J Residence / DK-LAB

first_imgCopyHouses•Jakarta, Indonesia Projects ShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOrhttps://www.archdaily.com/904077/j-residence-dk-lab Clipboard ShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOrhttps://www.archdaily.com/904077/j-residence-dk-lab Clipboard “COPY” Area:  977 m² Year Completion year of this architecture project 2018 ArchDaily “COPY” Indonesia Year: center_img CopyAbout this officeDK-LABOfficeFollowProductsWoodGlassConcrete#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousesJakartaYakartaIndonesiaPublished on October 23, 2018Cite: “J Residence / DK-LAB” 22 Oct 2018. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021. ISSN 0719-8884Browse the CatalogLouvers / ShuttersTechnowoodSunshade SystemsGlassMitrexSolar GreenhouseMetal PanelsAurubisPatinated Copper: Nordic Green/Blue/Turquoise/SpecialCoffee tablesFlexformCoffee Table – GipsyCurtain WallsIsland Exterior FabricatorsPace Gallery Envelope SystemWoodSculptformTimber Battens in Double Bay HouseStonesCosentinoSilestone and Dekton in Villa OmniaBricksNelissenInner Wall Bricks – LückingPanels / Prefabricated AssembliesULMA Architectural SolutionsAir Facade PanelsWoodBlumer LehmannData Processing for Wood ProjectsEducational ApplicationsFastmount®Hidden Panel Fastener at Massey UniversitySealants / ProtectorsTOPCRETMicro-Coating – Baxab®More products »Save世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否翻译成中文现有为你所在地区特制的网站?想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?Take me there »✖You’ve started following your first account!Did you know?You’ll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my stream Houses Architects: DK-LAB Area Area of this architecture project Save this picture!© Mario Wibowo+ 21Curated by Fernanda Castro Share Photographs Manufacturers: Alno, Eagon, LuxteelSave this picture!© Mario WibowoRecommended ProductsSkylightsKalwall®Skyroofs® – Specialty Skyroof® ApplicationsWindowsAir-LuxSliding Window – CurvedDoorsSky-FrameInsulated Sliding Doors – Sky-Frame ArcWindowsSolarluxSliding Window – CeroText description provided by the architects. The residential site of central Jakarta is characterized as a series of narrow and deep rectangular shape. As the narrow side of the site is on the front road side, when the building is actually seated, only the short side of the elevation is exposed from the entrance road, which is likely to lead to a design emphasizing frontality of the residence. In fact, it is the typical scenery of the area that shows only series of narrow elevational compositions configured with fence and frontal surfaces of the house.Save this picture!© Mario WibowoWe have started from how we can reveal the stereoscopic aspects of the house. A part of the front elevation is taken out to set back and the second floor mass that are not parallel to the road are projected out and recognized as a volume. While this approach may seem new to the area, it is obvious that it made a difference to the streetscape around the site.Save this picture!© Mario WibowoIt was also one of the key interests from the beginning that the travel in the direction of the long side from the entrance can be a significant architectural experience in this kind of land. It was intended for occupants to walk around many corners and navigate multi-leveled spaces through the nature until they arrive at the final destination, the living and dining area.Save this picture!First floor planTriangular cut in the roof and an outdoor court garden inserted in the middle of the house also give variations to volumes laid out on the site, which eventually make indoor spaces animated.In order to locate the outdoor programs like pool and gardens as close as possible to the living space, they dig into the mass and create a tight relationship with spaces around them.Save this picture!© Mario Wibowo The pool is closely surrounded by the living room right next to it and the master bedroom cantilevered out directly above. They create intimacy and coziness by being connected visually and physically.Main living room integrated with dining and kitchen area is also enclosed by pool and the court garden which draws a lot of light deep into the house.  Second floor library is connected to living room by opening above.Save this picture!© Mario WibowoAs a result, a variety of complex residential programs are stacked up three-dimensionally in a narrow and deep site but still have rooms to breathe and to feel the openness. That’s the significant strategy of how to convert the unfavorable site condition to more reasonable one.  The main stair is sitting in the center and trying to make people walk as much as possible to experience space with nature everyday. On the third floor, the triangular roofs were used for high ceiling rooms such as an indoor driving range, a gym and a theater. The stunning view from the terrace and the gaze overlooking the gym from the street serve as the main role of the third floor as objects on top.Save this picture!© Mario WibowoProject gallerySee allShow lessThe Roof House / MILODAMALOSelected ProjectsUMI / CAPDSelected Projects Share J Residence / DK-LAB Photographs:  Mario Wibowo Manufacturers Brands with products used in this architecture project J Residence / DK-LABSave this projectSaveJ Residence / DK-LABlast_img read more

