espyb

I understand your feelings on this, but I suspect that depends upon the degree to which someone is able to compartmentalize and multi-task. Having a work life and a personal life doesn't have to be an either/or proposition, even if you work for people you know. I freely acknowledge that it's not for everyone, however if you have the ability to structure your life properly, it can work wonderfully for both parties.

One of the biggest pluses would be the personality aspect. You can interview and hire someone with a stellar resume and great interview skills, however you cannot truly know their personality until you work with them, and personality is one of the things that can make or break a working relationship. As the article touched upon, you often better know the strengths and weaknesses of those closest to you. This allows you to find the best fit for someone's personality and skills, which benefits everyone. Additionally, your friends and family are likely to give their absolute best effort because they're not just a part of your business, they're a part of your life. That's not always the case I know, as I'm sure we've all heard horror stories of friends and family who have taken advantage of such opportunities. But implementing the steps outlined would aid in preventing such situations, or in remedying them quickly should they arise.

I agree wholeheartedly with your statement regarding autonomy, mastery and purpose. Paying someone is often not enough to make them feel valued.

I see your point, there are likely just as many people who consider being male an advantage, as there are people who consider being female to be an advantage in this situation. The only person(s) who actually knows why she got the internship and he didn't is/are the person(s) making that decision. Frankly I'm more concerned with her self-doubt than I am with his lack of tack. If you aren't going to believe in yourself, why would you expect anyone else to?

I love this idea of encouraging people to both take a little time for themselves and for others! It may seem like a sacrifice to lose 2 work days a month, but you may find that those 2 days allow you to be more focused and productive during the rest of the month.

I had as much legitimate mail going to the spam folder as I did actual spam, though I had entirely too much of that too. It's pretty useless IMO.

Exactly. A good friend wouldn't. That's a comment from someone looking to find a reason to explain their own lack of success. A good friend would congratulate you, regardless of whether you beat them out for the job or not. Sounds like a case of sour grapes to me... and some people don't just have a few, they have entire vineyards. Nothing will ever be their fault, it can't be because the other person was more skilled, or had more more experience, they must have had an unfair advantage. That's easier than taking a hard look at yourself, being honest and addressing the real issues.

I agree, using the term 'earned', rather than 'deserved' is an excellent suggestion. For some reason 'deserve' has always bothered me. I believe in working for and earning what I receive. Deserve in my mind implies something given to you, or perhaps something you feel you are entitled to, rather than something you earned. So for me, earning something would provide a greater sense of accomplishment/achievement, than being told I 'deserved' it. Though I've never heard the reference to 'Imposter Syndrome'. That to me seems like a case of low self-confidence?

True to a certain degree, but you could also say that money provides greater autonomy. However there are also people who work because they choose to, rather than because they have to, and I doubt they all consider it a hobby. Some people may not need the money, but they need work to give them purpose, which falls in line with the article. It's a good article, though a bit too simplistic, as I feel that motivation is more individualistic and diverse than what's set forth. But I think the purpose was to set forth the authors premise in a straight-forward, scientific manner, so the simplistic nature of the article is likely unavoidable.

Agreed. In my experience Google is notoriously bad at customer service of all types, and attempts to share constructive feedback are ignored. So making it easier to provide feedback is worthless if you don't have a system to actually interpret and implement that feedback. I think it's simply a move to make the user feel like their suggestions are valued.

I currently have a sleep schedule similar to your previous schedule... work until I'm done with projects, usually Midnight to 2:00 am, sleep until 9 or 10 am. However I've noticed recently that I wake up nearly every night around 5 am, regardless of when I go to bed, and then I lay in bed irritated that I can't get back to sleep until around 7:30 am, then I doze off and wake up again around 10 am. So based upon your comments, and the article, I'll try getting up when I wake around 5 am and doing something productive, and then go back to bed around 7:30 am and get a few more hours of sleep. I don't know why, but I would have never considered doing that, I guess because I'm always irritated that I can't sleep in the middle of the night. My work environment would allow me to nap during the day, but I find it uncomfortable to sleep during the day.

They would disappear briefly, only to reappear as a new shell corporation. That's the whole point for many of them, no real liability. They hide behind false information, then disappear when it's convenient and start over. So I doubt the threat of an automatic negative outcome during litigation would be a deterrent. The law really only intimidates the people playing by the rules, or trying to.

That's a common occurrence for myself and many of the designers I work with. Regarding content, we are at the client's mercy, and unfortunately I find their sense of urgency is often nearly non-existent.