Bluish

Bluish from Shannon Schnittker on Vimeo.

fabo'd this earlier today. It's certainly good enough to enjoy a double post. They look like they're having a blast. This also happens to be my favorite song of the day.

Post-Macworld Depression 392

Apple inc. has long been revered for it’s success, which is no surprise considering Apple currently commands over 6% of the US market, putting it far ahead of Dell, and just steps behind Intel. When Steve Jobs took over as CEO of the company in 1997, he turned the company completely around. Though Apple’s successes have a polarizing effect in everyday conversation. In an article “How Apple Got Everything Right by Doing Everything Wrong,” Leander Kahney scrutinizes Apple’s business tactics and employee treatment practices, which effectively render it a bureaucracy.

Bureaucracy is a term we defined just this week in 392, as a formal organizational system used to manage and regulate a large group for a special purpose—in this case—making a profit. The characteristics of a bureaucracy include 1) a division of labor, 2) an hierarchy of authority, 3) written rules and regulations, 4) impersonality, and 5) employment based on technical qualifications.

The article begins curiously, reporting on Apple’s projection of an egalitarian image to outsiders: the parking lot of Apple inc. headquarters in Cupertino, California is set up without reserved spots for higher-ups and executives. Instead, employees who arrive late to work are punished with a bad parking spot. To anyone outside the company, this seems like a fair set-up, and a dream that all cubicle employees fantasize about. However, Kahney reports a dark side—Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple since 1997, has been witnessed abusing handicapped spots when in a hurry. His employees have been known, however creatively, to bust his chops for this, leaving notes under his wipers that read “Park Different” and converting the handicap symbol to a Mercedes logo, matching his hood ornament. All in good humor, right?

Kahney believes not. Her description of Apple inc. as a business model screams bureaucracy. Let’s break this down:

1) Division of labor: Apple certainly boasts a division of labor. Jobs’ employees are specialized in different areas. The hardware and software developers are even housed in two completely different wings (so as not to share information with one another and to avoid understanding the ‘big picture’ of the project). There are few, if any employees that can do anyone else’s job.

2) Hierarchy of authority: Jobs is (obviously) at the top of the food chain. Although Apple generally keeps the dynamics of its headquarters under wraps, we can assume supervisors and managers of each department are under Jobs, developers and researchers, then those that physically build the products. Jobs is certainly the be-all end-all. He has been rumored to be “a notorious micromanager. No product escapes Cupertino without meeting Jobs' exacting standards, which are said to cover such esoteric details as the number of screws on the bottom of a laptop and the curve of a monitor's corners” (Kahney).

3) Written Rules and Regulations: With a company so large and prosperous, it is necessary to keep all employees on the same page. Whether or not this be with memos like in Office Space, there is no doubt that Apple has a way of controlling employees’ every move. Secrecy is key: “At times, Apple's secrecy approaches paranoia. Talking to outsiders is forbidden; employees are warned against telling their families what they are working on” (Kahney).

4) Impersonality: In any large-group setting there is an element of impersonality. Although Apple generally treats its employees well and rewards them with plentiful benefits, there is not much job security. With Jobs, “Even the most favored employee could find themselves on the receiving end of a tirade” (Kahney). It doesn’t matter who you are or what good you’ve done, one lapse in judgment could cost you your job.

5) Employment based on technical qualifications: There is no question really as to whether Apple’s employees are qualified in what they do. To be hired, employees must first undergo a rigorous training process in an area based on past experience in the field. This process, too, is kept incredible private.

Sure, it seems like Willy Wonka’s famous Chocolate Factory with all of its secrecy, but Apple is just playing the game. They’ve found it beneficial to keep their company vertically integrated—unwilling to collaborate or cooperate with hardware manufacturers outside their payroll. It is certainly a bureaucracy by all traditional standards, but is this bad? Office Space regards bureaucracies as structures that strip you of individuality and creativity, etc. But creative “sparks” in Apple employees are encouraged. It is impossible to believe Jobs is responsible for all of the innovation. He knows what consumers want, but his employees are responsible for making it happen. Overall, I think this article is a bit too accusatory (and was probably written by a PC owner). Apple has produced some of the most powerful, yet simple and elegant products on the market. Because all of the software is produced by them, they know how to fix bugs. And everything works together so harmoniously. I mean, really. Have you ever tried running iTunes on a PC? Fat chance.

