Saturday, June 18, 2011
So this company (not sure of the vendor) stamps each egg with the expiration date. They understand these two competing customer requirements (expiration dates and no broken ones) and were willing to spend a little extra on their packaging process to give it to them.
Salmonella is not pretty. I'm not sure a new container design would be better at preventing breakage. So a good tradeoff I think.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Two different streams of research have found the same conclusion. When it is hot, your aggression goes up, but not in general. Mostly it is the revenge component that goes up.
One of the studies looked at baseball. The chance of a pitcher retaliating for hit batsmen is much higher in 95 degree weather than 55 degree weather.
The other study looked at indoor environments. People were more likely to view others’ actions as hostile and it lowered the threshold at which people took revenge for the hostile action.
The benefit of the baseball study is that it isolates all of the other cultural variables that interact with perceptions and actions. The benefit of the second study was that it is more ecologically valid (more like our real lives).
So if you are managing a hot workplace, whether it’s outdoors or just near hot machines and processes, this is something you have to worry about. Try to keep the temperature below the 90s. And if you can’t, take some preliminary actions to prevent revenge and hostility. That can really destroy workplace morale and productivity.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
As I said in the previous post, I was volunteering at a food bank today. I discovered something very related to some research I have done in the past (and blog about frequently). Food labels.
My job today was running the tuna section. This may sound simple, but tuna is an inexpensive and nonperishable protein. Probably the least expensive and least perishable of all meat proteins. So it is very common for food banks. We get donations of canned tuna from individuals and grocery stores. I had at least 20 different kinds. There were brand names and store brands, there was oil-packed and water-packed; there was chunk light, chunk white, and solid white. There was regular and low-sodium. There were even a couple of onesies that were yellow-fin or some other special tuna species.
I had to keep them all separate because people came in with different needs. Children should stick with the chunk light because there is less mercury. Many of the elderly clients need low sodium because of diabetes, hypertension or some other medical condition. Those on diets wanted water-packed. Some asked for a brand name to make sure it was Kosher. So I had to get very familiar with the labels. Here are some things I discovered that are certainly not clear on the label.
There are 5oz and 7oz cans, which are hard to tell apart by size or by label.
The sodium ranges from 6% RDA to 10% RDA. Most of the cans that are actually labeled “low-sodium” are 6%. But so are most of the others. There was one can that was only 2% and didn’t have any low-sodium label. And there was one at 8% that said “not a low-sodium product.” So apparently the labeling has no rhyme or reason to it. You have the check the back if you care.
The serving sizes are smaller than they used to be. In the 90s, the regular size cans were all 6oz. Now they are all 5oz and the 7oz cans are labeled “larger cans” (although not clearly). The serving size is now two in a 5-oz can and three in a 7-oz can. It used to be two in a 6-oz can.
The number of calories is all different, which means some of the cans have more water and less tuna in them, even though the cans are the same size. Some brands are cheating you by putting in extra water. And the ones packed in oil assume you will drain the oil so that isn’t included on the nutrition label.
There were no labels about mercury anywhere. I happen to know that chunk light has less than solid white albacore so it’s better for kids. But if not for me, the other packers would have had no clue. You’d think this is even more important than most of the information they did label. Especially if the different between regular and low sodium is 2%
The libertarian in me doesn’t want to see this regulated by the government. If I was to eat high fat or high sodium tuna, I should be able to. But in order to make an informed choice, I need to be able to tell which is which and what is what. If a product as simple as canned tuna has this much variation in the label, I can’t imagine families trying to eat smart and buy the right foods for their kids. My 1990s research showed that people don’t look at detailed labels and rely on the front labels that say “low” this or “no” that. They don’t know exactly what it means, but if they need something to be low (or high), this is all they go by. Apparently, they are wasting their time. Either you have to study the detailed nutrition table or you are just wasting your time.
There is a good deal of research on the relationship between emotion and long term memory. I have blogged about this before. It came to mind today because I was volunteering at a food bank, which is my favorite thing to do. I would rather do this than take a vacation to an exotic island.
The research shows that looking back on past events (i.e. long term memory), what matters is the peak emotional feeling and the final emotional feeling of the event. So no matter if your vacation was a day, a week, or a month, if you had one really incredibly exciting activity and the last activity was enjoyable, you will have good long term memory of the vacation, even if the rest sucked. And the opposite is also true. If you had one really terrible disappointing activity and argued with the reception desk on checkout, you will have a very negative emotional connection to the memory, even if the rest of it was great.
Why did this come to mind while volunteering today? The last thing I did was grab a cup of coffee to go. They have one of those single serving machines. One of the other volunteers was working on that counter and she said in a really snitty voice “please throw your trash away this time.” I am usually good about throwing away trash and other basic consideration things and I didn’t remember leaving trash anywhere, but I will take her word for it that I had. Of course, there isn’t much trash in these things. All I could have left was the used coffee pack. Not exactly a mess. I am guessing there was something else behind her comment.
But it bothered me because I really value being considerate and polite. One of my favorite memories was being complimented on the way out of an airplane by the flight attendant who told me I was the most polite passenger she had ever served. And this was ten years ago. And since this was the last thing I did before I left, it ruined the day. On the way home, I was thinking about how happy the rest of the morning made me and wondered how such a little thing could have brought me down so far, so fast. Then I remembered the research and it dawned on me. I should have gone back in and loaded a few more delivery packages before leaving so that wouldn’t have been the last thing.
As usual with my posts, you have to get to the end to find out how to apply this. In both team management and in customer service management there are some insights you should draw from this. Imagine you are running a retail establishment. What is the last thing that the customer experiences on the way out? If it’s the cashier, then you want to hire/train/motivate cashiers to be very friendly, not just good at math. If you are managing a hotel, you want the checkout process to be exceptionally smooth.
For the team manager, you can focus on the peak activity. No matter how challenging and stressful a job is, if there is one really fun exciting event, let’s say once every month or so, then your employee satisfaction, productivity, and retention will go up. Think about something you can do, just every once in a while, that will bring a big smile to each employee’s face. Perhaps for one it could be simple recognition – a pat on the back and a “you really did a great job today.” For others, it might be being surprised with a pizza at the end of a long shift.
Well, I finished the book so here is the last sports fan science post. This highlights the differences between being a fan of the live sport, sports video games, and sports fantasy leagues. Some of the motivations are the same (need for achievement, need for social), but perhaps at a different magnitude. And others are true for only one kind of fan but not the others.
Fantasy sports leagues of all kinds have become incredibly popular – football and baseball are the biggest, but there is NASCAR, World Cup Soccer, golf, and lots more. Some of the differences in motivation may be obvious. People with a strong need for control get into fantasy sports because you actually manage the team. Also, people who enjoy problem solving, especially quantitative problem solving. Also, people with a high need for self-esteem and competition like fantasy sports because wins and losses are really your own. Some of the research finds that people try harder in leagues where they know the other people more than the anonymous leagues run by ESPN, Yahoo etc. And even just having your real name instead of an alias makes people try harder. It changes the need for aggression outlet too. You don’t get that through playing fantasy sports, but you do if there is an active discussion board. The trash talking that goes on in these boards is pretty astounding. Fantasy sports also change the effects of a need for socialization. With real sports, you can go into a random sports bar, find people with a hat or shirt from your team, and get an instant bond. You can’t do this with fantasy sports. But the bonds you develop with other “managers” in your league can get very strong.
But for people with high need for self-identity, fantasy sports are not good. You have to pick players from all different teams, even the ones that rival your favorite teams, if you want to be competitive. Some of the research shows that playing fantasy sports decreases the attachment you have to your favorite teams in real life. I suspect these last two are the reasons I never got into fantasy sports, despite my high need for control and love for problem solving.
Sports video games have also become very popular. Madden football is huge. And they come out with new versions every year to reflect new players and updated player statistics. These are popular with people with high need for achievement, aggression (it’s amazing how gory some of these games can be), and problem solving. It also changes the effects of socialization. You can play against other people, either in person or on-line. But you can also play against a computer by yourself and decrease the social aspect of it.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
There was a chapter that I thought was really interesting regarding what it said about different motivations for different people. This leads to different emotional responses based on how a sports event progresses.
For example, if you are a fan because of a need for self-esteem/self-identity/achievement, then a win makes you feel really good and a loss makes you feel really bad. No duh, you say? Well think about these other examples.
If you are a sports fan because of a need for stimulation, then you feel really good from a close game and not from a blowout. It is less important who wins. If you also have one of the above, you want a close game and a win.
If you are a sports fan because of a need for an outlet of aggression, then you get a lot our of rivalry games and less out of less relevant games like interleague in baseball. If the players get into fights or other aggressive behaviors, you get your outlet.
If you are a sports fan because of a need for social interaction, then it matters more how many people you are watching the game with and how excited they get. The actual game becomes less important, regardless of whether it’s close or not or who wins.
Some people have more than one motivation for being a sports fan, but some are dominated by one of these motivations and therefore have different reactions to different games. Two people can watch the same game, cheering for the same team, and one feels really good afterwards and the other doesn’t.
Again, you may ask why I am posting this here. Well, motivation is critical for understanding human cognition and information processing. Understanding different motivations is critical to being a good team leader. This same kind of analysis needs to be done on your team and then you need to differentiate the incentives and motivations you offer to each person depending on what will get them to be the most productive.
For example, there is a lot of research showing that financial and competitive incentives are good for people doing individual physical labor or rote cognitive tasks. But they are counterproductive when creativity and/or teamwork is needed. And some people are more motivated by financial incentives than other people are. Some people are more motivated by competition than other people are. Knowing the difference can make you a much better manager.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Great editorial in WaPo this morning about the job market and training. They discuss two basic improvements the government can make that would not be very hard but would have a significant benefit to jobs. One is process-based. As any IE knows, the two things that kill a process are delays and uncertainty. So they suggest that the administration revisit the way that new businesses and new business initiatives are regulated and streamline it so that it is faster and more reliable. The good thing about this is that other than the cost of doing the upfront investigation, it would save money in the long run.
The second recommendation is training-based. Most college graduates don’t have all the skills that companies want (and I’m a professor!!). Even worse, ten years after graduation, by the time their communication and teamwork and leadership skills are finally up to par, their technical skills have gotten old. So they suggest the government support training and retraining programs to solve these two challenges. To make this acceptable to both parties, I would recommend doing it in a way that the private sector decides on the content (because the government is not particularly good at this), but the government perhaps provides matching funds or tax credits to support the programs.
These are just my initial thoughts. I am sure you can all add some additional improvements. Please use the comments section to add.
Thursday, June 09, 2011
According to this article, we are changing the way we eat out. Because of our economic experiences over the last boom and bust cycle, apparently we want to have our cake and eat it too (almost literally). Instead of really cheap or really fancy, we want a discount establishment that has been gussied up. Think newly remodeled Red Lobster with an upgraded menu. Kind of like Target (Targey) instead of Walmart or Neiman Marcus. We want to feel like we are getting a good deal (because of the economic bust), but we also want to feel like we are treating ourselves well (left over from the previous boom).
Why is this relevant to us? Well, first of all, Darden (owner of Red Lobster, Longhorn Steakhouse, Olive Garden, etc) is more likely to hire human factors practitioners than Joe's Diner or Bouchon de Paris. On the other hand, the only way that these places can offer fancier meals at discount prices after a huge capital expenditure on remodeling is with some great design, effective processes, strong decision making, etc, etc. Right in our wheelhouse.
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
I am 2/3 of the way done with the book. This one is right in my wheelhouse on research. It is about the information processing heuristics and biases that influence sports fans. One thing that this study found was that the stronger you score on a measure of fan intensity, the more likely you are to experience overconfidence bias, confirmation bias, and hindsight bias. Basically, when we superfans watch games, we really see it differently. The refs are biased, his feet really were in bounds, etc. We also exhibit more of the coping behavior I talked about in Part I. We are much more likely to talk and read about games after a win than after a loss as part of our coping strategy. We are more likely to rationalize bad on-field (Zidane in the World Cup) and off-field behavior (even Michael Vick).
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
Another great show last night on the Diane Rhieme first hour. It was about the e-coli situation in Germany and historically in the US. She had some experts on the show as guests who discussed food safety very intelligently. They varied in their positions from libertarian to paternalist so there was some good debate and disagreement. But in general, they all really thought through the pros and cons of their opinions and how they thought the food safety system could be improved. I learned a lot, and I already knew a lot about food safety. So I recommend listening to the show online if you have a chance.