Yesterday, on my way home from school, I did what no person should ever do. I stepped into a McDonalds restaurant, and actually purchased something. In a desperate attempt to earn some extra credit points, I decided to try in this “experimental” assignment. I went to the local McDonalds near my house in Forest Hills, Queens, hoping that it would not be too busy. Luckily, there seemed to be enough servers with time to spare, so I felt less guilty about what I was about to do. I spent 30 seconds comparing the 3 different cashiers, trying to figure out which would be most accommodating. I may have picked wrong.
Deyandra was her name (or so her nametag claimed) and together, we would experience what may have been the most awkward 15 minutes of my week. When I first stepped up to the register, she smiled politely and waited for my order. I said I needed a junior cheeseburger and small fries, both from the dollar menu, but needed there to be exactly 4 pickles and no extra salt on the fries which needed to be well done. I said this needs to be on the receipt. That it is “crucial” that she put this on the receipt. She simply replied with an “ok” and gave me a strange look, but as she typed it in, she told me that she would tell them to put 4 pickles on, since she could only mark “extra pickle” on the receipt. I told her I absolutely had to have some proof of FOUR pickles ON my receipt, and told her that “extra pickle” four times would be good enough. She told me that the only way she could do this was by adding 4 junior cheeseburgers on the receipt too…which I would be charged for. I asked if she was sure (from my experience with modern registers, it should have been doable). Clearly annoyed, she nodded. She then took her pen out and wrote “(4)” on the receipt, which encouragingly did have “no salt” printed on it. But not “well done”. This could have been the end of it, but no, I had to push further.
I asked her to have the manager sign this, to approve what she had written on my receipt. This is when Deyandra’s true colours showed. It was clear she was no longer in a good mood. Whatever game I was playing, she wasn’t enjoying it one bit. She walked to the back, and stopped to talk to a coworker. Though she had her back to me, from her coworker’s reaction, it was clear she hadn’t been saying nice things about that OCD nutcase customer who was so obsessed with a receipt. She then went further back to a place where I could no longer see her. On her way, she had called out to one of the chefs that the junior cheeseburger with “extra pickle” needed four pickles exactly. I heard a laugh among two of the chefs. When she came back, I was shocked to find out that she had not simply asked the manager to sign it like I had requested, but had asked the manager to come deal with me himself.
Carlos, the manager, was much more pleasant to deal with. He asked what the problem was; and I explained the whole thing again. With my face already dark red with embarrassment, I said that it was really crucial that this appear on the receipt, exactly as I’ve requested. He explained that the receipt could not be altered, and that it would cost extra. I didn’t understand if he was referring to getting a new receipt, getting the extra pickles (I mean how expensive could a pickle possibly be?), or if I had to order it all over again. I said I could pay whatever he needed (Its easy to the big spender when the most it could cost was an extra $2.17). At that point he told me I would indeed have to order the whole thing again, which I said I would gladly do. He then typed it in to the register himself, and did in fact manage to put “extra pickle” four times, like I had suspected was possible all along. When I reminded him that the fries had to be well done he explained that the fries could not be “well done” because the whole batch was cooked together, and this could ruin the fries for the other customers, but he assured me that their fries are always cooked long enough to be “crispy and delicious”. On the receipt that he gave me, there was no mention of any details concerning the fries.
At this point I could not bring myself to place the same order a third time. I was hurriedly given my two orders, and only saw further agitation when I asked for extra BBQ sauce. I took my orders home, and received an excited welcome from my hungry younger brother, who told me that he finally appreciated my “school work”.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
ABC's of DISC
Main: D
Secondary: I
It is hard to say whether the test was accurate for me. However, due to my late arrival to class on the day of this exercise, i only managed to answer the last half of the 28 questions. With those results, I got a main D and secondary I. However, I was curious as to my actual results, so later on, i took the test again by myself, after finding the file on blackboard. After taking the whole test, i actually got the exact same results. Main D, and secondary I. I found this kind of interesting.
My difficulties in answering the question to this blog come from the one question that i was constantly asking myself whilst taking the personality test (both times) and seeing the kind of questions i needed to answer.
If this test evaluates our personality types, to what extent can our personalities change? i guess that opens up a whole new subject, of genetics VS environment. (kind of off topic, i know, sorry)
As i was answering the questions, i tried to answer them as honestly as possible, with how i was feeling at the time. But i knew that had i been answering these very same questions a few years ago, my results might have been very different.
Anyways, moving on.
So in an attempt to gain a little bit more insight on this personality assessment, i decided to Wikipedia it. Being the egocentric D that i am, i initially only wanted to find out more about D and I types.
Here is what I found:
High D (such as myself):demanding, forceful, egocentric, strong willed, driving, determined, ambitious, aggressive, and pioneering.
Low D (supposedly my complete opposite): conservative, low keyed, cooperative, calculating, undemanding, cautious, mild, agreeable, modest and peaceful.
Now is it just me, or does a "low D" person sound like an overall much more likable person that "high D" ?!?!?
So these descriptions of a high D? can i defend them? "egocentric" seems to be one of the worst ones, which i hate to admit may actually be kind of accurate. However, many of the others i feel simply describe someone who knows what they want, and is determined to get it. (hey, when i put it like that, its not all that bad is it?)
so i delve a little deeper to my secondary type:
High I: convincing, magnetic, political, enthusiastic, persuasive, warm, demonstrative, trusting, and optimistic.
Low I:reflective, factual, calculating, skeptical, logical, suspicious, matter of fact, pessimistic, and critical.
Ok, so at least with this type, i feel like "high I" comes off a little better =)
I'd almost wish that "I" was my primary type. This kind of person seems awesome, no?
So in attempt to reform my egocentric "D" ways, i'll read on about S and C types:
High "S" styles want a steady pace, security, and do not like sudden change. They are calm, relaxed, patient, possessive, predictable, deliberate, stable, consistent, and tend to be unemotional and poker faced.
Low "S" styles are those who like change and variety. People with Low "S" scores are described as restless, demonstrative, impatient, eager, or even impulsive.
I do feel like i fit into the "low S" description, except for my discomfort with change, which falls into "high S". I found this quite interesting, as i've often considered my discomfort with change to be a direct result of extensive moving (from country to country)as a child. So is this perhaps one way in which environment and experiences can actually alter our personalities?
And as for C's
"High C" styles adhere to rules, regulations, and structure. They like to do quality work and do it right the first time. They are careful, cautious, exacting, neat, systematic, diplomatic, accurate, and tactful.
"Low C" styles challenge the rules and want independence and are described as self-willed, stubborn, opinionated, unsystematic, arbitrary, and careless with details.
I think that i fit very well into the description of a "low C", perhaps with the exception of careless with details, which i feel is not always the case.
So do i wish i were another type?
Well, i think perhaps high I instead of D would have been better. I think that maybe having at least a little of each type is good, and the more we can have, the better.
As far as being a D, i think that it is perhaps a difficult type to be. I think that in terms of business and management, it could be a very useful type, but i am not sure if this is an easy type for women to be accepted as. I definitely do think that knowing or understanding someone's type can be useful. I think in a professional sense, it is extremely important for both employees and their employers to know what type they are, because it should probably make it easier to assign them to the right jobs/roles.
Personal Interactions?
I'd like to say that such a test could also help in other personal interactions, but i am not quite sure if this is true. I feel that as far as friendships and relationships, it could work in either direction. From experience, i have at times admired people who were most like me, because i admired our shared good qualities, but at other times i have hated seeing my own flaws in another person. Also, as a D, i have dated other D-like people, and found that we sometimes struggle for power or attention, and if we are both strong willed and egocentric, a regular fight can turn into WW3. So i see the ways in which a high D or I may compliment a high S or C, because it seems that high S or C's may WANT a more dominant person.
And now if i were "STRANDED"?
Normally, i think that in group situations i might clash with a high D leader. If i am not persuaded by their confidence, I might not trust their decisions. Maybe a high I would have some better qualities for managing a group that is comprised of various personality types. In a situation like "stranded", where all of our lives would depend on good decisions being made, i would worry that a high D would be too busy "being a leader" and not busy enough thinking carefully enough about what needs to be done. So, perhaps a high I would be best, since he/she could lead effectively, while using his/her people skills to keep everyone at ease, while evaluating their contributions to solving our problem, rather than dismissing them (which i could imagine a high D might do.)
So if you have finally made it to the bottom of this entry, i would like to apologize for how ridiculously long it is, and thank you for taking the time to read it.
Secondary: I
It is hard to say whether the test was accurate for me. However, due to my late arrival to class on the day of this exercise, i only managed to answer the last half of the 28 questions. With those results, I got a main D and secondary I. However, I was curious as to my actual results, so later on, i took the test again by myself, after finding the file on blackboard. After taking the whole test, i actually got the exact same results. Main D, and secondary I. I found this kind of interesting.
My difficulties in answering the question to this blog come from the one question that i was constantly asking myself whilst taking the personality test (both times) and seeing the kind of questions i needed to answer.
If this test evaluates our personality types, to what extent can our personalities change? i guess that opens up a whole new subject, of genetics VS environment. (kind of off topic, i know, sorry)
As i was answering the questions, i tried to answer them as honestly as possible, with how i was feeling at the time. But i knew that had i been answering these very same questions a few years ago, my results might have been very different.
Anyways, moving on.
So in an attempt to gain a little bit more insight on this personality assessment, i decided to Wikipedia it. Being the egocentric D that i am, i initially only wanted to find out more about D and I types.
Here is what I found:
High D (such as myself):demanding, forceful, egocentric, strong willed, driving, determined, ambitious, aggressive, and pioneering.
Low D (supposedly my complete opposite): conservative, low keyed, cooperative, calculating, undemanding, cautious, mild, agreeable, modest and peaceful.
Now is it just me, or does a "low D" person sound like an overall much more likable person that "high D" ?!?!?
So these descriptions of a high D? can i defend them? "egocentric" seems to be one of the worst ones, which i hate to admit may actually be kind of accurate. However, many of the others i feel simply describe someone who knows what they want, and is determined to get it. (hey, when i put it like that, its not all that bad is it?)
so i delve a little deeper to my secondary type:
High I: convincing, magnetic, political, enthusiastic, persuasive, warm, demonstrative, trusting, and optimistic.
Low I:reflective, factual, calculating, skeptical, logical, suspicious, matter of fact, pessimistic, and critical.
Ok, so at least with this type, i feel like "high I" comes off a little better =)
I'd almost wish that "I" was my primary type. This kind of person seems awesome, no?
So in attempt to reform my egocentric "D" ways, i'll read on about S and C types:
High "S" styles want a steady pace, security, and do not like sudden change. They are calm, relaxed, patient, possessive, predictable, deliberate, stable, consistent, and tend to be unemotional and poker faced.
Low "S" styles are those who like change and variety. People with Low "S" scores are described as restless, demonstrative, impatient, eager, or even impulsive.
I do feel like i fit into the "low S" description, except for my discomfort with change, which falls into "high S". I found this quite interesting, as i've often considered my discomfort with change to be a direct result of extensive moving (from country to country)as a child. So is this perhaps one way in which environment and experiences can actually alter our personalities?
And as for C's
"High C" styles adhere to rules, regulations, and structure. They like to do quality work and do it right the first time. They are careful, cautious, exacting, neat, systematic, diplomatic, accurate, and tactful.
"Low C" styles challenge the rules and want independence and are described as self-willed, stubborn, opinionated, unsystematic, arbitrary, and careless with details.
I think that i fit very well into the description of a "low C", perhaps with the exception of careless with details, which i feel is not always the case.
So do i wish i were another type?
Well, i think perhaps high I instead of D would have been better. I think that maybe having at least a little of each type is good, and the more we can have, the better.
As far as being a D, i think that it is perhaps a difficult type to be. I think that in terms of business and management, it could be a very useful type, but i am not sure if this is an easy type for women to be accepted as. I definitely do think that knowing or understanding someone's type can be useful. I think in a professional sense, it is extremely important for both employees and their employers to know what type they are, because it should probably make it easier to assign them to the right jobs/roles.
Personal Interactions?
I'd like to say that such a test could also help in other personal interactions, but i am not quite sure if this is true. I feel that as far as friendships and relationships, it could work in either direction. From experience, i have at times admired people who were most like me, because i admired our shared good qualities, but at other times i have hated seeing my own flaws in another person. Also, as a D, i have dated other D-like people, and found that we sometimes struggle for power or attention, and if we are both strong willed and egocentric, a regular fight can turn into WW3. So i see the ways in which a high D or I may compliment a high S or C, because it seems that high S or C's may WANT a more dominant person.
And now if i were "STRANDED"?
Normally, i think that in group situations i might clash with a high D leader. If i am not persuaded by their confidence, I might not trust their decisions. Maybe a high I would have some better qualities for managing a group that is comprised of various personality types. In a situation like "stranded", where all of our lives would depend on good decisions being made, i would worry that a high D would be too busy "being a leader" and not busy enough thinking carefully enough about what needs to be done. So, perhaps a high I would be best, since he/she could lead effectively, while using his/her people skills to keep everyone at ease, while evaluating their contributions to solving our problem, rather than dismissing them (which i could imagine a high D might do.)
So if you have finally made it to the bottom of this entry, i would like to apologize for how ridiculously long it is, and thank you for taking the time to read it.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
My Visions
Vision without action is just a dream.
Action without vision merely wastes time.
Vision coupled with action can make things happen!
Ever since I can remember, I've always been obsessed with my future. So, I guess this exercise might be helpful, as I can now note and organize these "visions", and take the time to think of the best form of "action" to take, in order to make my them part of my future.
VISION #1
Just like what I'm sure I'll find on every other person's list, "Success" is clearly one of my most important visions. But I don't think that can be my first "vision". Before that, I need to figure out exactly what it is I want to be successful at. Even though I am almost 3 years through my degree, I still don't know EXACTLY what it is I want to do. I've always seen myself as a "Jack of all trades, master of none" and so finding one field to commit myself to seems a little scary. I guess that to achieve this, I need to commit time to researching the many different options available to me. I should find ways of "sampling" them, before making any commitments. I'd probably do this by trying internships, and taking courses related to those topics.
VISION #2
Once I do figure out what it is that I want to do (or even if I never figure it out, but take a job somewhere regardless of my uncertainty)I hope to become "successful" at it. To make a decent (well preferably more than just "decent") living, and hold a position that not only challenges me, but that I also enjoy. The only way to achieve this vision would be hard work I guess (and maybe some luck and connections...) I need to work as hard as possible now, so that I can get the best grades possible, so that I have an impressive GPA to put on my resume. Once I graduate, I need to keep applying myself, and really dedicate myself to whatever it is I do choose to pursue. I would probably also need to work on my confidence and "people skills".
VISION #3
Although this may end up being dictated by my career, I do think that figuring out where in this world I actually want to end up is a pretty important goal of mine. As of now, I feel like I have no nationality. I've not spent enough time in any country to feel it, and my passports each have different nationalities. I know the pros and cons of these countries and the cultures, but I would like to figure out which country to eventually end up in, and hopefully find a way to identify myself with that nationality. I'm not sure how to do this. I guess the only idea I have as of now is trial and elimination. Or, god forbid, just let myself become an "American" =P
VISION #4
Aside from career, I really want to be a parent. Not quite yet, but once everything else is in place, it would be my #1 priority. I guess I don't need to explain the exact "steps" which one takes to accomplish this haha...but it would preferably mean getting married and "settling down" first. So, to accomplish this, I am going to try to avoid getting sucked into time-wasting relationships that are clearly going nowhere.
Action without vision merely wastes time.
Vision coupled with action can make things happen!
Ever since I can remember, I've always been obsessed with my future. So, I guess this exercise might be helpful, as I can now note and organize these "visions", and take the time to think of the best form of "action" to take, in order to make my them part of my future.
VISION #1
Just like what I'm sure I'll find on every other person's list, "Success" is clearly one of my most important visions. But I don't think that can be my first "vision". Before that, I need to figure out exactly what it is I want to be successful at. Even though I am almost 3 years through my degree, I still don't know EXACTLY what it is I want to do. I've always seen myself as a "Jack of all trades, master of none" and so finding one field to commit myself to seems a little scary. I guess that to achieve this, I need to commit time to researching the many different options available to me. I should find ways of "sampling" them, before making any commitments. I'd probably do this by trying internships, and taking courses related to those topics.
VISION #2
Once I do figure out what it is that I want to do (or even if I never figure it out, but take a job somewhere regardless of my uncertainty)I hope to become "successful" at it. To make a decent (well preferably more than just "decent") living, and hold a position that not only challenges me, but that I also enjoy. The only way to achieve this vision would be hard work I guess (and maybe some luck and connections...) I need to work as hard as possible now, so that I can get the best grades possible, so that I have an impressive GPA to put on my resume. Once I graduate, I need to keep applying myself, and really dedicate myself to whatever it is I do choose to pursue. I would probably also need to work on my confidence and "people skills".
VISION #3
Although this may end up being dictated by my career, I do think that figuring out where in this world I actually want to end up is a pretty important goal of mine. As of now, I feel like I have no nationality. I've not spent enough time in any country to feel it, and my passports each have different nationalities. I know the pros and cons of these countries and the cultures, but I would like to figure out which country to eventually end up in, and hopefully find a way to identify myself with that nationality. I'm not sure how to do this. I guess the only idea I have as of now is trial and elimination. Or, god forbid, just let myself become an "American" =P
VISION #4
Aside from career, I really want to be a parent. Not quite yet, but once everything else is in place, it would be my #1 priority. I guess I don't need to explain the exact "steps" which one takes to accomplish this haha...but it would preferably mean getting married and "settling down" first. So, to accomplish this, I am going to try to avoid getting sucked into time-wasting relationships that are clearly going nowhere.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)