Many of us recall the days when paper-based daily planners made the jump to the computer. Like many such advances, this offered a new platform with even greater usefulness and flexibility than the ingenious design of the original. The problem, though, was the jump: it had to be made repeatedly in both directions. There was no way to transfer information from the hand-held medium to the computer, other than the time-consuming method of hand-transcribing it.
Then, along came the Palm Pilot. This was a truly hand-held – and exceptionally effective – planner and organizer. It accomplished this by being focused, limiting its ambition to the reach of the technology of its day. It provided the minimum requirements of such a device – from calendar and contacts to to-do lists and notes – but did it extraordinarily well. It provided cross-linking, referencing, and search capabilities similar to the computer-based planners, so that you could organize information meaningfully and locate even the most elusive detail easily.
But even better than that, it closed the gap requiring the problematic jumping between your portable and office planners. It could be connected with your computer, and both could be synced so that no matter which device you entered information on, both would wind up with the same, and the most up-to-date, data.
While the original paper-based daily planners remained popular with many, and their manufacturers attempted to integrate the two by providing pockets for the hand-held versions in the planner covers, in my case this never made much sense. Key parts of the notebook planner fell into disuse, such as the calendar, contacts list, and even the business-card organizer.
Others, though, remained necessary, such as the reference and project sections, not to mention note-taking.
But not for long, as we’ll see tomorrow. We have a few more days on the gadget trail before turning to what it is that we really hope to find at its end. Please join us as we proceed.
—
Today’s tips: The subject of formal – that is to say, university degreed – leadership training is gaining visibility lately. I have offered my views about it most recently here. But here are two more:
Please see Miki Saxon’s deftly described depiction of leadership here, and especially here, for one side of the debate. But please also view Becky Robinson’s robust defense of the other side of the argument on Dan McCarthy’s Great Leadership blog.
—
Did you know you can read these posts, and any other at this site, on your mobile device? Specially formatted pages, more quickly downloaded and easily read, will open on your internet-capable phone when you navigate here (don’t forget to bookmark it!). Also, you can switch back and forth between standard and mobile views. Give it a try!
But before you go, please take a moment to subscribe, either by email or RSS reader, to be sure you receive future articles right here as well, as they’re published.
Technorati Tags: daily planner, computer, information, Palm Pilot, focus, ambition, technology, calendar, contacts, to-do list, information, notebook, business-card, project, gadget, university, leadership, training, Miki Saxon, Becky Robinson, Dan McCarthy
Sphere: Related Content
4 Comments
“Knowledge is Power” – Each of us apply this concept embedded within our own idiosyncrasies. The blogs I like to read usually have thoughts that employ a mixture book knowledge and the school of hard knocks. If one works in a company where hard knocks are oddly skewed from the mainstream, then getting a formal degree and its knowledge exposure is worthwhile. In addition, for those that have a few bruises, formal education allows for reading ‘expert’ opinions and thinking, “Oh, yes,” or “Really?”
I think obtaining a degree shows initiative. However, putting a boundary around the concept of ‘leadership’ and then judging whether one’s degree has allowed them to master that concept is hard.
I think the degree, and the knowledge obtained, allows for enriched dialog. But, using Miki Saxon’s fertilizer concept, if the plants getting the fertilizer are damaged in some way, the fertilizer has limited success for many reasons out of its control.
The great problem I see in leadership degrees is the same problem that affects many MBA and other programs and that is a narrowing of thought.
Harvard teaches by case study, Wharton focuses on collaboration and teamwork, other universities stress other approaches. Too often, graduates are locked into the mindset of their school and dismiss approaches that are different.
That is a major problem on the business side, but having future leaders believing that the leadership they learned in school is “right” and other, i.e., different, approaches lack value is a recipe for disaster.
I agree with Wally Bock’s comment regarding the real value of a liberal arts education and his example is riveting at LeaderTalk,
“If I were looking for colleges that produce leadership, I wouldn’t look at any business schools. I’d look to liberal arts colleges, especially small ones. They generate the kind of self-reflection, analysis and communications skills that are vital for anyone who leads a group. Augustana College in Rock Island, IL, for example, has graduated the highest percentage of individuals who have become CEOs of any undergraduate program.”
It’s true, isn’t it Allen, that the best solution is not one unalloyed approach or another, but a prudent and robust mixture.
Thanks for stopping in with this – a good and necessary point!
Hello Miki,
I honestly agree with that 100% myself. As it happens, my undergraduate degree was in the liberal arts, and had been far more valuable to me on a practical level than either of the succeeding business-oriented degrees. It did a much better job of teaching the value of open-mindedness combined with critical – and strategic – thinking. The latter degrees seem to, as you say, take a narrow, technical view of almost everything, attempting to quantify and close the debate on complex issues, rather than teaching you how to objectively assess and develop approaches to them.
Thanks Miki (and Wally)!
Post a Comment