Happy New Year 2021!
HR
Author: hectoraliruiz Page 7 of 15
Merry Christmas!
HR
Due to an event that took place recently in my personal life and of which for now I cannot share, but I will later, I will be taking a break from blogging for the upcoming weeks.
I will resume in January or February, 2021.
HR
After dozens of recommendations, I finally decided to watch the first attempt at a Star Wars series (non-cartoon), which is The Mandalorian.
For many years now the Star Wars universe (movie-wise speaking) has been broken, and several divisions in the Star Wars fanbase have appeared given the controversial approach presented by the prequel trilogy, the animated series, the standalone films and the sequel trilogy. Needless to say I myself am surrounded by this division given that two of my best friends are hardcore Star Wars fans.
Once again, objectivity and subjectivity are part of a discussion that has messed up the interpretation of the Star Wars universe, and I think I may give it a more deepened analysis in a future video.
For now I will say that The Mandalorian is an effective series that can be highly rated based on its own merits and not just because it’s part of the Star Wars universe… and that’s a wonderful achievement.
HR
A few days ago I was browsing the youtube comments of Deep Purple’s Japan’s live performance of Child in time. One of the people who posted claimed that “Deep Purple was/could have been better than Led Zeppelin, had they stayed together as Zep did.” This got my attention.
Speculating in sports is a bit easier because you can see the career’s projection of the person, therefore you can safely assume (to a certain degree) that similar results may keep happening in similar future contexts. IE: Monica Seles would have kept dominating the tennis cirquit throughout the 90s had she not been stabbed, because she had been doing so for the past three years and nobody had an answer against her game. In music though, it’s a bit different.
Regardless of either Deep Purple had kept its original line up (Giliam, Blackmore, Lord, Paice), Led Zeppelin was a great band, arguably second to The Beatles, or at least worth enough to be mentioned in the conversation of candidate bands for second place after The Beatles. Zep’s only “average” album is their last one, which is not that bad and it’s just that it’s not on par of its predecessors. I also know that Zep may have plagiarized a few songs and recorded them as their own without giving proper credit, but still it’s not like it was 80% of their songs.
As much as I love Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin’s songs cover a wider range with a variety of themes, than those of Deep Purple. I can listen to DP all day long and I know that it’s hard to believe they are the same band that play “Smoke in the water”, “When a blind man cries” and “Lazy”. Overall I think Zep was able to perform and demonstrate their talents on a more consistent basis than Deep Purple, and this is why I have to rate LZ over DP. The same logic applies to Uriah Heep: as much as I love “July Morning” (I can listen to this song in loop all day), “Rain” and “Gypsy”, UH also fell short to showing what they could have been.
HR
It looks like I may have a book cover reveal coming out soon.
Stay tuned.
HR
Working from home has been an interesting transition for a lot of people over the past months, in part because it involves managing requests from internal and external clients that come in a different fashion as we were used to when we had to go to our 9 to 5 office jobs.
I consider myself a very organized person, especially when it comes to prioritizing tasks and deliverables, however I am aware that I am part of a significant minority in the work force. Most people I have worked throughout my life work on a “First come-First serve” basis, whether if it’s tasks, phone calls, emails or anything. I, on the other hand, learned two of the most important lessons in the corporate world at a very early age in my life: 1) You can’t please everyone at the same time, and 2) You can’t please everyone, period.
So what is my thought process when I get seven emails asking for something at the same time? Needless to say a three paragraph blog post is not going to be enough to provide a straight answer to that question, but I will try to give a few quick pointers:
- Stop FCFS now. Take a deep breath, pause and relax (I’m dead serious). Take your time to clear your head and think right. You’ll appreciate what a few minutes of peace can do for you.
- Calculate how much time will each task take.
- Estimate how much of your focus will each task take.
- Separate what’s urgent from what’s important, in order. Yes, you can do it.
- Spend between 30 and 60 minutes to get rid of “Quick, easy and fast” (less than 5 minutes tasks). No more than that.
- Spend the rest of your day getting rid of “Long, hard and detailed” tasks.
- Don’t take any more requests until you get rid of what’s on your plate. Adding up is not going to help. Put it in a second queue list you’ll look at later after you’re done with your original tasks.
- Be honest. If you can’t make a dead line, tell your client right away that you’ll be late. He’ll appreciate and value you for it, rather than you going on mute mode.
- Finally, set goals and be true to them. Finish what you promise.
Good luck!
HR
I have to start by saying that I have 0 ATP points and have never played against a top 50 player in my life. But, I do know that if I would have played in the fifth set of a Grand Slam Final, I would have never hit an 85 mph first serve and even less a 68 mph second serve.
