decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Friday, April 07 2006 @ 11:51 AM EDT

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them
~ by David A. Wheeler http://www.dwheeler.com/

In March 2006, Peter Quinn (former Massachusetts chief information officer (CIO), made comments about clothing that set off a bizarre firestorm of news and discussion. His comments were noted in ZDNet Australia's article, "Sandals and ponytail set cramp Linux", CNET's article 'Sandal and ponytail set' cramping Linux adoption?, and many others. There were even articles in Linux Weekly News (LWN) and Slashdot.

What did Quinn say? He simply stated that the appearance of many free-libre / open source software (FLOSS) developers detracts from FLOSS adoption. "Open source has an unprofessional appearance, and the community needs to be more business savvy in order to start to make inroads in areas traditionally dominated by [proprietary] software vendors. [Having] a face on a project or agenda makes it attractive for politicians [to consider open source]."

Guess what? He's right.

I wear a tie almost every day, and like it. Why? It's not the tie itself; I don't care either way. Clothing is merely external; I believe changing clothing does not change who the wearer is in any fundamental way. But I learned a long time ago that a trivial amount of money (for a suit and tie) greatly increases the odds of someone trusting my words in many cultures -- particularly those with money. So with a small outlay of my own money, I'm more likely to cause changes in the directions that I believe are really important. I have bigger goals than changing what people wear; I'd rather wear a tie (as they request), and try to achieve the goals I really care about. Think of it as social hacking, or a money amplifier, if you like.

The fact is, people judge others by appearance. Pretending this is not true doesn't change the truth. What's more, you're unlikely to stop people from judging by appearance; universal genetic engineering on humans would probably be required.

Experts in influencing people have known about the importance of appearance for years. Dale Carnegie said, "There are four ways, and only four ways, in which we have contact with the world. We are evaluated and classified by these four contacts: what we do, how we look, what we say, and how we say it." Many people think judging on appearance is a good thing, because appearance is something that can be controlled. It isn't as easy to explain at a deeper level why people judge based on clothing and such; Ian Lynch says that "If they expect you to make an effort and you don't, you are signalling 'You are of no real value to me'." Certainly, if you want to convince someone of something, you need to consider their feelings, not just your own.

But in the end, the reasons don't matter; people judge based on appearance, and you need to live in reality. One comment on Slashdot (by Kadin2048) reported that "when I'm 'dressed for work' and go out into the world, the level of service and attention I receive is pretty significantly different... People are politer, service is faster... My experiences are probably region-specific... but in an area filled with white-collar corporate and government types... if you want to be taken seriously it's pretty obvious how you want to present yourself... if you're selling something -- as a whole lot of OSS developers effectively are, whether they realize it or not -- [you must match] your appearance to your client or intended buyer." You can whine about clothing and such... or use them as a tool to achieve the goals you really care about. I recommend thinking about your appearance (including clothes) as a tool.

The fundamental rule is simple: Figure out what your most important goals are, and then adjust your appearance (wherever you are) to help you achieve those goals. The optimal clothing generally depends on who you are talking to (particularly what culture they're from) and what the specific event is. There are events held by academics where showing up in a suit and tie will get you dismissed as a know-nothing. Conversely, in many formal meetings/presentations with government officials or businessmen, showing up in ratty jeans means that your message will be considered untrustworthy, and they're more likely to do exactly what you wish they would not do. If your life's primary goal is to "never wear a tie" then don't wear a tie; although this seems a truly petty life goal. And I'm going to work circles around any other goals you have, if you've chosen clothing as your most important goal. My goal is to make the world a better place, and I'm happy to use the tools available to me (including my clothing) to achieve my goals.

Figuring out exactly what's best to wear is trickier, of course. Usually the best thing to do is simply ask ahead of time. Sometimes wearing nice casual clothes, being clean, and having an overall neat appearance is what's needed. In other circumstances "intermediate" business clothes are a good idea. By that, I mean for men a tie, collar shirt, slacks, and polished dress shoes; for women, a nice blouse with a skirt or slacks, or a dress, with dressy shoes.

Some of the cultures with the most money and influence expect the most conservative clothing, particularly if you're trying to convince them to make a decision in your favor. For men, that's a dark tailored suit, white long-sleeved collar shirt, conservative tie, and polished black dress shoes (yes, you get rated on the shoes). For women, some say it's wiser to wear a skirt than pants in such environments, because skirts are universally accepted. There are lots of books and websites that will give you the gory details on business attire; John Malloy's books are often cited if you need to know how to dress up on the conservative end. Washing up, including clean fingernails and well-groomed hair, is wise everwhere. Being slightly overdressed is usually better than being underdressed.

If you're a man and love your long hair, find a way to at least make it attractive; greasy long hair is really nasty to almost everyone. I met a native American Indian whose tribe places great value on long hair; at a formal business meeting he wore a full suit with vest, tie, and so on, and neatly braided his hair with ties that were clearly Indian in origin (showing his heritage).

Much depends on the event; often, after a formal business meeting, there may be another gathering afterwards with very different expectations. The key is to be sensitive to the expectations.

Eric S. Raymond has also stated that clothing is important in advocacy, and tells people to "dress to persuade" (good idea!). He suggests a slightly different approach for FLOSS developers: the "Prince from Another Country" approach. This term is from science-fiction writer Norman Spinrad; Spinrad defines this as adopting "the attitude of being a high-ranking member of a different hierarchy". Eric dresses well but casually, "the way hackers dress in the movies", with a neat polo shirt made of good fabric, slacks, and high-end walking shoes. Eric claimed back in 2000 that "a technology advocate dressed in a business suit would tend to come across as a bad imitation of a business person". If you think the "prince from another country" approach is most likely to be effective in a particular circumstance, use it. But this strategy can be complicated to apply; it requires that the other person (1) view you as a member of a different hierarchy, (2) view that hierarchy as unknown or acceptable, and (3) view you as a prince of it. I think this strategy is more likely to work if you are from a different country, since you're somewhat outside their hierarchy to start with (Eric often travels). Unfortunately, after the Internet bubble burst, a lot of businesspeople decided that the casually-dressed communities were not to be trusted; being a prince of an untrustworthy group will harm, not help, your cause. Also, being viewed as a "prince" is much easier if you have a well-known name; this is easy for people like Linus Torvalds, but if you're not in the press a lot, that may not be as convincing. I think today, traditional business attire is often more likely to work in the more traditional environments -- particularly if you're not famous and you're in your own country. In any case, you still need to look neat and sharp -- not like you just rolled out of bed. The point is to use clothes as a tool when you're trying to advocate an idea -- think about the other person, not just yourself.

All of this has nothing to do with what you wear when you're not visibly interacting with others. Insight Express and SonicWall's survey of telecommuters found that one in eight male teleworkers and one in 14 female teleworkers do their jobs in the nude. Even more amusingly, less than half of the women and only one in three men shower every day if they work from home. Amusing, but who cares? -- They're not interacting physically with people then. But the rules change when you're visible to someone else... you have to consider their needs, and their culture, if you want to convince them of something.

Don't tell me "Microsoft and Red Hat developers don't wear ties"; that's irrelevant. The salespeople Microsoft, Red Hat, Novell, and others send to government and business leaders normally wear the most conservative clothing (for men, full suits with ties), because they are interested in changing laws, policies, and markets. Suits and ties aren't free; salespeople wear such clothing because they work, and since this is one of the few "tricks of the trade" that FLOSS leaders can use, it's foolish to not use them where appropriate. Yes, FLOSS projects have made inroads, but in some cases it's in spite of their leaders, not because of them. Many FLOSS project leaders incorrectly think that they only interact with the programming community, and thus can ignore all other cultures. But when project leaders try to advocate political or business changes to people from other cultures, the leaders are selling their ideas, not writing code -- and need to adjust accordingly. If they don't, then their voices will often be ignored at best.

Why is this article on Groklaw? Because Groklaw represents an extraordinary confluence of people from different cultures, such as software developers and people in the legal field. One challenge when cultures interact is that sometimes different cultures are not sensitive to the needs or mores of others. Most people in the legal field know better than to show up in extremely informal attire in a court room... and they can also quickly dress down when the situation warrants. But software developers all too often fail to consider others' cultures, and then they wonder why they fail to achieve their objectives. Developers -- you are being told why you sometimes fail to convince others; perhaps you should listen. Should software patents be rejected in Europe and elsewhere? Should the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) be repealed? Is it important to encourage the use of open standards? Is it important for people to use (or at least consider to use) FLOSS programs? Or... is never wearing a tie the most important issue to you? If you're a software developer, you should identify what goals are most important to you. Then, if you can help achieve your goals by adjusting your appearance, do it.


  


Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler | 657 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
OT Here
Authored by: jplatt39 on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 11:54 AM EDT
Make links clickable. I have nothing else to say on the subject :)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections here
Authored by: jplatt39 on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 11:56 AM EDT
If any.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I can take a hint.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:02 PM EDT
I think I had better go and put some clothes on:)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:09 PM EDT
This seems just a rehash of the same argument that has been seen elsewhere.
There is one point I'd like to make. It think far too much has been made of
dress as the reason for the "failure" of FLOSS. I think a much more
important issue is that the skill set need by a software developer is very
different from that needed by a lawyer, or a marketing person. I think this
skill set difference is not something that can be papered over by a suit and
tie.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:09 PM EDT
Excellent article, Very well said!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Don't fidget and or scratch yourself either
Authored by: hardcode57 on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:12 PM EDT
'nuff said

[ Reply to This | # ]

Development != Marketing
Authored by: MrEction on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:13 PM EDT
I'm bothered by this idea that developers should wear suits to gain acceptance
in the market. Part of what makes professional techs thrive is a relaxed,
"creativity-friendly" environment. From my personal experience,
serious technical companies accept or even encourage this. Companies that are
primarily traditional business, with tech "on the side" are more
likely to make their techies dress up-- and they also tend to have lower-quality
techies as a result.

Naturally, your marketing folks are going to wear suits. They know that they
live and die by initial impressions, and so that is a very different situation
from a techie working "in the trenches", generally isolated from the
business world.

Somewhat ironically, at most tech companies that I have worked for, when someone
shows up for an interview for a tech job wearing a suit, it makes a bad
impression, because it suggests being "out of touch" with the tech
culture.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:14 PM EDT
I disagree. After being in this business (IT) for 25 years. I have seen company
after company hire based on clothing. A big mistake. Always.... Most companies
are finding those who are dress to impress you with cloths, Suits, ties, etc...
may not have the skills to impress you any other way. Mostly a distraction. And
for those still looking at the color of the tie to hire a techie... You may want
to stay away from them anyway. They tend to make judgments on other subjects
based on meaningless facts. No matter what your business relationship with them
is, you will get hurt.

Just a option from a expreensed techie... that still puts on a tie from time to
time.


[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? You bet!!
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:16 PM EDT
While I never was a ponytail wearing developer, I certainly saw the time in
which they were popular and many companies thought they were the evangelists of
the future. In fact at my company, one manager hired someone who had a ponytail
and many, many piercings because he said "this is the image that our
customers are looking for in this technology".

I think in that day an age (circa 2000, and the dot com bubble) everything was
new and innovative and it was seen that this look was what was needed.
Challenge the norms, challenge the status quo seemed to be the motto of the
time.

Now, since these technologies have become mainstream, it is necessary to be more
"professional" in their presentation. These are no longer fringe
technologies that promise great things above what is alreay in place. They are
proven technologies that businesses can use to really move their efforts
forward.

Dilbert had a cartoon, I believe it was back in 1999 (I can't find it online
now), where venture capitalists where handing Wally a suitcase full of money
just because he had a cool ponytail. When Wally said he did have anything other
than a cool ponytail, they said "That's good enough for us. We like to get
in early." Unfortunately that does not fly at all today. While having a
cool ponytail is still cool, it is no longer a way of saying "I know tons
about this cool technology that is going to re-invent the world".

