Please enjoy the thoughts and musings of our friend, supporter, and long-time contributor Art van Bodegraven Jr., who passed away on June 18, 2017. Art was a prolific writer and had amassed a collection of unpublished blog posts he had planned to run well into the future. To honor his memory, we will continue to post these remaining blogs as he had intended. If you’ve been a fan of The Art of Art blog, check out our tribute.
Once upon a time, when one could still watch television in a black and white mode (two colors, just imagine), Lee Majors starred as The $6 Million Man. He had as many man-made parts (and powers to match) as advanced humanoid robots today.
But, what constitutes a $6 million person is up for some debate, with the passage of time, and marketplace conditions (which could change overnight, one hopes).
To pick but two examples from a multitude of candidates, let's take a quick peek at Thad Matta and Rachel Maddow. For those who've drifted left of center while dozing, Thad is men's basketball coach at The Ohio State University. Rachel is a definitely left-of-center talking head at MSNBC, at least for now.
Ms. Maddow has been a shooting star, a wind that blows hot and cold, then hot again, a birthday candle that gets extinguished but later erupts in flame with little warning. She began with strong academics, Stanford then a doctorate at Oxford (England, not Ohio). She toiled in a series of work-up-the-ladder media positions beginning in 1999.
By 2008, with Keith Olberman's sponsorship, she took Dan Abrams MSNBC slot, and ratings went through the glass ceiling. A gay, ultra-liberal woman - imagine that!
But some highly respected (and not alt-right outlets, btw) had tough things to say. Such as: "over-rated thinker", "intellectual limitations", and "smug cable partisan".
By 2013, her ratings had plummeted to new lows, and she, along with MSNBC, was adrift in the doldrums for a long time. In late 2016 and early 2017, things rebounded, not so much on account of her supercilious, condescending diatribes, but mostly as anti-Trump sentiment went viral and energized the half of the electorate that was willing to settle for unscrupulous mediocrity rather than embrace rampant narcissism. She is reported to earn some $6 million a year.
Can it last? Time and circumstance will tell the tale, as the pendulum continues to swing.
Thad Matta was once a hot commodity in coillege basketball, a winner and a crack recruiter at Butler, where he won over 20 games each year. It was a no-brainer to snag him for OSU, which had pressing needs on and off the court.
Success continued. More 20-win seasons, off-again, on-again recruiting with just enough superstars to keep the Buckeyes in the thick of things, conference championships, NCAA appearances, two final four shots at glory.
But, the 20-win years are behind him, the team falling short, no matter how many cupcakes were on the schedule, with 2016-17 an emabarrassing 17-15. This also marks the sixth straight year of declining wins. Last year, the team did not receive an NCAA invitation, and lost shabbily to a much inferior team in Round 2 of the NIT (Not Important Tournament). This year, in the ultimate huimiliation, OSU did not even receive an NIT invitation. It had a few good wins, a few really close losses and several inexplicable drubbings.
Recruiting, continuing its downhill slide, would be much improved if it were somehow elevated to a shambles. So, we have one - count them, one - player who plays with hustle and enthusiasm, and a van full of tall guys on the lookout for a Mickey D's. The future prospects are not the second coming of Kareem Abdul Jabbar or Magic Johnson - or even Muggsy Bogues.
Thad's annual contract is a measly $3.5 million, but he pushed the $6 million mark in 2015, based on a longevity formula.
So, I'll ask, " Is either one (or both) of these erratic (and declining) performers worth $6 million"? Are we mad? Neither is likely to marry into the Kardashian Klan. And, in an asylum in which Honey Boo-Boo and Mama June are back, is the currency so devalued that $6 million is the right compensation for no-to-low performers?
Consider that while contemplating your situation in the SCM Show. Are you, right now, performing at a bionoic level? Or, are you expecting, and getting, paid based on long-ago past performance? Is there a time-in-grade bonus for hanging in there through thick and thin? Do you need to move to a place where a fresh start would motivate winning ways?
If you are not genuinely bionic, the economics of corporate life in the 21st century dictate that you become so - or get ready for something less than $6 million, including displacement and some time in the purgatory we call "in transition".
The secret is to be good, all day, every day. To deliver the goods even when the odds are stacked against, sometimes over-delivering against under-promises. To be in continuous learning mode, and getting better and better and better.
Those are the keys to not having someone new and unknown take over your slot, and to earning that $6 million, or $60,000, or somewhere in-between.
Recent Comments