Because You’re Here

I listened to KQED, our local public
broadcasting radio station on my drive to work this morning. They just
aired a story which included an interview with a Captain of Iraqui militia
in Baghdad’s Sadr City. His description of why he was fighting sounded
familiar. I have been reading Shelby Foote’s monumental 1958 history
The Civil War: A Narrative and remembered the following passage from
Volume One (Fort Sumter to Perryville, 1861-1862):

      Perhaps the best definition of the conflict was given in conversation by a
      civilian, James M. Mason of Virginia: “I look upon it then, sir, as a war
      of sentiment and opinion by one form of society against another form of
      society.” No soldier would have argued with this; but few would have found it
      satisfactory. They wanted something more immediate and less comprehensive…
      Meanwhile, perhaps no soldier in either army gave a better answer — one more
      readily understandable to his fellow soldiers, at any rate — than a ragged
      Virginia private, pounced on by the Northerners in a retreat.

      “What are you fighting for anyhow?” his captors asked, looking at him. They
      were genuinely puzzled, for he obviously owned no slaves and seemingly could
      have little interest in States Rights or even Independence.


      “I’m fighting because you’re down here,” he said.

Leave a comment

Filed under News & Reviews

How to Survey, Part 2 (Best Practices)

In my 16 April blog entry How to Survey, I presented 3 sections: Key Questions, Tools and Services, and Reading. In this entry, I present some Best Practices based on my experience and the advice of two wise and capable women with whom I had the honor to work: Dr. Robin Jeffries and Dr. Kornelija Zgonc. All errors may be attributed to my misunderstanding, not their teaching!

The most recent survey completed by my department here in the Chief Technologist’s Organization at Sun Microsystems was the SEED mentoring program quarterly report for April 2008. See Mentoring Success Metrics (April 30, 2008) for details. SEED (Sun Engineering Enrichment and Development) has been collecting quarterly feedback from a web-based survey since 2002, so this is a mature example of a cyclic survey. The SEED survey is not anonymous. Most of the practices below are also appropriate for one-time surveys and for anonymous surveys.

Characteristics of a Good Web-based Survey (with examples from SEED):

  • It is Short. The SEED survey consists of 14 questions. One way to shorten surveys: don’t ask for information that can easily be mined from another source.
  • It is Easy to Use and Understand. Use pull down menus wherever possible to provide clear options. When a range of answers is possible, offer the same one-to-seven range, with “1” being low, “4” neutral, and “7” being high. State questions as simply as possible and test for clarity (if it is possible to misunderstand, someone will). Avoid jargon, abbreviations, and local slang.
  • It is Easy to Analyze the Responses. Use very few open text fields. Use a seven point range so that there is a clear low, neutral, and high (more on this below). “Does Not Apply” and “No Response” are always options. “No Response” is the default option (that is, the respondent must make an active change to answer).
  • For Cyclic Surveys – Prior and Future Versions are Comparable. Questions do not change much over time.
  • It is Trustworthy. Send a survey copy immediately in email to the respondent. Make survey analysis results available to respondents promptly. Actively protect private and anonymous information. Say in the survey introduction what will happen with the results (then, do what you say). Remember Robin Jeffries’ First Law of Surveys: “Don’t ask questions unless you are prepared to act on the results!”

The following Attributes of Poor Surveys list is material developed by Kornelija Zgonc, former Sun Chief Master Black Belt, and my Six Sigma mentor:

What’s Wrong?

  • Survey goals unclear
  • No forethought about your processes
  • Lots of yes/no questions
  • Lots of written questions
  • Focus on symptoms
Why it’s a Problem:

  • Take-aways unclear
  • Don’t know how to implement changes
  • Limited analytics; need big sample sizes
  • Unclear or unfocused questions
  • Get more questions, not answers!

The following Attributes of Great Surveys is also material developed by Kornelija Zgonc:

  • Goals, processes, and possible cause/effect relationships are analyzed up front
  • Widely-scaled numerical questions allow lots of analytics and keep sample sizes low
  • Only need a few written questions to address unforeseen situations or problems
  • Survey has action-oriented focus to generate solutions, not more questions

Why a 1 to 7 Range?
Multiple choice options make it easier to statistically analyze survey results. One of the common and energetic “discussions” among those who design surveys is what range to allow for numerical questions. Simply put: how many number choices should the respondent be offered? Too short a range (like: 1=bad, 2=neutral, 3=good) may not reflect an accurate subtlety of opinion. However, too many options can give a false confidence in the value and gradation of the answer. Don’t ask for more precision than your users are likely to know!