Serial rapist Nathan Loebe convicted in Pima County, Arizona, after testing of rape kit backlog

first_imgABC News(TUSCON) — A Tucson man was convicted of raping seven women over a 12-year period after police received a grant to test rape kits and changed a “mindset” over which kits get tested.“The old view was if you have a situation where the victim reported it was without consent but the defendant or suspect reported that it was with consent and there was nothing to corroborate either way, there was the idea that maybe it wasn’t worth testing the sexual assault kit because it doesn’t show consent versus lack of consent,” Nicol Green, deputy attorney for Pima County, told ABC News.Green, along with deputy attorney Tracy Miller, prosecuted the case against Nathan Loebe, who was found guilty on 12 counts of sexual assault, five counts of kidnapping, three counts of stalking and one count of attempted sexual assault, according to the Associated Press, for cases that occurred between 2003 and 2015.“Victims reported that they met a man in a bar or through an online dating site. He provided false names and lied about who he was,” Pima County Attorney’s Office wrote on Facebook. “Most of the victims reported that they had drinks with the man, and then they either lost consciousness or became incapacitated. The man then sexually assaulted them.”Loebe had previously been a suspect in sexual assault cases, according to the Arizona Daily Star, but claimed sexual activity had occurred with consent.It wasn’t until law enforcement started following the “forklift approach” of testing every rape kit regardless of investigation details that they were able to build a case against Loebe.“Quite frankly it was a mindset in law enforcement and prosecution in terms of the decision to test a particular sexual assault case looking at that case specifically rather than the big picture,” Green said. “As is often the case in law enforcement, as time goes on, ideas and priorities shift, and the recognition that this is a way to identify serial rapists kind of took hold.”Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall began prioritizing the testing of rape kits in 2014, Green said, and the attorney’s office worked with Tucson Police to get ahead of a growing backlog.In 2015, the Tucson Police Department received a $1 million grant from the Manhattan District Attorney’s office in New York, which funded a project to support the testing of rape kit backlogs from settlements with international banks that violated U.S. sanctions.That grant funded the testing of about 1,450 cases, according to Green, as well as a dedicated detective at Tucson Police and a victim advocate who worked out of the attorney’s office. Additional state funding is accounting for remaining kits’ testing — approximately 500 — so essentially all kits from the backlog are either already tested or in the process of being tested.Rape kits collect evidence from a victim’s body and clothing after an assault, including potential DNA evidence. When DNA evidence is found, it is entered into the Combined DNA Index System, or CODIS, to see if there is a match to a person with a past offense and to identify serial offenders.Of those 1,450 kits funded by the grant, 839 DNA profiles have been entered into CODIS, Green said, and there have been 364 hits to people who have been convicted or arrested for certain felonies.“It’s grueling,” Dallas Wilson, the detective who has been working on these cases at Tucson Police, told ABC News. “We have approximately 400 cases that need to be re-investigated that go back from 1988 to 2016.”There is no statute of limitations for sexual assault in Arizona, and Wilson says these cases are “completely different than any other investigation” as law enforcement is reopening investigations from the start, which is “like opening up a wound all over again” for many victims.Loebe’s DNA was in the system from prior convictions, and “his DNA profile came up within the first month of [grant] testing on more than one kit,” Green said.Tuscon police started searching for him in January 2017, and Loebe was arrested in Kentucky in connection with an alleged sexual assault a month later. As part of his assaults, Loebe allegedly impersonated former child star Brian Bonsall from the ’80s sitcom “Family Ties,” Bardstown Police said at the time.Loebe, who was also wanted in Colorado, Massachusetts and Ohio, was extradited to Tucson, Tucson News Now reported in August 2017, adding that the Kentucky charges were dropped.Nine women testified against Loebe in trial, said Green, who praised “their strength and bravery” and added that “they got justice that was long, long overdue, and as a prosecutor, that feels really, really good.”Five years after starting work on Pima County’s rape kit backlog, Green said it’s “fabulous” to see a result like this.“It’s a good feeling,” Wilson said. “We still have a lot more work to do, though.”Loebe is scheduled for a sentencing hearing on April 22.Copyright © 2019, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.last_img read more

