qualifications, yet gets called up and offered the top job at Kmart. Just like that. I’m sure there must have been more going on behind the scenes, but it doesn’t sound like Russo was even looking for a job. Maybe he’s a mate of a mate of Goyder.

Here’s a guy who’s worked his whole life at McDonald’s and worked his way up the food chain with just High School knowledge and in-house training. He then gets promoted to McDonald’s China, which is all well and fine. If he’s worked there that long, I guess it’s just a matter of waiting until everyone higher up leaves or dies from obesity related diseases.

He says:

Kmart was a test for me: can you do something you have no training in and use the skill sets that you have learned? … Because I knew very little, for six months I shut up and listened and observed. I tried to learn as much as I could …

Somehow I can’t see myself using that line in an interview.

Yeah, sure. I’ll sit around for 6 months watching and observing because I don’t know a thing about this company, its industry or its people. Oh, and you’ll pay me an executive salary.

So, I’m still stuck for a job. I don’t have the networks of people so I can just walking into something with a phone call letting them know I’m coming. I don’t have the consistent work experience because I keep attaching myself to the wrong horse.

I have the qualifications, I have the skills, I have the experience – at least I believe I do. What I don’t have are the connections, the contacts and the relationships with the people that make the decisions. And that’s what’s killing me. I spent so long living overseas that I came back to a blank slate. The city in Japan that I lived in was small enough that I could meet most of the other teachers, network with them and search out new jobs without too much hassle. But here, in Sydney, it’s a completely different situation.

And so I’m stuck. Maybe I should go and work in the mail room.

I’m going to write more about how following my dream killed my career, but that can wait. I’ve got plenty of time – I’m unemployed.

Share on TwitterShare on LinkedInDigg ThisShare on TumblrSubmit to StumbleUponSave on DeliciousSubmit to redditShare via email
 

I am an unemployed bum. Again.

When I look at my work history, I can’t think of a time when I’ve had a stable job. And by stable I mean one where I thought I’d be able to continue working, with hope of promotion for a company that was also economically stable. My resume is a train wreck of employment history.

I’ve found recently that the quality of my work, my experience and my education has little to do with my salary level – if anything at all. I can be educated up to my eyeballs (and I am) and still find it hard to find meaningful (or any) work at a minimum salary range that I need to sustain life.

There’s a correlation between wages and inflation that I think most people seem to miss, perhaps because most people aren’t educated beyond high school. (And that’s something I think a lot of well educated people seem to forget.) Such that, when wages go up, people tend to have greater purchasing power and they exercise that power by buying lots of useless stuff they don’t need and that in turn makes prices go up. We’re constantly bombarded with advertisements telling us how we aren’t happy because we don’t have the latest whizbang thingy, so we need to go out and spend, spend, spend. But how do the employers expect us to buy all the yummy things they lay out for us, if they don’t pay us enough to purchase their rotten items?

This then comes back to my thoughts on salary and experience. We’re not paid on how much we know, or how much we’ve done.

When I go and sell my home, I don’t tell the real estate agent how much I want to sell the place for, and I don’t inform purchasers how much they have to pay to get my place. The market decides. A smart seller will research what similar abodes in the local area go for and aim for that as a selling price (or, just above, or well above.) If there are more properties available than buyers, prices go down because buyers have the upper hand in negotiations as they can shop around. If interest rates are too high, or the money market has gone balls up and there’s a credit crunch then that also affects prices. But generally, it’s about demand, and demand drives prices.

If there are more jobs available than workers, wages go up. Now, I’m not saying you can get by with no education or experience, but when the market is tight (or loose, never sure which is which) – that is fewer unemployed bums than jobs, the talent have a better pick of the jobs available and the wages go up.

Sure, the role and the person have to fit. Much like a family looking for a 4 bedroom house isn’t going to consider a 1 bedroom flat. It’s still the square peg for the square hole, but the same pattern still applies. The market drives salaries and prices.

At the moment, there are lots of jobs for child care workers. Now, I just can’t rock up to a child care centre and get a job. I have to be qualified. (And, I’d probably have to lose the extra fashion item.) But that doesn’t mean I can earn $9.5 million a year as a child care worker. For a start, that’d be about $500K per child – I don’t think may parents can afford that. And think of what the other workers would do when they find out the wage gap between me and them. (Although, I’d probably only need to work for about a month and I could retire.)

So, I know what my minimum salary needs to be to meet my basic needs. And I’m concerned that I won’t be able to get a job that makes that level of salary. I might have a bunch of nice documents hanging on the wall and a lorry load of experience in different industries but if I’m stuck in a market that has a lot more unemployed layabouts than jobs, there’s (almost) nothing I can do to improve my lot.

So, that’s that then.

Share on TwitterShare on LinkedInDigg ThisShare on TumblrSubmit to StumbleUponSave on DeliciousSubmit to redditShare via email
 

I think there are two types of meetings: essential, and really essential.

I actually enjoy meetings, they get me away from my desk, and they provide an opportunity to get some input, for some decision making and to get dormant parts of my brain working again.

Essential meetings are those required to keep a project going, they might be daily or every few days. They can be something where people get together in a meeting room, or just pulling your chair up to a co-workers desk and going over something. These meetings get the most done, but are the least organised. However, one clear ingredient of these types of meetings is that they are usually internal meetings, and as such they tend to get spontaneously created, shifted around, forgotten, cancelled, changed or pushed into the background and as as Agent Smith says, it’s inevitable.

And if the focus is on getting the job done then meetings are like doing a check of the map to make sure you’re going the right way. If the highway doesn’t have any turn-offs then you don’t need to check the map so often. But if you’re in a squiggly city like Canberra, then you need to check the map every few streets (or have a good GPS.) But eventually you have to have one of these meetings to make sure all is well in the world. Thus, regardless how much disdain you give these kinds of meetings, they eventually become essential.

Really essential meetings are usually external meetings with the client. These will have a fixed day and time and rarely get shifted due to the amount of work it takes to actually organise it. These meetings can go for an hour, sometimes more and consist of quite a bit of waffle, kerfuffle and other ~fuffley items. Due to the number of stakeholders involved and their relative levels of power within an organisation, the ratio of decision making to participants tends to approach zero. (Or one, I never was good ratio maths.)

Well, I guess that’s a bit of an exaggeration (the inability to get things done in client meetings, not my mathematical ability with ratios.) But part of the challenge is that in internal meetings there’s already a corporate language in use that facilitates faster communication. When meeting with the external client, the use of language has to be very carefully clarified in order to avoid ambiguities.

When ever I have a client meeting, I’ll take lots of notes and then after the event (and sometimes, it is an event) I go back to my deskicle and write everything up as best I can and send it to all the stakeholders. (That’s an odd expression, stakeholders, it sounds as though Buffy is going to turn up with her friends and kill Edward, et. al. One can only hope.) Then afterwards I can use the notes as a point of reference of what I’m doing. Internal meetings however are just a fluffy feel good get together to do a check of how things are going. Usually.

I don’t like to have internal meetings run like external ones with client. But that’s just me and the situation I’m in now. If I was working in a huge corporation and I had people from all different departments who didn’t know each other, then yeah, I’d be a bit more formal, but then I think that would reduce the productivity of the meeting. Formality however reduces ambiguity.
So, where does that leave us?

In a mixed up world between formality and ambiguity.

Share on TwitterShare on LinkedInDigg ThisShare on TumblrSubmit to StumbleUponSave on DeliciousSubmit to redditShare via email
© 2011 The Three Legged Pig Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha