A(nother) Letter to Virgin Atlantic Customer Service

Michele,

We still have not received the refund you promised last year for the broken seats on our flight in August. I have reached out to you about the issues we experienced on 13 separate occasions--in September, October and November of 2016; and in January of this year. 

To remind you where we got to (since in many of our exchanges, it's apparent that there are either several people responding to Michelle Forrest's email, or one person with a terrible memory and no prior email history to refer to):

- On November 15, 2016, you emailed me the following:

"As for upgrading your seats, I have again spoken to my Team manager, and we would be happy to arrange a full refund for the two broken seats, which was yours and your daughters seats."  

- On January 27th, 2017, you emailed me the following:

"Thank you for your latest email. I would like to confirm that I have been in touch with our refunds team, as it appears that they missed my email.  I am very sorry that this has happened and I have sent feedback to their manager, that this is unacceptable. Please be assured that they are rushing the refund for you and this will be calculated within the next 7 -10 days [emphasis added].  As a gesture of goodwill I have credited a further 10000 miles to your Flying Club account."

It is now approximately 42 days since you promised to rectify the refunds team's "unacceptable" mistake within 7-10 days, and so for a 14th time I'm reaching out to you, as the Customer Relations rep at Virgin Atlantic, and at this point Michelle, I have only one question to ask (beyond where's our refund): What is going on with you people?

Sincerely,

Alex 

Phone Wars

Seems like there’s a war raging. Not the ones in the Middle East, silly—I’m talking about the iOS / Android war. Apparently you have to pick a side—and then ruthlessly taunt the opposition for, say, copying features from your OS. Who knew smartphone OS’s could trigger more passion-vitriol-loyalty than sports teams?

I recently made the switch from an Apple to an Android phone. Not that I don’t like Apple, I’m a total fanboy—I have an Apple TV, MacBook Air, iPad, and have been on iPhone forever, it feels like (actually since 2010, so less than 5 years). So, why rock the boat? Doesn't the Apple ecosystem feel familiar and work seamlessly? 

In a word, money (okay, more than one word—also flexibility—I want to be able to choose the device I like regardless of whether it’s Android or iOS, so I’m also doing this in the hopes of setting up a data / app environment where I can switch between OS’s with minimal impact). Oh, and I want to be able to fit my phone in my pocket...

AT&T pushed back on my recent purchase of an iPhone 6+ and canceled my plan (read the small print!), pushing me on to one that cost $30 a month more. With a two-year contract, the price of the phone itself, and the additional one-time fees from AT&T, this meant that this new phone was going to cost me close to $1,500 (for the 128GB 6+)!!!

So I’m taking it back to the Apple Store and switching to a beautiful sandstone 5.5” OnePlus One, the new phone, from Chinese manufacturer OnePlus, which reportedly just reached a million units in sales via word of mouth alone. Smaller, lighter and more pleasing to the hand than the 6+, the One has the same size screen (5.5"). More importantly, if you’re lucky enough to get an invite, you can snag an unlocked 64GB One for under $400—so no contract.

I had always been curious about Android phones but was scared to try and untangle my digital life from Apple’s walled garden. Apple makes it so simple to clone my old iPhone over to my new one. Here’s how that transition is going:

1. -       Notes. I used Apple’s Notes app quite a bit over the years, for storing odd things like names of restaurants, shopping lists, and business ideas. It was easy to go through and delete all the old notes I didn’t need, and send the rest to Evernote. Done. Time: 45 minutes.
2. -       Music. For a while now I’ve pretty much only used the Spotify app for listening to music on my phone. Done, a simple install of the Android app. My iTunes library (huge) is all in the cloud now and there’s no iTunes for Android, so I’m leaving that music there. I’ll only be able to access it from my other Apple devices, no big deal to me but if you want to use this music on your phone I don’t see an easy way to get it, unless you have access to the library of mp3s, in which case it looks pretty simple to load in to an Android app. Time for me: 5 minutes.
3. -       Other Apps. pretty easy to locate an equivalent for most of the apps that I use regularly. Exceptions: Remote for Apple TV.  Time: About 1 hour to locate, install and sign in to them.
4. -       Notifications. I’m missing Apple’s lock screen ticker of app notifications. Not sure how to get this back in Cyanogen Mod, the operating system on the One, although I have used the Widgets feature to load email, calendar and stock ticker apps on to a series of screens available with a couple of swipes from the lock screen. Working on getting to a passive scrolling ticker as this was a great feature for staying vigilant for important messages with the iPhone!
5. -       Voice Memos. I have years of audio recordings in the form of voice memos on the iPhone. In theory these should be simple to sync over to iTunes but I haven’t figured out how to get them to actually transfer.  I see plenty of other users that have had the same problem online, but no solutions. I may just have to let these go—or get them back by resurrecting my backup whenever I move back to iPhone.
6. -       Camera. The 6+ has an incredible camera. This camera does not compare—especially to its ability to focus very quickly on action scenes and take a fantastic shot in the moment. See the below picture from a recent trip to Thailand as an example of the power of the iPhone 6+’s camera.
   
7. -       Pictures: I use iPhoto as the master storage for all my pictures. Fingers crossed, I can download easily from the new phone to the same iPhoto storage, even if the photos aren’t going to be quite as impressive.
8. -       New features. Some features work much better in Android—Google Now Launchpad, for example, gives me a level of “desktop” personalization that I’d never been able to get from my iPhone, with anticipated desires (e.g. online purchase shipping notifications; restaurant suggestions; commute times) all teed up for me on a left flick from the home screen. And I like having desktop widgets so I can get in to Frequently used apps without launching them, just flick to the right from my homescreen.
9. -       General user interface. I’ve figured out where everything is in the course of a few days and I am not at all unhappy with being on Android over iOS. The only real bummer is it feels like the UI has an infinitesimal lag that the iPhone didn’t, for example when scrolling a web page or Facebook / Instagram feed. The iPhone gave the illusion of physically moving the page around smoothly with your finger, an illusion that is just out of reach with the One.

All in all, an interesting experiment—at this early stage it feels like I might be back on iOS when the price for the current models drops, and the powerful 6+ camera is available, say, on the next generation of the regular-sized iPhone 6--probably in September with the 6S. But I think I’ll be pretty happy to use this device for the next year or so. And, who knows, with discoveries of new apps and features, I might decide I actually PREFER to be on Android…

N.B.: Completing this transition depends on the Apple Store giving me my cash back for my 6+. I have one week until the return period is up, and a couple of scratches on the phone. If they won’t take it back, I will have another week left to return the Plus.  Fingers crossed.

The Internet is Invading My Brain

The year: 2006. The place: Chinatown, Manhattan. One Sunday morning, bleary and tired from a great night out with friends, I poke around with one hand on the floor by the bed in search of my glasses. "Google them," my tired brain told me; which at the time made me chuckle--or at least, muster an exhausted smile.

Eight years on, the internet is invading our brains and the idea of Googling misplaced glasses is not laughable. Since 2006, Apple solved the touch-screen problem, giving us a device that was delightful to stare at day and night, in blissful ignorance of everything going on around us. Samsung and HTC followed in hot pursuit and now almost everyone can afford to be online while they're on line. Soon, wearables like Looxcie and Memoto, propelled by crowdsourcing fund Kickstarter, could help us locate items lost in a haze (and fill us in on a number of other late-night high jinks that might best be forgotten). Lucky pioneering "Glassholes" might literally be able to Google the whereabouts ("wearabouts") of their high-tech specs.

Futurist Ray Kurzweil writes that the integration of our brains with the Internet doesn't require a direct hard wire, à la Keanu Reaves in the Matrix--or even a Bluetooth connection--but in fact that it's already a reality. With a couple of swipes and taps of my finger, I can access needed "knowledge" from the internet in not much more time than it would take to pause for thought to recall something in my own memory.

