My interview for this job was so great. The manager was really interested in learning about my background and how I’d applied myself in the past. He asked great, probing questions that really challenged me to think. I sure wish he would “interview” me like that again now that I’ve got the job.
—an employee (perhaps yours)
Imagine if the job interview was the beginning of an ongoing conversational thread throughout someone’s career. Imagine uncovering layer upon layer of your employees’ skills, abilities, interests, and more—right up to the day they retire. Imagine what you could do with that information. Imagine what employees could do with it.
You can enable career-advancing self-awareness by helping employees take stock of where they’ve been, what they’ve done, and who they are. Looking backward thoughtfully is what hindsight conversations are all about. They surface what people need to know and understand about themselves to approach future career steps in a productive and satisfying way.
In Chapter20, we
learned that the Flex framework includes a sophisticated collection of
customizable components for creating user interfaces. The Flex
framework's user interface components are typically used with MXML-based
applications, but can also be used in applications written primarily in
ActionScript. For the benefit of readers who do not wish to use MXML,
this chapter describes the bare minimum steps required to use the Flex
framework's UI components in a Flex Builder 2 project, with as little
MXML as possible.
For the record, this chapter has nothing against MXML. In general,
MXML is an excellent tool for creating standardized interfaces deployed
to the Flash platform. This chapter simply caters to situations where
either an application's layout is entirely programmatically generated or
where the developer does not have the time or interest to learn
For complete information on MXML and the Flex framework, see
Adobe's documentation and O'Reilly's Programming Flex
2 (Kazoun and Lott, 2007).
The standard against which communicative defences can be identified involves two possible open, non-defensive communicative sequences. They are:
1. Conscious registration, followed by direct or language-based awareness and responsiveness.
2. Unconscious registration, followed by encoded language-based representation, the identification of the evocative triggering event, and then trigger-decoding so that the unconscious experience is brought into conscious awareness.
In principle, then, communicative defensiveness following conscious registration is defined as a failure to sustain awareness of a previously registered, consciously experienced event and its meanings. Psychologically, this would be termed conscious-system repression because the defence operates in the realm of conscious experience; communicatively, it would be identified as conscious-system noncommunication.
With respect to unconscious registration, communicative de-fensiveness has two major forms. The first involves the natural use of encoding or disguise, with the resultant creation of derivative representations. Depending on its consequences, this process may be adaptive or maladaptive. The second form is, however, always maladaptive to some degree; it entails the obstruction of the trigger-decoding process.