So, as Barney would say on CBS's 'How I met your mother', "suit up"!!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:19 PM EDT
I once was in a meeting with government officials (in Europe) and a large
worldwide known software firm. I was dressed informally (yeans and sweater) as
where the government people. The people of the software firm where all dressed
formally in a suit. The software firm did not het the job because the goverment
people got the inpression that they were paying more attention to the their
clothing then getting the job done.
So they where clearly not dressed for success !

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: photocrimes on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:27 PM EDT
Did Steve Jobs get this memo?

---
//A picture is worth a thousand words//

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for occasion
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:32 PM EDT
Now I'm punishing myself for not having read the original article...

The point is: WHEN FLOSS developers are selling their software (asking for
funds, meeting with big players, maybe even conferences and pictures on their
websites) they could (/should) use a more appropriate clothing. But when they
are developing, at home or at work (as long as the workplace policy doesn't
demand differently), or even on a developer-only meeting, who cares? It does
not detract from the quality of software... it probably increases it.

I notice how much less productive I am when I'm unconfortable because my shoes
are too rigid, or tight, or the tie is unconfortably pressing against my neck.
It's purely psychological, but then motivation is a purely psychological
factor.

[]s Gus

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:33 PM EDT
I have an instinct to distrust anyone who wears a suit and tie. Do you know why? I often get the impression that they are trying to distract me from what really matters.

Another point: it worries me that so-called business leaders can be so easily swayed by a bit of cloth. Doesn't say a lot for their professional judgement.

Third point: I can't work properlyif I'm not comfortable. I feel extremely uncomfortable in a suit and tie. Therefore I don't wear them unless it's absolutely necessary. Actually, I don't een own a suit.

For the record: I'm a software developer, and I'm 47 years old.

Pogue (at home and not logged in)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:34 PM EDT
Finally, someone really lays out why geeks don't get taken seriously. After a
transition from the geek to the professional side, I noticed most of this. Being
in environments where people ask what type of tie you wear--because it looks
that good, or bad--being able to reply "Zegna" is critical. Being
caught with a cheap Ken Cole tie or something off eBay is equivilent to asking
for a pink slip.

The point of control is crtical. You can control every part of your wardrobe and
it eminates everything you are about. A nice tailored dress shirt, custom
titanium cufflinks, and Super120s suit say a lot about a person and what they
strive for.

At the upper echelons of society, your dress, or lack of, can make and break the
first impression--this being everything the rest of the meeting leverages upon.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:35 PM EDT
A friend of mine once said...

All you need in your closet to look good, at work, dinner, weddings, funerals,
is:

White Shirt
Nice Tie
Tan Pants (Kaki or close)
Blue Blazer
Comfortable good looking shoes - something that can be used for all occasions,
that appear to look like Wing Tips.

Heck - it is just a uniform, but first impressions you can never do over again.
Pretty easy to keep a bunch of them clean... don't need 3 piece suit to look
good, and too look like you are still on the edge.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: a1pha on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:37 PM EDT
And this BS is the reason why I left IT and will never return to it - I'm doing

astrophysics now in academia where its what you do, and not what some
artificial construct does to your look, that matters.

I make it a rule in my life to divorce myself from superfiicial people.

---
--
Trech Gwlad, nac Arglwydd

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: shiptar on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:41 PM EDT
Why not just be true and honest?

Why promote a culture of discrimination?

I thought Groklaw was above this type of thing.

There's nothing wrong with being who you are. Regardless of what anyone says.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Universal Genetic Engineering is the solution
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:48 PM EDT
The human brain is a very powerful tool... unfortunately, its primary connection
seems to be to the gonads. If we could genetically opt for an additional
transmission mechanism, then maybe social change would get a little more
traction. Judging based on looks is all about sex, but not even sex is all
about looks.

Buck the trend. Dig a little deeper. Most times it doesn't even require that
you think hard enough to give yourself a headache to make a difference.
"First impressions are usually true," is a true statement, but even if
they are true 90% of the time, it has to pay 111% for it to be a break even
bet.

Quinn is mostly right when he says dress for success, Richard Stallman is mostly
right when he says that someone using the phrase "intellectual
property" is trying to deceive you, but neither one is completely correct,
and no matter how good the advice, following blindly only leads you astray---
always.

One last comment: that tie reduces blood flow to the brain. Think about that.

Geek Unorthodox

[ Reply to This | # ]

My Duality with ties.
Authored by: Mecha on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:50 PM EDT
I read this statement and said NOT ME.

"I wear a tie almost every day, and like it. Why? It's not the tie itself;
I don't care either way."

I don't like putting a noose around my neck everyday. However, I really like
the look of ties. I just don't like wearing them.

---
** This is my signature and I happen to like it **

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dan Brown and the Holy Blood
Authored by: geoff lane on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:52 PM EDT
The verdict in the case against Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code, instigated by the authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail has been decided in favour of Dan Brown.

Why is this interesting?

Because essentially Dan Brown was accused of copying the form and "methods" of the story told in the non-fiction book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. As there is no copyright on ideas, the legal argument was essentially that Dan had copied the form and organisation of the story told in The Holy Blood. The judgement went with Dan Brown and costs (approx. £1 million) awarded against Mr Baigent and Mr Leigh.

Both books were published by Random House. I've read both and The Da Vinci Code is by far the worse written, but quality didn't matter :-)

The parallels with the arguments made by TSG are obvious.

---
I'm not a Windows user, consequently I'm not
afraid of receiving email from total strangers.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Was 600+ words really necessary to make this point?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:57 PM EDT
So the point (undoubtedly valid) is:

"Dress so as not to detract from the message you want to convey."

I sifted through the rest of the article, but once the premise is stated, not
much is added to the argument.

There's:

"Eric Raymond agrees"

and

"Look at how your audience is dressed, and dress like them."

This lack of concision is not limited to the author. It's why publications hire
editors. You should not only dress appropriately for your audience, you should
also not waste their time.

Nail your point, then head for the exit.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:57 PM EDT
Well said. I have been a consultant for 15 years now. I found out pretty early
that the quality of my life, how I was preceived and my influence on the
organization changed with how I dressed. I have now come to generally dress like
the VP, since he is the key person that I work for.

As said elsewhere Development is not Marketing and dress is much more relaxed in
development. However, when an engineer needs to visit customers, do
presentations and mingle with management, appropriate dress is important. Also
when you want a promotion or raise its good to dress appropriately.

[ Reply to This | # ]

"Laredo", by the Smothers Brothers
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:57 PM EDT
As I walked out in the streets of Laredo,
as I walked out in Laredo one day.
I spied a young cowboy dressed in white linen.
Dressed in white linen and cold as the clay.

I can see by your outfit that you are a cowboy.
You can see by my outfit I'm a cowboy, too.
You can see by our outfits that we are both cowboys.
If you get an outfit you can be a cowboy, too!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Personal Pref.
Authored by: ThatBobGuy on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 12:58 PM EDT
Couldn't agree more but, it also goes to personal pref. I worked at the
internet side of a magazine company, roughly 80 dedicated to the website. We
had an interview scheduled for this guy, rumored to be the best Linux/C++
anywhere. He came to the interview wearing cutoff shorts, a "skinny
puppy" tee-shirt and blue hair. Looked my boss (director of operations) in
the eye and asked, "Can i wear this here?" My boss immediately said
no. The interviewee was very polite, thanked us for our time and left. It was
our loss, no question about it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Think of your skill set stack
Authored by: DickPilz on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:02 PM EDT
Many people here are familiar with the OSI 7 Layer Model.

7 Application layer
6 Presentation layer
5 Session layer
4 Transport layer
3 Network layer
2 Data link layer
1 Physical layer

In dealing the real world your skill set needs to consider 2 additional layers.

The (8) Political and the (9) Religous (or Cultural) Layers.

The political layer relates the way that people interact (including economics)
and the religious layer relates to the often unvoiced underlying values,
prejudices, and priorities driving the interactions.

Any technical project needs to add these layers to the protocol stack.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:02 PM EDT
You know, it's funny. The one stipulation I made when I was hired was I'd never
have to wear a tie. :)

When the new CEO took over he asked me to compromise. I could wear jeans every
day if I was willing to wear a white company shirt (name over the pocket) but no
tie.

I said yes... (laughing)

One of the reasons I like working with computers day in and out, I *don't* have
to deal with customers who have medievil mores when it comes to appearance
equalling worth.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:05 PM EDT
"Think of it as social hacking" is a beautiful quote. Gonna have to
remember that one. Thanks very much, Mr. Wheeler.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:10 PM EDT
There are two parts to this:

Professionalism

"Dressing for success" indicates you care about what you do and what
people think about you. By implication you will also care about the product you
produce and how that product will be received.

Status

If you look successful then you must be successful and your product is a good
one.

Regretably more than one .com went bust because they spent more effort on
appearing to be successful, (corporate planes, etc.) and not enough effort on
the product they were developing.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Fine Line Between ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:20 PM EDT
I agree that a professional should be bathed and not dressed in rags, but there
is a difference between good hygiene and racism. Take this to an extreme, and
you have a perfect vehicle for racism.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sandstorms
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:21 PM EDT
There was a world fair held in Paris very roughly about 1900. One of the most
popular exhibits was a trick riding show put on by Berber horsemen from North
Africa. The Berbers wore colorful neckties to keep sand from blowing down their
neck during sandstorms. Their neckties were a fashion hit and started the
modern practice of wearing neckties.

So I wear a necktie every time the weather report predicts a sandstorm.

----------------------
Steve Stites

[ Reply to This | # ]

"organising a bunch of Software Engineers is like trying to herd cats..."
Authored by: softwizz on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:27 PM EDT

I take your point about making a good fist of your appearance in order to influence others, PJ, but my take on it is that above all, I must feel comfortable, or I won't be best able to use my way of speaking to put across my message about what I do (the other three factors of which Dale Carnegie spoke).

I cannot wear a tie. When I do so, I feel strangulated. And anyway I can't easily find shirts with necks large enough to button at the top (18 1/2 or larger).

I cannot wear shoes (very wide fitting feet), so I invariably wear high-grade sandals (typically costing $150 a pair - emphatically *not* scruffy!). My wife has a joke saying "socks plus sandals equals beard" which she thinks says something about nerd style. I prefer to think of it as being the uniform of the non-uniform, if you get my drift.

It has been my experience - over a very successful career of more than 30 years as an independent software engineer - that the client who will be good to work for, is the client who places maximum value on what I do, and who takes a flexible approach to how I look. Such clients also are more likely to have 21st century attitudes to workplace flexibility (I like to work in my own home-based development lab).

The clients who demand that I look like a clone of their own staff, are usually the ones with Victorian management attitudes, to whom one's physical presence in their offices, and one's adherence to a bunch of rules, is more important than one's intellectual output. In a marketplace which shows a marked scarcity of my sort of skills, I know which sort of client *I'm* going to work for. This all applies equally well to FLOSS. The FLOSS developers have very desirable product to offer, and while I would not advocate a deliberate flaunting of individuality in the face of potentially puritanical customers, I would certainly hope that they do not *dumb down* their individuality in the name of commercialism - it is, after all, that very individuality which is an integral part of their inventiveness.

[ Reply to This | # ]

So many are missing the point
Authored by: joef on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:29 PM EDT
Regardless of your role in FLOSS -- developer, user, seller, whatever -- sooner or later you'll find yourself in the position of being an ambassador for the idea of FLOSS. It may be as spokesperson to the local school board or town council, trying to convince them that open systems will save the taxpayers big dollars. It may be to a legislative committee considering whether to standardize on a proprietary product, or the board of elections considering alternatives to proprietary voting systems. It may be to your church's finance committee trying to decide whether to stick with Windows for their systems. It may be to others on a jury who you need to persuade to your point of view before the jury renders its verdict. It could be in any of a number of settings where something you value is at stake and you feel the need to speak out about it.

