KatysBlog

Tomorrow is the last day for SEED applications for the 2005-2006 terms.
Tanya and I are mostly helping people update the applications they already
sent in to which they now want to make changes, and still answering basic
eligibility questions. We are also sorting out seniority levelling questions –
whether this title for a technical service architect is equivalent in seniority
to that title for a senior software developer. I was on a Q&A conference call to
Bangalore late Tuesday night and I hope that some of those folks will apply.

So far, we have 69 Recent Hire applicants:

• China: 12
• Czech Republic: 2
• Germany: 2
• India: 23
• Russia: 11
• United States: 19

And we have 64 Established Staff applicants:

• China: 2
• Czech Republic: 2
• France: 2
• Germany: 2
• India: 6
• Israel: 1
• Singapore: 1
• The Netherlands: 1
• UK: 3
• United States: 43

I am answering SEED questions by email while eating breakfast, feeding the dogs,
changing the bird’s water, doing laundry, answering a frantic phone call from my son
who forgot-Zach’s-birthday-present-and-the-party-is-this-afternoon-Mom!,
and the usual morning stuff.

When I was out feeding the dogs and letting them run around the yard, I saw that
one of our huge prickley pear cactus had dropped a branch right on top of my blooming
alstromeira lillies. Sigh.

“The minute we stop maintaining our gardens, the ravages of wind, snow, ice, droughts, floods, weeds, pests, and diseases transform them into something we never imagined. Basically, there’s no such thing as a “natural” garden, even one that consists entirely of native species. Much as we might like to deny it, nature abhors the garden.”

Peter Del Tredici, 2001
“Pacific Horticulture” July-Sep 2001 issue

5 days to go on our 2005-2006 mentoring terms application period.
There have been 32 recent hire applications and 33 established
staff applications for SEED’s 11th and 12th terms. This is our first
term using a single application form for both groups. Tanya Jankot
(SEED’s Applications Engineer) and I hope the new way it is less
confusing for the applicants. Tanya fixed a bug in the date sorting which was
putting some of the new hires into the established staff area so we
think we have a good count now.

The recent hires category has no seniority or service requirements,
only a excellence criteria. The established staff category has
seniority, service, and excellence criteria. We have only gotten one
formal request so far for someone hired in August 2003 to be considered
a recent hire rather than established staff (for which the person did
not have the seniority). We approved the request. Only 6 applicants have
been disqualified so far for being too junior for established staff at
the same time as having been at Sun too long to be considered a recent hire.

It is a pleasure to see at least ten familiar names among the managers
recommending their staff for participation. Several managers have more than
one of their staff among the SEED applicants. One is a Distinguished Engineer
who has served twice as a Mentor and once as a Participant reappearing as a
recommending manager for an applicant. Another is a Mentor in
the Bangalore pilot term which ends this month. In addition, there are 22 SEED
participants now on the Potential Mentors lists and several of them have already
served more than once as mentors. I see these patterns of repeated program contact
in several roles as indications that SEED is supporting its priority to “Build
Sun’s Engineering community by making and strengthening connections between its
members and with the rest of Sun”.

There has been lots of internal Sun email this morning about blogs.
The 13 June San Francisco Chronicle article

“Writing the codes on blogs Companies figure out what’s OK, what’s not in
online realm” apparently started the discussion. It is fun to see people
I know written about. I am particularly pleased to see SEED participants like
Rich Burridge quoted. I enjoy reading Rich’s blog, especially when he mentions
the SEED program:
“Sun Tours” (1 Oct 2004).

10 days to go to the Engineering mentoring program application deadline of 17 June.
Last night I was on a conference call
with lots of Sun people from Asia Pacific (Singapore, Australia, Korea…) to give a SEED
program overview and answer questions. I think it went well. As usual, the HR folks wanted
exceptions to the service and seniority criteria, and deadline extensions. As usual, I
explained (in the words of the FAQ):

Suggestions for SEED program change are very welcome and should go to Katy Dickinson.
Please review the “Mentor Selection Process” and “Participant Selection Process” before
making detailed or large scale change suggestions. The SEED program staff uses
sigma methods to refine and improve
itself from term to term. As the program has evolved over the last few years, there have
been several
sigma projects associated with it.
The application and selection processes in particular are often under discussion and
have been improved and better targeted many times already since the program started in
2001. However, these process and criteria changes must take place between application
periods so as to be fair to all current applicants.

There have been 17 Recent Hire and 29 Established Staff applications so far. Applicants
come from the Bay Area CA USA (20), Shanghai China (1), Boston area MA USA (3),
Beijing China (7), Guangzhou China (1), Bangalore India (5), Los Angeles CA USA (1),
Broomfield CO USA (2), Herzelia Israel (1), Dallas TX USA (1), Columbia MD USA (1),
and Camberley UK (2). Even after 5 years of creating and managing this program, I find
making personal connections between superb contributors who work in such far flung
places very exciting.

We had our monthly SEED world-wide phone-in meeting this morning featuring two women who
both started in the USA but one was working in China and the other England when they
were mentoring partners. As is common, they have continued their communication far
beyond the actual SEED term. It is always fascinating to hear how much the SEED pairs
get out of their conversations and how they solve the always-challenging barriers of
time, culture, and distance. One discussion topic this morning was how important it was
to the mentee that she have a female mentor.

SEED Mentor Gender Patterns was one of the slides I presented at the October 2004
Hopper conference:

• Women Participants are more likely to ask for women Mentors.
  • 19% Women Mentors were requested
  • Women Participants requested 32% women potential Mentors while male Participants requested 14% women potential Mentors.
• Women Mentors are more likely to accept women Participants as mentees.
  
  Half of the women Mentors chose to mentor other women.
  • 16% Women Mentors were matched
  • 51% Women Mentors accepted women Participants while 20% men Mentors accepted women Participants.
• Gender is one of many considerations.
  Others include: availability when asked, accomplishments, experience, personality, capabilities or skills, common intellectual or professional interests, personal compatibility and commonality, & physical or time zone proximity.