The Times, They Are a'Changin'

October 19, 1987. The Stock Market crashed. The housing market slowed. Six months later, I was laid off from my job with a major mortgage lender. I almost instantly found another mortgage position, 400 miles or so away in Connecticut. So, I left my life-long home in South Jersey and relocated to central Connecticut.

As I was making this life change, savings and loans (or "thrifts") were failing. They had been since 1986, mostly due to bad real estate investments. (Sound familiar?) President Bush (the elder) introduced a "bail out" in February of 1989 but it was too late for my new employer. They just happened to be owned by a Texas-based savings and loan. By all accounts, they were doing well, then, boom! They were declared insolvent near the end of 1988. The RTC (Resolution Trust Corporation), an arm of the OTS (Office of Thrift Supervision), took over our parent company and our mortgage subsidiary was shut down in February of 1989.

I returned to South Jersey and found another job...in the mortgage business. The economy improved and, two voluntary job changes later, I landed my current position. That was a little over 12 years ago.


Today I face the possibility of another involuntary separation. My employer cut 75% of our workforce in the past year and a half to 2 years. News reports and "implod-o-meters" on the Internet predict our imminent demise. Those of us who remain show up every day and wait for the other shoe to drop.


Things are different from what they were in the late '80s. In the mortgage business back then, the people who suffered the most were employees of savings and loans. There was a rash of foreclosures but they were mostly concentrated in Texas. Now, it's global. You can barely find any business or person unaffected by the conditions.


So, as I consider my options, I find myself reflecting on how things have changed in respect to looking for a new job. The biggest change I see is the importance of the Internet.


Casting the Net


My, how things have changed. Back in the day, I found my jobs through one of three ways:

1. Professional recruiter who was paid a fee (usually by the employer).
2. Newspaper ads.
3. Personal referrals.

In fact, I can say I found positions with each of the three at least once.


Today, I don't know a person who starts a job search without the Internet. In fact, that's where much of the concentration appears to be. And it's no longer just going to an employer's web site, clicking on their "career opportunities" page, and scrolling through a list. We now have tools which, I believe, fall under the recent categorization of "Web 2.0".


The New and Improved Web
My understanding of Web 2.0 is still a little fuzzy. I've read articles but the techno-jargon gets in the way. But, what I grasp is this:

• Web 2.0 is user or audience focused. It seeks to interact with us. We're not just clicking on links. We're establishing the information we want from a site. We may even be adding information to a site or database.

• As information available on a site changes, the look and feel of the site doesn't. Data available on the site is independent of the site. Applications are running on the web. We're no longer looking at static pages where information must be changed in html to be refreshed.

So, how do we interact using Web 2.0? The articles I've linked to give plenty of examples: Wikipedia, blogging, iTunes, del.i.cio.us.
For job searching, the focus seems to be on two things:

1. Social networking sites - particularly LinkedIn
2. Interactive job search sites - Monster.com, industry specific sites.

Reach Out and Touch Someone


Going back to the old days, if you wanted to network, you had a Rolodex and hoped that you had everyone's home number. If you wanted to hook up (professionally) with some new contacts, you attended networking events, professional meetings, etc.


While the face-to-face meetings still have a place, the Rolodex is so 20th century. In today's world, the on-line social networking sites are where you stay in touch. And, they're where you can meet your contacts' contacts without a formal introduction. In my circles, LinkedIn seems to be the site of choice. I started getting invitations from departing coworkers just as the body count started.




By sending and accepting invitations to join one's network, you have access to a multitude of contacts and information about them. You can see where someone works, their past experience (like an on-line resume), and recommendations from current or former co-workers. This gives you a better idea of who you're dealing with.
LinkedIn has more applications that I've not yet explored. So far, the most critical area has been "People". Staying in touch right now just seems to have the most urgency. Particularly when you haven't had a chance to say "good-bye". But these are also the people who, as they land in new places, will be the most likely to help us late-comers (or late-leavers) land safely, too.
The social networking sites are part of Web 2.0 because we, the audience, are responsible for the content. We're building the database.
A Hunting We Will Go
Another newer function to the internet that I believe falls under Web 2.0 is the "define-it-yourself" job search. Some of these engines are undoubtedly better than others. The thing that I think makes them Web 2.0 is that you can narrow your search by setting criteria and then have links to the job...not just the site...sent to you when there's a new match.