When you present the wrong image with respect to expectations of your audience you have just given yourself a big handicap to overcome. When your audience is the other guys back in the lab, dress for the lab. But don't expect that to go over big in the boardroom.

[ Reply to This | # ]

A couple of observations on this topic from an old techie
Authored by: kehall on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:43 PM EDT
First, about fifteen years ago, I went on an interview for a job at a site run
by a fairly well-known "facility management outsourcing" firm. It was
an interview, so naturally, I wore a suit. But I'd had a beard for 10 years or
so then (still have it), and I was warned in advance that the firm had a policy
of "no facial hair".

The guy who interviewed me was about 5 foot 6, and must have weighed close to
300 lbs. Not to be unkind, he looked like a beach-ball in a three piece suit.
They wanted me badly, but a non-negotiable condition was that I had to lose the
beard, and I ultimately passed on the job.

It wasn't the beard thing per-se that I had trouble with. It was the idea that
the manager's appearance was acceptable, but mine was not, even though my beard
was probably less of a danger to my health and performance than his weight.

When the outsourcing firm absorbed the facility, they kept most of the existing
staff, and exempted them from the "facial hair" policy temporarily.
They all ultimately left (for various reasons), leaving the firm with nobody who
knew the environment, and a replacement staff chosen more for their appearance
than their ability. Is this a benefit to anyone?

On another note, I have to take at least some issue with Mr. Wheeler's comment
that "you're unlikely to stop people from judging by appearance; universal
genetic engineering on humans would probably be required." That might be
true in general, but appearance standards ARE subject to change. A hundred
years ago, it was widely believed you could tell a person's character by the
shape of his face, or the size of his head. The remnants of this attitude are
still in our culture, but are (mercifully) fading slowly over time. (And I’m
just talking about western culture here. I won’t even go into standards in Asia
and the Middle East.)

The same has been happening with dress. Fashions are notoriously volatile. 70
years ago you wouldn't think of going to a social event, or even a nice
restaurant, in anything less than a tuxedo. By the 1950's, the business suit
had moved into that territory, and now it's rare to even find a restaurant that
requires a tie. A while ago, I went to the opera in NY, and there was a
middle-aged couple there in tuxedo and gown looking very out-of-place next to
the tourists in polo shirts, and students in jeans.

The modern business suit is an atrophied military uniform, replete with
completely useless ornamentation such as sleeve buttons and lapels. I have a
trench coat with epaulets. Does ANYONE remember what those are for? How many
people wear cufflinks today, versus, say, fifty years ago? It’s all ultimately
destined to fade away as practicality overtakes tradition, just like high
collars and spats.

Tastes and styles DO change. It just takes a while to get everyone onto the
same page.

Where I am now, in the financial industry, we’re sort of on the edge. We’ve
gone to “business casual” for day-to-day, but many of the old-guard managers,
even those my age, occasionally grouse about “declining standards”, and hang on
for dear life to tiny details of dress code trying to keep things from devolving
“too far”. I believe it’s a lost cause though. Citing the example above
(fourth paragraph), the cost of going back would probably be too high.

But at any given moment in time, there are rules. I wouldn’t advise anyone to
go on an interview in torn jeans and T-shirt unless they were REALLY sure of the
prevailing culture. Personally, I still subscribe to a policy drilled into me
four jobs ago when I did customer calls: "Outside the office, wear a
jacket and tie", and I stuck to it even in warehouses, factories, and small
businesses where people were wearing jeans in the 1970’s. But nowadays, with
more offices going "business casual" or even farther, it's more a
precaution than a policy. It's hard to overdress in business, but very easy to
underdress.

In the end what this means is that the situation has become really really
complicated, and magazine articles have been written about how much more
difficult it is to choose the "right" dress-down attire than it is to
choose a suit. And no matter what the fashion police would have you believe, a
suit and tie is not the guarantee of acceptance it once was (especially if it’s
five years out of style). It can, however, usually be treated as the “safest
common denominator” if you’re going into an unknown situation. Flexibility is
the key. Even our IBM reps, for a time the only people around still wearing
suits and ties, have moved to a policy that allows them to conform to the dress
code in effect at the customer’s site. Keep an eye on current fashion as it
evolves (from a high level, at least), and try to be aware of the culture you’re
entering. And in most situations, if you don’t know, lean toward the
conservative. The more liberal cultures are generally more tolerant when it
comes to first impressions. You can always adapt later, if it becomes
necessary.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Reading Comprehension Skills
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:47 PM EDT
Why do so many people replying to this article think it says everyone should
wear a suit?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:50 PM EDT
D. Wheeler wrote:
What did Quinn say? He simply stated that the appearance of many free-libre / open source software (FLOSS) developers detracts from FLOSS adoption. "Open source has an unprofessional appearance, and the community needs to be more business savvy in order to start to make inroads in areas traditionally dominated by [proprietary] software vendors. [Having] a face on a project or agenda makes it attractive for politicians [to consider open source]."

I got the impression that Peter Quinn was speaking metaphorically. He was implying that FOSS needs to market it's wares more rather than let it's performance speak for itself in order to compete with proprietary software vendors who aggressively market their products. I really don't think he was suggessting that developers should wear more formal attire.

I disagree with him. You only need to look at how successful FOSS products like Linux have been lately to realize it's not much of a problem. I think one of the hallmarks of FOSS developers is that they let the quality of their products speak for themselves.

[ Reply to This | # ]

News flash:
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:54 PM EDT
We don't care if the suits adopt our software or not. And we're not willing to
dress like conformists just to make them like us more.

Either they'll see past our appearance and take an interest in the software we
give away for free, or they won't. I see no reason why I should pander to their
prejudices.

[ Reply to This | # ]

My only complaint
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 01:56 PM EDT
Excellent!! This is a good article, it is thought and discussion provoking!!

However, I fear that the pundits who like to trash GL every chance they get will
come out and say "See how dumb those people are? They need someone to tell
them how to dress!"

I can see the headline already "PJs mom did not do her job".

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: LosD on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 02:05 PM EDT
That's the nastyest thing I ever read on Groklaw

[ Reply to This | # ]

Where does the infamous PJ Red Dress fit into all of this then? ;) n/t
Authored by: TAZ6416 on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 02:09 PM EDT
Hey, it says n/t in the header.. nothing to see here move along :)

Jonathan

Jonathan & Lou's Holidays With Their Furry Friends

[ Reply to This | # ]

Supply and demand
Authored by: billmason on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 02:16 PM EDT
One thing that was mentioned, but not explained in depth, is that this all
depends on power dynamics and supply/demand.

When someone else has something that you need or want, and it's a rare enough
commodity, then you need to take the beggar role and convince them to hand it
over. Appearance can help with that.

However, when the power dynamic changes, when you have what someone else needs
or wants, and it's a rare enough commodity, they become anxious to overlook
silly trivialities like appearence.

Witness the results in the tech industry. The tech industry has far more long
haired guys in tattered jeans than, say, the restaurant industry. That's
because tech skills are a hot commodity.

Here's an example. Say Linus needed a job. He skips a shower for a week and
wears shorts and a bermuda shirt, with sandals. He posts somewhere (anywhere,
really): I'm looking for a job. The reply? "When can you start?"
The interview wouldn't even be necessary, and even if it were, what would they
ask? "Why should we hire you?" "Well, I WROTE your
kernel." (okay, not all of it, but you get the point)

This is important to remember, because open source is a hot commodity. The
value proposition is enormous. They want us more than we want them. Maybe
Novell wants to make sales. Fine, they dress the part. The rest of us can go
tell Quinn to take a flying leap. If he doesn't want to use our software, then
stick to Microsoft. Like we care. And if you do care, and you don't think your
value proposition is good enough, then fine, dress up.

Personally, I make it a goal to always be on the right side of the supply/demand
equation, thereby not having to worry about shallow trivialities like dress
code. If I'm not, I don't focus on dressing fancy, I focus on changing the
power dynamic. In the meantime, I'll wear what I have to, but it's only
temporary.

Wheeler says it's a "petty life goal" to refuse to wear a tie. Sure,
word it like that, and you're right. But it goes deeper than just a tie. It's
about freedom and integrity. The freedom to be who you want and wear what you
want and not be judged for it. This is important, and anything but petty.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dressing for success?
Authored by: Rudisaurus on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 02:53 PM EDT
I recall attending a bio-chem engineering conference in Stuttgart many years
ago. The conference was organized such that it started with grad students and
post-docs presenting the results of their recent work and proceeded on up
through the ranks of professors and heads of departments at corporations and
universities. Of course, this being Germany, as the seniority of the presenters
increased, the suits became darker, the ties skinnier, the shoes shinier, and
the stance at the podium ever more rigid and formal.

The keynote speaker for the conference was a Nobel laureate in chemistry, who
was to speak last. When his turn came, he wandered out dressed in baggy brown
corduroy pants and an old grey cardigan sweater with holes at the elbows, and he
leaned casually on the podium as he gave his talk. The unspoken message was
crystal clear: "I've transcended your little societal conventionalities.
I've made it."

[ Reply to This | # ]

Clothing optional software development
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 03:14 PM EDT
"Open source has an unprofessional appearance, and the community needs to be more business savvy in order to start to make inroads in areas traditionally dominated by [proprietary] software vendors. [Having] a face on a project or agenda makes it attractive for politicians [to consider open source]."

Guess what? He's right.


No. He's projecting his own goals onto the free software community as a whole. There are some in the community that want to compete in the corporate marketplace (though I would bet there are far fewer of these individuals than Novel or RedHat would have you believe.) There are others in the community that simply love free software because it works for them, it scratches their itch.

Personally, I could care less whether or not some corporate MBA approves of the way I dress. If he choses to avoid free software because he sees me giving a presentation in a T-Shirt, so much the better...that MBA would contribute nothing and would consume time and resources. If you tell me that DEVELOPERS are avoiding free software because they see other developers dressed in a casual fashion....that's surprising and troubling news. But if USERS are avoiding it because of appearances...good riddance. We don't need users (corporate, government or individual) who contribute nothing and whine about trivialities like the length of Branden Robinson's hair, the cut of RMS's beard or the speedos Linus chooses to wear.

Giving the software away for free isn't enough any more? I never cease to be amazed by people who think they're doing the world a favor by USING free software.

[ Reply to This | # ]

But s/he's got a great personality!
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 03:15 PM EDT
Anyone who is arguing that looks shouldn't matter ... I'll believe you when:

1. You cancel your subscription to magazines featuring hot chicks/guys, or those that mostly tell you how to fit your body to the currently accepted "hot" look.

2. The words "but he/she's got a great personality" are no longer in your vocabulary, nor do they make you avoid an arranged date.

3. Hooters restaurants go out of business

[ Reply to This | # ]

When to ignore the rules
Authored by: requiem on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 03:42 PM EDT

Of the replies I see that disagree with the article, many seem to fall into a category of "dress is irrelevant to what I do", "I've [seen|worked at] $LOCATION, and they wear $CASUAL_DRESS", with a small smattering of "I hate ties". For this post I'd like to focus on that last element, and possible tackle the first two.

For people who hate dressing up, I assume it's because the clothes feel uncomfortable. It's a safe assumption; I'm guilt of the same thinking about women's shoes. (That they're all appearance, and hideously uncomfortable. Being male, I have no plans to verify this.) Usually, this means these sorts of people have experienced clothes that fit poorly, and are of low quality. The point of dressing up is to look good, and both those qualities detract from appearance. Quality shirts look good, and feel good. If you had to tear past shrink-wrap to unpackage a suit, it's going to feel (and look) horrid.