A range of seven is the best choice. When seven or more numbers are offered in a scale (like: 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=disagree, 4=neutral, 5=agree, 6=agree, 7=strongly agree), the data collected behaves and can be analyzed like continuous variables. (Data are discrete if there are a limited number of values possible. Example: number of legs on a cat, number of letter grades possible on a test. Data are continuous when the measurements can have any value. Examples: time, weight.) This allows tremendous analysis flexibility because there are many more statistical tools for continuous data analysis than for discrete  data analysis.

Why Statistics Don’t Matter (sometimes) With all deference to my colleagues who are statisticians and Six Sigma Master Black Belts, sometimes statistics don’t matter.

  • The survey itself is a form of communication, regardless of whether it is answered, analyzed, or acted on. The survey may change the nature of the audience’s awareness.
  • If you don’t ask the right audience or collect enough responses, the answer does not matter.
  • Some people will never give a top or bottom score under any circumstances.
  • Refine, reduce, remove:
    • Too many surveys make people hate or ignore you.
    • Too many questions will cause your audience to abandon the survey part way through.
  • If your questions are too personal or respondents are embarrassed to tell the truth
    (for example: admitting they don’t know the answer), answers will be worthless.

Links and formatting on this post refreshed 11 October 2017

1 Comment

Filed under Mentoring & Other Business

Mentoring Success Metrics

Every quarter, the SEED (and PreSEED) mentoring program announces a
web-based survey for current participants (mentees), mentors, and managers.
Tanya Jankot just finished her analysis of the April 2008 reports.
The results and comments are very similar to previous quarters. Satisfaction remains high, and the most frequent request from participants is for more opportunity (and financial support) for face-to-face contact with their mentor and other participants. Once again, there was no significant difference in satisfaction between participants co-located with their mentor and those working at-a-distance.

The purpose of SEED’s quarterly report is to measure the success of the program. It also gives participants, and their mentors and managers, a chance to voice their opinion of the program and share their thoughts and experiences with fellow participants and the SEED program team. These reports are published with the full knowledge of the participants; we encourage participants to submit more private comments in a separate email. We measure the program’s success through participants’ reported satisfaction and learning, plus the more objective annual measures of promotions, retention, performance rating, etc. The success of the individual participant is due to their own capabilities and hard work (plus available opportunities and good management!). Increased success of the participants as a group may be attributable in part to the SEED program.

Here are some of report highlights:

    • This quarterly report was for 4 terms (3 SEED terms, plus 1 PreSEED term).
    • 92 people responded to the survey: 53 participants, 29 mentors, and
      10 managers answered. There were 149 eligible participants (36% response rate).
    • Participant respondents report that participation in the program positively influenced the following:
      • Better career direction: 58% of respondents
      • Greater understanding of Sun’s overall architecture, strategy, or business direction: 55% of respondents
      • Broader network of contacts (peer or executive): 45% of respondents
      • Increased visibility, within or outside work group: 42% of respondents
    • Participant satisfaction with the program:
      • 92% reported being satisfied
      • 98% thought that the meetings with their mentor were worthwhile
    • Mentor satisfaction with the program:
      • 79% believe their Mentee’s participation has made them more valuable to Sun
      • 89% would want to be a mentor again in the SEED program in the future
      • Several Mentors noted that their partnership had just begun and they were not yet able to assess the program’s impact.
    • As with past quarterly reports, analysis does not show significant difference in responses to “Q15 Overall Worth of Meetings with Mentor” and “Q24 Overall Satisfaction with Program” between participants at-a-distance from their mentor and those co-located with their mentor. A full 76% of participants who responded to this quarterly report were at-a-distance from their mentor. This is a positive indication that SEED mentoring partnerships are beneficial to participants whether or not the mentoring pair is able to meet in person.

For information on some of SEED’s survey techniques, see my 16 April 2008 blog
How to Survey
and my 1 May 2008 blog

How to Survey, Part 2 (Best Practices)
.

PreSEED is a pilot of the SEED worldwide Engineering mentoring program.
More information on SEED is available at

http://research.sun.com/SEED/

1 Comment

Filed under Mentoring & Other Business

Bougainvillea in Bondage (update)

You may remember my
March 18, 2008
blog entry called “Bougainvillea in Bondage”. Here is an update
photo from my project to turn a red Barbara Karst Bougainvillea vine sprawled across a
low fence into a small tree.

