What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video discussed that the culture of overwork creates a situation where people have to choose. If a person wants to work in a certain place, you’re going to work here, you’ve got to choose between work and personal life.
Because the speaker thinks of that as a problem of work family conflict, the way that they address it and the way many companies do is work family accommodations, which are great. The problem with work family accommodations in a context, in a culture of overwork is that people who take them are seen as uncommitted and their careers derailed. The speaker tried to liken that oh, well, if I want to work here and be successful, I’m going to have to give up that part of my life. I’m going to only have work, I’m not going to have love and so we end up with these kinds of cultures of overwork that have all sorts of negative implications, among them that it is really hard for women to advance in them. As the example taken by the speaker is the result of research that has a concern on women’s existence in the workplace, she reported that Ely and co-researcher Irene Padavic spent 18 months working with a global consulting firm that wanted to know why it had so few women in positions of power. In confidential employee interviews, a common theme emerged.
Everybody has the same explanation for why women aren’t advancing. This work requires 24/7 availability. Women are not able to meet that requirement because when they have children, they’re devoted to their children and that’s why they haven’t advanced. The narrative is that it is a problem women have, not men. Then it leads to a narrative that women’s devotion to family makes it impossible to put in necessary long hours. Men are the workers. Men go to work, and women stay home with the kids. In fact, when we saw for both men and women is real wish to be at work and to fulfill their work ambitions and a real wish to have a personal life, whether it with kids, or community, or spouses, partners. Everybody was feeling the tension of having to go to one side or the other in a context that basically says if you’re going to work here, and you’re going to be successful, you need to be available 24/7. Women are going against the grain. Men are going with it. And they’re both paying a price. Although virtually every employee the authors interviewed related a form of the standard explanation, the firm’s data told a different story. Women weren’t being held back because of trouble balancing work and family; men, too, suffered from that problem and nevertheless advanced. Women were held back because they were encouraged to take accommodations, such as going part-time and shifting to internally facing roles, which derailed their careers.
The real culprit in women’s stalled advancement, the authors conclude, is a general culture of overwork that hurts both sexes and locks gender inequality in place. To solve this problem, they argue, we must reconsider what we’re willing to allow the workplace to demand of all employees.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The speaker’s main purpose is to inform the audience that the culture of overwork hurts both men and women, especially for those who contextually have been married, having children and this is also talking about the equality for working between men and women.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
I think the video is trustworthy because the speaker explained her view in relation to overwork culture by enclosing a related research. The video is uploaded by Harvard Business Review where this channel has hundreds of thousands subscribers. This channel also produces numerous content about an updated topic. The speaker also usually is the professor of Harvard business school to produce the content of this channel.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
From the explanation related to overwork that can hurt everyone, she agreed and validated it by supporting it with research and consultant views. She tends to agree that the culture of overwork hurts everyone, she is proposing to address these issues of structural inequality, say where in our culture do we see structural inequality getting reproduced? And what are the narratives? What are the kinds of interactions people are having with each other? What are our policies, our norms? And really taking a look at that. Is it really true? Do we really need 24/7 availability? Is it really true that it is only women who are suffering? And do we want to change that?
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
-The speaker supported her argument with her findings from research of t Ely and co-researcher Irene Padavic spent 18 months in a workplace. She also gives the portrayal that when someone spends their 24/7 for working, allowing among a group of highly ambitious competitive people to work and work, this is to show that they stand out as the superstar. It’s the opportunity to prove how smart they are, how smart and analytical they are. She explained this idea based on her findings from some consultants. This is part of a fabricated idea where people put their time and resulting overwork, it means that they have another goal.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
I can get the general information about the culture of overwork and from this video I can try to get the portrayal to create the project outline.