If appropriate dress includes a suit, have something tailored. I'm not suggesting a 4 kilodollar Savile Row suit, but simply something that fits. If you have the chance to swing by Hong Kong, you should be able to find similar custom suits for an order of magnitude cheaper.

A bespoke suit will stay in place no matter how the wearer moves. A suit that is not properly fitted will move up when the wearer moves his arms. If you watch Roger Moore's James Bond, then he keeps his jacket on for the action scenes The jacket behaves itself because it's bespoke. Pierce Brossnan's non bespoke suits move all over the place, and often he'll not be wearing his jacket for action scenes. --Pete Bailey

Next, the point about ignoring the rules. Everyone can think of at least one example of a respected guru in a tattered sweater. The correct interpretation is not "it's ok for him, therefore it's ok for me." Rather, Rudisaurus nailed it: "I've transcended your little societal conventionalities. I've made it." You should only ignore rules and conventions once you have grokked them fully. If a student turns in an essay sans punctuation, he should be marked down. If José Saramago does it in a novel, he may get a Nobel prize. It's not a double standard, it's a recognition that rules and conventions exist for a reason, and that until someone can demonstrate mastery of them, it must be assumed that noncompliance is a mark of ignorance or unconcern, and both of these qualities are dangerous in employees.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Black Socks - Dress for success?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 03:47 PM EDT
For the love of God, if you get a suit & tie, go the extra mile to get them
tailored. Also buy black socks & shoes.

White socks & deck shoes or sandles don't cut it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hmmm! Sorry, ties reduce intelligence
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 03:52 PM EDT
The fact is I can't think when I wear one. I guess it reduces the blood flow to
my brain or something. So I never wear one except when I go to a funeral.

And I can't see that it had a negative effect on my professional life.

And when the "caca" hits the fan, it's me they come and get to sort
out the mess, not some well clad salesman or manager.

So personally, I would not trust a software developer who wears a tie.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Clever people vs morons
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 03:57 PM EDT
Let me ask a simple question. Isn't that true that only a complete moron cannot
grasp the underlying value of FLOSS? If some common business butthead doesn't
get this, then he is either bought and paid by Microsoft OR a complete idiot.
BEING VOCAL and OUTSPOKEN is what keeps the FLOSS community going. So, if some
business jerk has ignored you, put his name out and get "his head taken
off". (Not to misquote Peter Quinn). It infuriates me when some
nincompoop starts saying that the reason they don't use Linux is because Linux
doesn't have sufficient MARKET SHARE!!!!!!!!!

PS I myself work in a business environment.

[ Reply to This | # ]

It depends on the audience
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 04:05 PM EDT

Dell ran a very effective ad against market leader Compaq a dozen or so years ago, something along these lines:

"Your Dell computer comes with [list of techie-sounding things, amount of RAM, L2 cache, etc]

A Compaq computer comes with a guy in a suit..."

People I care about will ignore trivia like clothes, as long as I look clean. They will listen to my message.

It worked for Dell. Compaq no longer even exists.

[ Reply to This | # ]

On the Internet, nobody knows what you wear ...
Authored by: Toon Moene on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 04:11 PM EDT
And I still don't get it. I am a (on and of) GNU Fortran developer. I work
from home. I've never met Mr. Quinn or anyone who makes purchase decisions
which could involve Free Software (other than colleagues in my Institute,
KNMI).

Why does it matter what I wear ?

Now this would be another matter if the question was: What should the sales
force of <insert name here> Free Software Services Provider wear.

Sales types should wear sales types' suits. Case closed.

---
Toon Moene (A GNU Fortran maintainer and physicist at large)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Jude on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 04:31 PM EDT
Mr. Wheeler seems to be suggesting that, in order to promote FLOSS, we must
submit to letting business interests dictate the conditions under which we
interact with them.

I'm not comfortable with this. In my experience, businesses respond to
concession by demanding more concessions. If we give them this, what will they
want next? Perhaps they will say that Linux has to be closed-source so that it
can provide a secure DRM environment?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The suits...
Authored by: Latesigner on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 04:33 PM EDT
If you want to sell to us look like us?
Otherwise we'll be owned by Microsoft for the next century?

---
The only way to have an "ownership" society is to make slaves of the rest of us.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Another aspect
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 04:50 PM EDT
An additional aspect I encountered in my professional life is that the question
of clothing can also be used as a power instrument in the pecking order in the
office. Simply said, when the pointy-haired boss can make the techie wear a tie,
he has strengthened his hierarchical position and got another pitiful
technoslave he can exploit. The Dilbert comics are full of such episodes (I
think there was one where the PHB gave everybody a list of allowed clothing
parts, including approved underwear).

I therefore like Wheelers 'Prince of another country' approach. For my actual
job, I can fortunately wear jeans and T-shirt most of the time. When I have to
give a presentation or visit a customer, I try to adapt an 'intellectual'
appearance. I have some good dark-colored long-sleeved shirts and a good jacket
for such an occasion, and *no* tie. So far I get along quite happy and are
accepted without denying too much of my personality. And you don't need to be
Linus Torvalds or Alan Cox for this strategy. Simply give the message 'I'm not
in your hierarchy but I'm not a no-one'.

[ Reply to This | # ]

There are alternatives
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 04:54 PM EDT
I never wear a tie unless I really really have to. Usually a turtleneck is perfectly acceptable.

Style is also something really important. If you are stylishly underdressed and well groomed most people won't think badly of you. You are however drawing attention. Part of the game is being able to perform under that added pressure. If you're self-conscious, choose the suit.

For those really really uncomfortable in suit and tie, here's a tip: if you know you'll have to wear a suit, start wearing one at home regularly. Have one suit special for learning not to notice it. And then you'll also notice the importance of a suit that fits...

And for the real rebel... I have two very nice ties. One is with a Charlie Brown cartoon. It works, it's a tie, it has nice colors, a good fit, looks nice, but it still is Charlie Brown. Which makes it difficult to be really overdressed. If everybody else is in jeans, just lose the jacket, roll up your sleeves, unbutton a few buttons and do that thing cool detectives do in the movies when they walk out of the court room (loosen the tie). The other one was specially for relating to programmers and "hip managers". It had a naked 60's diva on the back. It worked like a charm. Especially for myself. I hate ties. But wearing one like that somehow made it OK.

Now I tend to go for the turtle neck (thank you Jobs) and really nice pants.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I would never use software...
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 04:56 PM EDT
... written by someone who read this entire article and came away thinking it
said everyone needs to wear a suit or tie. Wouldn't hire them either and I
wouldn't care how they were dressed.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 04:58 PM EDT
Linux has never been about the mainstream. It is about value created by true
geeks(like me) and not well dressed tech want-a-bees that cares more about is
looks, than the jobe they do. That kind of think went out in the early 2000's.
It sound more like Microsoft than Linux to dress up to sell yourself. There will
always be those who want to turn what works well into that that works mostly.
That is what they do. I think anyone with any real hard core experense in the IT
field knows. You dress is for show, but solve problems for doe. A part of IT
managment in a large company myself I would never bet my job on the show offs. I
want the geeks. However they are dressed. They get the job done, where the show
offs look real nice as there explaining failure after failure.

[ Reply to This | # ]

East coast - west coast?
Authored by: fxbushman on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 05:05 PM EDT
This is a fascinating discussion. Unlike most of the discussions on Groklaw it
contains a true difference of opinion. I don't know if this has been brought up
elsewhere here (who can read it all?) but I wonder how closely that difference
of opinion (in the US, anyway) relates to the speaker's residence on the east
coast or the west coast. I know that as a lifelong resident of the left coast,
whenever I see someone who thinks of suit-and-tie as normal away-from-home wear,
I have to wonder if he is an alien intruder from the east. (For us, back east is
anywhere beyond the Rockies.) There is a real difference in what easterners and
westerners regard as normal casual wear, which may be partly fueling this
discussion.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Appropriate Respect
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 05:11 PM EDT
Dress can is a sign respect. In an interview or presentation dressing in
'business attire' is sign of respect for your audience. Even the most fish out
of water obviously uncomfortable back room coder will get some acknowledgment
for the effort. Sort of like calling Don Corleone 'Godfather', it's a sign of
respect.

It amazes me that people going to a different part of the globe are often
advised to be aware of cultural differences and to follow the prevailing
customs, but people never think to do the same when interacting with the folks
on the other coast or on a different floor of the building.

On the other hand the hosts can be equally clueless. I recall one pre-proposal
conference for a national project. They set up an elaborate system of meetings
and qualifications invited all of the vendors from across the company to an
'optional' conference at headquarters. Of course everyone flew in and was
wearing a suit. The two yahoos running the project showed up and spent the first
few minutes laughing at everyone for wearing a suit. Of course it never occurred
to them that all of the executives in the company were wearing a suit every day.

---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.

"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk

[ Reply to This | # ]

Relax everybody!
Authored by: bigbert on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 05:28 PM EDT
Wheeler is a "Yossdy" - Yuppie OSS Developer
RMS is a "Hossdy" - Hippie OSS Developer
PJ is a "Lossry" - Legal OSS Researcher

No problemo! Room for everybody! ;-)

---
4c 69 6e 75 78 20 52 75 6c 65 73 21

[ Reply to This | # ]

I think Paul Graham said it best
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 05:30 PM EDT
From <a href="http://paulgraham.com/bubble.html">What the Bubble
Got Right</a>.

"If you're a nerd, you can understand how important clothes are by asking
yourself how you'd feel about a company that made you wear a suit and tie to
work. The idea sounds horrible, doesn't it? In fact, horrible far out of
proportion to the mere discomfort of wearing such clothes. A company that made
programmers wear suits would have something deeply wrong with it.

"And what would be wrong would be that how one presented oneself counted
more than the quality of one's ideas. That's the problem with formality.
Dressing up is not so much bad in itself. The problem is the receptor it binds
to: dressing up is inevitably a substitute for good ideas. It is no coincidence
that technically inept business types are known as "suits."

"Nerds don't just happen to dress informally. They do it too consistently.
Consciously or not, they dress informally as a prophylactic measure against
stupidity."

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 05:43 PM EDT
"So with a small outlay of my own money, I'm more likely to cause changes
in the directions that I believe are really important. I have bigger goals than
changing what people wear; I'd rather wear a tie (as they request), and try to
achieve the goals I really care about. "

That is far below the belt; insinuating that refusing to wear ties equates to
putting ones own dress sense over an important goal and that yielding to
commercial expectations regarding attire is somehow the nobler course.

Furthermore, it's insulting to defend that pettty jab with "Because you
can't change the world anyway. If you can't beat them, join them."

I understand the necessity of dressing up to popularise and sell open source.
And if that is the imperative goal to one, I can understand giving in to the
whole circus act and put on the clowns robe.

However, some of us are not only in it for the money.

Some of us value the freedom aspect more then anything else. And this includes
the freedom not to submit to the whims of the tinsel giant the information
technology industry has become; an institution where incompetence is rife and
conforming outer appearance signals excellence.

Of "what we do, how we look, what we say, and how we say it", only
"what we do" and "what we say" matter to some of us.

So, if you care about corporate adoption, feel free to do as you feel will
maximize the succesrate in such endeavours. But please refrain from calling
others unwillingness
to be subjugated to such practices as "unprofessional".

-------------------------------------
"Almost cut my hair
It happened just the other day
It was getting kind of long
I could have said it was in my way

But I didn't and I wonder why
I feel like letting my freak flag fly
And I feel like I owe it to someone"
-CSNY

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success... but only...
Authored by: BitOBear on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 05:44 PM EDT
"Dress for success, but only if your idea of success is to become an
ineffectual middle-management suck-up".

(I wish I had hard citations, but this is from memory 8-).

