The WSJ also reports that China’s health tracking app will be mandatory even after the Covid-19 pandemic is over.
Bluetooth is normally not active when the phone is locked – or the app is not in the foreground – in order to save battery and reduce security risks. Android is being modified to support this but it’s not clear if iOS is being updated.
Another problem with contact tracing apps is they cannot detect contacts across time. Some one sits on a bus seat or commuter light rail seat, coughs. Then gets up and leaves. Another person boards and sits in that seat and touches it with their hands. The BLE model is unable to detect this contact. Considering that the NYC subway is now thought to have been a major vector for diseases transmission, this is a serious short coming.
Another example – some one sits at a table at Starbucks, coughs on the table a few times and then leaves. 3 minutes later, someone else sits at that table and touches their hands on the table and later scratches their nose. The contact tracing app cannot detect surface contamination scenarios across time. While Starbucks might clean tables frequently, there is no guarantee.
There is no way to solve this problem using a BLE contact algorithm that does not store actual location data – the BLE tracking app only detects instantaneous “moment in time” contacts.
This week the CDC said that may be surface contamination is not a big source of infections so perhaps this is no longer a big factor.
Does it Matter? May be not?
And then perhaps none of this matters. In Utah, where they have traced the source of most Covid-19 patients’ contacts, about 60% were traced to close family contacts that had the disease and about 25% to close social contacts. That’s 85% of all traced contacts. There were not many random connection contacts leading to becoming infected. Originally, China thought about 60% were due to random contacts – but it might be appropriate to extrapolate that – from congested cities where much of the population travels via public transit – to many U.S. states (like Utah) where public transit use may be just 1-2% of the population.
Moving Further Apart Can Increase Signal Strength!
Another interesting problem with BLE-based tracking apps. They rely on the BLE 1 mw discovery process which can send a signal out to about 10 meters. They combine this with the Received Signal Strength Indicator to estimate that a contact is within about 6-7 feet. In a pure “free space” environment, signal strength can approximate distance. But the real world is not a “free space” environment.
First, if the phone is in your left pocket and you stand several feet from another person on your right, whose phone is in their right pocket, the direct path may have lost 20 db of signal strength due to your body blockage. The software thinks the two of you are far apart when you are actually standing next to each other.
Second, in the real world, radio signals do not travel in a straight line from transmitter direct to receiver. Instead, signals reflect off of objects in the environment. Some times the reflected signals arrive at the receiver in a way that increases their apparent strength and in other cases they arrive in a way that decreases their apparent strength. This is known as “multi-path”.
Think of a pond of calm water. Toss in a rock and see how the waves move across the surface. What happens when the waves strike the shore or another rock – they typically reflect or bounce back creating a new wave front. In a complex environment, there are many wave fronts traversing that water. In some places, wave heights may combine momentarily to create a higher wave, while in others they may combine to create a deeper trough.
The effect of this in the Bluetooth contact tracing app scenario is that – and this has been tested in the real world – there are real scenarios where people moving further apart see a stronger received signal strength!
The software erroneously thinks these two people have increased their risk when they are moving further apart!.
The opposite can also occur – as people move closer together, due to multipath, the devices may sense a drop in signal strength and erroneously think there is less risk.
The Need for Controlled Trials
This is why this technology must be tested in the real world before it is rolled out to entire populations. The bottom line assessment is: Does it detect actual contacts we need to worry about – without missing contacts we do need to worry about? Does it result in an actual, measured decrease in the spread of Covid-19?
To answer those questions requires controlled trials, just as controlled trials were required for the use of hydroxchloroquinine.
Some will argue no controlled trial is necessary as the use of the app is harmless. However, if you are periodically placed in 14-day quarantines – unnecessarily – harming your income and mental health, is that truly harmless?
If not tested, deploying smart phone contact tracing apps is a mass population medical experiment without informed consent – which is illegal in the United States. But given we are dealing with public health, laws no longer matter, of course.
“Low code” means using “drag and drop” tools to create software applications. These systems make the creation of user interfaces easy, and provide functionality through similar drag and drop interfaces. We used to call this “Rapid Application Development” or RAD.