My site of choice right now is USA Jobs. (With banks and other financial institutions failing and billions of dollars in bail-out money, those regulators will need plenty of people experienced with the inside workings to shovel through the muck and help set things right. )
With this site, you decide how much information you give upfront (like whether or not to provide a resume) and what jobs you want to "hear" about. You can set up as many searches as you want or need. And the information is constantly updated without changing the look or feel of the site.

What's Next?
Honestly, I'm not technically saavy enough to make predictions. I read that collaborative sites and audience defined functionality is the future. Some of it I find useful...like the tools I've mentioned here for networking and job hunting. Some of it I find confusing...like the new language of the internet and the associated tools. And some of it worries me...like the "democratic" nature of tools like Wikipedia - how "facts" and information can be owned by people without expertise in the given area. Maybe that's a blog for next week. "What scares me about Wikipedia." Hmmm...

Why Don't You Just Pull Over and Ask for Directions?

That's a frequent complaint of my passengers. If I can't find my way with a map, I'm determined to find my way by intuition. Fact be told, I actually enjoy getting lost. Unless I'm really late. Or I'm in a bad neighborhood. But, in general, it's usually an adventure. I find things I'm not expecting.

That's true for me on the web, too. I start out with a general idea of what I'm looking for, get lost, and discover all sorts of new and interesting material. The problem is, that takes up so much of my time. And I'm starting to suffer from information overload. There's way too much information out there to sift through. It can be a bit ovewhelming.

Can I Get a Referral?

When I'm looking for someplace to eat in a strange city, I often ask a friend or go to a guide book to find something interesting. Being a vegetarian, my options are often limited so getting information from someone who's been there is useful.

The same can be said for traveling that "information highway". We often share links via e-mails. Now we can share them via "social networks". I recently joined "Delicious". (Sounds decadent, doesn't it?) I can bookmark sites I find interesting and share those bookmarks with you. In fact, here's a link to my bookmarks: My Bookmarks (Hey, I tried to insert the "badge" like the Delicious instructions told me to but it just didn't work!)

By "joining" another person's network, you have access to real-time updates. This method of sharing has potential in the classroom as well as the office (or wherever your workplace might be). Teachers can easily share approved sources of material with their students or useful homework sites with parents. In the workplace, you can similiarly share important (or amusing) material without having to send out e-mails or update web sites.

Is It Behind Door Number 1? Or Door Number 2?...

I chose a variety of links to help me learn a little more about how do so some things on the computer (like record audio, use CSS, and create a web page), refresh my policies and procedures skills (with a link to Information Mapping), and to remember an enjoyable class assignment (the short video on the history of Copper Black typeset). As I build up my collection of bookmarks, I'll need some way to keep them organized or they'll be nothing more than a long list of links.

The organization of these bookmarks can be helped with "Folksonomy" - a word not quite in Webster's yet, I'm sure. It generally means the method of labeling bookmarks, photographs, and other material found on the web using key words. Some consider it to be a very democratic process. However, there are generally no conventions so it's a free-for-all, even anarchical. A librarian's nightmare!

Why is this important? Because you also share the tags. Now, I may understand that the tag "Saturday Night Entertainment" means pictures of the night we pulled out the laser pointer and exercised the cats. Someone else might have a completely different interpretation. And, because anybody can place any link under any tag and identify it with any name, you never know where you're going until you get there.

Which can be make life interesting. Just make sure those parental controls are still set...

At Least It's Not My Writing...

Some things you're just happier not knowing. I recently read an article about using typefaces. Most people probably know them as "fonts"...the various styles of the characters on your computer keyboard such as Arial, Lucida Grande, Trebuchet, or Verdana.

