Situation: An employee isn’t performing up to par (really slacking or screwing up).  His or her direct supervisor isn’t doing a good job managing the employee.

Q1: Who’s more at fault?

Q2: Should there be any disciplinary action? If so, how severe?

Q3: How would you rectify this?

currently listening to: Andras Schiff playing Mendelssohn’s Songs Without Words (selected)

While reading the Businessweek “Competition” Issue, I wondered how I measured up to my peers in terms of “competitiveness”.  Here’s what I know about myself (based on my experiences):

1.  I’m not very good playing second fiddle; i need to be el maestro. 

2.  I like to study people’s intentions, desires, and fears.  In short, I enjoy applying game theory to practically everything I do.  I believe these are essential for effective negotiating and understanding people. 

3.  Nothing motivates me more than when another underestimates me (I make them regret it).  Controlled anger can be a powerful force.  I’m usually at my best under those circumstances and believe me, nothing is more inspirational than the thought of my slighters/doubters wiping their own dung off their faces. 

4.  I’m not sure if this was by chance or what, but I don’t remember ever getting picked on by a bully.  There may have been non-bullies who tried to pick on me, but usually I got them to cut it out :)  

5.  You can’t put me on a hand (don’t even try).  I’ve had people tell me that they can ‘read’ me, but so far, those who’ve made such a claim have lost huge pots against me shortly afterwards. 

For the record, the above is simply my way of motivating myself to keep improving.  

I would rate myself a 9.5 out of 10 for ‘competitiveness’.  But is that necessarily a good thing? 

AFC champ: Indianapolis Colts

NFC Champ: Carolina Panthers

Super Bowl Champ: Indianapolis Colts

I don’t know what inspired this idea. Perhaps it’s from reading this Chinese proverb: Before you decide to play a game, 1) know the rules, 2) know the stakes, 3) know the quitting time.

Here are the rules: I’m going to study hard for the GMATs, work diligently on my applications and apply to 5 different Business schools before January 1 of next year.
Here are the stakes: If I am lucky enough to get accepted to one or more of these schools, then I’ll matriculate in fall of 2007. However, if I don’t get into any of these schools, then that means it just wasn’t meant to be. I’ll then move to Las Vegas on August 15th, 2007 to become a professional gambler. No regrets and no turning back.

I haven’t decided whether to play this game or not, but it’s quite appealing in certain respects. If anything, it’s a good motivational tool to really work hard to achieve a goal. Despite all the drama, it’s not all that different from other situations that ordinary people face at their work or at home. “To play or not to play”–is not really a question, but a rehash of things already said and done.

And for the record, I believe in ‘fate’ more than I do in ‘choice’.

I don’t think I’ve ever raved about a TV dinner before, but I just had Chef Ming Tsai’s Tropical Curry Vegetable Rice Bowl which was perhaps the ‘best’ TV dinner I’ve ever had.  I’m a huge fan of curry and must say that the flavor is excellent–especially considering that this a frozen meal! It’s also one of the healthier TV dinners around–for a curry dish, it’s low in salt content, fat, and you get 5 g of fiber (21% recommended daily allowance), and lots of veggies.  And the portion size is just right (i’m a notoriously big eater).   

I could see myself eating this and other Blue Ginger frozen meals for lunch or dinner on a regular basis.  Well, maybe not daily, but 3-4 times a week.  The Tropical Curry Vegetable is part of the Blue Ginger line; Blue Ginger frozen meals are sold exclusively at Target and SuperTarget stores. 

5 out of 5 stars.  Easily. 

 Finished reading The 360 Degree Leader (audiobook).  In my opinion, it’s better to listen to books on Leadership rather than to read them. On the other hand, books on more technical subjects deserve to be read. So I went to the bookstore and picked up these two books–one on how blogs can be an effective marketing tool (Naked Conversations) and the other on Entrepeneurship (Never Bet The Farm) which focuses on dispelling myths about Entrepeneurs and best practices.    

 

Took the Quantitative and Verbal sections of the second practice GMAT CAT (skipped the writing section today) and scored in the 670-690 range (up from 640-660 from last week).  I was barely able to finish the Quantitative Section as I probably spent too much time on a couple questions early on so had to rush through the second half. 