What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video entitled the only way to have work-life balance discussed the needs for everyone to set their boundaries in facing the work. Mel Robbin said that it is called “Set a quitting time every single day”. If you’ve been so busy with your work and you spent a day in the office, when you promise yourself to put your phone in at six until nine o’clock at home, you need to respect and honor it. It means that we need to allocate our time based on our needs. Especially when we have a target of work and we need to finish it based on how we set our time. She also mentioned Parkinson’s Law. Parkinson’s Law is a law related to time management, which says “Work develops according to the time available to complete it”. This means that when you allocate one week to complete work that can be completed in three days, the work will still be completed within one week. This is because someone tends to make up work to fill time, which actually has nothing to do with work. In the end a job feels more difficult when approaching the deadline. She implemented it on how she did her work. Parkinson’s Law also illustrates that the amount of time available requires less effort, while the short time available requires more effort. From here, Parkinson’s Law is expressed to be effective in determining the deadlines of a job. Changing the mindset of “How much time do I have to do a job?” becomes “How much time do I need to do a job?”. So, by doing that, we can adjust our time to work and the activity outside our work.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The main purpose of this video is to inform the audience about one of the ways to have a balance between work and life. It is all about how someone can set their quitting time and allocate based on our needs.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
I think this video is trustworthy enough because this is one of someone’s perspective for having a balance between work and life. The speaker isMel Robbins, she is an American lawyer, television host, author, and motivational speaker. Robbins is known for covering the George Zimmerman trial for CNN; her TEDx talk, How to Stop Screwing Yourself Over; and her books, The 5 Second Rule and The High 5 Habit
The source is from her personal Youtube channel. I think both the video and the speaker are trustworthy. The video tells us about a strategy that people can use in this life in order to achieve a balance. She started to explain her speech by giving the audience a chance to ask first, continued by answering those questions with her explanation supported by theory.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
The speaker seems excited when explaining her idea. It was kind of a class session or discussion session and she definitely agreed with the topic that has been carried out. She elaborated what has been explained by giving some examples in real life situations, answering the questions from the audiences in relation to setting the quitting time. Some people have the propensity to work 24/7 because of some reason such as they love what they do, they love seeing all the stuff that’s going on and for some people, controlling that things is also challenging. So, one of the ways proposed by Mel Robbins is that people need to set their quitting time because it works for her.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
Yes, I think the speaker put in enough trustworthy information, some of it is strong because it is supported by the theory from an expert, that was about Parkinson’s Low. She explained it pretty well and how she tried to relate it with our life situation. She also mentioned a research regarding how long we can focus. When the prefrontal cortex was so gassed, it focused so long. That it was tiring. The reason why we have habits that get automated is to give the prefrontal cortex a break. Because if the brain had to focus on everything intently 100% of the time, it would not be able to do it. It would blow up in the head. So the reason why it goes back and forth between behaviors and patterns and behaviors that cause us to be intentional is because our brain needs to take these little breaks.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
This video contribute in giving me the step how to create the work-life balance based on the theory of Parkin’s low. This can be used to support my final project
What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video entitled How to turn busy into a balance by Sara Cameron talks explores being busy, why we become busy, and what we can do to feel less overwhelmed and more balanced. Being busy is a choice. She divided her explanation into four parts. At the very beginning, she said that being busy is a choice. In the second part she explained that balance is what makes us more fulfilled, in the third part she generally talked about the misconception, and in the last part she mentioned about white space.
Not only are we choosing to be busy but we’re making this choice based on bad information. Being busy doesn’t give us the fulfillment that we desire. Many people see that it will be easier to be busy. Everyone can say yes to pretty much everything and by doing that people don’t need to worry about being seen as lazy or anti-social . This is one of the ways to avoid uncomfortable feelings for many people, meanwhile those busyness is not the same as productive . She mentioned 3 main misconceptions about multitasking. First, multitasking is not actually multitasking, we’re just only quickly switching the certain activity not really serious on one thing. Second, multitasking saves our time. Meanwhile there’s a study that shows they took employees an average of 25 minutes to get back on track after multitasking. Third, multitasking doesn’t make us better at multitasking. This is because it actually makes us more prone to distraction because our brain is unable to filter out irrelevant information. It slows down our cognitive process and damages our cognitive control. Last but not least is about white space. This is related to the schedule that promotes balances. In white space, this is the moment for someone to integrate their time with daily life activity. The way that integration works is that these experiences that we have in our daily lives over time once we integrate them is what makes us who we are as individuals. In a simple way, we can liken ourselves as puzzle, and our daily experiences are the pieces. Without white space we have all the pieces but no time to put them together.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The speaker’s main purpose is to inform how to turn busy into balance with the numerous experiences faced by her. She described that being busy is not always the same as being productive.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
I think this video is trustworthy enough since the speaker gave a point of view from Dr. Siegel, a psychiatric, professor and an author about his study. The speaker use it to support her statement about white space.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
She seems full of power when explained about how to turn busy into balance. She also seems to agree that everyone can turn their busy work into a balance by doing certain habits, like changing step by step a micro habit that we always do in our life.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
Yes, I do think that the speaker put forward a strong argument. Every single point she stated was followed by the example she experienced. The example she brought also has a close attachment with our life when she talked about a person’s daily life.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
It helps me to get additional information or data to accomplish this project.