I have long though future software would be created with advanced tools that simplify the development process, particularly for straight forward applications of modest size. MIT App Inventor, and Scratch, are examples of drag and drop programming interfaces. Scratch is for teaching programming concepts to children. App Inventor leverages the Scratch concept into developing mobile apps for Android. You can learn about Microsoft’s Power Apps feature here.
Those of us who have seen Neil Ferguson’s ICL Covid sim model have the same views as this computational epidemiologist:
As Ferguson himself admits, the code was written 13 years ago, to model an influenza pandemic. This raises multiple questions: other than Ferguson’s reputation, what did the British government have at its disposal to assess the model and its implementation? How was the model validated, and what safeguards were implemented to ensure that it was correctly applied? The recent release of an improved version of the source code does not paint a favorable picture. The code is a tangled mess of undocumented steps, with no discernible overall structure. Even experienced developers would have to make a serious effort to understand it.
I’m a virologist, and modelling complex processes is part of my day-to-day work. It’s not uncommon to see long and complex code for predicting the movement of an infection in a population, but tools exist to structure and document code properly. The Imperial College effort suggests an incumbency effect: with their outstanding reputations, the college and Ferguson possessed an authority based solely on their own authority. The code on which they based their predictions would not pass a cursory review by a Ph.D. committee in computational epidemiology.
This is a troubling issue where we rely on software for every feature of consumer products. Software that can be updated to add features can also be downgraded to remove features.
Years ago, Amazon deleted e-book copies of George Orwell’s novel, 1984. Apparently Amazon did not have the distribution rights signed up correctly and customers who had bought the e-book addition discovered Amazon remotely deleted their copy of the book. (Amazon did refund the purchase price). That this was a giant corporation removing, of all things, 1984, was a bit of a shock to many.
Meanwhile, the FAA has proposed a massive, Rube Goldberg-like regulatory scheme for small unmanned aerial systems (SUAS), also known as remote control model aircraft. The FAA envisions a world where all model aircraft regulations are enforced by software, logging their position with government designated Internet databases, once every second during flight – rather than the traditional trust and enforcement mechanisms of all other laws. There are multiple issues with the FAA’s proposal, but one side effect of their attempt to enforce the law via software is they’ve managed to eliminate essentially all indoor flight by model airplanes and quadcopter – because a one-size fits all rule does not work. They’ve also created a monster that would enable automated drone fleets – and consumer drones – to be enlisted by foreign adversaries in international espionage, permitting – indeed, encouraging – all drones to collect aerial imagery and other data as they fly over our homes and cities.
It wasn’t so much that the new app that the Iowa Democratic Party had planned to use to report its caucus results didn’t work. It was that people were struggling to even log in or download it in the first place. After all, there had never been any app-specific training for his many precinct chairs.
No training? This points to a lack of common sense and systems analysis at the start of the project. How was this missed?
Further, they likely had not created use cases, which would have caught the next set of failures.
So last Thursday Mr. Bagniewski, the chairman of the Democratic Party in Polk County, Iowa’s most populous, decided to scrap the app entirely, instructing his precinct chairs to simply call in the caucus results as they had always done.
The only problem was, when the time came during Monday’s caucuses, those precinct chairs could not connect with party leaders via phone. Mr. Bagniewski instructed his executive director to take pictures of the results with her smartphone and drive over to the Iowa Democratic Party headquarters to deliver them in person. She was turned away without explanation, he said.
I live in the state that featured Cover Oregon, a $450 million health exchange that never enrolled a single individual subscriber. It was a complete failure. Healthcare.gov received most of the media attention concerning large government failed software projects but several state projects also failed.
Both health exchange fiascos – and the Iowa Caucus disaster – point to over reliance on software and an assumption that more tech is always better. Tech can make things better, but only when qualified people are involved in all aspects of the project.
Shadow was also handicapped by its own lack of coding know-how, according to people familiar with the company. Few of its employees had worked on major tech projects, and many of its engineers were relatively inexperienced.
Only 25% of precinct chairs were able to successfully install the app. Colossal failure. The system relied, in part, on “security by obscurity”, which never works.
My Disastrous Hair Cut at Great Clips – and how their information systems contributed – a Case Study
Plus, suggestions for any business on how this should have been handled
Sections As I have learned more about the business of hair cutting this has probably expanded to my longest ever post!
