Travels etc.

Meetings are important part of the business activity. Our basic need to communicate is topped by necessity to deliver meaningful results at workplace. As usual though reality is not as rosy as the ideal that many of us trying to achieve with meetings. What is a good work-related pastime for one is at the same moment a time wasting and useless activity to another. This contradiction is coming from a few factors (among other things): 1.     Core difference in perception of meetings between different levels of workplace hierarchy or among committee/board members 2.     Meeting audiences and agendas 3.     Involvement and focus level of participants during the meetings Therefore usually instead of being an effective business or private processing tool, meetings become the opposite. There is an opportunity to adjust existing practices to meet new expectations of the work related activities to be more productive and fun....

There is usually two distinct perspectives on multi-tasking: 1. Multitasking is counterproductive. We get distracted by multiple tasks that all get our way and fight for our scarce attention, time and resources. This leads to a common fallacy that if you do multiple activities “at a time” you are not doing good work in any of those. 2. Multitasking is a way of getting many things done in a short period of time or in a long run. Indeed it can be either a disaster or a great helper depending on how it is used and practiced. Most recent research shows that we don’t do multiple tasks purely in parallel or simultaneously. That means we don’t purely multi-task, but switch between tasks and execute them one at a time, but by spending very small timeframes on each task. A good example from the history is a story about Julius Caesar capabilities in that area. Plutarch writes, “Caesar disciplined himself so far as to be able to dictate letters from on horseback, and to give directi...

We all have probably seen on the Web pictures which may look like the following: It implies that if someone quotes to a customer low (or lower than average, I presume) price for the services or products it necessary means low/lower quality of the services or products provided. This is very interesting assumption and I had a short conversation a while ago on Twitter with another SharePoint specialist about it: Original Bjørn's article should be here http://t.co/36brwYq4Kf A study in Journal of Consumer Research http://www.jstor.org/userimages/ContentEditor/1351717003127/DevalRelease.pdf in regards to the subject clearly shows: '" Consumers rarely have complete information and use various strategies to fill the gaps in their knowledge as they consider and choose products. One of these strategies involves using naive theories : informal, common sense, explanations that consumers use to make sense of their environment. For example, consumers may believe th...

It’s hard to underestimate importance of planning. It is (or should be) integral part of any conscious activity that requires more than 1 step and implies a target. Especially when we deal with complex processes of various kinds. Contemporary prejudice about planning is that it’s only relevant to big projects like construction, IT, space exploration, military operations, massive production etc. However any activity that involves setting up a goal and steps to achieve it requires planning. Why is it necessary? Because we need to: 1. Estimate approximate date/time to reach the goal 2. Understand what/who is required to achieve the goal 3. Measure success or failure 4. Review and adjust the plan if needed. So planning may help not only at work, but also in personal life which will in turn positively influence our so-called work-life balance. Planning should only serve one purpose – reaching as close as possible to the target. Very often this idea is being overlooked and burie...

- "Should I buy those gloves?" - "How much are they?" - "$70" - "Hmm, that’s too expensive" A couple was in a tiny store in the centre of Sydney buying discounted uggs and other sheepskin apparel. $70 was a significant amount for them especially comparing to the prices of other goods in the store. In about a week she decided to buy them though. They returned back to that shop, bought the gloves and she was very excited. The excitement continued with a shopping spree at Paddy’s Market in Chinatown market which is very famous for low prices. They bought some clothes, souvenirs and other things. All those other purchases however were not as precious to her as the gloves she was aiming to buy at the beginning and were the main goal of the second trip. Back at home they started unpacking the stuff and realised they lost the gloves somewhere. It doesn’t matter whether the price level or the value of all these movements back and forth just...

Have read an ambiguous article today about " Young People in the UK to Choose Between Poverty and Debt ". What is apparent, there are socio-economical issues that the UK people would like to resolve: growing unemployment growing poverty young people sitting on welfare payments competition from skilled people from other countries The initiative David Cameron announced sounds very interesting, especially in it's part where jobless "would have to accept mandatory 'community work'" if failing to find employment within reasonable timeframe. I would like to highlight some failing points in the article that are presenting the initiative as "predictably vindictive" and with permission from a reader to provide advice to "young" persons like me. One of the complaints is low level of payment for apprenticeship and for young men and women who just finished studies. This claim is based on presumption that every business owner (and...

I have just finished reading Alcibiades I , by Plato. In that dialog I found very good part that may illustrate many events that happen constantly when someone deals with people in regards to influence, politics, problem solving, negotiations etc. Here’s the text I’d like to quote: --- SOCRATES: Then let us compare our antecedents with those of the Lacedaemonian and Persian kings; are they inferior to us in descent? Have we not heard that the former are sprung from Heracles, and the latter from Achaemenes, and that the race of Heracles and the race of Achaemenes go back to Perseus, son of Zeus?  ALCIBIADES: Why, so does mine go back to Eurysaces, and he to Zeus!   SOCRATES: And mine, noble Alcibiades, to Daedalus, and he to Hephaestus, son of Zeus. But, for all that, we are far inferior to them. For they are descended 'from Zeus,' … whereas, we and our fathers were but private persons.   How ridiculous would you be thought if you were to make a display of yo...

Have recently started  Understanding economic policymaking  course by  IE Business School . Though the name doesn't say macroeconomics, it's the best macroeconomy lectures I have ever attended. Even some specific economy courses didn't do much for me to start understand the principles and rules. Professor Gayle Allard is a great instructor and the structure of the course is very easy to follow and to learn. The course is an awesome opportunity for everybody interested in how the economy works.

According to the British Petroleum Statistical Review of World Energy, 2013 , global coal reserves declined in the decade ending 2012: Figure 1. Proved coal reserves . Proved reserves of coal are generally taken to be those quantities that geological and engineering information indicates with reasonable certainly can be recovered in the future from known deposits under existing economic and operating conditions. If we look at supply and demand factors in the decline, we can see that: a) Coal price has grown significantly in the decade ending 2012 1 :   Figure 2.  Prices in US Dollars per tonne . b) Coal consumption has also grown significantly worldwide 2 : Figure 3. Coal consumption by region . c) The price of substitutes (i.e. Natural Gas) has also grown. Not so in North America though, but if we look at the world trend it is growing 3 : Figure 4. Natural gas prices . Therefore if the rule of supply and demand worked we would see increase i...

The Wealth of Nations: An Inquiry into the Nature & Causes of the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith My rating: 5 of 5 stars Have just finished this book. It has been a long process, but fully rewarding. It's the hardest book I have ever read. Firstly because of the author style and secondly because of my habit to read everything in the book and not jump to the next section until I understand the current one. I have heard of Adam Smith's ideas from other sources before, but now I see that majority of those who said Smith is this or Smith is that - haven't read this book at all. In addition to that, many people think theories of 17th and 18th century don't work today. however during the whole time of reading I have had a feeling that Smith has written about today with only a few differences. I highly recommend this book to everyone who is interested in how everything works around us. View all my reviews

Some interesting ideas from the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith regarding big capital: "The trade of a joint-stock company is always managed by a court of directors. This court, indeed, is frequently subject, in many respects, to the control of a general court of proprietors. But the greater part of these proprietors seldom pretend to understand any thing of the business of the company ; and when the spirit of faction happens not to prevail among them, give themselves no trouble about it , but receive contentedly such halfyearly or yearly dividend as the directors think proper to make to them." "The directors of such companies, however, being the managers rather of other people’s money than of their own , it cannot well be expected that they should watch over it with the same anxious vigilance with which the partners in a private copartnery frequently watch over their own. Like the stewards of a rich man, they are apt to consider attention to small matters as not ...

Not long ago I published an article  Economic Lessons - Consumer Influence on Price  with an intent to show that not everywhere rules of supply and demand work as per the textbooks and as per wishes of some people. I have discussed this topic with many people and majority seem to still believe in supply-demand mantra. Today I stumbled upon the article by BT Financial Group -  4 surprising facts about the property market : "Supply and demand pricing rules don’t always work with property".

From time to time an opinion comes up regarding state deficits, national debts etc. Here's the insight on how it is relevant and whether it does influence wealth of the country or not: "The balance of produce and consumption may be constantly in favour of a nation, though what is called the balance of trade be generally against it. A nation may import to a greater value than it exports for half a century, perhaps, together; the gold and silver which comes into it during all this time, may be all immediately sent out of it; its circulating coin may gradually decay, different sorts of paper money being substituted in its place, and even the debts, too, which it contracts in the principal nations with whom it deals, may be gradually increasing; and yet its real wealth, the exchangeable value of the annual produce of its lands and labour, may, during the same period, have been increasing in a much greater proportion. The state of our North American colonies, and of the trade ...

We have not long ago discussed some aspects of sociology. There is an opinion that theories of 17-19th centuries are not applicable today - in the 21st century. However as I am reading Adam Smith at the moment, here's quite an interesting quote: "In every country it always is, and must be, the interest of the great body of the people, to buy whatever they want of those who sell it cheapest . The proposition is so very manifest, that it seems ridiculous to take any pains to prove it; nor could it ever have been called in question, had not the interested sophistry of merchants and manufacturers confounded the common sense of mankind. Their interest is, in this respect, directly opposite to that of the great body of the people . As it is the interest of the freemen of a corporation to hinder the rest of the inhabitants from employing any workmen but themselves; so it is the interest of the merchants and manufacturers of every country to secure to themselves the monopoly o...

Now here's where "Invisible Hand" comes into play:  "As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can, both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce maybe of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it . By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security ; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain ; and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest, he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually ...

From time to time the question of money comes up in conversation. Many people tend to think that money can increase wealth or to help to resolve many issues relating to health, starvation and education. However, there is an interesting quote from the 17th century: "It would be too ridiculous to go about seriously to prove, that wealth does not consist in money, or in gold and silver; but in what money purchases, and is valuable only for purchasing. Money, no doubt, makes always a part of the national capital; but it has already been shown that it generally makes but a small part, and always the most unprofitable part of it. It is not because wealth consists more essentially in money than in goods, that the merchant finds it generally more easy to buy goods with money, than to buy money with goods; but because money is the known and established instrument of commerce, for which every thing is readily given in exchange, but which is not always with equal readiness to be got in...

Have been reflecting on some economy principles and rules for a while and here's what still doesn't came through to me in regard to Supply and Demand equilibrium and price results: How do consumers influence the price? Say when we come to the grocery store or a super market we don't bargain, right? Also with big purchases like furniture, expensive electronics, cars or real-estate we don't do many of those frequently enough to influence the price. There is another part of economy - B2B  where "consumer" or one side of the relationship sometimes can influence the price and sometimes can't. Very often in case of businesses the procurement decisions are not made by one person and not always fair or economically efficient.  Or I am missing something here? I just thought the Demand part of this system should "belong" to the consumer, hence the idea that the buyer should influence the equilibrium somehow. However, to me usually the consumer has ...

"Such as they were, however, those arguments convinced the people to whom they were addressed. They were addressed by merchants to parliaments and to the councils of princes, to nobles, and to country gentlemen; by those who were supposed to understand trade, to those who were conscious to them selves that they knew nothing about the matter . That foreign trade enriched the country, experience demonstrated to the nobles and country gentlemen, as well as to the merchants; but how, or in what manner, none of them well knew. The merchants knew perfectly in what manner it enriched themselves, it was their business to know it. But to know in what manner it enriched the country, was no part of their business ." - Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations

Interesting indeed: "A rich country, in the same manner as a rich man, is supposed to be a country abounding in money; and to heap up gold and silver in any country is supposed to be the readiest way to enrich it. For some time after the discovery of America, the first inquiry of the Spaniards, when they arrived upon any unknown coast, used to be, if there was any gold or silver to be found in the neighbourhood? By the information which they received, they judged whether it was worth while to make a settlement there, or if the country was worth the conquering. Plano Carpino, a monk sent ambassador from the king of France to one of the sons of the famous Gengis Khan, says, that the Tartars used frequently to ask him, if there was plenty of sheep and oxen in the kingdom of France? Their inquiry had the same object with that of the Spaniards. They wanted to know if the country was rich enough to be worth the conquering . Among the Tartars, as among all other nations of shepherd...

Getting closer to the core: "All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind. As soon, therefore, as they could find a method of consuming the whole value of their rents themselves, they had no disposition to share them with any other persons. For a pair of diamond buckles, perhaps, or for something as frivolous and useless, they exchanged the maintenance, or, what is the same thing, the price of the maintenance of 1000 men for a year, and with it the whole weight and authority which it could give them. The buckles, however, were to be all their own, and no other human creature was to have any share of them; whereas, in the more ancient method of expense, they must have shared with at least 1000 people. With the judges that were to determine the preference, this difference was perfectly decisive; and thus, for the gratification of the most childish, the meanest, and the most sordid of all va...