Jagger, Warhol, and another guy you've never heard of

Check the letter below, a fairly famous one at that, written in 1969 from the Rolling Stones Mick Jagger to the artist Andy Warhol regarding Warhol's impending collaboration with the band on the cover art for their soon to be released album:

In three short paragraphs, and with 100 words give or take, Mick schools us all on the difference between the Talent - himself, the band, and of course Warhol; and the 'support' types like the unfortunate Mr. Al Steckler, who will look 'nervous' and can essentially be ignored.

I post a lot on this blog, perhaps too much, about the challenge and threat that increased automation and robot technology pose to the workforce and workplaces of the future. But I don't think that the changes and potential disruption that more powerful automation technologies, smarter artificial intelligences, and the increasing acceptance of robots in all kinds of workplace environments can be ignored. The primary challenge for many of us, and certainly for the next generation of workers, will be to find ways to ensure we can continue to create value - unique, hard to copy, and certainly hard to automate value.

This is not really a new requirement, although the pace of technological advances are making it more pressing. Back in 1969, Mick Jagger already it pegged. People like himself and Andy Warhol, well they were the creators. They were the important parts in the machine. And they'd enjoy the spoils - did you catch the line in the letter were Mick basically tells Warhol to name his price for creating the album cover art?

In 1969, for a non-creative, non-essential type like Steckler the worst think likely to happen was he'd be ignored and maybe marginalized a little. In 2013, the risks of being someone branded as a non-creative, worrying, nervous, functionary I think are far worse.  We can get a robot to handle those jobs soon enough. 

And the robots won't get nervous or bother the talent.

Have a great week all!

Off Topic: Cruise v. Hanks

I am on record as stating Tom Cruise is the finest Amercian actor of the last 30 years.

I am also frequently mocked for holding this position. 

Recently, in a fascinating Twitter group discussion, (well chronicled here by Lance Haun), a Mr. Tom Hanks was proposed as at least a rival to Mr. Cruise in this regard. I stipulated that Hanks deserved consideration.Negative Ghost Rider, the pattern is full

So for today's Off Topic post, I am breaking down the filmography (selected) of both of these venerable actors, to determine once and for all who deserves the title of 'Greatest American actor of the last 30 years', (admittedly a meaningless title that I made up). And since this is my meaningless title to bestow, I have created an equally meaningless basketball-themed model to frame the assessment.

So here we go:

Hall of Fame Caliber - the three greatest films for each actor

Cruise - Top Gun, A Few Good Men, Jerry Maguire

Hanks - Forrest Gump, Saving Private Ryan, Cast Away

Advantage - Push. Gump is a legendary film, but over time Cruise's work is holding up well. And all three Cruise films still resonate with quotes, catch phrases, etc. Only Gump registered in the American psyche in that way.

All Star - the next three best films

Cruise - Minority Report, Born on the Fourth of July, Risky Business

Hanks - Philadelphia, BIG, Sleepless in Seattle

Advantage - Cruise, but it is close. Risky Business clearly head and shoulders above anything Hanks did in the first few years of his career as well.

Solid Starter - films that are not necessarily great, but are eminently watchable AND re-watchable

Cruise - The Last Samurai, Mission Impossible, Collateral

Hanks - The Green Mile, A League of Their Own, Apollo 13

Advantage - Hanks, but close. I wanted to go with Cruise mainly on the strength of Collateral, but from top to bottom Hanks' depth and quality rates the edge.

Rotation player - films that will do in a pinch, like if your cable goes out but you find an old DVD lying around

Cruise - Rain Man, The Color of Money, Cocktail

Hanks - Splash, The Money Pit, You've Got Mail

Advantage - Cruise, easily. All three Hanks films are forgettable, while both Rain Man and The Color of Money are very solid, could even be higher on the chart type works.

Rookie - their early films, a sign of future potential

Cruise - Taps, The Outsiders, All The Right Moves

Hanks - Bachelor Party, The Man With One Red Shoe, Volunteers

Advantage - Cruise, and it isn't close. Bachelor Party is a classic, but it is the only memorable film of the bunch. All the Right Moves is very underrated.

Draft busts - the worst or most disappointing films in their catalogue

Cruise - Vanilla Sky, Eyes Wide Shut, Rock of Ages

Hanks - Joe Versus the Volcano, The Bonfire of the Vanities, The Terminal

Advantage - Push. These are all horrible, horrible films. 

The Overall Winner?

CRUISE, in a fairly close contest. 

And sure, I was a little biased coming in. And yes, I did not include 'voice' parts where Toy Story might have factored in Hanks favor. But I think the depth of Cruise's work gives him the decision. Feel free to disagree in the comments.

So that is it. As far as I am concerned this case is closed.  And probably should never have been opened.

Have a great weekend!

#HRHappyHour LIVE Tonight - 'HR and Health Care Reform'

Now that 2013 is in full swing, your thoughts as an HR and Talent Pro can only be turning to one thing - Health Care Reform!

I kid, but only a little.  Whether you call it Obamacare, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or just Health Care Reform, chances are it will impact your organization and your employees in 2013, and it might be equally likely you don't really know enough of what you need to know about these changes.

Well my friends, as you start your 2013 HR and Talent trip into the forest of Health Care Reform, you are not alone. The HR Happy Hour Show is back with you as well, with our latest live show of 2013, tonight, Thursday January 17th at 8:00PM ET.