What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video entitled Managing your time is the secret to balance and life success by James Ganiere in TEDxFlowerMound discussed how time can be seen as the most valuable currency in the world. It can be either bead created nor destroyed it. It can be hoarded nor purchase back. Once we spend a minute, we can never get the minute back. He stated his perspective on how much time we spent in a day should have been getting a return in various forms or kinds of things. For example, when he asked how do you spend your time? And what do you got in return? When the answer is sleep, then what we got is health, energy, and regeneration. When the answer is work, the answer is money, acquiring assets and currencies such as knowledge, skills, reputation & honor, goodwill, relationship etc. He gives the portrayal of his colleague when he asks what do you spend your time on and what kind of return you’re getting, his colleague, answer that he spent over a billion dollars on facebook and has no intentions of ever stopping. Corporations know that the most valuable thing of us is our time, and our focus or attention in that time and they’re willing to pay for it. So we are supposed to know what we’re spending our time on and what we get in return. He also explained that what we’ve purchased never ever wastes our time again. So as individual, we need to focus on one thing with a balance. But without balance, we’re gonna ended up running into some trouble. Aside from that, in managing our time, relationships between people also takes role. Because in doing something, when the context is in workplace, it cannot be separated from how we interact with other people. So, it we need to consider how we manage our time with people around us. Well, he concluded that time is precious and more valuable than anything. Relationships are everything and always be present.We can alter our future by the way you spend our time.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The main purpose of the speaker is to inform that time is really precious and valuable for human and from this video, it will make people realize and aware that we should consider how much time we spent in a day and what will we get in return.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
I think this video is trustworthy enough since the speaker is a business owner and an author, he stands in TED Talks that means he has a capability to explain about this issue. He also often provides examples in his past and present life towards the topic, especially about the time.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
The speaker’s tone towards the subject is powerful to encourage people to be more aware on how to manage their time in order to get balance and give some tips according to his point of view to be a successful person.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
Yes, I think the speaker made a strong enough argument by providing examples from his personal life. Even though he just give a little amount of valid statements and less data, but overall his personal experiences support a lot on what he argues.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
Some part of this video will be included into the explanation of my projects. It is generally about the amount of time we spent for doing something and something that can we get in return
What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video entitled Forget the Work-Life Balance. Tailor your Life! by Prof. Dr. Daniela Elsner in TEDxFS discussed about disagreement towards the perception of work life balance. The speaker tends to mention it as “tailor life principle”. It actually consists of many different strategies that those people successfully apply in their life. It means that they are doing all those things without feeling worn out, without suffering from a bad conscience, without permanently thinking about what they are missing in their life, without feeling sorry for themselves. In this video, she mentioned about 5 secrets towards her idea or strategies. First, she said that if we want to get it all under one roof, she recommends throwing away work-life balance. Why could it be? Many people believe that she is a work-life balance queen, most of them believe that her live must be in a total equilibrium that she managed to dedicate 50% of her life time to her private matters and 50% to her business duties. But she couldn’t care less. She doesn’t believe the whole concept of work life balance. In fact, she really feels exhausted to separate it one by one.
She believes that the concept like this will even hinder us from being satisfied. Easily, we are revealed as workaholics. She also doesn’t like the common model of work life balance is the idea of balance implies that the answer to satisfaction lies in equal distribution. Consequently, she concludes that the more time she needs for her work, the more time she needs to invest in her private duties, because work actually is connected into enjoyment. Second, instead of balancing out our time life to do eight to eight (eight to sleep, eight to business, eight to private time) try to find our personal mix. Third, it is about how to prioritize. Taking a wise decision is one of the secrets that people really do who get it all under one roof. Getting many things under one roof means taking wise decisions and how to get wise decision? The answer is by introspection naturally. So we really have to find out what do we want in our life. Be true to ourselves. Each time something new will come in. In each time we feel overburdened, clarify for ourselves which of those tasks do deserve our priority. Because they are in line with our personal goals. Fourth, concentration or focus. If we have decided to do something, just concentrate on that thing. Mind wondering, multitasking, that not the things. Particularly we should focus on one aspect we do. Five, Successful person who make it all work take responsibility
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The speaker’s main purpose is to give the audience a portrayal that actually the principle of work-life balance does not really exist according to her preference.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
I think this video is highly trustworthy, since the speaker is a professor, an executive coach, an author and she also has a family where she lives as a mother, as a daughter, and as a wife. It is also launched by TED Talks, whereas the speaker should have a wider and deeper knowledge towards certain topics to be able to stand in TED. So I think this is trustworthy.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
The speaker’s attitude and tone towards work-life balance is opposite with some of people. She disagree with the whole concept of Work life balance and try to explain it with logical reason.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
Yes it does. I do think that the speaker put forward a strong argument. Every single point she stated was followed by the example she experienced. It also supported by a research, and experts.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
This video gave me a portrayal that everyone will have their own definition about what actually work life balance is. Even though she disagree with this terms, but she gave a logical reason. So for my project, it will become something that should be considered more.