Hidden Agenda Movie Download Hd
Evagret Homestead
LinkedIn and 3rd parties use essential and non-essential cookies to provide, secure, analyze and improve our Services, and to show you relevant ads (including professional and job ads) on and off LinkedIn. Learn more in our Cookie Policy.
One thing companies grapple with the most is customer feedback. Yet, many people in a company have their own egos. They want their ideas to have merit. They want to be seen as pivotal to meeting or exceeding company goals. UX is not innocent in this regard either. Even a well seasoned UXer has an unspoken agenda. That agenda is to put the user at the center of the organizational culture. This is change management at scale, and often comes with residual push back or dragging of feet from others on the team. It's not really their fault. We humans aren't always fond of change are we? Change takes a certain gravitas and audacity to seek out and accomplish. When we get comfortable with the way things are it's hard to change, because in that there's discomfort. We immediately return to our safe space. In this article, I'm going to single out UX from other professions like product management, marketing, and engineering. This is because unlike product management, marketing, and engineering who collectively abide by the business-centered corporate culture, UX is different. It strikes a balance often feeling as though it teeters more towards the customer benefit rather than that of the business. To PM, Marketer, and Engineer this feels almost illogical, irrational, and is perhaps the reason why designers in the past have be regulated to the outskirts of the process where they just make something look pretty on the outside without much say on how it works. You see, a UXer with a seasoned background is different than an amateur novice in one way. The novice is happy to do the pretty wrapper on the outside. It took me 5 years myself as a professional designer from 2006-2011 before I was exhausted putting up client requests. I then began to change my process, and ask "Why?" This was not a popular question. Today, I still find that when asking "why?" to colleagues, or clients there's tension. Whether it's my own tone, timing, or the way I ask could be a culprit. Yet, I find that deep within us we've all avoided this question, and often need the help of others to let it emerge. The most humble of leaders value this question, because precisely it helps to bring clarity to strategic decision making. Yet, when questioned and the layers of onion begin to peel back, many of us shriek realizing we may have not done as thorough a job as we once thought. UX can only achieve its hidden agenda through questioning. It begins to unravel the group think mass formation psychology of a team and company culture. This is when the tribalism may kick in, and reject outright the notion of UX's true mission. Therefore, the UXer must be slow and patient with their questions and approach even within a tight timeframe. We as UXers may not achieve all that we'd like in terms of changing company culture so rapidly. It may take years to eventually change a company's process, but that's what has to happen in order to implement UX. In fact, the best UXers are able to go all the way up the chain of command to get the necessary hours and days required to ensure they get enough time with engineers during development, QA, and Beta testing to make aesthetic changes not only in how something looks, but how it behaves. This is in direct odds with Agile Manifesto which likes to lean towards developers relying on reactive quantitative metrics burning 1000 bridges before realizing somethings wrong. Marketers too are guilty of the falling victim to analytical bias of short term vanity metrics. In fact, I'm guilty of it myself. Yet, in order to implement UX at a company we've got to unshackle ourselves from short-term dopamine hockey stick charts, and think long term. It feels unfathomable, but that's what we mean by leadership, that's what we mean by visionary, mission, purpose. It takes a long view perspective. Short sided narrow minded thinking keeps companies where they are, and eventually they'll be unseated by a startup that's rapidly growing precisely because of the alternative principles it holds so dear. UX's hidden agenda is that everyone at a company is a UXer, they just don't know it. This is because like Jared Spool once said, "everyone who affects what the design becomes is a designer." At its core, UX can make the most impact by getting the team's ideas out in front of customer ASAP. In the past I've used Guerrilla Usability Testing, Unmoderated Usability Testing, and Intercept Testing to achieve this. It's extremely important to note that one must video record the sessions as evidence of qualitative proactive objective data. We've all heard the term "big data" and "data-driven decisions" right? Well, many of the teams think that the only data is quantitative. Maybe it's a Wall St phenomena maybe it's analytical bias. Maybe it's this false notion that "numbers don't lie" debunked by researchers who have shown a light on inappropriate data collection tactics. Nevertheless, UX is proactive. UX avoids burning 1000 bridges after launch, by recruiting customers in cohorts 5 at a time. Using statistics we can still provide quantitative data visualization but it's packed with story and insight. As Eric Rise once said, "For every mistake found during design is $1 a mistake. During development $10 a mistake. After launch $100 per mistake." Yet, teams have still avoided proactive qualitative data at all defending their actions by saying "we don't have time for research." Well UX has a hidden agenda. It can get data same day. Today, we can recruit testers that accurately match the target demographics of an existing customer base with tools like UsablityHub.com, and UserInterviews.com. Before I knew about these tools, and before their existence, I myself went out in the field and tested people at coffee shops. If you're strapped for cash I recommend it. Testing with kindergarteners and senior citizens even when they're not your target demo will still improve usability so much that whatever your target dem is it'll be able to use your product. You must forgive me for the long read here, and I thank you for your time you've taken to read it. It's a conversation started, by no means the end. I have to run now, because like you I've got a life to live. Just wanted to get this off my chest, and grant the opportunity for readers like you to leave your thoughts and questions in the comments below. Cheers!
Before 2020, all items on the agenda of an NPCSC session, save for late submissions, were made public by the first day of the session at the latest. Here is how the process has usually worked: The NPCSC generally meets every two months, and its sessions are convened by the Council of Chairpersons, a powerful decision-making body headed by the NPCSC chairman (currently Li Zhanshu). Except for emergency sessions, the council must meet to call an NPCSC session at least seven days in advance. The official Xinhua News Agency has always published readouts of these council meetings on the same day. Each readout includes a proposed list of bills to be reviewed at the upcoming NPCSC session. The readout is the earliest occasion for publicly disclosing the agenda of an NPCSC session.
Similar considerations do not explain the omission of every bill, however. Some had no apparent political salience and were unlikely to attract public attention, such as an August 2018 draft law creating a special ranks system for the newly founded China Fire and Rescue Force and a December 2019 decision authorizing technical civil procedure reforms. They may have been omitted simply to control the length of the council meeting readouts, which are broadcast verbatim by the nightly Xinwen Lianbo news program, which is capped at 30 minutes, absent political events of the utmost importance or domestic emergencies like the COVID-19 crisis in early 2020.
Bills that underwent a single review by lawmakers were first revealed to the public only after having been adopted. There have been two such bills: the November 2020 decision that imposed additional political-allegiance requirements on Hong Kong legislators and the October 2021 decision that authorized the State Council to carry out property tax pilot programs.
To be sure, public comments on the hidden legislation would likely have resulted in, at most, only modest improvements. Indeed, those five bills were hidden probably because Chinese authorities (correctly) anticipated widespread backlash. They preempted calls to revise or withdraw these bills by pushing them through quickly and disclosing them only once they were faits accomplis.
Contrast those bills with the proposed legislation to apply the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law to Hong Kong and Macao. The latter was disclosed early, weeks before it was considered by the NPCSC in August 2021. This gave the interested parties, in particular Hong Kong businesses and banking institutions, an opportunity to voice their concerns about the contemplated move. The NPCSC deferred votes on the legislation as a result and has not taken further action on it.
7fc3f7cf58