This instant access from anywhere I am separates the current state of integration of external information sources with our brains from the previous availability of information in the form of books, magazines, etc. In the analogue era, the cost in time of locating information needed to satisfy our curiosity made it undesirable to do so.

You're at a restaurant with some friends, circa 1990, and for some reason that no one can remember it's now essential that the group confirms Michael Jackson's star sign. You could use your primitive cell phone, if you have one, to call a librarian and see if they are willing to find an encyclopedia and track down the information (calling directory enquiries first to get the librarian's number--remember directory enquiries?); or you could ditch your friends and run home to comb through your back issues of People, which you have been saving for just this occasion. Instead, you give up answerless, frustrated.

These days, the barriers to discovering the answer to any question are so low you never need to labour under a misapprehension again. I don't have to imagine where my friends are or what they're doing, I can just look it up on social media. Thanks to Google Maps, I "know" that Zambia and Zimbabwe are land-locked, and that the traffic on 101 South is clear right now. A lot closer to home, I don't need to walk over to the window and open it to feel what temperature it is outside, I can click a button and see it right in the palm of my hand.

As backlash to all this abundant power, some are starting to switch off more regularly and, unlike some who experience intense FOMO (fear of missing out) when not connected, report that it is possible to achieve a state of JOMO (joy of missing out) when not plugged in to the 'net. This being relative--because one can easily guess how I heard tell of this latest trend.

In the end, I found my glasses without the need for lifelogging or the Internet of Things, they were in the freezer with the rest of the vodka, of course. Three years later, the musician I mimicked so often as a child while wearing my father's black fedora and blasting Bad on vinyl suddenly died. Michael Jackson, Virgo, was 58. But then I didn't need to tell you that. I never need to tell you anything again.

Romney vs. Obama: 14%, 42%, 47%...

Whatever percentage of the electorate Obama needs to win over to stay in office, one thing's for sure: percentages have not been kind to Romney.

Take the 14% he paid in taxes on millions in income. Romney defends by saying that his income was already subject to America's high corporate taxes. It may be unpopular, but he's mathematically in the right here.

Consider two companies. Company A makes $210,000, but pays it all as wages to Al--so it'll make no "profit". The company must pay around 5% in payroll taxes, so Al will get $200k, about 35% of which he'll give back in taxes. Total to (federal, state, local) government: $80,000; total to Al: $130,000.

Company B makes the same $210k but calls it profit, and pays it all to its sole shareholder, Bill (Willard) Mitt Romney. But first it must declare that profit and pay 42% to the government. Then Bill will pay his 10% capital gains tax on the rest. Total to govt: 88.2 + 12.2 = $100,400; total to Bill: $99,600 ($30,000 less than Al, in case you hadn't noticed).

It's hard to feel for the millionaire, but it's clear from these simple sums that America's very high corporate tax rate is unfair and redistributionist (a good illustration of just how much higher it is than other developed countries here: http://www.economist.com/node/21548245), not to mention a drag on the economy and a disincentive to investment, and a driver behind high levels of corporate debt (as interest payments are tax-deductible).

Much was also made of Romney's gaffe-claim that 47% of Americans are takers who enjoy more back than they contribute, and would therefore vote for Obama. Put aside for a moment the insidious class implications of the statement and the sneering contempt for 150m Americans (if you can) and consider this.

If income is taxed equally at all income levels, and the benefits distributed evenly amongst all citizens, then it is a mathematical fact that the lowest 50% on the income scale will get more back out of government than they put in (assuming the government's output is equal to its input) and vice versa the top 50%.

And we know that income is not taxed equally; the top 5% of earners in 2009 paid almost 60% of the nation's federal income tax burden, earning 30% of total income (http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-individual-income-tax-data-0). Or, put another way, the bottom 95% of earners paid just 40% of taxes, on 70% of income.

