blog.grahamallen.net

OK. So maybe a title such as ‘fail’ is a bit on the pessimistic side and doesn’t accurate describe the truth of my current situation.

Here’s what I’m toiling over now: Frameworks are not libraries, global variables are unnecessary and methods pass messages rather than variables and values. You could write the Controller and Model code into the same class, but this would be unconventional. Cocoa is merely a term that is used to described a framework that is simply a conglomerate of several other frameworks that make up the core developmental set for OS X (but do NOT confuse this with a library).

In all seriousness, I’m really starting to understand the Model/View/Controller (MVC)  design pattern. It is very similar to the integration of CSS into the web with the seperation of content (Model) and presentation (View). Integrating client-side or server-side logic to automate the interaction between content and presentation thus becomes your Controller.

So most of this is coming together. The only problem is I can see each individual piece quite clearly, however, when looking at the whole from a greater distance, the edges get fuzzy. I have a feeling I’m one or two blanks away from filling them all in and THAT is the exciting moment in such an endeavor. Can’t wait to put the pieces together and roll it all up into a tangible and meaningful knowledgebase to build and grow on.

More to come.

This is the prevailing thought for the moment after hearing a disturbing tale today that emanated from a place I once enjoyed being. It prompted me to think about myself, the people around me and how we all inter-relate. Just what IS the difference between a leader and an alpha male?

In order to truly define a difference, one would have to define each role. In providing my own such definition, there would naturally be a backlash of subjective debate from those who may disagree with my assessment. However, I would feel less than effective if I allowed myself to concede the argument. Of course, those who know me and understand me know very well the source of this speculation and introspection on my part. Some might even disagree. It would be quite arrogant of me to state that such disagreement is wrong. What I CAN say is that my thoughts on the matter are well formulated and well-thought out and, at the very least, are deserving of consideration.

Alpha male, being a concept more than a specific entity, is difficult to clearly define. In its broad definition (as summarized in the Wikipedia article for “Alpha (biology)”) is “…the individual in the community to whom others follow and defer.” The typical implication is that the alpha male leads by dominance. In nature, this dominance is purely dictated by physical superiority. In our modern climate and culture, there is still a certain remnant of this pure physical dominance, however, there is the added intellectual factor: dominance dictated by position of authority or power.

In its purest definition, a leader is one who leads….more specifically, one who leads a group or activity. As it applies to discussion in our current culture, this word has taken on a more detailed inference: a leader is one who leads WELL. This opens doors to even further speculation on what it means to lead WELL. In my estimation, an effective leader is one who is naturally respected by his/her peers and leads the group or activity to its best possible outcome. There are any number of leadership styles at play in the world we live in. Some more effective than others and some that leave you wondering how and why an individual might have come to their level of power. This latter curiosity is what really fuels this discussion.

Human beings are creatures of volition. We each have our own motives and agendas that drive us and map out the routes that we take. A leader not only acknowledges this volitional tendency, but actually respects and attempts to work within the constraints of each individual’s own volitional fiber. The alpha male, in being driven purely by dominance would not do this.

A leader does not command respect. A leader EARNS respect. The alpha male EXPECTS it. Even the select few who tend to follow the alpha male do not respect the alpha male on the sole basis of being the alpha male. Respect must still be earned.

A leader does not automatically assume that he/she is right. A leader will continually make efforts to improve, acknowledging his/her own weak points. The alpha male has theoretically already proven to be superior and typically does not see the need to seek such improvement.

A leader will NEVER ask of another what the leader would not be willing to do him/herself. The results of going into battle on behalf of someone who is unwilling to fight will never match the level of going to battle with one who fights beside you. The alpha male may or may not be this person. More often than not, the alpha male would not deem it necessary to go into battle with subordinates, opting to watch from afar.

A leader MOTIVATES his/her subordinates into action, rather than demanding. The alpha male demands it.

More than anything, a leader holds a strong conviction. A leader does not look to his/her subordinate in ANY situation to say: I can’t help you. There are a wide variety of scenarios that this may apply to, but for purposes of simplification there are only two:

1) The subordinate is inaccurate or has missed some crucial point. In this scenario, a leader guides the subordinate’s thought process to the appropriate conclusion with logical evidence and reason.

2) The subordinate is accurate and has a valid request. In this scenario, a leader who says “I can’t help you” has turned their back on someone who is dependent on them for guidance and supervision. The leader has failed the individual and the group by placing him/herself in a position of powerlessness. The fallout from such a failure is manifested in a variety of ways. First and foremost, the leader will lose the respect, at the very least, of that one individual. More often than not, people being the great communicators that they are, the leader will lose the respect of the group. Further, this understanding that the trusted leader is now a powerless figure is almost guaranteed to de-motivate the subordinate and/or group of subordinates.

What comes into play in the second scenario are nested leadership structures. Each leader has their own leader all the way up the chain of command. Though the leader at the first level may not be the point of failure, somewhere up the chain is a leader that has failed miserably. Additionally, in everything that we do there  are tasks that we are expected to perform by our leaders and leadership groups. While being held accountable for these tasks, others must be held equally accountable, else the balance of respect within the group is shaken and fragile. When an individual within the group proves to be the most productive, this individual should be rewarded or, at the very least, should be afforded the respect that goes along with being the most productive. If a massive disparity in production is demonstrated within the group, the subordinates who are grossly underperforming MUST be held accountable. If this lack of performance is treated as the status quo it WILL become the status quo. If performance is not rewarded, it will NOT become the status quo.

The alpha male will fail to acknowledge performance within the group. The group will perform simply as a side-effect of the alpha male’s dominance. Thus, an individual who is placed in a leadership role who exhibits the tendencies of the alpha male, demanding performance without motivating subordinates to perform, will ultimately fail to produce the best result. It should be noted that dependent on the strength of the individuals within a group or team, they may, by default, produce the EXPECTED result. But, they will never produce the best result. Over time, the alpha male mentality will ultimately thrust a group into a state of perpetual decline and performance will eventually fade to nothing.

While I won’t complain about having to overcome the adversity of being somewhat awkward and unusual, I will never understand the prevailing mentality that I was somehow at fault for others promoting mediocrity and shooting performance square in the face. I am guilty of one thing and, even for that I! AM! NOT! WRONG! (never was) I am guilty of being thoroughly repulsed and disgusted by the perpetuation of a culture of mediocrity, particularly by those I respected and expected the most of. The fact that they still fail to comprehend the accuracy of my own perspective is not only perplexing, it is actually relatively disturbing.

What is most intriguing is how someone who was a respected and trusted leader within a group could so quickly become a corrupt alpha male politician. I’d chalk it up to youth and a singular perspective, but that’s really no excuse. Even more intriguing is how others could be so blind to such a disturbing turn. Either way, it spreads like a plague and only perpetuates the eventual decline of a group that used to be functional and effective. They might do what you say out of fear for their own livelihood , but they won’t respect you and they won’t produce for you until you start rewarding productivity and show even the slightest appreciation and respect for your colleagues and subordinates.

Or should this more aptly be named “the objective-c follies”? Seriously. This is an entirely new code structure and I’m having a hard time grasping even the simplest concepts. I mean, I understand how to create algorithms in code and I understand objects, classes and methods. What I’m trying to understand are the specific underlying principles in Objective-C, XCode 3.0 and Cocoa that vary greatly from what I am accustomed to.

The biggest example to date is the ‘id’ object. I think I’m starting to understand, but it would REALLY be nice for someone out in virtual space…..actually, ANYONE out in virtual space to post a finite answer in layman’s terms for those of us who are trying to soak all of this in (NOTE: This is foreshadowing to a day when I finally understand it fully….I’ll be that guy….it’s in my DNA).

What I am understanding ‘id’ that is declared without a type until runtime. Almost like a placeholder object. Typically this is given the name ’sender’. At least that’s what I’m seeing thus far…..some random reference out on the web stated that this was a Cocoa convention.

I think the difficulty I’m having is that the syntax in the header files and implementation files seems to change depending on context. More on this later as it sinks in more….

FYI, for anyone seeking tangible information, I wouldn’t look here just yet. ha! But check back soon. I’ll get it down well enough before long……

So Joe Maddon says the chances of a deal are 50/50? Don’t look now guys, but the Yankees are gaining ground and…….one moment…….this just in……..THEY JUST SIGNED THE GUY YOU NEEDED!!!!

As I sit here, the Rays have just put a single run across against the Royals in the second inning. A single run seems to be a common thing these last couple of weeks. It’s almost predictable. You can count on our starting pitchers to give up two runs at the most. You can count on our bats to produce four runs scattered over nine innings and leave about fifteen on base.