I was reading [pre dot-bomb and pre bubble] that someone had finally done a
study based on the book "dress for success" and they had concluded
that it went hand-and-hand with "the peter principle", which says that
people are promoted to the level of their own incompetence. (e.g. you keep
getting promoted from jobs you are good at until you get one you are not good
at, and then the promotions stop, but you cannot ever move back "down"
into the highest position you _were_ good at.)

Digression aside, most outstanding entrepreneurs do _not_ "dress for
success" and most top performers in most roles also do not. There are a
few positions (mostly sales positions, including marketing, religion, and
politics) where the primary skill is, essentially, acting. And in _those_
positions costuming has high importance.

In first impressions (for men anyway) eye-contact, willingness to shake hands
and a good handshake, a direct manner, and a presumption of equality amongst all
parties trump clothing by more than an order of magnitude. Every time. Period.

The "smelly hippy" presentation usually doesn't work, not because of
the clothing per se, but instead because it violates the "presumption of
equality" clause. It takes a good bit of social finesse to overcome the
message that "I didn't have to dress up even if you did" implicit
message. This is particularly true for some people who have worked for the
"only the boss gets to break the rules" people.

The simple truth is that clothes _are_ useful for overcoming personal weakness
in communication skills, but only so much and only so far.

the problem with the presentation of FOSS is _actually_ that a lot of people in
hermitage dress are actually hermits. They either perceive themselves as having
superior knowledge and/or they perceive themselves as being superior to the
circumstance.

Linus does not get listened to because he is "the foreign prince" he
gets listened to because he can _speak_ (write, etc).

If you want to be taken seriously, and you have expertise in a particular field,
you have to be ready and willing to cede expert status for other areas to other
people. When a “software guy” tries to ride-heard over a “banker” in a mater of
finance he looks like a clueless jerk. This is because when the software guy is
“holding forth” on the software he is probably not open to receiving the
economic jargon and experience trying to flow the other way. It becomes a
lecture instead of an exchange.

People who believe in their power don’t like having that power usurped.

So you _can_ walk up to a politician in neutral (street) clothes and if you
start by saying, and _really_ _meaning_ _it_, that you have a concern that you
need them to help you translate into a political reality. That is, when you
“open a dialog” instead of making a pronouncement.

Don’t “tolerate” being corrected, _rely_ on it, learn receptiveness as a skill,
and _then_ you will be playing in the dress-doesn’t-matter arena.

As far as the “I get better service when I am in dress clothes” effect; sure,
because you have your game-face on by habit. I get excellent service
_everywhere_ because I remember that this person is providing a service (as
opposed to being a serf). I always treat my server as a _person_ first, and
then follow that up with respect for the job.

If some people can only be in this mode while wearing their work clothes, well
at least they know that.

Contrapositively, about two weeks ago I went out an bought a Toyota Prius. I
went in deliberately underdressed and when the BMOC salesmen ignored me I was
quite content. When the lady salesman came up we proceeded to do business. I
had given the BMOC man my “lets do business” face, but he couldn’t see past his
game. I was there to _buy_ not to “be sold”, so I expressly didn’t _want_ to
speak to someone who was playing odds. The entire transaction went
marvelously.

The whole issue, in every direction, comes down to awareness of others. If you
are not aware, no tie on the planet will help you. If you _are_ aware then you
virtually never have to stoop to playing dress-up.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Totally don't care
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 05:48 PM EDT
I totally don't care what anyone wears, as long as it is clean for xst sake! It
is the idea that is important, not the wrapping. That is why commercials have
no effect on me.

I dress simply, I don't like clothing stores, I don't like shoe stores, I don't
like people who emphasize such silly things to me.

I dress functionally. If it is cold outside, I will put on something warm. If
it is warm outside I will put on something light.

I can't stand ties, because I had to wear the red pioneer tie, when I was
attending school in the former USSR. I hate ties, so I would never put one on
my neck, but I don't care if you wear ties.

I can see the difference between people who dress up on purpose in an attempt to
hide behind their clothes because they either bought into this 'must dress how
they expect you to' idea and the people who really view clothes only as a
necessary evil that we have to put up with.

I prefer people to dress in a way that is not offensive though (as in clothes
with some common sense.) Certainly, you can be very extravagant looking with
swimming flippers and a tie and a motorcycle helmet and thong while I am
interviewing you, but I will be concerned with your wellbeing. How are you
going to take an escalator wearing those flipper-fins? At least your head is
protected.

I must admit that more important than clothing is your attitude. There is
always a general feeling that you get when you talk to someone, I don't believe
this has to do with clothes, rather with the manner of speech and your overal
behaviour. This of-course is also facade, but this really translates into your
ability to work with people, and not the fact that you like to wear women's
clothing while you are a 300lb male.

Usually people are normal with only a few cases of total freakshows that happen
time to time. I had to work with some of these freak-shows. From my experience
with those specific people they have other mental issues.

Generally speaking, if you are dressed into something clean and not freaky, I
can work with you as long as you have the right attitude, experience and
abilities for the project.

[ Reply to This | # ]

When do we appear in person?
Authored by: iabervon on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 06:12 PM EDT
The thing I don't get about this is when open source developers actually end up
in a formal situation where business people see their clothes. My feeling is
that open source adoption in the business world is held back by business
people's guess at what open source developers wear, and it doesn't matter at all
what those developers actually wear, because they're never seen anyway. As
evidence of this, not all that many open source developers actually live in
places where sandals are plausible clothing much of the time. I think the
perception is that software comes from Silicon Valley, and open source software
comes from people in Silicon Valley who aren't dressed for work. But the weather
at OSDL on today's date is normally 59F, and it's supposed to rain the next four
days. Of course, everybody's been at LinuxWorld in Boston, where it's been low
50s and rainy all week. Obviously, open source developers can't change the
business perception of open source software by changing their appearence, which
is clearly not visible anyway.

I think the real issue is that open source projects tend not to have people who
make sales calls at businesses; the only people that businesses see as involved
with open source projects are the developers, who (they assume) aren't dressed
up. It would be equally accurate to say that open source developers need to
print on glossy paper, use diagonal gradient fills, and cold-call corporations.
But the real thing is that they don't have a motive to go through the sales
process, and they're not really in a position to sign deals the way that
businesses expect anyway. So it's not just that open source developers don't
wear suits; they also don't make sales calls, submit bids on contracts, perform
installations, and so forth. These functions are performed by companies like Red
Hat, Novell, and IBM. Open source developers trying to do them would be doing
unpleasant work for undesired gross income.

Peter Quinn went on to say that he blames businesses for their own problems due
to not taking advantage of open source opportunities. The people wearing suits
and making pitches for open source should be employees in companies' own IT
departments who have evaluated all of the available software, not just the
software that sales people are pushing. These are the people whose job
descriptions include making convincing presentations in person to business
people.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 06:20 PM EDT
Never liked ties, don't wear suits and there is no need for them in programming.
I consulted for 15 years and everytime I grew my hair long enough for a
ponytail the jobs were easier to get. "Oh, the programmer is here now,
let's get down to business". My suited friends would roll their eyes but I
got the jobs.

That said, I didn't show up in jeans with holes in them and was presentable, but
several years at Intel made me very casual.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: grayhawk on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 06:21 PM EDT
I think how you dress is cultural, not only cultural depending on the country
where you live but cultural in the corporate environment that you work in. You
always need to fit in with your peer group. It starts already at school and
carries on into the business world.

In Germany for example even a Janitor comes to work in a suit and tie. Here in
Canada most system types, programmers, programmer - analysts, analysts and
project leaders come to work in clean and casual dress. Being dressed slovenly
and unkempt is not acceptable to anyone in a front office environment. However
a suit and tie for the systems people is not what they should be wearing.

I would love to see the suit and tie folk climb under a desk to work on a pc or
get into the ceiling to string cable or go out onto a shop floor with dangerous
equipment to work an scanners, plc's, etc.

Get into the management ranks such as a manager of MIS or into Sales, then a
suit and tie is in order. But for the role up the sleeves type it is totally
nonsensical to think a suit and tie should be worn. It would be the same as
expecting your mechanic to work on your car in suit and tie.

As a person who interacts with ordinary users, a suit and tie does nothing to
make you acceptable in their ranks. You need to have these people work with you
and allow you to be seen as trust worthy. Dress to kill and you put a wall up
between you and the shipper/receiver whose experiencing system problems and you
are there to help.

So dress to fit the job, the culture and the environment in which you must
operate and don't let somebody tell you that you become more acceptable if you
wear a suit and tie or give FOSS a black eye because you refuse to dress like an
executive.



---
It is said when the power of love overcomes the love of power, that it is then
and only then that we shall truly have peace!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 06:32 PM EDT
"I'm more likely to cause changes in the directions that I believe"
Perhaps it's time to change causes.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 06:43 PM EDT
Wow, David started a real firestorm with this one.

A lot of the comments fall into two categories:

(1) "if you are given the task of selling F/OSS software to business people
or governments or other suit-wearing types, do yourself a favor and dress up in
a suit".

(2) "I'm a developer, I don't care about those suit-people, and I'm not
never going to follow their dress code because pleasing those people is not a
priority for me".

Both of these views are correct. I think this article was targeted at the
people in situation (1), but those people are vastly outnumbered by the rest of
us, who are in situation (2).


Personally, I am strongly in category (2). I find the suit-people to be
generally clueless about things that interest me, and vice versa. Also, they
are manipulative (especially the marketing types, but all successful business
people, lawyers, etc. that I've met seem that way to me). I don't really want
anything to do with them. So I'm glad they dress in a recognizable fashion so I
can avoid them, and I absolutely refuse to dress they way they want, both
because its uncomfortable and because mindless conformity does none of us any
good. Fortunately I'm in a position where I never have to talk to customers or
other suit-people.

Once, I almost lost a job opportunity because I declared early on in the
interview that I would never work for an employer who insisted that I dress up.
Fortunately for me, the interviewer did not cut the interview short right away
(as he later told me he considered doing), so I had a few more minutes to
demonstrate that I knew my stuff and was worth hiring. But that's life. Had
the interviewer stated at any time "our company has a dress code, we expect
you to at least wear these things" I would have thanked him for his time
and immediately crossed them off my list. Fortunately the company was more
forward-thinking than that, and I went on to years of developer-happiness there.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 06:53 PM EDT
Not a single ponytail or pair of sandals here:

http://devnulled.com/gallery/v/misc/random/linux_nylug_booth.jpg.html

[ Reply to This | # ]

sometimes the reverse is true...
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 07:47 PM EDT
In the 1980's, Heathkit had some nice, competitive 8 bit computers (the H8 and H89). They also had a nice operating system, HDOS, that had some really nice features compared to cp/m. They also had a management that judged appearance above talent, which is one of the reasons JGL left that company to move out west. (it probably also explains, to some extent, why Heath and Zenith Data Systems basically don't exist anymore)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Who is he talking about?
Authored by: Jaywalk on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 07:56 PM EDT
Umm. Novell? IBM? "The sandals and ponytail set"?

My dad was a CIO and he always said that tech companies always have someone who knows the system inside and out with no social skills at all. You just gave him an office with his own exit and slipped sandwiches and problems under the door.

No, the "front man" shouldn't be the scruffy looking geek, but what company providing a professional Linux solution doesn't know that? But the fact that some of the most technically talented people aren't good choices for "client facing" roles isn't limited to Linux.

---
===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====

[ Reply to This | # ]

I've had this conversation....
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 07:59 PM EDT
With my wife. Several times. With me on the "it doesn't matter to what I
do, it shouldn't matter to anyone else, it's all just a poser's game"
side.

David Wheeler, my compliments. You said it in a way that really communicates to
me. I was starting to get it (slowly) anyway, as I got older, but you really
said it well.

MSS2

[ Reply to This | # ]

Misunderstood goal
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 08:04 PM EDT
There is a presumption here that the developers of open source software have a
goal of making their programs commerically successful.