A couple of weeks ago Thiem and Zverev were protagonists of arguably one of the most boring Grand Slam finals of all time, to a point where it seemed neither of them wanted to actually win the title. Three weeks later, Nadal and Djokovic reached the finals by completely destroying almost everyone in their way -including scary and next generation players-, with Nadal giving an almost flawless performance in his match against Djokovic.
As a coach, it’s quite obvious that both Thiem and Zverev have every single shot in the book to be multiple Slam winners. What they don’t have is the attitude, the mind and the understanding that despite being physically fit and capable of hitting any shot, it is strategy and a proper mental state what wins titles. My advise to both: fire their coaches and hire a coach to work on those aspects.
HR
With the NBA Finals on the way, the debate of the GOAT will be in the mouths of every basketball fan for the remainder of the year, especially if the Lakers win.
The fact that we are even having the discussion of the greatest basketball player of all time makes me wonder if either people have short memory or if trends dictate the standards on any discipline. By reading these lines, you probably realized that I will side with Michael Jordan, even though I give a lot of credit and respect to LeBron James.
There several points I can use to make my case, however I will quickly list three that to me seal the deal:
- Michael failed and kept trying until he succeeded: I’ll never forgive LeBron for moving away from Cleveland to Miami to get his first championship. It felt like a cheap move and an easy way to solve a problem. I really admire MJ for sticking with Chicago until they finally broke through.
- Steve Kerr’s shot: “I’ll be ready” is what Steve said to Michael to assure him that he was ready and willing to take a shot in the last play of game six. Not only Michael was great, but he also made his teammates great.
- So many great players got deprived of NBA Rings: Barkley, Miller, Malone, Stockton, Ewing and many others were shut down by MJ and his Bulls. To put in in perspective, LeBron and Steph are the equivalent of Larry and Magic. If either would have silenced the other one, then that person would be the equivalent of MJ.
I can rank LeBron anywhere you want and as high as #2 if you want me to, but never #1. That place still belongs to MJ, and I only listed three reasons.
HR
A few days ago I was having a chat with two of my childhood friends whom I’ve known for over thirty years. We went to school together and after graduating, we took on separate career paths. Despite being apart, we always kept and held firm to our friendship and still do to this day. During the chat, one of my friends who has never seen me speak in public or negotiating with a client, commented: “I find hard to believe that you are a great public speaker, because ever since I’ve known you, you are an incredibly introvert and soft-spoken, low-profile guy!”, and he is absolutely true: I am an introvert. However, sometimes a specific quality in a person, does not necessarily relate to the other.
People normally confuse “introvert” with adjectives like “shy”, “quiet”, “insecure”, as well as stereotypical qualifications like “not fit to be a leader”, “cannot command”, and “follower”, and this is when confusion allows for misjudgment. Me being an introvert means that I like to think more rather than talk. I like to read, look, analyze and observe, rather than engage in small talk. My habits also back my personality: I play the piano, as well as guitar and bass, and I play tennis and chess. All of those are individual activities that require deep thought, rather than engagement with people. When I go to a party, I’m normally the quiet guy sitting on a corner looking how everyone is having fun. Now, that does not mean that I dislike engaging with people; in fact I love it. I absolutely do. The thing is, I love to do it with a meaning behind the engagement, and that is when the great public speaker comes in.
Throughout my life I have been told several times that once I step on a stage, I go through this sort of metamorphosis that releases this completely different person who comes out of his shell. I become a firm, engaging speaker, who talks with passion about the topic on hand, and who is incredibly hilarious, as well as fascinating to watch. The reason why this happens is because I focus on the message being clearly sent rather than the words. There are a lot of public speakers out there who speak nicely and sound unbelievably fluid and fascinating, yet their message is empty, or even worse: fake. They use stories to engage with people and stories are more engaging than facts. I on the other hand, use facts. The key difference is that I talk about facts using words that someone else would use for stories. So the question is: Do you prefer a speaker who clouds your vision and paints you fake pictures talking with nice words? Unfortunately, a lot of people do, and this is why sometimes a lot of my counterpart extroverts are able to get away with scamming so many people.
I do not have anything against extroverts and I am aware there have been several successful extrovert leaders and public speakers, as well as there have been several introvert scammers. The bottom line is not to judge an introvert only because he’s quiet; instead, give us the chance to prove you are wrong in your assumptions.
And of course, pay attention to the facts in the message. Never pay attention to the beautifully well spoken words surrounding the message.
HR