Vine on Fence

2007

Bougainvillea Vine on Fence
photo: copyright 2007 Katy Dickinson
Vine in Bondage

March 2008

Bougainvillea vine In Bondage
photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson
Happily Blooming

Now

Happily Blooming Bougainvillea vine
photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson

Images Copyright 2007-2008 by Katy Dickinson

Leave a comment

Filed under Home & Family

Creating a Cactus Garden, Part 3 (Creating an Arroyito)

Last weekend, I continued creating the little dry creek or arroyito, that
runs through the new cactus garden beside WP668, our backyard caboose.
I have many sizes of stones and three colors of gravel with which to create
the illusion of a natural creek bed. Picking through the stones for those
of the best shape and color and then fitting them together takes time.
Pictures follow.

John and I have also been hunting contractors to work on WP668. I can tell
that our local housing industry is in trouble because I am getting calls back from
my messages and estimators will come out to give us a bid within just a few days
even though ours is a small job. (To give you a comparison, it took 8 years
to find someone who would put a fancy stucco finish on our cabana because the
job was too small.) This week, we have finally found a metal roofing supplier
plus someone to install the linoleum floor. Those projects should be done within a
month. The stained glass should also be completed and installed before June.
We are still looking for a woodworker to build 8′ x 16′ of floor to ceiling glassed
bookcases and a window seat. We found someone who agreed to do the work but then he
got too busy.

Arroyito photos:

Partly done

Partly done Cactus garden Arroyito
photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson
Arroyito overview

Cactus garden Arroyito overview
photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson
Work in Progress

Work in Progress, Cactus garden Arroyito
photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson

Images Copyright 2008 by Katy Dickinson

Leave a comment

Filed under Caboose Project and Other Trains

Cottonwood Fairy Fuzz

The female Cottonwood polar trees along the  Guadalupe River behind our house are now filling the air with fuzzy seeds.  Sometimes when the wind blows, it looks like a snow storm or a great invasion of tiny white fairies. We know where all of the spider webs are on the house, garden, and our backyard caboose, WP668, because they are full of cottonwood seeds.  This happens every year but the volume of seeds is still awesome. Some photos:

Windowsill with seeds

Windowsill with cottonwood seeds photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson

Seeds in window web

Cottonwood Seeds in window web photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson

Seeds in caboose web

Cottonwood Seeds in caboose web photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson

Seeds in Aloe Web

cottonwood Seeds in Aloe Web photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson

Seeds in cactus web

Cottonwood Seeds in cactus web photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson

Seeds on geranium buds

Cottonwood Seeds on geranium buds photo: copyright 2008 Katy Dickinson

Images Copyright 2008 by Katy Dickinson

1 Comment

Filed under Home & Family, News & Reviews

52 PreSEED Participants Selected

On 25 April, we selected the 52 participants in the PreSEED Engineering
mentoring program for the June – December 2008 term. There were 65
applicants to the term from Sun’s Software Division worldwide but not
all applicants were eligible because of incomplete applications, or a
mismatch with the scope of the program.

Tanya Jankot and I are now preparing for next month’s announcement of
the 2008-2009 Recent Hire and Established Staff terms of the SEED mentoring
program. Because of PreSEED’s success, we are redesigning the
scope of all three mentoring groups (PreSEED, SEED Recent Hires, and SEED
Established Staff) to fit together better. We have a flow chart already
and will be announcing the new scope’s details soon.

The next steps for new PreSEED participants are:

    1. Participants will create their 10 name Mentor Wish Lists
      due on 5 May 2008 (9 a.m. Pacific time)
      by way of the internal web site.
    2. Participants will work with Tanya Jankot to personalize the
      participant web pages she will create.

About the New Participants
65 Applicants
52 PreSEED Participants Selected
Work Locations: China, Czech Republic, Germany, India, Ireland,
Japan, Russia, USA
Division: 100% Sun Software Group
Gender of Participants:
* female: 8  [ 15% ]
* male: 44  [ 85% ]
Grade Level: all Members of the Technical Staff, levels two to four (MTS 2-4)
14 Previously Applied to SEED, 27%
Countries of origin this term include: Austria, China,
Czech Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Germany, India, Iran,
Ireland, Japan, Korea, Russia, Slovakia, UK, USA, Viet Nam

Software Chief Technologists

Bob Brewin
(Distinguished Engineer and Vice President) and

Tim Marsland
(Fellow and Vice President) are PreSEED’s pilot term Champions.

Greg Papadopoulos
(Chief Technology Officer and Executive Vice President of Research and Development) is the SEED
program executive sponsor.

PreSEED is a pilot of the SEED worldwide Engineering mentoring program.
More information on SEED is available at

http://research.sun.com/SEED/

Leave a comment

Filed under Mentoring & Other Business