This makes no sense. Linus Torvalds gets a little bit more fame each time
somebody installs a Linux kernel, but he doesn't get any money from that ... so
why would he care about increasing market segment share?

If you read what Linus says[1], and watch what he does, then it becomes clear
that his goal is just to make Linux the technically best operating system it can
be. Whether anyone goes off and actually uses it for anything real is pretty
much irrelevent.

[1] Disregarding the "world domination" comments which are always a
joke.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Deal with it.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 08:32 PM EDT
To all you people complaining about how uncomfortable ties are:

The only reason a tie is uncomfortable is because you won't buy yourself shirts
that fit properly! Get your neck measured and purchase accordingly. If the
collar doesn't choke you, the tie won't either.

If you only buy shirts that run Small-Medium-Large-Extra Large then you will
almost certainly not be able to wear a tie comfortably with them.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Is wearing a decent suit really enough?
Authored by: krguert1 on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 09:42 PM EDT
Is it really true that if someone makes a reasonable effort to wear a suit,
that it will be appreciated? If that's true and that's the end of it, that
seems reasonable.

However, if someone gets a nice reasonably priced suit that fits fairly well,
won't they then be judged based on further details? Won't they be judged
based on whether there is some minor problem with how the suit fits, or how
expensive it is, or whether someone likes your tie? Is having one or two nice
suits enough? If you meet with someone several times, are they then going
to judge you because you only seem to own two nice suits, or one or two
pairs of nice shoes, or your suit is slightly wrinkled because you don't get
it dry cleaned as frequently as they would like? If you wear a suit because
people expect you to, could you just be encouraging them to move on to
judging you for some other superficial reason?

Trying to impress people based on how you dress seems like a never-ending
cycle. Exactly how much time and money are people expected to spend on
dressing the way certain people expect them to? Where is the right place to
draw the line and say that you've done enough, and being expected to do any
more than that is unreasonable? I suspect this is a major reason why some
people choose to draw the line at not wearing a suit and tie. If just wearing
a decent suit and tie was enough, then that might be a reasonable place to
draw the line. However, I think people suspect that it isn't enough, so they
balk at wearing a suit because they don't want to get on a never-ending
treadmill of trying to impress people based on how they dress. At what point
do you stop and make a statement to the culture that enough is enough?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Decide on your goals: Honesty and Integrity
Authored by: jbb on Friday, April 07 2006 @ 11:03 PM EDT
This whole debate is really about honesty and integrity.

From the esteemed Mr. Wheeler:

I wear a tie almost every day, and like it. Why? It's not the tie itself; I don't care either way. Clothing is merely external; I believe changing clothing does not change who the wearer is in any fundamental way.

Think of it as [...] a money amplifier, [...]

I believe this is not strictly true. I think that there are some outfits (such as being naked or worse) that would make Mr. Wheeler very uncomfortable to do business in. He may claim that this is merely because he would "not fit in" if he were naked but I can imagine situations where being naked is the norm and Mr. Wheeler might still be uncomfortable without clothes on.

I think a more accurate statement from Mr. Wheeler (please correct me if I am wrong) would be:

It is within my sense of integrity to do business in standard business attire and therefore you should do it too.
Mr. Wheeler has several straw man arguments against people who are uncomfortable in corporate attire:
  1. they think people are not judged by what they wear
  2. their bigger (biggest?) goal is changing what people wear
  3. They are trying to stop other people from judging by appearance.
This is all somewhat self-contradictory. It seems that according to Mr. Wheeler, people who do not share his comfort level in wearing a suit and tie either think too little or too much about how the clothes make the man.

I do not believe that Mr. Wheeler has achieved such a level of comfort with self that he is totally oblivious to what he is wearing (or not wearing). Clearly wearing a suit and tie every day to work does not violate his own sense of integrity even though their are plenty of other outfits that would. I think Mr. Wheeler is short-sighted when he implicitly projects his own sense of integrity onto everyone else in the world.

It is about integrity not suits. It violates my own sense of integrity to wear a suit and tie to work every day. But I am perfectly comfortable wearing them to a wedding or a funeral and would in fact be uncomfortable there without them. It also violates my sense of integrity to drive to work every day or to tell any lie associated with my work.

But other people are different. I'm not claiming that Mr. Wheeler lacks integrity because he wears a suit. For example, I have great respect for PJ's integrity but since she works/worked as a paralegal and since she posted this article, I imagine that she is/was perfectly comfortable wearing "proper business attire" to work every day -- it doesn't violate her sense of integrity. But I do think that Mr. Wheeler (perhaps unwittingly) is asking me and others to violate our own senses of integrity.

I don't know if it is still true today, but for many years the one profession that was always rated as the "most trusted" by people was engineer. This jives with my own experience especially if we use a broad definition of engineer that includes software engineer. I have found that people who deal with "real world" problems such engineering generally have a very different sense of integrity and work related honesty compared to those who deal with "people" problems such as salesmen, politicians, and management.

I have found engineers to be much more honest than salesmen. In fact, I have found a very high correlation between honesty and quality in engineering. I found the opposite correlation in sales. In my experience, the best salesmen are not just those who can lie, the best are those who can lie and not violate their own sense of integrity in doing so.

I don't think the correlation between honesty and quality in engineering is an accident. I think a person's ability as an engineer are limited by dishonesty. There was a famous baseball hitter, many years ago, who was asked what was the secret to his success. He said he secret was in his eyesight and he never went to moving picture shows because the subliminal flicker took the edge off of his sight and reaction time.

I think a similar thing happens with solving engineering problems. For me, the best thinking happens subconsciously. For example, if I am working at night on a program, I will almost always wake up the next morning with a list of bugs in my head. I get a "bad feeling" about the places where there are bugs. But I find that when I do things in line with Mr. Wheeler's advice such as thinking about what other people are thinking, or how to interact with them, or what to say, then my subconscious debugging aid gets blunted and no longer works.

In fact, I am convinced that most people cannot work as a salesman and as an engineer at the same time. This sort of dichotomy is well known and respected in other fields such as art and entertainment -- that is why there are agents and galleries and all of that. It also explains why so many of the world's greatest inventors died penniless or worse.

Mr. Wheeler's article boils down to the suggestion that FOSS developers become their own corporate sales force. I think this idea makes about as much sense as having a company's sales force suddenly do all the engineering. Instead of telling FOSS developers how to act and what to wear, I think Mr. Wheeler would be more helpful by volunteering to be a "corporate sales rep" for one or more FOSS projects of his choosing. I don't know if all FOSS projects would accept him, but those that did would gain a powerful ally.

---
Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hard work and competence trumps appearance
Authored by: LarsLohn on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 12:05 AM EDT
In 1996, I was hired for a one week contract position at a Wall Street firm. In
our first group meeting on a Monday morning, I was met with great hostility by a
conference room of suits. I wore my usual jeans and a black Harley T-shirt.
This tattooed long haired long bearded freak was to judge their work? It was
tough week of long hours as I worked closely with these folks to evaluate their
code. I delivered my final report on Friday morning. At the wrap up meeting
that afternoon, I was the last to enter the conference room. Everyone else sat
rigidly around the table with a copy of my report in front of them. When I
completed my presentation, the entire group stood up simultaneously, removing
their dress shirts to reveal new Harley T-shirts. Hard work and competence
trumps appearance.

FOSS is about changing culture. While some may speak of revolution, the actual
change will instead be a much slower evolution. Those that judge software by
the tailoring of someone's clothing will eventually make the wrong decision and
cost their company or government money. Evolution has a special place for such
failures.

Meanwhile, I'm not concerned that the adoption of FOSS is going too slowly and
needs to be bolstered by manipulating people with attire. Perhaps when the
tailoring industry goes open source, I'll consider wearing a tie.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The passion for this subject is astonishing.
Authored by: dbc on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 12:25 AM EDT
Now who wants to say that techies are not clothes conscious?

But really, back on point. This article is about credibility. Perhaps if PR
were call "Credibility Engineering" techies would understand it
better, or at least be able to think rationally and dispassionately about it.

What, you think credibility can't be engineered? If that were true, numerous
political campaign managers would be out of work today.

So let's approach credibility as an engineering problem:

Problem statement: Important memes originating in techie culture have slow
uptake in other cultures.

Root Cause Analysis: Presenters of memes have insufficient credibility in target
cultures, causing importance of memes to be discounted.

Summary of literature search:
In order to be credible in a foreign culture, you need to understand that
culture, bear the tokens of credibility of that culture, and speak to them in
their terms. You must listen to their concerns and respond in the terms of
their culture.

Project plan: First, do your anthropology. Gather sufficient data for sound
cultural analysis. Then, having analyzed and developed a model for the culture,
you need to present yourself and your memes in terms that resonate with that
culture and are credible within that culture. You must practice hearing
questions and creating responses in the terms of the culture in the same way
that you study a foreign language.

Follow ups: The outcome of each encounter with the foreign culture should be
compared with the outcome predicted by the model. Revise model as needed.

So, does thinking about it as Credibility Engineering make it easier? Does it
help you focus on the desired meme uptake outcome?


[ Reply to This | # ]

A Clothing Example from My Life
Authored by: darkonc on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 01:22 AM EDT
Just for starters: I'm one of those people who, when I work from home, can be wearing anything or nothing. My favorite beach is a nude beach. Nonetheless, I've been well trained in the concept that, if the people you're talking to stop listening before you open your mouth, you're sunk.

Way back, I had just moved provinces for romantic reasons, and I was job hunting in a city where I had precious few contacts in the computer field (my girlfriend was a plant biotech).

One day, I had two job interviews. One was at a university and the other was the regional office of a reasonably large company. Although my last job was at a university, I had gotten it because the people there knew me already, so how I dressed was never really an issue, so I really didn't know what the standard dress was for university business. So I asked around. The answer I got was essentially 'high-end casual'.

I went to the university wearing suit pants, and a nice casual businessish shirt.

In the car on the way to the regional office, I changed my shirt, and put on a tie and suit jacket (the pants matched the suit jacket).

At the end of the day, I got offered both jobs at my asking salary (which was a bit of a push for both employers).

I chose the university.

My point here is: wearing a suit at the university would have been about as out of place as going to a business interview in casual wear. -- and they're both a little big out of place at the nude beach (which was about 400metres from the university).

My parents are from Trinidad, which is pretty much equatorial. The business wear there is quite different from what it is in the US and Canada because the weather pretty much demands it. If I walked into a busines meeting there in a full suit, they'd look at me and think "silly foreigner", and I probably would be uncomfortable -- Not because they would make me uncomfortable, but because the reason why the business wear there is different is that it's so hot and muggy that wearing a suit and tie is stooopid.

Following the local cues is not just about fitting in, or respecting the people you're dealing with or being listened to. Sometimes it can be a simple matter of practicality.

---
Powerful, committed communication. Touching the jewel within each person and bringing it to life..

[ Reply to This | # ]

I'm not your free employee.
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 01:57 AM EDT
I'm not your free employee. I'm not dressing up for you. I write software
because I want to, and how I want to. If you want someone to play dress up, you
go to Redhat, Novell, or IBM. They'll put a pretty face on what I do for my own
reasons. I'm not changing my licenses to "Open Source" rather than
"Free Software" to please you. I'm not programming to match your time
table. You're not going to get me to wear a tie for you.

Don't even THINK you have the standing to tell me what to do or how to dress, or
I'll flame you. And I'll be right to do so.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Walking the Talk
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 02:09 AM EDT
I ran a rigorous project once and rejected a solution used by another part of
the company due to 'risk'. An IT guy with a suit on told our business manager
that I was wrong. That mistake cost us $1 million. The company went bust three
times. The guy was full of management 'bluster' but could not walk the talk when
it came to the crunch. SO many managers want people who look like they do
(expensive) and talk like they do.