It’s difficult to say whether the score increase is due to having more experience with CAT format, my skipping the Analytic writing sections, or having done more Data Sufficiency (DS) questions this past week. 

Some observations: 1) On today’s CAT, I didn’t miss any easy and intermediate questions.  This may suggest that I’ve improved my concentration and am making fewer careless errors.  2) On last week’s CAT, I got only 7 out of 15 DS questions whereas today, I got 11 out of 15 correct.  My focus this past week was on Data Sufficiency, so hopefully this trend will continue.  3) I did more or less the same on Verbal (which is expected since I didn’t spend any time working on Verbal this week). 

Yesterday, I went to the bookstore and purchased Nova GMAT Prep Course book and Kaplan’s GMAT Math Workbook.  Since my math has edged closer to my verbal, I’ll spend equal amounts of time studying Math and Verbal from here on out. 

4 more weeks to prep and i now have all the practice questions that I need.  Now it’s just a matter of effort, really.   

My grade for last week’s prep: B/B+ (slacked off on two days).  I’m aiming for an A-/A for this week.   

 

Breast Implants linked to Suicides?. 

I have no way of knowing this, but I suspect that it’s mainly because those who underwent breast augmentation procedures were either those who were more likely to be depressed than the general population to begin with, or who later realized that having larger breasts wasn’t all that it’s cracked up to be.  It illustrates the absurdity of the time and value that people tend to place on such worldly things.   

The 360 degree Leader (audiobook).  It’s so nice to have a car stereo that works and can play CDs (was without a car stereo for almost 2 years).  I’ve recently added audiobooks (CDs, podcasts, etc) to my library and have started listening to The 360 degree Leader on the drive to and from work (25-30 minutes each way) yesterday.  I’ve completed the first of 3 CDs and have learned quite a bit already.  One of the things that wasn’t totally obvious to me (and the same can be said for others as well) before listening to this audiobook is that one needs to constantly develop his or her leadership skills early on.  All too often, people mistakenly believe that it’s the title or position that bestows ‘leadership’ ability on the individual, so they don’t bother to invest the time and energy necessary to hone their leadership skills.  They think that once they get that lucrative position or title, that’s when they’ll start becoming ‘leaders’.  Little do they know that it’s precisely for this reason that they will forever continue to remain on the lower rungs of the corporate ladder.  Self-analysis: In my humble opinion, I usually score high in terms performance-related variables–stuff that college prepares you for (e.g, asking the right questions, brainstorming ideas, risk management, etc); however, I probably score closer to the mean when it comes to handling ‘people’ issues and situations.  I think part of it stems from my competitive nature and the type of training that I received while as a college student.  In college, we were led to believe that Darwin’s (and Wallace’s) theory of natural section applied to everything in life.  And so we challenged everything and it was as if our mantra was ’May the Best Idea Win!’. Unfortunately, in the professional working world, this is more the exception than the rule as most of the challenges are not technical, but are ’people’-related.  It’s not enough to just ’sell’ your idea; you must ’sell’ yourself first and then know how to present your idea.  According to the author, to be a leader is to be an agent of change.  Unfortunately, many either are averse to change or are quick to judge an idea because they feel that you’re stepping on their toes.  We can take comfort knowing that most great ideas initially face heavy resistance, but, with patience and effective persuasion, will eventually win over the skeptics.  As much as I’m loathe to use a poker analogy here, it goes without saying that it’s more important that you play the player(s) and not simply relying on the cards you’re holding. I think I’ve made progress in the last 8 months or so and have learned how to deal with different (and sometimes, ‘difficult’) personalities.  Of course, there’s still room for improvement and hopefully, I’ll continue to improve.     

Finished the last chapter–Practice Section (untimed).  Out of 37 problem solving and DS questions, I got 28 correct and 9 wrong.  Of the 9 mistakes, 2 were due to careless errors, and 1 error is one that I don’t agree.  Here’s the problem:

Three children, J, P, and R, are playing a game.  Each child will choose either the number 1 or the number 2.  When on child chooses a number different from those of the other two children, he is declared the winner.  If all of the children choose the same number, the process repeats until one child is declared the winner.  If R always chooses 2 and the other children select numbers randomly, what is the probability that R is declared the winner? 

