{"id":568,"date":"2006-02-20T21:19:04","date_gmt":"2006-02-21T05:19:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/glenandpaula.com\/archives\/2006\/02\/20\/staff-reading-cohort\/"},"modified":"2006-02-20T21:23:16","modified_gmt":"2006-02-21T05:23:16","slug":"staff-reading-cohort","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/glenandpaula.com\/wordpress\/archives\/2006\/02\/20\/staff-reading-cohort","title":{"rendered":"Staff Reading Cohort"},"content":{"rendered":"

Our staff team is going to begin a reading program together. We\u2019re picking our books now, and I thought some of you might be interested in the guidelines we\u2019re using. I sort of made these up and modified them based on the feedback I received.<\/p>\n

\nFrequency<\/b>
\nLet\u2019s start off with a book every two months. This will give us plenty of time to pursue our own reading without shortchanging our staff reads. We can always adjust the time later if we need to.<\/p>\n

Selection<\/b>
\nWe make our list up two full cycles in advance (one whole year). We each get to propose 4 books, and then we each rank the resulting list of 12. We tally the votes using an internet script (Condorcet method for any voting geeks out there). The top six books win. We\u2019ll decide the order in which the winners will be read informally, trying to alternate older books with newer books.<\/p>\n

Guidelines<\/b><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. We have to propose books that we have not read yet. Don\u2019t pick something you loved and think it will be good for everyone else. The point of this exercise is personal growth.<\/li>\n
  2. Having said that, it\u2019s okay if someone else proposes a book that you have already read and the team selects it. In that case, you don\u2019t have to reread it\u2013skimming will do.<\/li>\n
  3. Don\u2019t try to impress anyone. No need to pick academic philosophy or anything like that\u2013unless you really want to read it.<\/li>\n
  4. Let\u2019s try to alternate between new books and books older than we are. This isn\u2019t a rigid rule, but an aspiration.<\/li>\n
  5. Freshness is good when we\u2019re talking about something based on research, and age is good when we\u2019re talking about something based on reflection. If you want us to think about science or culture get a new book. If you want us to think about God or life get an older book. Unless you really don\u2019t want to\u2013these are guidelines and not rules. \ud83d\ude09<\/li>\n
  6. The books can be about anything, but let\u2019s keep fiction to a minimum.<\/li>\n
  7. Nothing over 500 pages without first clearing it with everyone else.<\/li>\n
  8. Nothing over $30 without clearing it first with everyone else.<\/li>\n
  9. If you want, you can propose multiple short books as a single recommendation (less than 200 pages total).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    After Reading<\/b>
    \nFollowing the reading of the book, by a specified deadline, the chooser will compose a few (3\u20135) questions for group discussion either in person, over the phone or online. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Anyway, it\u2019s not too elegant but it looks as though it will serve us well. We\u2019ve each made our suggestions and here\u2019s the list we\u2019re going to be voting on:<\/p>\n