Where Things Went Wrong
Update (things learned after writing the above)
About the Hair Cutting Franchise Market (This is probably the most interesting part – the industry is basically a scam that preys upon young women – almost all workers are female – pays minimum wage, no benefits, and they must provide their own hair cutting tools after completing 1,000 to 2,100 hour licensing programs. Most franchise chain stores are owned by passive investors – its a cash flow generator. Owners make a lot of money while staff pay is on par with fast food restaurant workers.)
Went to Great Clips for a hair cut. Big mistake! My hair is always a few inches long and cut back, at most, to the top of my ears. Great Clips stylists refer to their Clip Notes database to supposedly read notes on my prior haircuts there – but unknown to me she is reading the notes for a different client. Without warning, she runs a razor along the side of my head, cutting my hair which is 2+ inches in length to 4 mm or 1/6th of an inch in length. I tell her “What?” and she proceeds to say that this is what the computer says while whacking off the other side of my head. Shortly after she has literally shaved the sides and back of my head in a crude attempt to balance her butchering job, another stylist tells her she is reading the notes for “Nick” who was a no show and is giving me the wrong haircut. At this point, she rushes me out with a hair cut looking like a Nazi.
How on earth could an organization be this incompetent? That is the subject to this case study and based on my research and observations I will never go to a chain hair cutting place again. They really are that bad.
Companies often add information systems – because they can – without thinking through possible failure scenarios and how those impact workers and customers. This is a case study of how a common failure scenario, and a distracted or incompetent stylist abruptly shaved the side of my head – leaving me with a Nazi-style hair cut. Unbelievable. Yes, a semi-Nazi looking hairstyle which will take up to 4 months to recover from.
Great Clips white supremacist/Nazi haircuts are even a meme on social media.
My background is information systems (M.S. in software engineering) and an M.B.A. Doing systems analysis, organizational and information systems architecture is what I did, and this is a classic business case study.
Great Clips is a large chain of franchised hair cutting businesses that typically operate at local retail strip malls.
Their business model is to be the low cost franchiser of hair cuts for men, women and children (versus SuperCuts, a chain which seems to charge a little more and offers more services or versus locally run barber shops and styling salons.)
A few years ago, Great Clips began using a data base to track their customers’ hair cuts. They call this Clip Notes. Stylists made notes in the database to – hopefully – guide the next hair cut (since you probably will not have the same stylist each time).
Separately, Great Clips began offering a smart phone app, and eventually a web app, to enable customers to reserve a time in advance, versus being a walk in customer and having to wait for the next available stylist.
These two data systems, combined, to produce a very undesirable outcome!
I was a walk in customer to the local Great Clips. While I have only been to this store 3 or 4 times (we recently moved) I had gone to Great Clips for 7 years (mostly at my prior address). Because some customers reserved on the app and a couple of other walk-ins were ahead of me, I had to wait a bit – ended up being about 30 minutes.
Where Things Went Wrong
They went to their waiting list and called for “Nick”. But Nick was not in the store (if he was a walk in) or never showed up (if he was reserved). When it was obvious Nick wasn’t there they went to the next name on the list – me. And this is where everything went haywire at Great Clips.
The stylist, unknown to me, was still thinking I was Nick and read the hair cutting notes of Nick – who apparently has a super short military style hair cut. She mentioned something about a 1 1/2″ razor and immediately takes the razor and buzz cuts the side of my head. I said, hey, wait, this doesn’t seem right!
UPDATE: Turns out she said a “1.5 razor” and I interpreted this as “1.5 inch razor” as that is about how wide the razor looked to me. But 1.5 is a razor head guide number denoting a razor that leaves just 4mm long hair on the head – literally an Army buzz cut. How is an ordinary consumer supposed to know what a 1.5 guide number means?
I’ve never seen their Clip Notes entry for me and I know that sometimes the stylist cut my hair using a comb and then running a razor along the comb line to trim a clean cut. I thought she was referring to that. I had no idea that her reference to a 1.5 razor meant she was about to run a buzz cut across the side of my head.
And while I’m telling her this isn’t right, she then does the same thing on the other side of my head.
In matter of less than a minute, this Great Clip’s stylist has obliterated my hair. She realizes at this point that somethings not right and buzz cutting the top of my head is going to make it worse. She tries to balance the look and ends up shaving off the back of my head. I’m now left with shaved sides and back of my head with hair too long for that style, on top. A Nazi haircut. (I later learned that others refer to this on social media as the Great Clips “white supremacists” haircut – that’s nasty.)