Both those guys have gone now. I do not wear a suit. (I do not dress like a slob
either). Our new manager is a results focussed guy. He respects my opinion
because of what I have achieved. He checked my work out when he got to the
company and asked other lower managers "whats up with this guy" (one
of them told me this). Some of them said some nice things (so one of then said
to me).

I have learned to talk the talk now and dress for it if I have to. Sometimes
when I wear a suit people think I have a job interview elswhere. It keeps
everyone on their toes.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 02:16 AM EDT
Someone tells me to wear a suit, and others tell me to dress casually.
Depending on how I dress, I am trusted or not trusted.

Whether people who prefer to dress nicely or badly like it or not, this article
is spot on. The message here is to dress like your peers expect you to. Those
that say they would not trust someone in a suit is a clear case of what this
article is describing. They are using stereotypes to try to guess whether or
not the person is to be trusted.

Personally, I show up to an interview in a suit, because I have a suit. If I
don't wear it, then it is just going to sit in my closet. Suits can be quite
comfortable if you purchase the right ones. It can also be fun to dress up for
an occasion.

As for the workplace, I am more concerned about how many hours I have to work
rather than what I have to wear. I'll walk out on an interview if they expect
their employees to work extra hours consistently or without compensation.
Though, I mainly value the time I have to work on my own personal projects and
spend with my family more than anything.



[ Reply to This | # ]

Sometime it's wrong to be right
Authored by: jo_dan_zukiger on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 03:16 AM EDT
That's the problem with the "dress for success" concept.

Yeah, we should understand that conventions can oil the works. We should
understand that oil can be a good thing at times, but we must also
understand that it can be a bad thing at other times, and just be irrelevant
most of the time.

One problem with conventions is getting used to them. And it seems to me to
be a sad thing that those who run our legal system have done just that.
(Apologies to the author and to the site host for the overly-broad brush.)

The best way to dress for success is to be yourself at all times, but be your
best self, whatever that might be for the occasion and for the other people
who are there. The second best way is to be considerate of the others who
will be there. Neither of those principles, nor both together, support any sort

of formal approach to dress.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Prince from another Country
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 05:47 AM EDT
Well, this sums it up nicely, because that is what I do. I have quite a
collection of very weird clothes, like a spanish jacket with white embroidery,
several different naval jacks from the last century (mostly with two rows of
buttons), a heavy 19th-century looking long coat and so on.
I normally wear long-sleeved linnen shirts of medieval type with no collar,
tough I have some more modern ones as well, which I wear with a bowtie -- never
a normal tie. Or even shirts with a detachable collar and cuff links and a
frock.

Above all, hats. Hats make a very distinctive impression. While of course I do
have a top hat, this would mostly be a bit overdone; however, a normal black hat
with a smaller or bigger brim is never wrong; also, some smaller
renaissance-caps and hats also look very nice (and most people can't tell what
they are).

Shoes: I've got two pair, one pair of black army-boots, which (worn beneath the
trousers, the round cap carefully polished) is generally acceptable. The other
pair is in black and white 1920ies style for rare occasions -- they go with a
cutaway and a bowler or tophat.

Looking like the beginning of the 20th century is generally a nice idea to make
an impression on very formal occasions like on a ball; most probably you'll be
one of the best-dressed there, and still differentiate very much from the
armani-wearing masses ;).

The general Idea is to look well-dressed, but alien.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wow, PJ, you really failed us this time
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 06:26 AM EDT
PJ, PJ, PJ, sigh. RMS makes the point very often that this is a war of ideas,
of values, of intellectual integrity, and that whoever gets to set the vantage
point gets an advantage. We must not accept the term Digital RIGHTS Management
without a fight; RMS calls it Digital RESTRICTIONS Management. And he is right.
Terminology and frame of reference are very important. You're encouraging us
to let "them" set the frame of reference. FLOSS is not about playing
"their" game, accepting "their" agenda, doing things
"their" way. Dressing for success in pandering to them, and as such
you've half-way lost by conceding where the battle will be fought. See, the
anti-FLOSS factions want us to THINK that dress-for-success is really important.
Every one of us that they manage to convince is a victory for them. Because
that's a battle that they already know how to win, and we don't. We have to
make them fight on our terms, not the other way around. We have to make them
fight on merit. On economics. On quality. On democracy. For FLOSS, you
schmooze, you loose.

Sure, it may take a bit longer in the end, but I have to side with RMS and his
purity here. This like Free Software vs Open Source Software: one is
idealistic, one is pragmatic. Dress-for-success is just Animal Farm all over
again. Some coders are more equal than others, eh? We are a movement built on
meritocracy. Built on the elimination of bull. Built on kicking out the
marketing morons. Built on ignoring the suits. We call them suits for a
reason: because the suit is more important than the person inside. We must rage
against the dying of the light! That is an affront against our ideals.

In the American Revolution, the colonists didn't fight the way the British did.
Our ancestors didn't line up in rows on the battlefield to be mowed down by the
better trained Brits. We earned our independance and freedom by making them
fight on our turf, our way, not by sending diplomats to convince ol' King
George.

If you think that somehow FLOSS will wind up illegal, you're living in fantasy
land. It's already too important to the world economy and will only become more
so. The FLOSS patent problem is only of concern to big business and is
untenable even in the medium term. If you think your government is too stupid
to understand open standards, then really you are indirectly worried about being
over-taxed because the government failed sound economic analysis. Eventually
the economic competition will force even the government to change.

So I say don't play their game. Don't sacrifice ideals trying to
"win" a few years earlier, because you may fail or the victory will be
hollow. Stick your guns, write better code without the suits screwing
everything up, use the influence you have as best you can, and victory is
imminent.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Not for everyone! Dress for success?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 08:06 AM EDT
The whole point of the OSS movement is that the old ways don't work, and it is
filled with people who would rather code than "change the world".
These people aren't revolutionaries; they don't have political agendas;
they are, in short, not world-changing zealots, who will use any means at their
disposal. They are people who genuinely want to code, want to create things of
beauty (in their eyes). They, in fact, only really value the opinion of others
of like mind, and don't care a great deal whether the rest of world knows how
good they are, or how good their product is. The world has now taken an
interest, and wants them to change to make it more palatable, but that is NOT
the point of the movement.
Indeed, what people who promote "Dress For Success" overlook is that
the thinking behind such is difficult for many good programmers, and a HUGE
drain on their intellectual and emotional resources. They would rather, and the
world is better off if they do, program with 100% of their mind
and emotions. The "appearance" thing is a pure distraction, and as
such reduces their effectiveness in the world they have chosen to inhabit. To
come along and say "you must live in reality" is an affront to their
culture, and assumes that "your" culture is more important than
"theirs".

Indeed, there do now appear to be OSS zealots who see this vast work as a way of
changing the world, and if they want to "Dress For Success", more
power to them, but for the average guy in the trenches, the goal is great
software, not changing the world. Changing the world is just a side effect of
creating great works in a way that is inherently fair to
all involved.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Who should Dress for success?
Authored by: jazzyjoe on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 09:14 AM EDT
Developers aren't the ones who should dress for success, Marketeers should dress
for success. The problem with FOSS isn't that the developers aren't dressing
right, the problem is that the developers are playing marketeers as well.

Developers should develop. Leave marketeering to marketeers. That way,
developers can continue to wear their ponytails, and potential FOSS users are
approached by people trained specifically to be business savvy. Hopefully, their
training also taught them to dress for success.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 10:49 AM EDT
As much as I respect most of what Mr. Wheeler says (as a security professional
and Linux developer), I am absolutely horrified by this. I agree with your
assertion: why promote a culture of of discrimination? This is a misleading
mythology that has been around for eons; and with it comes a culture of
authority, where it's OK for executives to mistreat employees. This is absolute
nonsense. Mr. Wheeler, out of everything wonderful you have done, this is
shameful.

[ Reply to This | # ]

A story
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 11:52 AM EDT
I've read the article above but as yet, not all the comments. So I'm not going
to express an opinion on this, one way or the other. Instead, a story, with no
moral or message intended:

After finishing at University, I went for my first job interview with a large,
respectable company, for a position in one of their computing sections (it
wasn't called IT or DP then). At that point, I only had two suits. They
weren't particularly expensive suits, but were both new and looked smart. I
opted to wear my best one.

As I was driving to the location of the interview, I started to get an uneasy
feeling about my suit. There was something wrong. What was it? It was
something... to... do... with... its...

...smell.

Oh, no!

Distracted, I had a horrible thought and hurriedly searched through all my
pockets whilst driving. And there it was, a mothball my mother had put in a
pocket to protect my precious suit. I was furious!

But I was already part-way there and it was too late to turn back. I had to go
and attend the interview in a posh-looking suit that stank of naphthalene. What
a mix. I started sniffing the air that wafted up from my suit, trying to assess
how bad the smell was, wondering if it might disperse by the time I got there.
At 70 mph, I opened all the car windows, so it was like driving a convertible -
a really strong blow - hoping that would do the trick. It was *so* cold.

When I got there, I could still smell naphthalene. This was majorly
embarrassing.

I met the girl from Personnel, who walked me across the site to another building
for my interviews. I was reasonably confident at that point - outside - but
wasn't looking forward to the interview. We got there and headed for the lift.

Oh, no. Not the lift. The stairs? Couldn't we use the stairs? No, we used
the lift. Bad. Then I really got it full-whack in the face and realised how
strong it was. How embarrassing. I could have died. I had to explain to her
what the smell was. Yeah, great start!

I knew then, people would be able to smell my suit, even walking down the
corridors. I was leaving a strong naphthalene scent trail behind me. What
would it be like being shut up in the same room with me? Terrible!

You know those dreams you sometimes have? The ones where you are outside, or
out in public somewhere and you look down and suddenly realise you're only
wearing underpants? It was like that.

The rest of that day was just too embarrassing to recount, so I won't, but
suffice to say I have hated the smell of naphthalene ever since.

I won't say whether or not I got the job, so as to keep this short piece
opinion-free.

:)

---
SCO: hunting for snarks in an ocean of sharks
---
Should one hear an accusation, first look to see how it might be levelled at the
accuser.

[ Reply to This | # ]

You may speak also about friendly Schwizerland !
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 12:36 PM EDT
Apart fron wearing a fashonnable suit and a tie, i found that speaking of
friendly Schwizerland and others similars resorts of money shelters may attract
a favorable attention from wealthies people.
Also If you agree to some politics arguments about the benefits of globalisation
and the transfer of production to low wages countries, you wille get a point.
Don't hesitate, go ahead, this people are waiting you to promote open source as
an open source of profits.
Dress Yourself, teach yourself on how to speak to money makers

[ Reply to This | # ]

First Impressions Count
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 04:33 PM EDT
Having read the main article, I'm going to try and write down what my first
impressions were on reading it, rather than what my coloured opinion might now
be, having read a lot of the comments:

I first thought to myself: phew! this is a *hot topic*! Why is this article on
Groklaw? Won't we just start ripping our own throats out? I'm going to be very
careful about what I say here. I think maybe I won't even post anything. This
looks like a read-only one for me.

Turns out I was right.

And then, I too, joined in the general melee.

The last paragraph of the article starts with the question: "Why is this
article on Groklaw?" I read and understood the answer, but the original
question persists in my mind. More and more, I get the feeling that article
does not belong here.

Sorry David, your article is PR. Its surface veneer looks good, in much the
same way as an Armani suit, but beneath the surface it misdirects.

I think jbb put it best, above. It's about honesty and integrity. I could
add:

Never need praise, approval or sympathy;

Never compromise with your own reality;

Don't desire to be liked or admired;

Be your own adviser, keep your own counsel and select your own decisions;

Be true to your own goals.

By that last one, I mean your *own* goals, not goals someone else tries to pass
off on you.