What you can’t count on is our bullpen. Mad props to Grant Balfour for having that wicked fastball of his, but our bullpen seems to think they’re playing for last year’s team. A solid night is followed by a horrible night is followed by a solid night and so on.

Wait, this just in. It looks like the Yankees aren’t done yet. Look for Jarrod Washburn to be wearing pinstripes by weekend’s close. Call me a cynic or whatever you might (I’ve earned this living through the first twenty VERY thin years of the Buccaneers), but the underdog just became more so. And with a “deal being 50/50″ we have to hope that the ship rights sooner rather than later and that all the talk of Rocco Baldelli coming alive is not fluff to make us feel comfortable with the fact that there will be no Jason Bay and no Xavier Nady.

Three weeks ago, the Red Sox were our greatest threat and our worst adversary. Look out folks….that monster from the Bronx has finally left the runway and they…..are……AIRBORNE…..

Note to ownership: You might want to give a little more than 50/50 consideration to getting that deal done, because the likelihood of surviving this Yankees surge is much less than surviving the consistency the Red Sox have shown. This surge is looking more and more likely to be come an accepted 2008 norm from the Yanks. Here’s the problem: You produced a team we could get behind and rally behind. You are pushing the “last chance for season ticket packages”. I’ll make a deal with you: You demonstrate your dedication to us and we’ll demonstrate our dedication to you. We like what you’ve done so far, but the bar has been raised. This is what life is like in the sports world and I, for one, am hoping you’re prepared

I really wanted to post commentary on this before now, as it’s been a week since I actually saw the movie, but I’ve been quite busy.

This is all about meeting and exceeding expectations. If I had any criticism to make of the movie, it would be that there was no preamble to what will follow in this latest Batman series. But even that may just be a good thing.

Heath Ledger gets a pardon for that shameful film I like to refer to as “The Miserable Failure” (i.e. Brokeback Mountain) in what will likely come to be known as his final cinematic moments (my understanding is that there is a film called The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus that is currently in post-production, however, it would take a lot to overshadow his role in this film). Without being a spoiler for those who haven’t seen it, this Joker is a far darker and more sinister character that is much more true to himself. The jokes are not implemented through grand motions and vocal intonations, but are delivered dry and to the point. One would think that this would soften the blow of the comedic delivery, however, the jokes have more depth and more humor than even Nicholson’s Joker. The local dime-store make-up job only enhances this home-grown character who has about as many reasons for his facial deformities as there are costumes in a Madonna concert.

The Batman character continues where we left him in Batman Begins. A dark and wealthy man who is a lackadaisical billionaire by day and a deeply complex superhero by night. Again, we are given the deep, overly synthesized voice that became the voice of Batman in Begins, however, it continues to be true and relevant to the story as a method to further mask the identity of a superhero the citizens love to hate.

The development of Two-Face, as  a minor sub-plot, is delivered impeccably. Though the character has very little time to develop, he remains central to the story and does not deviate from the core values that make the character until he is greeted with a major life-altering event. At this point, the transformation is delivered with intent and purpose.

Despite these major players in the film, I can not express enough how much I enjoy watching Gary Oldman work. Even after seeing the first film and having difficulty believing that he is indeed playing the part of Lt. Gordon, I still marvel at the diversity of this man’s abilities. Though not nearly as central to the plot and the story as the rest, the character is everything that it needs to be and does not deviate from the character’s true identity.

Last, this movie is all about delivering a believable and real Batman. With a couple of minor exceptions, the techno toys this Batman is given to play with are the brainchild of his own corporate empire and, though not entirely within the realm of our current technological capabilities, are certainly more than believable in this almost realistic Gotham City.

Much criticism has been written about the levels of violence and a couple of relatively graphic scenes that make the film’s PG-13 rating somewhat questionable. Personally, I didn’t see it. This movie had very little in the way of violence that was at all a departure from what one sees in any of the latest action films. The so-called graphic scenes are little more than cinematographic and cg trickery. Though I would recommend a parent see this film prior to taking the children, I personally believe any criticism of this film as gory or at all graphic is simply a perpetuation of the wussification of America.

At the end of the day, I can not say this is the best movie I have ever seen, nor can I say that it is even better than Batman Begins. The two story-lines are wholly different in their purpose and in their implementation. I can, however, say that I think this movie should easily be a nominee for several major awards (including the Oscar for Best Picture). I would recommend that any fan of the Batman comics and the Batman character make it a point to see this film sooner, rather than later.