About now, a different stylist calls the name of the next person still supposedly on the waiting lit- and calls my name! But I’m already having my hair slaughtered – what?
This other stylist realizes what just happened and tells my stylist that she has the wrong customer and is referring to the hair cutting notes of Nick, not Ed.They just gave me someone else’s haircut. And worse they give me someone else’s lousy haircut – done really badly, and I mean really sloppy and poorly done.
This action by the stylist, surprisingly, appears to qualify as a 4th degree misdemeanor assault in my state. Crazy, huh? But in reality, she will face no repercussions. Great Clips has no quality assurance program nor metrics on stylist customer satisfaction – literally, no accountability.
Broken Business Processes
There are multiple things going wrong at Great Clips:
Great Clips lacks a procedure to verify and cross match the computer record with the actual customer. Simply asking the customer for his or her name and cross referencing to the record or reading the name from the record out loud would have spotted the error immediately. This is either a systems analysis failure, a design failure, or a training failure. At this time, they do not have any process/method for verifying the names match. (I have since spoken to a manager and this is true – they don’t have an existing procedure to verify anything.)
“No shows” are a frequent problem with their scheduling system. Some “walk ins” went to Starbucks to wait – but did not return in time. Some “walk ins” walked out after finding the wait time was longer than they could wait and did not come back. And some of the reserved customers never showed up. This fiasco started the moment Nick did not show up. This led to a cascade of errors starting with the no show, not verifying the customer record, and then applying someone else’s hair cut to a different customer. “No shows” are a catalyst for problems and they appear to have no procedures in place to reduce no shows or how to prevent them from causing additional problems.
Having not verified the correct customer and data records, the stylist then failed to communicate properly with the customer. The stylist was distracted, not competent or a ditz (a.k.a. scatter brained). Before she touched my hair, she should have confirmed my name with the record. She should have noticed that the description bore no relationship to my existing hair style (which was several inches long). She should have explained clearly what she was about to do and/or ask me specifically how I wanted my hair cut (I was never asked and assumed she had correctly read my prior visit notes). She used terminology that was meaningful to her but not the customer. To illustrate, at past haircuts, the stylist combed out to the edge of my hair and then ran a razor along the comb – not my head. I thought her reference to a razor was to its use along the comb. She has poor communication skills and failed to properly communicate on multiple levels.
The moment the stylist was aware of the error, the proper customer service oriented response would have been to own it, apologize, say there is no charge and offer to make the next hair cut free. Instead, she rushed through the rest of this, leaving the wrong haircut done badly, with straggling hair in places, rough cuts on both the left and right, and charged me, albeit at a discount. An hour later I saw the mess in the mirror, looked online for what to do about a screwed up haircut and the word was, call or visit them back the same day. It took a phone call and two more trips back to get a refund. Related: When you are a guy and they’ve shaved much of your head there is nothing that can be done to fix it at this point except to live with the embarrassment for a few months.
They do not seem to collect any metrics. When the stylist messed up, no notation was made anywhere. Even when I went back to the store (twice!) no note was recorded about the stylist’s error. They do not do customer satisfaction surveys – in other words, they have no metrics to evaluate product and service quality. Without metrics, they can never become a better organization! Another way to view this is that there is no quality assurance program and no one is tracking their output.
A complaint to Great Clips corporate headquarters was responded to with “its the franchisee’s problem, not ours”. This is a common response from franchisers who take no responsibility for their franchisees’ actions. Quality organizations, like Starbucks, manage their franchisees to deliver consistent services throughout all of their franchised stores. But too many franchise operations operate like Great Clips and absolve themselves of responsibility.
A franchiser can either stand behind the franchisees or in this case, hide behind them!
In effect, the Great Clips brand is meaningless because they are not able to deliver consistent quality repeatedly across their foot print. Or, the corollary: the Great Clips brand name means inconsistent hair cuts, every time! (See update at end)
Incredibly, both a friend of mine and my adult son had the exact same experience at other Great Clips! There too they used a different customer’s records and gave my son someone else’s haircut (he has not returned since this happened 3 years ago in Eugene, Oregon). This points to poor management at Great Clips corporate and not adequately placing appropriate processes across their franchisees. This failure scenario for their Clip Notes usage has been going on for years and they’ve done nothing to fix it. Indeed, there’s a long online list of bad experiences at Great Clips.