You can listen to the show live tonight at 8:00PM on the show page here - on the listener line 646-378-1086, or on the widget player below. Also, you can participate on the show backchannel on Twitter - hashtag #HRHappyHour.

Listen to internet radio with Steve Boese on Blog Talk Radio

 

And, if for some reason you miss the show live, you can always catch the replay on the show page, or on iTunes - just search the podcasts section for 'HR Happy Hour.'

Joining us to talk the about the upcoming changes and challenges presented by Health Care Reform will be returning guest and friend of the show Jennifer Benz, CEO of Benz Communications; and John Barkett of Extend Health, and one of the original authors and implementers of the legislation that became known as Obamacare.

And of course riding shotgun with me will be the HR Ringleader herself, HR executive Trish McFarlane.  

We will be taking about and taking your calls on:

What are the most important aspects of HCR that you as an HR pro need to know?

How does HCR and its implications and demands differ across company size?

What key communications messages and strategies do you need to consider when keeping your employees informed?

What does the medium and longer term look like in the world of employer-sponsored benefits?

Where can the HR and Talent pro go to learn more?

These questions and more will be answered on the next episode of the HR Happy Hour Show - LIVE tonight at 8:00PM.

I hope you can join us tonight, it should be a fun and informative show!

Things your employees don't care about

Admission up front - this (brief) piece is a straight up rip-off homage to a post by Pete Warden titled 'Things users don't care about'. You should click over and check out Pete's list, from a technology service provider perspective, of things that a solution's users don't care about.  In case you don't click over to the post, here are just a few of these nuggets of insight on things users don't care about:

How long you spent on it.

How hard it was to implement.

How amazing the next version will be.

What you think they should be interested in.

Whose fault the problems are.

Fantastic stuff. And if you look across these examples, and several of the others Pete provides, it is pretty easy to discern the common themes. Namely, that users, customers, or employees from an HR service provider perspective, generally don't care about your problems. In IT it might be buggyDon't care. software, a difficult to manage supplier, or a lack of budget to procure new hardware or software. In sales it could be an inflexible pricing structure or an inability to promise a delivery.  And of course there are a million 'HR' problems that, mostly, your employees simply don't care about.

Government immigration rules making it hard to get visas for the three foreign engineers?

Don't care.

Recruiting system doesn't talk to the Payroll system making your team do double entry of data?

Don't care.

The list of 'mandatory' job requirements for the open position I'm trying to fill is so long, it's making it impossible for you to deliver a deep slate of candidates?

Don't care.

(I admit at least on that last one, your hiring manager should care, but that doesn't mean she does.)

Sure, in a perfect world and in an high-functioning, collaborative, 'Best Places to Work' kind of environment your problems as an internal service provider would actually resonate with your customers and employees. But most of us don't work in places like that.

Even in really great organizations, IT or Legal or Auditing or HR are still often simply looked at as the necessary evils of doing business. The 'users' or customers might, and often probably do care about the needed outcomes you deliver, but not one bit about the myriad of struggles, travails, and long hours you have to spend to deliver those outcomes.

It's the outcomes that matter, not what had to be overcome along the way. Within reason of course. Don't decide to go all Lance Armstrong on us.

But truly, it's a Honey Badger world when you are overhead. And Honey Badger, as we all know, simply don't care. (link to the video you have seen a thousand times, but it remains NSFW).

Why is the robot looking at me?

This past Sunday the seemingly inevitable march towards humanity's future domination by our robot overlords took a pretty significant if old-fashioned step - with a feature story on the venerable news magazine show 60 Minutes titled 'March of the Machines'.  In the piece, (video embedded below, email and RSS subscribers will need to click through to watch), CBS' correspondent Steve Kroft provided a well-balanced overview of many of the recent advances in robot technology, and how automation plays a critical and complex role in the nature and future of many types of work. 

60 Minutes - 'March of the Machines'

The piece, and supported by interview comments from 'Race Against the Machine' authors Andrew McAfee and Eric Brynjolfsson from MIT argues that some, if not most, of the jobless nature of the economic 'recovery' of the last few years has been driven by increased automation and the reduction in human workers required in those industries where this kind of automation, (manufacturing, logistics, even in health care), has become more widespread.

The piece, if you follow these developments reasonably closely, doesn't break much new ground, although simply by virtue of being covered on a well-known and widely watched show such as 60 Minutes, will bring the issue of the potential threat robotic automation into greater awareness.

In addition to the 13 or so minute piece that aired on the show, (the video you see above), the show's website also posted a shorter piece, with some additional footage and some out takes, that has the segment host, Mr. Kroft interacting more with some of the robotic technology from the story, (embedded below, same click through message as before). 

60 Minutes - The Robot Waltz

This little piece of B-roll cuts a little closer to some of what will be the inevitable issues and concerns that will arise from people working more closely with robots and robot technology. Fear, anxiety, trepidation, unease and more - all summed up in Kroft's telling question - Why is he (the robot) looking at me?'

Why is the robot looking at you indeed.

If you take a few minutes to check out the clips, please let me know what you think - are those of us that keep writing, talking, and thinking about the changes in the nature of work due to these kinds of advances in robot technology over reacting?

Or should we truly be teaching our kids how to better relate to their future robot colleagues?