How Apple Got Everything Right

Here's a humorous video I found. Not really related to this, but still funny.

WHAAA?

pencil printer

Pretty incredible right? A printer that recycles your small pencil stubs into compressed powder and prints onto paper using a carbon-transfer type of technique. AND, it can erase!

The Odd Couple

Incredibly impressed by the fluidity of this compilation, even if it is paired with absolutely (synonyms for awesome) hair stylage. Ever since I heard the Top 40 of 2009 mashup, I had lost a little bit of hope...

want.

Sharky.

An adorable idea followed by thoughtful execution. The Sharky tea infuser has an air chamber in the "fin" that keeps it floating while it steeps your rooibus. Such sport :)

Tattoo Subculture in Iraq-392

In a recent reading assignment, “The New Tattoo Subculture,” Anne Velliquette and Jeff Murray explore the new social meanings of tattoos in American society. Throughout an involved participant study, the pair found that the tattoo artists’ legitimization of their career as an art form has weakened the accepted stigma about tattoos—that engaging in this subculture is an act of deviant behavior. When this article was written in the 1990s, it was estimated that 12-20 million Americans have joined the subculture. Their findings suggested that “tattoos are a form of self-expression, a way to communicate to others some aspect of the wearer’s identity,” for the same purpose that we adorn our bodies with jewelry, wear make-up, etc. (Ferguson 80).

One such recent example in which tattoos are used as a form of self-identity is in Iraq. An article written in December 2007 for Gorilla’s Guides relates the emerging tattoo subculture to the fear of impending death. (Gorilla Guides is an informal blog-turned-newswire that reports interesting analysis on the events in Iraq.) This editorial piece reports that tattoos have become “useful in identifying the deceased” when their bodies are otherwise mutilated beyond identification.

I thought that this article was an interesting extension of Velliquette and Murray’s previous analysis. They acknowledge the tattoo as a form of identity, but it seems Iraqi’s are employing this in an especially literal way. Most members of this subculture choose a symbol that only their family and close friends will recognize and associate with them, so that their identity is not revealed to strangers, for privacy reasons.

But not only does the tattoo subculture benefit the consumer, it also has opened up a market for the producer. Tattoo artist al-Rubaie claims that “I was an illegal immigrant during the former (Iraqi) regime. I settled in Beirut where I learnt the art of tattoo. I was poorly paid, but now I make heaps of money from it. Tattoos in Baghdad are many times their prices in Beirut” (Tattoo Industry).

I think the most interesting aspect of this emergent subculture is the fact that many Iraqis feel it to be an extension of Western culture—from the United States—and many are resistant to it. With the sudden influx of American soldiers at the time of our invasion, this is perhaps one element of our culture that the Iraqi culture has adopted. One interviewee reports that he got a dragon to represent masculinity. Not until this century, just years after the US invasion, has this form of self-expression really taken off in Iraq.

Tattoo subculture is constantly being redefined in American society as more acceptable, and is quickly diffusing in the Iraqi society, showing that cultural changes can happen quickly when sudden cultural upheavals occur. In the same way that America was made a “melting pot” of cultures with its colonization, so too is Iraq when the people of different cultures are distributed differently. It is hard to predict implications of this cultural change, but we have already seen both resistance to the change and economic changes with the new tattoo market emerging. Though we notice mostly opposition from the Iraqi people in regards to US involvement, perhaps we are offering more than the promise of peace—we are offering cultural artifacts such as the tattoo that will take on distinct cultural implications in Iraqi society.

Gorilla Guides (original blogger account)
Tattoo Industry Flourishes in Iraq