Making the grade

first_imgAsthe practice of forced ranking comes under the spotlight, Keith Rodgers findsthat it needs to be used with other measurement tools to be truly effectiveIf you’re in the bottom 5 per cent of performers at Siebel Systems, theSilicon Valley-based computer software company, you’d do well to start refreshingyour resumé. Every six months, using data aggregated from an ongoingperformance appraisal process, the company culls its lowest-ranking employees.Taking its lead from a process evangelised by Jack Welch, the former head ofGE, Siebel effectively forces its managers to face up to tough questions: whichemployees really add value to the organisation, and which are a drain? This process of ‘forced ranking’, adopted by a number of US companies, hascome under the spotlight over the last year as the economic downturn forcedcompanies to pay closer attention to their bottom-line costs. Criticised insome quarters for taking a mathematical approach to a complex human issue, inmany companies ranking is evolving into a highly sophisticated measurement activity,supported by a growing array of software tools and business processes. Moreimportantly, however, it’s now being viewed not as a standalone activity thatcan make or break individual careers, but as one part of an extensive HRportfolio that incorporates techniques such as competency profiling ande-learning. Carried out as an isolated management activity, forced ranking isonly as good as the metrics and management disciplines that underpin it: usedin association with other business measurement and workforce improvement tools,however, it offers organisations the chance to really leverage their humancapital assets. At a basic level, the processes behind forced ranking are deceptivelysimple. Each employee is set objectives against a specific timeframe: at theend of the period, they’re judged on a scale of one to five (or ‘a’ to ‘e’) asto how effectively they hit their targets. That ranking is used in both formalappraisal processes and to determine performance-related compensation. Inorganisations like GE, the data is also aggregated to provide a checklist ofwhich employees are failing to make the grade. In theory, by culling the bottomperformers, the company improves the average level of performance, raising thestakes for the rest of the workforce when the next review period comes round. In practice, however, the process is far from simple. To begin with, judgingemployees collectively assumes a level playing field that rarely exists.Managers in different departments may set objectives that vary widely in termsof how difficult they are to achieve, and measurement is rarely standardised.If two employees are told to improve their sales presentation skills, forexample, one may be judged merely on how they were ranked in a training session,another on whether they delivered a predetermined number of live presentationsand how the clients responded. Those are two different goals, and moreimportantly, two very different sets of measurement – one a formalised trainingprocess, the other a live sales scenario. The playing field is further distorted by market and geographic conditions.In customer-facing functions such as sales and marketing, the relativeperformance of individuals operating within the same division can be affectedby numerous regional factors: expand that on a multinational scale and thedifferences are greater still. Those variables have to be taken into account bymanagers as they set objectives, bringing a degree of individual autonomy to aprocess that theoretically should be standardised. Finally, the scientific framework that underlies forced ranking takes littleaccount of the realities of people management, a point stressed by Mark Geary,managing director of Hong Kong-based AsiaNet Consultants and a former senior HRexecutive at companies such as ICI, Ladbroke and Inchcape. He believes that thesystem can often be undermined because of the implications of poor ranking.”Most managers are loathe to rank people lower than ‘c’ because they don’twant to demotivate them,” he says. “Also, if the manager’s doing their job, they shouldn’t have to waitfor an appraisal system to see someone’s a ‘c’. And if they end up ratingsomeone as an ‘e’, what are they doing as a manager? That’s the weakness. Soyou end up tolerating under-performance. The whole area is a real can ofworms.” Proponents of forced ranking, however, argue that if the rightinfrastructure is put in place, many of these anomalies can be ironed out.Anthony Deighton, director of Siebel’s Employee Relationship Management (ERM)division in the US, argues that successful employee performance measurementrests on a combination of business processes and software tools, driven bywell-understood business objectives driven from the top down. Siebel, whichmarkets an ERM software suite built on the back of its own internal employeerelationship management applications, has established a top-to-bottom rankingprocess internally that includes a series of management checks and balances.Company-wide consistency in terms of the metrics deployed by managers isenforced through three processes – training and support from the HR department,executive review and load-balancing analytics that spotlight variances (seebelow). The fact that an employee is ranked low doesn’t necessarily reflect onthe manager, he argues – it may simply mean that an individual is in the wrongjob. More importantly, ranking also has to be seen in a wider context. Leavingaside negative attitudes, personality clashes and other “character”issues, the most common explanations for poor performance are that individualshave either been badly trained or that their skillsets don’t match therequirements of their role. By linking the appraisal procedure to learning,competency assessment and career development processes, organisations cantackle both the causes and effects of underachievement. Learning Management Systems, for example, provide the IT infrastructure forself-paced training and Internet-based virtual classrooms, and alloworganisations to monitor which individuals have taken which courses. Used inconjunction with other management tools, they can provide the basis for moreextensive performance analysis. Managers can link improvements in individualranking, for example, to the training courses undertaken by those employees,establish patterns and use that data to determine whether to extend thetraining programmes to other members of their team. There are caveats to thiskind of cause and effect analysis, of course. While there may be a correlationbetween sales staff who’ve gone on a particular training course and an increasein closed deals, the number of variables