Nor are benefits distributed evenly, with those in greater need receiving more--rightly so. (Of course, the government may be destroying value, in which case more of us will get less back than we put in.)

This doesn't excuse Romney's contempt for 47% of Americans, but it does support his claim that those at the top of the income scale are already paying their dues.

I admire Obama as an intellectual and a man, and abhor Romney's arrogance and mendacity. If I was a US citizen I'd still vote for Obama, on character alone, and because I don't believe this anemic recovery needs further cuts in government spending.

But it seems to me Romney's been given a hard time where he had good points. Will points mean prizes? Just three weeks to go before we find out!

Work life imitating fiction?

Devices of literature have real-life applications to working in organizations:

1) The art of storytelling

The way organizations move forward is in large part driven by individuals and teams weaving persuasive stories for each other.  Being able to deftly articulate plot, characters, and events--providing only those details absolutely necessary to the story--is a skill a change agent must have or develop.

2) Suspension of disbelief

Making the case for change, such as a project or a restructuring, involves asking your listeners to cast their minds forward into a possible future.  The storyteller's skill at evoking that future in a way that makes sense to them--so that the "pictures in their mind" are close enough to the ones you have in yours--involves taking the reader / listener / coworker to a fantasy land of what the future could be like.

3) Plotting

Overall plot direction is usually decided through evaluation of alternatives in strategy (plotting) sessions.  This is often best done behind closed doors, to minimize uncertainty to others as all plot alternatives are considered, and to avoid undermining suspension of disbelief.

4) Detailing specifics supports suspension of disbelief

For listeners to pay attention and be taken away by a description of the future, the speaker must articulate clearly and vividly.  Once the course is set, she must confidently translate the arc of the story into immediate actions.  Providing concrete details helps the reader's mind picture that future.  Compare the following two statements, picturing you work for Pam (or Paul):

"We will consolidate Pam's department with Paul's, and create synergies saving the company 10% of it's operating costs two years from now."

"Moved under Paul, Pam's team will eliminate six positions, with affected individuals notified exactly one month from now."

In my experience, most leaders don't do a good job of getting down to the specifics that help the affected individuals to start sketching out their own role in (and reaction to) the storytelling process.

Whether you're a leader or not, you can use some of the same techniques applied over the centuries by Homer, Shakespeare and Joyce to capture your audience's minds and implant in them the pictures they need to help you, follow you, advise you, or give you that important promotion.  Just remember--unless you're actually writing a novel, don't take the "fiction" part too far!

Where does innovation come from?

Is the belief that innovation usually comes from the outside a justified one?  In The Innovator’s Dilemma, ClaytonChristensen suggests some very successful companies have failed because theydon’t have the internal capabilities needed to adapt to disruptiveinnovation.  Armies of frequent-flying consultantswould probably agree on the value of an external perspective.

Another well-known book on the subject, Scott Berkun’s The Myths of Innovation, debunks manycommonly-held assumptions about innovation, for example “Good Ideas Are Hard toFind,” and “The Best Ideas Win.”  Often,the answer was staring you in the face all along; how often we’ve seen inferiortechnology “win” (Beta/VHS; Netscape/IE; Xbox/Wii).  

 “The Best Ideas Win”is an important myth for IT professionals to heed.  Diffusion of innovation is organic andunpredictable.  Important forces at playinclude network effects (the first fax machine?), complementary products (an iPhonewithout apps?), blind luck, and circumstance—and, in the book of (Steve) Job(s), thecustomer not knowing what they want.

If the prospect of being a “trusted advisor” seemsintimidating amidst the uncertainty of customer adoption and the ceaselesspounding of disruptive waves of innovation, then try assuming a position ofprovocative leadership!

Eric Topol’s CreativeDestruction of Medicine illustrates how important a role technology innovation may cometo play for life sciences.  Advances ingenomics, wireless sensors, internet access and computing power—what Topol calls“superconvergence” that will precipitate “the great inflection of medicine”—alreadyimpact how we discover and develop new cures for serious disease.

