Hi Greg, just one more thought...
How did you come to that assumption from my post?
Here's a thought:
When Baby Boomer women entered their careers, they reportedly dressed like guys (really male-looking suits). Apparently, they weren't able to look different nor point out their differences. Because maybe if they did, they would be attacked for it?
Even Intel had this photo of what a VP looked like - anyone remember that from the early 90's. It was hilarious. That made a few laughs with us Softies (where it was said, women do and can look like women. Btw, MS is probably one of the best hightech firm for women (at least when I was there it was & would assume it still is), after my startup of course.)
As a parellel, I made a post about Group 1 making rules over Group 2 in a vacuum and said I heard there are some companies doing that, and you immediately assumed the issue was with Group 1, rather than "in a vacuum." Why's that? Do you assume Group 2 should hide and Group 1 should not get customer input from Group 1? (think of the 80's, auto industry car design, product designing, women wearing male-looking grey-boxy suits in the 80's). Please think about this paragraph and ask if it relates to an incorrect interpretation of my post.
This SARS thing is nasty. I had to have a meeting with an exec from Intel who basically lives in a plane. Wonderfully smart person, but after hearing how Intel has their employees working in a SARS building in HK and thinking this is going to spread here in the US, I really wanted to cancel the meeting. There was no way I could avoid the handshake either. I wish all companies would tell their employees to stop shaking hands. This SARS might kill more than the war. I was very glad Asian WSJ wrote a good opinion piece about USA co's should stop all travel to China. Wish to hear more like it. China is way too closed on this topic. Only $ will pressure them on this. They snapped CNN's satellite of all things.
Regards,
Amy J |