I thought the answer was 1 out of 4 since these are the possible scenarios:

J, P, R = 1, 1, 2 or 1, 2, 2, or 2, 1, 2, or 2, 2, 2. 

But the answer in the book says 1/3.  I suppose if you don’t count the 2, 2, 2, as an actual outcome but as an intermediary round, then I can accept it.  If my logic is correct, then this is a lousy-worded question. 

Overall, I did a bit worse than I had expected.  I was expecting maybe 31 questions right and 6 questions wrong, but I guess it’s just more motivation to study harder.  One bright side is that of all the questions I got wrong, only 1 question was one where I was just stumped and I wouldn’t have gotten it right anyway.  Most of the mistakes were either due to carelessness or recalling certain things fast (just need to brush up on those topics).  Wish I could say the same about the GMAC Challenge problems… 

It is apparent from reading this recent article that Bill and Melinda Gates have fallen into the logic trap of assuming that “Women key to fighting AIDS” + “more preventative measures for women” necessarily equals an overall reduced HIV transmission rate among the general population.  I could see a likely scenario where this actually backfires and results in higher rates of infection.     

There’s no substitute for promoting awareness of HIV protection (the use of condoms).  We know that those who are poor or less educated are more likely to catch and spread HIV.  The rate of new cases in the middle class is alarming too.  And assuming that the low and middle classes are mostly comprised of individuals of below-average to average intelligence, the majority of the population may actually think that the use of the women’s gel can replace the use of the condom during sexual intercourse. Most probably won’t understand that this woman’s gel only works if the woman does not already have HIV.  If the woman already has HIV and she uses this gel, the male more than likely will not be wearing a condom.  Because many women are ignorant of their carrier status, many may perceive using the gel as more beneficial to them (allows more sensitivity) than the condom, this would actually be putting more men at risk since it does not appear–from the article–that this gel protects males from contracting HIV! 

Because the mechanism for prevention is one-way only, introducing the women’s gel will provide a false sense of security to users.  It will also confuse and dilute the message of the importance of having protected sex using condoms, I think.    

 

I took a Data Sufficiency (DS) Skill Building Quiz from the Borders-Kaplan GMAT Diagnostic Test and Practice Questions book.  Out of 35 questions, I got 31 correct.  While that may seem like a good score, the questions in this book are a lot easier than those in other books, but nonetheless, still good practice I suppose. 

I\’ve realized that some of my mistakes with DS are because I tend to rely on my intuition as opposed to setting up equations.  I started to write down the AD/BCE grid last week and it seems to have helped me eliminate answer choices, but i still need to get in the habit of setting up equations as this will help me visualize what can and can\’t be answered with the available information. 

More DS today.   

I took my first GMAT Practice CAT (Cambridge Educational Services) this afternoon (i’d taken a couple diagnostic tests, but they weren’t computer-adaptive and didn’t include the one hour written essay section).  I’ve been putting off the CAT because the perfectionist side of me dreaded the timed writing section.  But with only 5 weeks left to prep, I didn’t have much of a choice.  

The AWA (writing) section wasn’t all that bad.  I probably did decent (though not spectacular) on that section.  But considering that it’s my first AWA, hey, i’ll take it. 

Next, was the Quantitative section.  Although it was not nearly as challenging as the GMAC Challenge questions, the questions seemed tougher than the ones on the two diagnostic exams that I took last month.  The computer returned “Very Good” for both Quantitative and Verbal sections, but I think the Quantitative results were on the lower end of the “Very Good” spectrum.  From the breakdown by question type, I’m still missing more Data Sufficiency (DS) questions.  Which means I’ve really got to buckle down and spend more time to master DS questions. 

The Verbal section seemed easier than the Quantitative.  I got 13 out of 14 Reading Comprehension questions correct (the only question I missed was considered “easy” by the computer, go figure).  As with the Diagnostic tests, Critical Reasoning (CR) is my weak spot in Verbal.  I probably did improve my CR the last couple weeks, but there’s still more room to improve.  I seemed to have improved in Sentence Corrections (SC) from before (or maybe the SC questions are easier?) as I got 11 out of 14 correct. 

