Harvard Berkman Klein Blogs

Back in the early 2000s I had a blog where I would try to post multiple times each week. While I wasn't a poor writer before, it was amazing how much I learned about overcoming writers block and being able to quickly get ideas from my head into a text file. (https://www.productivity501.com)

Later I had a blog post answering some key questions about Agile on a different site. That post didn't get much attention, but it was a good exercise in articulating part of what I'm trying to convey when coaching software engineering teams. (https://blogs.harvard.edu/markshead/what-is-agile/)

After reworking the post into a concise PDF, I sent it to a few people at a potential client. Later, after I had been awarded a contract, I found that the PDF had gotten emailed around within the organization and many people knew me as the "guy who wrote that PDF about Agile."

I then took the contents of the PDF and reworked it as a script for an animation that I posted to YouTube. That video now has 2.7 million views and has given me quite a bit of recognition in the industry...or at least recognition of the cartoon version of me. I hear he is much better looking anyway. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9QbYZh1YXY)

I think took the general ideas from the blog post, the paper, and the video and put it together in a book that I generally give away like business cards to potential clients. (https://www.amazon.com/Starting-Agile-Finding-Your-Path/dp/1945121092)

The practice of writing on a blog…

The "Divided Dial" series (six parts) from WNYC's On the Media does an excellent job of detailing how and why radio in general (both AM & FM bands in the US) has come to be both so concentrated (in ownership) and divided (in content and audience). Both ... portend poorly.

The full series, with both audio and transcripts, is here: <https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/divided-dial>

Doc Searls, an old radio hand himself, often writes about the topic, though concentrating more on infrastructure than business or culture:

<https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/category/broadcasting/>

I'd argue that AM radio, much as with FM and over-the-air television, is fading fast, especially in urban regions in which broadband Internet and cable programming offer far more attractive options. For myself, I find I'm listening to podcasts far more than informational radio (though I'll listen to some music programming) over the air --- it's convenient, and has very little advertising. Less than the nominally noncommercial public broadcasting alternative.

But in rural regions, where markets are sparse, AM's range still pulls in what few people there are, and motivated and ideological ownership often drives content, radio remains a potent force. The OTM series gives strong insights into those dynamics.

(The series was mentioned downthread by
danielodievich: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34602095>)

> There's a reason why Harvard is happy to take people's money and give them an education in the Harvard Extension School, but why they firmly tell those people they can't call themselves Harvard graduates.

Just wanted to add since I've looked into Harvard Extension School (HES): a HES graduate from a degree program is enrolled in the Harvard Alumni Association and does get to refer to themselves as a "Harvard graduate".

The degree is from the HES with a degree in "Extension Studies", which is the big distinction versus "real" Harvard, but I also suspect that beyond you first or second job, that becomes about as meaningful as your GPA.

Also importantly, that difference has come up in the last few years, to the point where the Harvard College Undergraduate Council and the Harvard Graduate Council both voted last year in favour to remove that differentiation from HES degrees[1]. It is however, Harvard University that has to decide, although it's quite interesting that the students - who are generally considered to be the ones who make the biggest fuss about "real" Harvard - are the ones in support of the move.

It's also worth noting that the child of a HES graduate is still considered a legacy, so that benefit is also conferred on their family.

---

[1] https://blogs.harvard.edu/lamont/2022/03/28/harvard-college-uc-supports-extension-school-students-on-degree-name-issue/

It is an extraordinary risky decision to do a PhD (maybe except in CS). I have seen the best ones fail career-wise.

Excellent blog post about it:
https://blogs.harvard.edu/philg/2018/06/14/losing-the-nobel-prize-on-careers-in-science/

Quote:

"My take-away from the careers aspect of the book is that if you (1) love competition, (2) have a huge appetite for risk, (3) don’t mind working long hours for a minimum of 27 years until getting that first grant, and (4) are mostly indifferent to money, pursuing a physics PhD and an academic job might be a reasonable plan. You’ll get to work with a lot of smart people, for sure, but, as the book notes, quite of few of them may be planning to stab you in the back when it comes time to assign credit for a Nobel-worthy discovery. It is not like most other fields of human endeavor where there is room for everyone to excel in his or her own way."

Reminds me of "Surveillance Camera Man" [1] from several years ago. His YouTube channel seems to have been scrubbed of videos, but basically the guy just stood out in public recording people, just like thousands of surveillance cameras currently do, with lots of subjects objecting, berating him, becoming scared, upset, even violent. Point being, it's no different than all the surveillance that is already done, except people freak out when there's an actual human visibly holding the camera.

1: https://blogs.harvard.edu/internetmonitor/2013/07/10/surveillance-camera-man-draws-ire-provokes-questions-about-recording-in-public/

You'll need a source for your aggressive claims -- these suggest that chapter 11 recidivism isn't that rare ("less than a handful" is patently false) [0][1]. And I wouldn't go so far as to abolish it, but to give debtors a stronger vote in the proceedings. Right now, the balance of power strongly favors shareholders, socializing the losses amongst creditors and prolonging the demise of companies that have no future (e.g. JC Penney).

[0] https://blogs.harvard.edu/bankruptcyroundtable/tag/chapter-22/
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bankruptcy-repeats/companies-turn-to-bankruptcy-again-and-again-idUSTRE8251N120120307