Corporate said they would forward my comments to the local store. After a day, I’d heard nothing so I stopped back in the store. Every person working there said they’d never heard the name of the stylist that butchered my hair! I am wondering if the store employs unlicensed stylists? They took my name and number and I did eventually hear back from a supervisor. They refunded my money and offered me a free future haircut. I will not go back of course (See update at end).
The “free haircut” offer expires in 8 weeks – but it will be 4-5 months before my hair has grown out such that this offer is a bit of an insult. They had repeated opportunities to respond in a positive customer service oriented fashion, but instead did the wrong thing at each step. This was when I chose to file a formal complaint with the state licensing office and sent a detailed version of this case study to the office of their CEO. This paragraph is probably the most important one in this case study – they lack a customer service mind set and have no idea how to be a pro-active customer service minded organization.
I posted a short description of what happened, with 1-star reviews on Google, Yelp and Facebook.
There is a corollary to (8). In the 1980s, business management guru Dr. Tom Peters noted that, back then, businesses only heard from about 1 in 28 dissatisfied customers. The other 27 just never returned – but told 10-12 of their friends, on average, of their experience. Today bad business interactions get shared far more widely. It’s not just a few bad reviews – its what happens when recipients of poor service tell far more friends via social media sharing.
This disaster had some personal costs, let alone the psychological self image/self esteem issues that many of us deal with. In the aftermath, I canceled out of many events, groups and activities out through the end of November as I do not want to be see at these events looking like this.
I’d gone in for this haircut just before a rare all family get together – the result was bad enough that we did not do any group portraits.
I have revised my own procedure for hair cuts – who knew we need a procedures list for purchasing a hair cut? (1) Read reviews; (2) ALWAYS bring a photo of yourself with the correct haircut; (3) if they refer to prior notes, request they read out the name and the description of what they are going to do – do not permit them to touch your hair until they have clearly stated what they will be doing; (4) Don’t assume they have appropriate procedures or competent staff; (5) Take charge of the hair cut – ask them about each tool they are going to use, (6) if at any time something is not right yell (really) “STOP!” and go no further until the problem is understood by the stylists, and (7) write down the full name of the stylist or barber and their license # for future reference, if needed. RELATED: It’s noted that guys do not know much about hair cuts (true for me) and we tend to space out and not pay close attention during our hair cuts. In fact, we need to be focused on the cut as it happens and yell Stop when it goes off the rails.
The list I sent to the CEO’s office has more items but this is enough for you to get the general idea of numerous process failures and customer service mistakes made at every step. I do not expect to hear anything back from Great Clips corporate regarding my many suggestions for fixing their deficiencies. However, quietly behind the scenes they will probably adopt at least a couple of them 🙂
Obviously, I am never going back to Great Clips.
I learned it takes up to a week for Corporate to forward customer satisfaction issues to the local franchisee. A week? That says customer satisfaction is not a high priority. They need to fix that. Amazon can ship a product in a day but Great Clips takes a week to electronically send customer feedback to their stores?
After I shared my bad experience with friends on social media, several said never go to Great Clips. As one put it, they are “the worst of the worst”. Ouch. I also found a few people saying “only White people go there” and their haircuts for guys look like “white supremacist” haircuts (true). I searched Instagram for #GreatClips tag and that’s all I found after scanning through hundreds of photos. Double ouch. I had no idea that retail chain hair cutting places had such reputational issues.
Above, I wrote about a “1.5 inch” razor. In doing some research, I learned my interpretation was completely wrong. In fact, when she said “1.5 razor” she was referring to a number that designates a specific razor head size (a number that can vary by razor manufacturer). In fact, the 1.5 razor head is a cutter that cuts the hair to just 4mm in length! When I said she did a buzz cut on me, I was not joking. My hair went from several inches long to 1/6″. The stylist used terminology that was meaningless to the customer and failed to communicate what she was about to do, after reading the wrong notes. Having learned this I feel better about having filed a complaint with the licensing office. She screwed up on multiple levels.
