I think, by now, you get the idea that I'm a Very Busy Girl. If you think I wake up early, juggle work and school and life constantly all day, go to bed late and start all over the next morning, you would be correct. And I like to think I make it look easy--or, at the very least, not nearly as hard as it is. So if I had you fooled, great! :)

How old is old? Apparently, not all that old, according to a friend. The bad part, though, is that it apparently makes you a bad risk.

Let me back up. A friend is "exploring new career directions" and was interviewing for a job in a different field, but one that was more junior in required experience. OK, but she was starting over, and was perfectly willing to do what it takes.

Cut to the interview. The hiring manager asked a few routine questions -- "why did you leave your last job?" (because they laid off half the staff?) And then asked the zinger -- "Why are you looking for something that you're overqualified for? Won't you just leave when the job market improves?"

So my friend is facing long-term unemployment in a field that's shrinking. She's interested in moving onto something new. She has a flawless track record, staying at each of her previous employers for several years. And she's staring across the desk at a hiring manager who equates her desire to bring HER work ethic to HIS company to that of a newbie, with no track record of loyalty. Sorry, but I really don't get it.

Until the job market tightened up, many young professionals saw job-hopping as the route to follow to sure-fire career success. Work for a year, maybe year-and-half at the absolute most, then jump to the next rung on the ladder. The HM (hiring manager) was ready to pass on my experienced friend (who had never jumped after a year) to hire a totally untested recent grad.

And that's what he did.

We're still shaking our heads, not comprehending the logic. (And we're trying to figure out where the line for age discrimination really lies). This, by the way is not the first time I've heard stories like this. So if anyone can enlighten me on how this makes sense, here I am. Please tell me. I'm not unsympathetic to recent grads, I assure you, but some hiring practices baffle me.

Photo by joi

Anybody else ever lose their brand? Did it hurt?

We lost our Twitter brand temporarily, thanks to some twhackers who made many people's avatars disappear, to be replaced by the default l'il tweety bird. Not the worst thing, but our ExperienceLive symbol is pretty distinctive, and we're proud of it (not to mention all the great info that gets tweeted every day -- check it out!), and want it back.

In a greater sense, though, brands -- whether corporate or personal -- have become pretty important in our marketing-driven society. So what, you say? What it means for you is that without your own personal brand, you could easily get passed over for a job or a promotion.

Or not. I've spoken with many recruiters over time, and they all say the same thing -- they're looking for someone who stands out from the crowd, not the play-it-safe, non-descript candidate. They're looking for somebody with a real brand.

I'm not telling you to make things up, and I'm not advocating that you present a shallow marketing image. If you don't think you need to sell yourself as somebody unique, somebody extraordinary, who can make a difference, then go ahead -- tell me I'm wrong! But you better have a good counter-argument ready for me if you do.

On a somewhat related note, congratulations to Jenna, a former contributor to this blog, who has just landed a new job at a new company with the title all marketing people secretly covet -- she's going to become the Director of Buzz. Yes!

I got an interesting mass email last week from the coordinator of my summer internship program with The Government. She told The Interns, most of us in our 20s, about a conversation she had with a professor of public policy about generational differences in the workplace.

He, a baby boomer, argued that Gen Y-ers are terrified to make mistakes. As in, so scared we’ll avoid giving our opinions or going out on any sort of limb…or maybe even going near the tree.

She, a Gen X-er, argued that maybe it’s because boomers aren’t very tolerant of mistakes, that they don’t give the Y-ers the freedom—and forgiveness—to make mistakes freely in the name of learning and growth.

She asked our opinion, and I found it difficult to answer.

My gut reaction was to defend my generation. No! Of course we’re not scared of making mistakes! Then I thought, hmm, maybe it’s not a terrible thing to be scared of making mistakes. Yes! We are scared! And, definitely, those mean, mean baby boomers are being big and scary! Yeah!

But when I really thought about it, I realized that a) I don’t know if it’s as much a generational difference as a difference in where people are in their careers, and b) that I made too darn many mistakes to be classified as a scared-of-mistakes kind of person.

Don’t get me wrong—I hate screwing up. Like really, really hate it. Like beat-myself-up-over-it-forever hate it. Like play-everything-back-in-my-mind-and-list-all-the-moments-I-could-have-avoided-screwing-up-but-didn’t hate it. But I like to think that as I move forward in my career, two things will happen: I’ll eventually screw up less (I hope), and neither I nor anyone else will care as much if I do.

I don’t know that it matters so much that we’re Gen X or Y or Z—isn’t everyone just starting out their careers eager to please and in need of some good references?

More on my actual mistake-making to come. That’s much more exciting, I know. :)

I haven't been on vacation this week, but I am feeling the aftereffects of Labor Day. Which brings up a pretty popular topic -- four-day work weeks.

First, a definition (or at least my definition -- you do what you want). A four-day work week crams five or more days into four, with no reduction in total hours or loss of productivity.

For some companies, actually closing one day a week can mean an energy savings (we've talked about this before). For some employees, a savings in commuting time (PLUS a three-day weekend every week). The craziness starts as you decide whether a company stays open, but splits the fifth day among employees (e.g., some work on Friday, some on Monday). Then, employees -- are you used to working 10-hour days?

A little perspective -- I've worked four-day weeks in the past (also 3-day weeks and 6-day weeks, but those are stories for another time). I loved it, would love to do it again. But there is a concern now that didn't exist before -- a big concern in these days of fewer people working longer hours to increase productivity. How do you accommodate an increased workload as needed when you're already working 10 hours?

When we talk about transitioning to a flexible workplace (yes, it came up at a Labor Day barbecue), four-day weeks always pop up in the conversation. I don't know that it's really all that simple. And if you add in a season's worth of H1N1 virus decimating the workforce, we could be in for a lot of mixed ideas about how to keep a company going.

What's your best idea?

photo by tziralis

Yes, I realize 3Gen is dedicated to the working world.

Here's another one of those old technology tales. Once upon a time I had a clunky metal bin filled with index cards.You may remember them, some of you even owned one -- they were called Rolodexes. (No, not Rolex, Rolodex!)

The cards had all the pertinent business and/or personal information of everybody I had any reason to contact -- ever. The cards were attached to a spindle, arranged alphabetically and I could thumb through an entire life's history of people I knew from work, from home, the plumber, the plumber's kids' names, the DMV. If you had the private phone numbers of some of these people, they were worth their weight in gold.

At one point I had hundreds of cards, all neatly spindled. And then cheap electronic data came along, in the form of a Palm Pilot. I could take it anywhere, I could beam my info to another Palm user -- all kinds of cool things. Well, that evolved into my cell phone -- it doesn't have much in terms of people's work backgrounds, but I can always try to call folks I worked with six or seven years ago, and maybe they'll still have the same number. Maybe not.

In the past few weeks, the process of reconnecting with a lot of friends and former colleagues has made me realize -- isn't LinkedIn the new Rolodex? Not with phone numbers, but with so much else.

I can send email anytime from anywhere, and be sure they receive it. I can ask a lot of people at once for advice or other connections. I can see where the've worked or are working or went to school (much like the online Portfolio offered by our company, Experience.com). I can keep up with what people are doing, or what conferences they are attending, without having to wade through the Facebook adventures of the family dog.

So when people talk about LinkedIn becoming the online network for professionals, yes they're right. But I'm just happy to no longer carry around an 8-pound Rolodex.

What's your preference for staying organized -- Facebook or LinkedIn? Or a Rolodex?

Photo by TOKY Branding and Design