is high – on the one hand, the salesmay have closed anyway, on the other, failure to close a deal may reflect moreon the customer’s budgetary constraints than the quality of the sales pitch.That said, early adopters of this kind of HR analytics in the US argue that thecorrelations thrown forward have value simply in the fact that they raisequestions: finding the answers may require trial and error, but in many casesthose answers wouldn’t have been sought without the software application. AsDeighton argues, real value comes when analytics are translated into action: ifa specific training course appears to be achieving results, roll it outelsewhere and validate the proposition. “You need an organisationalculture which allows people the flexibility to make changes, where they cantest different things – you can’t create a culture where people are so scaredto act that they can’t do anything.” The training data that’s gleaned from Learning Management Systems also formpart of the information set needed to build competency profiles, which againlink back to the appraisal process. Typically, organisations define at a broadlevel the skillsets or profiles required for particular generic roles – theseare then customised by local managers for the specific requirements of thepositions in their department. The skillsets of the employees that fill eachpost are then matched against the checklist of requirements, highlightingdisparities in competency levels and providing guidelines for future trainingprogrammes, recruitment needs and career development. Populating the initialprofile database can be a daunting task – one US mobile telephone operatorestimates that it would take two people six months to build the templatesrequired for a 34,000-strong workforce. But the implementation timescales canbe radically reduced if employees are encouraged to build their own skillsprofiles, monitored by their line of business manager – that typically requiresan internet-based IT infrastructure that gives controlled access to relevantparts of the central competency database. Organisations like Hewlett-Packard,the Silicon Valley-based IT systems and services company, have already rolledout this kind of competency profiling system to its most senior employees,covering some 10 per cent of its total workforce (see web feature). While profiling has clear value at an individual level, the aggregate data isalso critical for gap analysis and workforce planning, providing seniormanagement with an understanding of organisational weaknesses and an insightinto the company’s capacity to expand its business or move into new markets.Again, if the competency management process is linked to a forced rankingsystem, the data will reflects not only skillsets, but also how effectivelyemployees’ deploy those skills in their day-to-day roles. As each element ofthe HR function is integrated in this way, the combined value of the analyticaloutput increases exponentially. Ultimately, this integrated approach to employee management extends beyondthe HR function and reaches right to the heart of business performancemeasurement. “The appraisal isn’t something that takes place on an annualbasis – it should be continuous,” argues Geary. “Do it the simple way– you don’t need to do a full, big review which takes an hour or two perindividual – but you should be doing a 15 minute review of the objectives thatforms part of the quarterly business review. It’s people that deliver on thecompany goals. Business performance consists of financial and peopleperformance, and the two need to go hand-in-hand.” Case studySiebel: forcing the issuesSiebel Systems, the US-based developerof customer and employee management software, has built its forced rankingsystem on the back of corporate objectives that cascade down from the top ofthe company. On the first day of each quarter, chairman and CEO Tom Siebelpublishes his corporate objectives, generated from an off-site executivemeeting. By day three, senior managers will have reviewed the objectives andcreated their own targets for their specific divisions. By day 15, all 8,000employees of the company will have created their own sets of objectives inconjunction with their managers. According to Anthony Deighton, director ofSiebel Employee Relationship Management (ERM), these objectives are reviewed ona frequent basis through the quarter at both an individual and team level.At the end of the quarter, employees write a self-assessment,and discuss how effectively they hit target with their line manager – theirperformance is measured against each objective, culminating in a one to fiveoverall ranking. Managers have the ability to override the automated rankingcalculation to take into account specific factors that may have influencedperformance, such as extended sickness.In addition to the formal ranking, the review also covers arange of other factors, including soft measures that are not objective-based.Siebel employs three techniques to ensure the ranking processis carried out as consistently as possible across the company. The HR department supplies relevant  documentation, web-based training and an employee helpdesk in aneffort to standardise objectives and measurement techniques. Additionally, allobjectives are reviewed by the next layer of management. Finally, the company’sERM software generates a ratings and distribution report, which highlightsbands and trends.”If someone has given everybody five, you make themjustify it,” says Deighton. “If the manager sees something is skewed,they can drill down, see details and reject a review.”This ranking system forms the basis of Siebel’s six-monthly‘cull’ of the bottom 5 per cent of employees.”We do the analytics, get the names, and then go andinterview them to find out if this is the right 5 per cent, or if there is adifferent set,” says Deighton. “This is not maths, it is people’slives – that 5 per cent is a blurred boundary.”Although the process may seem ruthless, Deighton argues that itis ultimately constructive. Few people who fail to make the grade are ‘bad’employees – maybe one-quarter or half a per cent of an organisation, hebelieves. Most of them, however, are simply in the wrong job for theirskillsets – and it may be there is no suitable alternative opening within theorganisation.”There has always got to be a bottom performer. You areforcing managers to think about their people – who is more of a drain than aplus? It is certainly seen as positive by the people who remain. If you do notdo it, the star performers will get frustrated and leave.” Related posts:No related photos. Comments are closed. Making the gradeOn 2 Apr 2002 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Articlelast_img read more