I did hear about a week later from their area district manager and she is apologetic, will be working with the store manager to get more training for staff there, and offered to refer me to a stylist that she regards as excellent (but I will not go again to Great Clips). There were some comments about certain people’s abilities, skill sets and training needs that I will not mention publicly. I believe she recognizes they messed up – I was pretty forceful during our phone conversation, which is the opposite of how I usually deal with things. I hope they will be making some changes but I will be going elsewhere for future haircuts. (See below – I’ve learned more about the franchise hair cutting business and I no longer plan to go to franchised outlets – see below).
Bottom line is they had a series of business process failures – starting with the “no show” problem, then no procedure to ensure they were matching the customer with the customer record, then apparently no process to handle mess ups. As I noted above, the moment they knew they messed up they needed to own it, apologize, immediately say there is no charge and offer the next hair cut on them. They need a system in place to gather metrics when staff make big mistakes and to collect customer satisfaction data. At present they have no metrics and thus, can’t identify failures, learn from them, and develop improved processes.
Great Clips knows their stylists can infuriate their customers. Why else would this be their odd policy “for safety and privacy”:
This ends up – hopefully – as a useful business case study and lesson for other businesses.
About the Hair Cutting Franchise Market
A benefit of being retired is I can choose to learn more about obscure subjects like hair cut franchise models and businesses, if I want to.
The local hair cut chain store franchise is primarily a business pursued by passive investors. That is, they put up the money to set up the business: hair cut places are very low cost – minimal furnishing, low inventory. The owner generally has zero experience in cutting hair – it’s strictly a business investment. It is also a service business that Amazon probably will not squeeze out of the market – and a decent salon will get repeat business from their customers.
You don’t need to know anything about cutting hair
It’s pretty darn recession-proof”
As we will see, the owners make a very good income. The stylists, however, make crap wages, receive no benefits and must provide their own hair cutting tools. The industry is basically a scam that preys upon young women who make up 92% of the work force.
The owner hires a salon manager who hires staff, which are independent contract workers (no benefits) and not employees in the traditional sense. Stylists have to purchase and provide their own hair cutting equipment. The entire business is a scam that preys on mostly young women.
The U.S. has a surplus of licensed staff for working in hair salons so the pay is low ($9-$12/hour is typical). This came about because the government, for a long time, provided scholarship money for students to pursue training in cosmetology, in spite of the markets being saturated with workers.
“It’s a high turnover industry with a bunch of women who are used to not staying in a job very long or being treated very well. In that industry, you have to treat your employees well; I had a jump on that. I’m good with people, and figuring out what their natural skills are. “
It is generally expected that the investor will have sufficient funds to set up multiple store fronts (say, three or more). The business produces cash flow for the investor and the growth opportunity comes in three forms: (1) initially to max out the number of customers per store, (2) to open additional stores, and (3) to sell a successful retail business after it is up and running. A typical start up cost is about $130k to $250k but may net up to half that in income per year (or more) which is a great ROI for a passive investment. Franchisees pay fees back to Great Clips.
Investors may need to open up more local stores to prevent cannibalization of sales from new Great Clips outlets in their neighborhood. If the investor does not do so, Great Clips may sell the right to another local investor whose stores may eat into sales of the existing storefronts. On the flip side, perhaps in smaller markets, Great Clips may prevent competing franchisees from opening, thereby providing a local brand monopoly.
The typical worker is a recent graduate of a “beauty college” trade school and is looking to build experience. Others are older workers who wish to work part time or who were not successful in or dislike the intensity of high end salons offering more services. The workers are almost entirely female (92%) – and again, low paid.
The work can be either okay or grueling – depending on the facility and the manager. And training requirements vary widely, by state, plus other factors that make life as a student and job seeker a mess. I suspect the field has a Pareto 80:20 distribution – for 20% of those in the field, this is a great career choice earning a good income at an independent salon. The other 80% struggle or work part time.
Visiting “beauty college” web sites is amusing. First, all of the photos of guys show a military style razor cut with super short hair and a tuff on top. This seems to be a post 9/11 phenomena where all guys are now, apparently, expected to have a U.S. Army hair cut. Indeed, as the chain haircutting stores have proliferated this too is the male haircut image they push – because its fast, low cost and high volume. 70% of Great Clips customers are male – and the buzz cut is a fast hair cut, whether the client wants it or not.