I must pause and acknowledge the primacy offunctional innovation over IT services innovation.  In the biopharma sphere, discoveringa cure for cancer trumps enabling an exec to run instant messaging on heriPhone.  Even so, if the reason twopreviously unacquainted scientists cross silos and collaborate to produce thatcure lies in inspired innovation in internal social media, wouldn’t that be cool?

Whether scientist or technologist—or both—there may beprinciples of innovation we can all draw upon. JonahLehrer’s New Yorker article on Groupthink provided grist for themill, illustrating (among other things) the role architecture and neighborhood canhave in generating innovation.  Breakingdown silos doesn’t have to be virtual. Sometimes the answer may really be right in front of you—on the otherside of your cubicle wall.

But let’s not ignore opportunities farther afield.  While superior resources and market demand willsupport the continued spread of new technology in the developed world, themother of invention—necessity—is everywhere in poor countries.  A CDC smartphone pilot in Kenya cost just $60,000, an amount most pharma's technology budget could afford  many times over.

Does innovation have to come from the outside?  Probably not--but it does seem to be important to keep an open mind about possible sources of inspiration.

Celebrating business jargon

I recently heard a piece on NPR, with FT columnist Lucy Kellaway, about the meaninglessness of many ubiquitous business phrases.  As self-appointed author of the Guff Awards, Lucy made some great and funny observations about dubious business usage of the English langage, like the ubiquitous phrase, "going forward."

I agree businesspeople speak far too much in the abstract, leaving their listeners wondering what the hell they're talking about--the cure for which can be found in Dan & Chip Heath's "Made to Stick", a great practical guide for anyone that has to communicate regularly in organizations.  The Heath brothers discuss Elizabeth Newton's Tappers & Listeners study, in which subjects were challenged to tap out a famous tune for a listener to guess.  The study showed that the tappers grossly overestimated the chances that listeners would correctly guess what they were tapping--a phenomenon that illustrates well the difficulty of communicating with others.

In Wharton professor Stuart Diamond's "Getting More", Diamond discusses the importance of "getting to" the pictures others have in their heads.  When I speak, I'm trying to use language to magically conjure the picture in my head in the heads of others.  Since I will always fail to some degree, understanding what is the picture is in their head is key.  The Heaths would, amongst other things, tell you to speak in specific rather than broad terms ("for the next year," vs. "going forward").

But I would like to very briefly stand up in defense of three kinds of universal business metaphor:

1) Sports - "Skating to where the puck is going to be"--Apparently a Wayne Gretsky quote, perhaps popularized as a business phrase by Steve Jobs, this colorful metaphor reflects not just the fact that competing in business involves chasing a moving target, but also that moving your organization is going to take time and effort, so staying one step ahead of--and occasionally stepping around--the competition is essential.

2) Driving - "Moving the needle"--For non-American speakers, the needle in question is the indicator hand of the speedometer--not to be confused with unrelated sewing or nursing analogies!  Frequently used in "what it'll take to move the needle," a phrase that efficiently evokes the value of achieving an incremental improvement in cycle time, and the need to quantify the required change in input to achieve that improvement.

3) Gastronomy - "Eating (someone else's) lunch"--I'm not sure I ever fully understood this phrase until I read in today's New York Times: "'Android and Apple together are eating BlackBerry’s lunch,' said Frank Gillett, a Forrester analyst."  The idea that you can do the hard work of packing your lunch and bringing it to school--in this case, creating the smartphone market--only for someone else to take away your rewards--is both insightful and motivating.

American business culture is full of these colorful metaphors.  I admit that, as an outsider, some of them can be confusing (I still have no idea what motherhood and apple pie is a reference to, and am about to go look it up!)  But if a picture paints a thousand words, then metaphors are a few words with the power of evoking a vivid picture in someone else's head.  Going forward I will aim to use them more!