Total score of 640-660.

One way to look at it:  If I had done as well on my Quantitative as I did on Verbal, I would probably be at or very close to my target score by now.   And seeing that I only have about 5 weeks to prepare for the actual GMAT (i’m currently about 60 or so points from my target score), it would behoove me to spend 3 times as much time working on Quantitative than Verbal.  Data Sufficiency is my weak Quantitative area, so that will be my main Quantitative focus.  Critical Reasoning will be my focus for Verbal (with some spattering of SC reviews here and there).  The good news is that I have yet to really study effectively and consistently, and I’ve managed to cut out all major distractions since my declaration to do so last week.  The bad news is that 5 weeks isn’t too far away and the margin for error is very low. 

  This is what went down in Wednesday’s home game:  I call in early-mid position with 10, 7 offsuit.  A below-average player 4 seats to my left raises 5x the BB.  A good player a two seats to her left calls the raise, and I call, as well as one other person on my left.  The flop came out Js,9s,7c, with two spades out there.  I check to the raiser and she bets out small (around $3) and the player to her left calls. I call.  On the turn, puts out 6 of clubs, so two possible flush draws out there plus straight possibilities. 

Some background info:  A week earlier, I had watched footage of Stu Ungar drawing to an inside straight to win his 1997 WSOP title (he did this at another tournament that he won).  Earlier, on the drive there, I had mentioned to someone that I was going to draw to an inside straight tonight.

I figured the raiser had a hand like AK and I could probably take the pot down by going all-in–representing the straight (because there were two possible flush draws out there, a player with a made straight would try to protect his hand by making it very expensive to see the next card).  My chip count was over 6-7 times the size of the pot and I thought only someone with at least two pair here would call me (i didn’t think my opponents had that good of a hand there to call, based on how they played the hand).  So I pushed all my chips in.  The good player few seats to my right asked for a chip count and as I counted out the chip, the raiser calls….and the good player thinks for awhile and then folds.  The raiser shows AA and celebrates (prematurely).  Another player remarks, “He’s got the straight….Show the straight.”.  Of course I didn’t have the straight and as I turned my 10,7o over, it drew some ‘wtf?’ reactions at the table.  I was kind of surprised that someone with AA would call my all-in there, but then again, this player is notorious for overplaying her hands.  I needed either an 8 or a 7 to win the hand (6 outs).  I was way behind in the hand.  River card = 8.  I take down the pot as if I had expected to win it as everyone’s in disbelief.    Some might think that was a horrible play.  But in my defense, I had reasons to take a stab at it.  There was a good chance that everyone would fold to my all-in.  And even if I get called, I still had outs and potentially put a bad beat on someone.  I’m usually on the losing end of bad-beat stories (which is actually a good thing because that means I get my money in when I’m ahead).  But I wanted to be able to tell a good bad beat story–that I put on someone else! And I figured, even if I lost the hand, the fact that I played it the way I did will throw people off or make people second-guess themselves when they play against me.  This was the first time I made that kind of all-in bluff (drawing to inside straight).  But more importantly, it was the best hand I’ve ever played.      

It’s time to get serious about studying (i’ve been very inconsistent for the last 6 weeks–pretty much all for naught) for the GMAT.  I’ve got about 5 weeks left to study and it’s all about being focused on winning.

Here’s the game plan:   

1. Except for the occasional “down time”, no more recreational activites (e.g., pickup games, TV, poker,–well, except for the home game on Wednesday–between now and when I take the GMAT). 

2.  No piano between now and the GMAT. 

3.  Exercise daily.  (I’ve observed a direct positive correlation between exercising in the morning and how effectively I study).

4.  3-4 hours of ”effective” prep on weekdays and 6-8 hours on weekends.  2 Computer Adaptive Tests per week.  (Wednesday and Sunday)

5.  Document both my exercise and studying on a daily basis in a spreadsheet file.        

6.  Go to sleep before midnight and wake up before 7am on weekdays.  Wake up no later than 8:30am on weekends.