At Great Clips, stylists are expected to do 4 hair cuts per hour. They may receive a productivity bonus if they exceed this level. The Army or white supremacist haircut takes less than 5 minutes, enabling stylists to exceed their quotas. (I saw a Great Clips discussion saying that some guys haircuts are done in as little a 2 minutes – that was my experience.)
Stylists are encouragde to “up sell” products like shampoos and conditioners, which sell in the salons for much more than equivalent products sell for at your local drug store. Making money doing men’s haircuts is difficult – that’s why it has to be a high volume business. Or, a full service salon offering hair color, perms, weaves, extension and other services. In fact, many in the field say the high end services that women purchase are what make salons successful.
The pay of a stylist in a franchise chain is near minimum wage ($9-$12/hour) plus tips. It can be hard to offer good service that encourages tips when stylists are working against the clock.
For most stylists at these places, its an opportunity to build experience, possibly build a client list, and move on to a higher paying opportunity elsewhere or to possibly become a salon manager or assistant manager. (It depends highly on the local manager as to whether it is a good place to work or not a good place to work.)
The next step for a stylist is to rent a chair at a higher end salon and offer premium high $ services (which includes hair color, perms, weaves, extensions, braiding etc). But to do this requires having a client list to start. Hence, the franchise chains are a starting point for those in the field.
In my market there are about 35 places that do hair cuts (5 barbershops and the rest as mostly independent hair salons). All of the barbershops are locally owned and have 4.7 to 5.0 star ratings on user reviews. All but one of the local hair salons have very high ratings – while the hair salons do cut guy’s hair, most of them are oriented towards female clients. And then there are the retail chains like Great Clips and Supercuts with 3.7 to 4.0 ratings. Some of the retail chains are sometimes seen as scams that prey upon investors, and as shown above, prey upon low paid female workers.
After several months of hair regrowth I will be going to one of the highly rated locally owned barbershops. No more chain outlets for me!
At a Great Clips in Chilicothe, OH, (near Columbus), 49-year-old Jimmy Nguyen was so displeased with the haircut he received that he punched the manager in the face. Those of us who’ve suffered a Great Clips haircut have likely acted out similar fantasies in our minds, though few of us punch our stylists in the face.
Rough day for Nguyen, but come on. It’s Great Clips. What did he expect?
Windows 10 Home now forces you to sign in with a Microsoft account—unless you disconnect from the internet first. Microsoft has always wanted you to sign in with a Microsoft account, but now it’s going even further.
“I don’t think a four year degree is necessary to be proficient at coding. I think that’s an old, traditional view. What we found out is that if we can get coding in the early grades and have a progression of difficulty over the tenure of somebody’s high school years, by the time you graduate kids like Liam, as an example of this, they’re already writing apps that could be put on the App Store,” TechCrunch quoted Cook as saying on Friday.
This occurred because the tools to develop software applications are far more advanced than in the past and are easier to use. 25 to 50 years ago, development of much software required an understanding of processor architecture and system hardware (and programming in assembly language), and the development and use of efficient algorithms to make use of the then limited hardware capabilities. Today, fast hardware often substitutes for inefficient and bloated software. Which makes sense as writing software is expensive while hardware is now cheap.
Of course there are still many positions requiring a college or graduate degree level training. But even there, experience may offer a good substitute to a degree.
Where this is headed, naturally, is the concept of licensed professional engineers (P.E.) in software engineering. Development of a professional engineering licensing exam for software engineering was done many years ago. I believe Texas was the only state to offer the exam; however, due to low participation, they are discontinuing the software engineering PE exam as of April 2019.
I noticed my PC was bogged down and the CPU cooling fan has powered up to a higher speed. What’s up?
Google claims the Software Reporter Tool scans your PC looking for malware that may interfere with the Chrome experience. I’m not sure I want Google scanning and peaking inside my computer, at all of the files on my computer. I really have no idea what this app is doing or what information it is collecting, who has access to the data, how long it will be stored, and how it will be used. Since I seldom use Chrome on this PC, I went ahead and uninstalled Chrome. However, the following describes a way to prevent the tool from running. (I already run both Windows Defender and a second anti-malware application – the SRT seems superfluous.)
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.