Harvard College junior follows humanities

first_imgAs I prepared for my fall journey back to Cambridge, I was confronted with a new reality — life as an upperclassman. When I opened the door to my spacious suite for the first time, I was happy that I no longer had to live in a matchbox.But along with the improved living conditions came the realization that I was halfway through Harvard College. While my first two years prepared me well for the workload, they did not prepare me for the self-reflection of a humanities concentrator, evaluating the potential for real-world employment.Coming off a remarkable summer that included research for a brilliant, renowned history professor and part-time work for a venture capital firm, I felt balanced, confident, and excited to continue on my academic journey. I have always been secure in my selection of concentration, given my lifelong love of ancient history. But while I never second-guessed the pursuit of my intellectual passions, I became concerned that employers might view my focus with skepticism.Although I filled out applications, submitted resumes, and attended information sessions, I could not help but wonder how employers might interpret my academic interests. One afternoon at lunch, I sat with friends in the dining hall and discussed impending interview notifications for internships. After hearing that friends with concentrations in economics, applied math, and STEM fields had received rejections, I expected the worst. Yet I wondered why corporations would not look for students striving to understand the past, which not only teaches one to think, but also how the world works. Humanities offer marketability in a competitive world Related ‘I have come to see my concentration as an investment in versatility and intellectualism’ I soon found out that I was getting ahead of myself. By the time I returned to my room that day, I was prepared for any outcome. I logged on to my computer and happily found invitations to some interviews, showing that what I feared might be a handicap may have actually been an asset.Over the following week, I realized that each student has a unique journey reflective of his or her drives, interests, personality, and background. Rather than be concerned how recruiters or graduate school admissions committees might interpret a humanities concentration, I began to recognize its inherent value. After meeting interviewers with various degrees, from physics to history to economics, the message was universal: Corporations seek candidates with diverse academic backgrounds. More than once, I was asked what I learned from my concentration. My response was immediate — a humanities concentration teaches critical thought, applicable to any field. The utility of my concentration in ancient history (Greek and Roman) became abundantly clear, even with real-world employers.The beginning of junior year has meant a lot more than a search for an internship; it has revealed the importance of living a balanced life. While I could spend countless hours actively pursuing a post-campus future, my life as a junior is here at Harvard. Perhaps the best advice for junior year was delivered on a postcard from my freshman year peer-advising fellow. He wrote, “Spend time with your thoughts.” This sage advice will continue to guide my undergraduate path as it hits its midpoint.While I have already experienced so much in two years, I still cannot wait to see what more is to come.Matthew DeShaw ’18 writes an occasional column about Harvard College experiences.last_img read more

All the social media image sizes you’ll ever need

first_imgBelow we have a fantastic and up-to-date resource for you on every image size you’ll need for posting to social media.Provided by We Are Top 10, this infographic provides a great page to bookmark and refer back to if you forget one of the image sizes for a social media post you’re working on.This graphic also includes some of the character lengths for your CU’s all-important profile information, where you should definitely be including searchable keywords as well as current or trending hashtags and member service contact information.We find that when your social media image sizes are correct, the content you are sharing, on ANY platform, performs better organically and when turned into an ad. So PLEASE, don’t take these sizes lightly… they are easy items to get right every time you post or share for your credit union! continue reading » 17SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblrlast_img read more