The article is entitled "Avoiding Typeface Terrors" by Kathleen Burke Yoshida. It is interesting material. (Well, it is if you create documentation for a living.) And, I found it very helpful. But it also put me in the position of having to make a change to my documentation approach.
Righting a Wrong
You see, it seems as though I've been using the wrong typeface for my policies and procedures and training documentation for years. I like Arial. It's clean. No fuss. Just like I try to write my documentation.

However, according to the article, Arial's lack of "serif" - or the little feet or protrusions from the lines as highlighted on the "T" to the right - makes it harder for the reader to follow the text; the reader finds it difficult to continue through the many lines of words without the little feet to lead the way.

So, where does that leave me? You might say it's easy. Just use the Microsoft default - Times New Roman. The problem is a little print related PTSD. Times New Roman and the lighter, wider Courier bring with them the baggage from my beginning years in banking.

It was in the early Reagan years and I unexpectedly found myself in an office job where I had to type...using a typewriter! Now, I took typing in high school so I could type my own college term papers. I didn't do well in the class - too slow with too many mistakes. But I could get by well enough to pull together a legible (if not smudged) paper on an old 1940s manual typewriter.

My job, however, had me typing legal documents - Notes and Mortgages - and mistakes were not permitted. The worst was the Mortgages. Each Mortgage includes a property description which basically defines the perimeter of the property. A nice rectangular property can be a short five lines. But an odd shaped property, especially in a rural area where landmarks are tree stumps and the intersections of neighbors' lots, can go on for pages. I could spend hours on one Mortgage.
Times New Roman and many of the other "with serif" typefaces remind me too much of the typeface used on the typewriter. I have my own "emotional" response to the little feet. Plus, I think it looks cluttered.
The Search
I want to do right by my readers so I'm in search of a new typeface. Normally, I really enjoy selecting typeface...when I have the opportunity. It's usually for a flyer or other material related to my volunteer activities. I can actually spend more time selecting the typeface than drafting the text. It can be fun. There are so many options. I recently discovered that there's quite a business in creating and selling typefaces. One site I came across (http://www.veer.com/) sells some amazing, interesting typefaces for $40 to $100. Not that I'm interested in spending $40 on a new typeface.
This search, though, leaves me with little opportunity for fun and creativity. There are rules and limitations.

• First, it must be readily available in Microsoft Office.
• Second, it must be legible.
• Third, it must be readable.
• Fourth, any "personality" it has must be professional.

After scrolling through the selections in Microsoft Word, I think I'm going to give Century a try. Here's what I like about Century:

• It's open and round. The letters are not pressed together.
• It's not heavy. There aren't a lot of thick lines.
• Of the typefaces with serifs, Century is one of the cleanest. The feet are more like size 6 rather than size 9.

The down side to the openness is that it might take up more space potentially adding additional pages to each document.

Testing the Typeface

The question is, does it pass the tests outlined above?

• Available in Microsoft Office: I found this in the list of available fonts and I have not added any to my computer. I also know it's available on my computer at work. Pass.
• Legible: To test legibility, Ms. Yoshida suggests that you "place a piece of paper over the top or bottom half of a word or sentence. If you can read the word or sentence easily by just looking at half of the letters, then the typeface is likely to be perceived as legible." Pass.

• 
  
  Readability: The type size is easy to read and it has the obligatory serifs. Ms. Yoshida says to look for a large "x-height" meaning the body of the characters (the portion above the line that does not extend above the top of a lower case "x") is larger than the "ascenders" (the parts above the top of the "x") and the "descenders" (the parts below the line). Pass.

• 
  
  Personality: The personality of Century is not quite as formal as some of the other serif typefaces. But it's not casual. Because this typeface will be used for documentation that must be viewed as credible and must be taken seriously, it's important that it is not too informal. My opinion is that it passes but I think it requires a test drive from some discerning eyes.

Wish me luck!