---
SCO: hunting for snarks in an ocean of sharks
---
Should one hear an accusation, first look to see how it might be levelled at the
accuser.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: fxbushman on Saturday, April 08 2006 @ 11:48 PM EDT
Yet another insight on dressing like the suits in order to succeed among them:
Norbert Weiner said that if you compete with slaves you become a slave.

[ Reply to This | # ]

"I respected his collars, his vast cuffs, his brushed hair"
Authored by: Sean DALY on Sunday, April 09 2006 @ 05:30 AM EDT
"It was upward of thirty days before I saw the mouth of the big river. We anchored off the seat of the government. But my work would not begin till some two hundred miles farther on. So as soon as I could I made a start for a place thirty miles higher up...

"I didn't want any more loitering in the shade, and I made haste towards the station. When near the buildings I met a white man, in such an unexpected elegance of getup that in the first moment I took him for a sort of vision. I saw a high starched collar, white cuffs, a light alpaca jacket, snowy trousers, a clean necktie, and varnished boots. No hat. Hair parted, brushed, oiled, under a green-lined parasol held in a big white hand. He was amazing, and had a penholder behind his ear.

"I shook hands with this miracle, and I learned he was the Company's chief accountant, and that all the bookkeeping was done at this station. He had come out for a moment, he said, 'to get a breath of fresh air.' The expression sounded wonderfully odd, with its suggestion of sedentary desk-life. I wouldn't have mentioned the fellow to you at all, only it was from his lips that I first heard the name of the man who is so indissolubly connected with the memories of that time. Moreover, I respected the fellow. Yes; I respected his collars, his vast cuffs, his brushed hair. His appearance was certainly that of a hairdresser's dummy; but in the great demoralization of the land he kept up his appearance. That's backbone. His starched collars and got-up shirt-fronts were achievements of character..."

Joseph Conrad, Hea rt of Darkness (1902)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: mattw on Sunday, April 09 2006 @ 10:35 AM EDT
I refuse to re-enforce the misconception that people in suits are worth
listening to.

SCO wear suits.
RIAA wear suits.
MPAA wear suits.

I bet all the people who invest in them are impressed by their suits.

Sure, you can play along, but people who play with animals tend to get dirty.


[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for Disguise
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, April 09 2006 @ 06:56 PM EDT
If I worked for SCOG, whatever my job, I would wear the fanciest suits I could
find, with patterned vest and painted silk tie, and frills on my shirt collar
and cuffs, in an attempt to convince my family and friends that I was a piano
player in a whore house.

-Wang-Lo.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dress for success? Decide on your goals, then act to reach them, by David A. Wheeler
Authored by: ewe2 on Monday, April 10 2006 @ 01:35 AM EDT
Wow. I never expected the FUD to be so wildly successful. Now they've got even
you believing it. Whoever said FLOSS devs were long-haired hippies hit your
buttons, and now you're groping for a sense of validity.

They can't attack the code, so they sneer at the clothes. Big deal. Next.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dressing for the audience
Authored by: PeteS on Monday, April 10 2006 @ 03:47 AM EDT
I've read lots and lots of comments where '... I never interact with suit types...' etc. I think the article was clear that if that's the case, nobody cares (or knows).

I primarly develop hardware and systems these days, and I do have to interact with those who wear suits, be they customers, investors or my own executive management.

When I am developing, and there is no danger of the above being around, I tend to be in jeans or slacks and a comfortable shirt, because that comfortable feeling is what I personally need for best performance; when, however, I need to present the features of a system (or a proposed system) to the money people (and most money people are very conservative, at least here in the UK (and most of the eastern US, as I personally remember), then appropriate attire is a necessity to prevent distraction from the issue at hand.

Rather than guess, I usually ask the meeting convenor what the appropriate dress is for the occasion - after all, they are the ones getting all the people together and are usually in the best position to figure out what everyone (from outside, particularly) will be wearing. I don't want to wear a 3-piece suit in a development meeting where everyone else is in jeans, nor do I wish to look (relatively) slovenly in a business meeting where we may be doing £MM worth of business.

The author stated that it's when we meet the outside world that appearance matters. I would go one further - the appearance of our product matters too.

i.e. what it looks like has to meet a predefined (in a cultural way) appearance. What sells is not merely the inner product, however much we may rail against it - it also has to look pleasing to the eye.

PeteS

---
Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity

[ Reply to This | # ]

Clothes may make the man or woman, but they don't make FOSS
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 10 2006 @ 11:37 AM EDT
Pam, as you're repeatedly pointed out, the FOSS development community isn't
selling anything, and owes no obligation to anyone except others inte FOSS
community to develop software that's as good as it can possibly be. Open Source
software stands on its own merits and the rest of the world is free to take it
or leave it.

For the same reasons that FOSS doesn't need to change its image to further its
adoption by mainstream "enterprise" businesses, FOSS developers don't
need to "dress for success".

I refer you to ESR's very funny talk on the subject which he frequently gives in
which he suggests that if one is actively and personally trying to convince
corporate management to adopt FOSS software, one needs to dress as a
"prince from anothere country". He advises, for instance, against
wearing a suit and tie, since everyone (including top management) knows that
only junior executives wear suits and ties, and that the main job of junior
executives is fetching coffee for the executives.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Another call to change who we are
Authored by: raindog on Monday, April 10 2006 @ 06:16 PM EDT
I think I can distill this article down to "Free software will never get
anywhere unless all you guys get serious about how you look."

I'll file it in the same place as I filed:

"Free software will never get anywhere unless all you guys stop being such
jerks to newbies"

and

"Free software will never get anywhere unless you guys change your licenses
to make them more palatable to business."

My answer is: free software is doing fine with me writing GPL code, ignoring
mails that say "PROGRAM DON'T RUN WHY???", and doing it all without
ever putting a tie on. It'll continue to advance whether or not I personally
bend to other people's demands, so I might as well be me. Find another
approval-seeking patsy.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Look decent, be confident, no tie..
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 11 2006 @ 12:14 AM EDT
There are places for looking bad and for looking good. Wearing a tie isn't
necessary for the majority.

The work I do, wearing a tie is technically an OSHA hazard. I had one workplace
that mandated business casual with a tie. When I took my tie off to do some
work, I got flagged for being "unprofessional". When I dragged the VP
to the work station and had him operate it, with his tie dangling near the
"death machine"... and had him cycle it.... no more tie for me. Policy
was changed.

I've had the "suit" types in the business casual and better dress
steal from me and present what they stole to upper management as their own.
Thieves of knowledge. They eventually get found out, but management never seems
to learn that the "look" often doesn't have the abilty.

It goes along with the "paper", those certificates and degrees that
the unknowlegdeable seek as proof of actual ability. Like the many corporate
presidents and CEO's who've lost their jobs lately for the paper they
"have" and really didn't, though they do have the "look".

There are always those who look for the image because they don't know how to
look for the ability.

As for some of the "dress up", if you want to look more professional,
wear a sport jacket with your shirt and jeans. Levi's, western boots/shoes or
even sandals, oxford style shirt and a sport jacket is often all that is needed
to be accepted by the suits. You're comfortable and they note the jacket.

Most of what is impressive to the suits is how you carry yourself when you are
meeting them. Meet them as an equal regardless of dress and you can make a
positive impression.

Some of these guys look down on you to intimidate and control the situation. If
you don't allow it, there is a gain in respect. The Harley shirt-jeans guy in
the High Finance area probably displayed more of a positive attitude, which
impressed these guys more; hence the Harley shirts on the last day. Competence,
confidence, leadership and an inability to be controlled makes a bigger
difference.

As such, a pony tail, sport coat, sandals, jeans and an appropriate shirt for
the ensemble (hawaiian, western, oxford, whatever) for the locale can be
professional, provided you have the right attitude: confidence, competence, and
leadership says far more than a suit and tie.

It's all part of the professional look. The attitude. I wear Levi's boot cut
jeans, western boots and generally oxford shirts. When it's cool out, I don a
sport coat. I rarely wear ties as they are uncomfortable and an OSHA hazard.
Skip the nonsense about tailored shirts and such, I don't like anything close
around my neck. If you like them, fine, I don't.

I deal directly with customers and deal with them with confidence, and they
sense it.

Something I learned long ago in the Oil Field: the rich are so busy trying to be
rich they are unhappy and miserable and want everyone else to be that way too.
The super-rich either have been rich so long it no longer matters or got rich so
fast they never realized they were rich, so it really doesn't matter and they do
what they like.

If you approach everyone the same as the super-rich, with the confidence, it
doesn't matter what you wear. The rich wore Armani suits at the oil dereck,
complaining of the oil staining their clothes. The super-rich typically dressed
equal to or worse than me; one at $750 million wore flannel shirts, worn jeans
and old, crusty western boots. Rich was between $100k to about $50 million.
Super-rich was about $150 million and up.

Now, wearing an old, worn T-shirt, worn dirty jeans, open sandals, and being
nervous, uncertain,... kiss of death with any group you are with.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Designate some people as "public representative" for projects (good idea by jbb)
Authored by: dwheeler on Tuesday, April 11 2006 @ 05:14 PM EDT
It will be VERY HARD for anyone to read all the comments on this article, and jbb has a VERY VERY GOOD idea that I don't want to get lost in a sub-sub-sub-thread.

What prompted me to write this original article? Basically, I kept seeing the ineffective way that some developers explain themselves and their projects or issues (e.g., software patents) when they go to "the other guy's turf". Showing up to talk to a government official (on official business and on their turf) in rags, smelling like no showering has ever occurred, and mumbling unconfidently, are going to make it really hard for the official to even SEE their points. Yes, it happens. Which was Quinn's point, and mine too. Yes, the "best solution" should always win, but why should its advocates make it HARDER to see all the solutions objectively? If you have no particular goal, then my recommendation quickly becomes the null set (you're done!). However, many people have an objective that involves changing other people's minds; in the FLOSS world, Raymond recommends thinking about clothing, Perens wears a tie when speaking at government-type settings, and Bradley Kuhn wears a suit when necessary. Rick Moen just sent me an email saying that after talking with Raymond, "my ratty t-shirts and shorts invariably get replaced with polo shirt, slacks, and loafers for all dealings with the business world. I've never regretted that." And obviously both PJ and I agree on this article's point. If you're going out to convince members of other cultures, you need to consider their norms; you don't necessarily need to ADOPT what they do (e.g., use the prince of another country approach), but you better CONSIDER them.

I believe that ALL of us should be prepared to explain ourselves and our views, if necessary. Sometimes each of us needs to do a necessary task even if it's not what we're good at, because no one else can or will. But do not leave all of this to the corporations like Red Hat, etc... because while they do a lot of great stuff, in the end they must represent the company's objectives, which are not always the same as yours. So for those of you who don't normally do this kind of explaining, and suddenly have to, I'm trying to provide useful (if somewhat unpopular) advice. But obviously it'd be best if the task of talking to outsiders was done primarily by people who are actually good at it. I think nearly all of us can agree that some people are better at talking to non-technical people than others.

jbb suggests that "FOSS friendly people who are comfortable in suits [should] volunteer to become corporate reps for the FOSS projects of their choice." I think this is a REALLY REALLY GOOD IDEA, and one I don't want to get lost in the shuffle. I'd call this role "public representative", since it's not always talking to corporations (and some corporations are developers who don't need that). I'd suggest that the project website list the public representative(s) and how to contact him/her/them, if they have such a role. The public reps' job would be to explain the project and its resulting software to potential users of the product (who are NOT software developers). I suspect only larger projects, distributions, or lynchpin programs could justify having such a role... but where they make sense, I think they'd really make sense.

Then the text I wrote above would only be focused on the public reps, since they're the only ones "out in public" (for that project). I doubt software tools (like gcc) have a strong need for such a role, because the developers can speak the language of their users directly. But other projects really need someone who is good at translating the project into terms the nontechnical can understand, in ways that they will best understand.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )