The Center of Professional Excellence rates being well dressed as number two an indicator of professional behavior. It is second only to “communication skills” according to a 2010. According to Forbes dressing well at work can not only enhance how you come across to other people, it can enhance how you come across to yourself. Respect and enthusiasm for how you look often translates into enthusiasm for the job itself, and better productivity can lead to better opportunities later on. There are very strong correlations between the price of the suit and how much it’s wearer makes a year.

How we present ourselves most certainly depends on the context in which we are responding to.  From a social stand point I feel that for most people what we regard as “normal” dress for this function or that function is largely intuitive. Unless it is specified by the invite we have very little need be so specific about appearances; it therefore comes down to a matter of function whether that be comfort or warmth or anything else. We spend our entire lives, particularly as children, learning what to do and not to do and often our ques as adults are based upon that model. However, from a professional world standpoint the rules change drastically and are laden with a good deal more expectation. In part because, particularly for interviews, the employer has very little else to go on.

From a professional standpoint appearances can make or break someone.  Resumes are rather fixed in what they can tell an employer about a potential hire. Ultimately although it does come down to one’s personal skills on the job, how you come across as a person starts with your clothing. How you try and dress nice says a lot about your willingness to conform to the local culture and get fit in with co workers in part. It also says a lot about your personal initiative and ability to adapt. A good suit is not the end all, be all, but clothing and posture and language can all play massive parts in getting that job in the first place and getting ahead further along. Coming into a work place looking like last week’s laundry basket found under a bed will leave just as much of an impression as anything you have to say in that meeting. We’ve all heard that we shouldn’t judge by appearances. But whether we like it or not, whether we are even conscious of it or not, the judgement is there in the first 30 seconds or less; this goes back to childhood skills of watching and judging and absorbing the assumptions of those around us. Some things are just too deeply rooted into our culture to be easily rid of. In a very literal sense these things we form of the basis of judgement can be the difference between fire and hire, success and failure.

As far as I am concerned personally, I do not fuss overmuch about normal everyday wear, so making that extra effort with something that does matter, like an interview, is a bit nerve wracking. But there is a certain sense of satisfaction/ease to be had knowing that even if you screw something up you will look decent doing it. Do I think it is unfair that people can be judged and discounted by something other than their actual credibility? Yes, it is not very fair. But at the same time I understand the inherent logic behind it. If one can not take the time to look nice and be willing to go that extra step or two to make a presentation to someone else, one of two things has occurred: 1. They don’t actually care about the thing. In which case, why are they bothering to apply and why should you bother to hire. Or 2. They are careless, disregarding or lazy when it comes to their appearance, something that can be likely to translate into their work ethic. Dressing nicely usually does not take much and it is, in the end, really a display of initiative and positive-ness. The social world can be flexible, the professional one is not.

Sources:

Career Builder.com:  http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/16/living/workplace-professional-dress-cb/

Forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkwilliams/2013/08/09/first-impressions-count-the-business-value-of-dressing-for-success/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/cherylsnappconner/2013/01/01/can-dressing-well-increase-your-income-in-2013/

The workplace is changing every single year. But lets take a look at how the workplace was ten years ago…

We barely used technology (i.e. iphones, computers, ipads, powerpoints, prezis, webinars, emails) ten years ago. It was more face to face communication than ever. Take a look at the baby boomers compared to Generation X  (Ashe-Edmunds). Generation X takes more advantage in technology nowadays than the baby boomers. The reason? The world is changing, the workplace is changing fast everyday. Generation X grasps social media faster than baby boomers. For example, on you resume you could have social media skills listed as your top priority because your just that great at it. Furthermore, imagine the forty five year old you are completing against to gain that job. You realize that you must have more social media skills than “this guy” over there. You have the advantage in the company because you are up to date on tech “stuff”. But is this fair? I think not.

Forty five year olds should have the same chance as a graduate fresh out of college. I feel that employees should level the playing field for everyone, meaning, that social media should be taught upon on when hired. Not everyone has supreme social media skills, it is a taught skilled.

On the other hand, how is the workplace changing? Have we gotten lazy enough to rely on technology most of the time? In Sam Ashe-Edmunds article, he talks about how companies use telecommuting and technology use has affected people’s lives and will continue until we do not even have to attend work pretty soon. Telecommuting has a been a hot commodity for a while. We use it to work from home, or to attend meetings. Look at how technology has changed for employers. Not too long ago…we use to have blackberries. Remember those? Now, most companies have Iphones or Samsung phones for their employees because it provides more functionality than the blackberry did.

courtesy of: http://www.desummarize.com/apples-oranges-workplace/

So, how do employers view you based on how you dress? Many companies have different stand points on this. For example, Adult Swim require that you do not dress up everyday. You can wear casual clothes to work because you are expressing yourself, your everyday wear. Now, if you worked at a law company or a government building, then your clothes would be different. You would look much like the people above in the picture. But what else do you see in the picture? Are most of them attractive? The answer is yes because most employers view you based on looks. Its true folks. It is like a bad case of whos hot or not in high school. The more attractive someone is (especially woman) than the more likely that other clients will buy into that person and invest in the company. Not fair? I totally agree with you.

So, what else do you see in this picture?  You can respond in the comments below.

Source

Ashe-Edmunds, Sam. “How has the workplace changed?” 21 Nov, 2014. Web. <http://work.chron.com/workplace-changed-12823.html>

Technical communication has interested me for several years; mainly due to the fact that my father has been writing technical documents for a living and it seems very interesting. With my college graduation looming, enrolling in this class has further increased my level of interest.  During this semester, I would not say that my preconceived idea of “technical communication” has changed; more so, I would say that my knowledge on the subject has expanded to a whole new level that certainly makes me appreciate its existence and those who shape it. Originally, I held a very simple understanding of technical communication; that it basically dealt with instruction manuals and scientific discourse.  Although still true, that is only a minor aspect in the intricate understanding of technical communication that I have amassed.

Technical communication is ever present in our society today: from instruction manuals to road signs to government contracts.  The absolute main goal of technical communication is to be explicit, efficient, user-accessible, and free of loose interpretations or connotations.  However, for this to occur, an incessant connection to the audience is necessary.  The extent to which an audience influences the course of technical communication is vast and complex.  The techniques, language, and design choices used in technical communication should benefit the audience, appeal to them in a way that keeps them interested yet properly informed.  This class has taught me many different examples of effective technical communication based on audience.  It has also introduced me to significant figures in determining the definition and purpose of technical communication.

Katherine T. Durack is a prominent figure in the technical communication field that has greatly influenced my understanding on the subject.  She highlights three principals of technical communication that coincide with the aspects I discussed above; which have expanded my knowledge in her journal article, “Gender, Technology, and the History of Technical Communication.”

• Her first point states, “Technical writing exists within government and industry, as well as in the intersection between private and public spheres.”  This statement coincides with my point about technical writing being ever present in our society.

• Her second point states, “Technical writing has a close relationship to technology.”  This statement coincides with my point that technical communication needs to be direct and user-accessible.  One of the main ways an audience receives information is through quick technology that is readily available for a majority of the population.  Technical communicators need to be aware of the most current technologies to make sure their audience receives their info in the most user friendly way.  Also, there are so many new programs for designing the most efficient technical communication and the most successful communicator will be up-to-date with these programs.

• Her final point states, “Technical writing often seeks to make tacit knowledge explicit.”  Simple enough, this point coincides with my point that the communication needs to be simple yet accurate, easily understandable, and free of loose interpretations.

Source Cited:

Durack, Katherine T. (1997). Gender, Technology, and the History of Technical Communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 6(3): 249-60.