personal

The benefits of Hiring A Commercial Home loan Broker. Written by admin on 03 June 2011. In regards to real estate property or residence issues, people generally would like to do it on their own only simply because they feel that it is their very own … Other than giving you advice, these brokers also allow you to obtain loans which can fulfill your personal monetary requirements. A industrial mortgage loan broker could be of significantly support in getting you a loan …

See the original post:
The benefits of Hiring A Commercial Home loan Broker | Audiogoldrush

May 27 (Bloomberg) — Goldman Sachs Group Inc. officials were frequent guests during U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro’s first two years on the job. Schapiro had 10 meetings with Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein, more than any other bank, according to her personal calendar for 2009 and 2010. The calendar information, posted without notice this week on the agency’s website, shows the dates, times and participants in meetings with Schapiro. Bloomberg’s Megan Hughes reports. (Source: Bloomberg)

See original here:
Video: Goldman Logs Most Banker Time on Schapiro’s Calendar

What It’s Like Being Interviewed By Apple

May 18, 2011

In Pirates of Silicon Valley, Steve Jobs tears into a potential Apple employee by asking him, “Are you a virgin?” The frightened interviewee stammers, intimidated by the question, but eventually says, “No.” Jobs lays into him and says, “You’re still a virgin, you just think you’re not.” Applying for a job at Apple today is unlikely to land you in a similar situation, since the company is much bigger and Jobs is no longer in the office on a day to day basis. However, getting a job at Apple isn’t going to be easy. You’re going to have to answer highly technical questions, and talk about your personal life a little bit.

Read the full article →

Caroline Dowd-Higgins: Convene Your Personal Board of Directors

May 13, 2011

It’s no secret that a mentor can be a terrific resource as you navigate your career path. The “it takes a village” philosophy is a great way to tap multiple mentors at once and develop your personal resource team. Why get stressed about growing, managing, or navigating your career path alone when you can utilize the wisdom of others who want to help you move forward? From entry-level job seekers to seasoned professionals, everyone can benefit from a personal Board of Directors. Think about the people you can ask to be on your resource team who can assist with career strategies, special training, or network building. Your personal career posse can help when you need it most and be a valuable resource outside of your workplace for you to confide in. Here are some ways people can serve on your Board since a variety of people will perform different functions. Accountability Master — this person will hold you to task and give you the gentle (or not so gentle nudge) to get you moving towards your goal. They will help you navigate your blind spots and provide honest constructive criticism when you need it most. This person can also help you step out of your comfort zone to take a risk and embrace change. Motivator — this person will be your cheerleader and provide support and inspiration even when the going gets tough. Your enthusiasm may wane with stress and lack of focus but your motivational Board member will give you a renewed sense of energy and help you play to your strengths. Trainer — perhaps you have been promoted to a new leadership role at work but have never supervised a team, for example. This Board member has significant experience as a leader and can advise and counsel you with best practices. If you don’t have that skill set available from one of your volunteer Board members, then consider hiring an Executive Coach who specializes in leadership training to get you into shape to take on your new professional responsibilities. No matter what the unique competency, a variety of trainers can be an asset as you grow your career and take on new roles. Connector — if you are in transition, interested in growing your career, or just wanting to learn about a career different from your own, chances are your connector will know someone you should meet. This person has a vast network and can make introductions on your behalf for informational interviewing, job shadowing, and other professional referrals. You should have multiple connectors on your Board because these people are in-the-know and current with industry trends and organizational practices. They know the scoop! Strategist — you need a visionary who will help you map out your big picture career path and assist you with implementing a plan to achieve those goals. This person can also be a great resource when problem solving or handling difficult scenarios at work. Proofer — whether you are sending out a resume, cover letter, or portfolio for new job lead, have someone proof you work before you push send. We get so close to our materials that it’s easy to miss things and your detail oriented proofer can catch mistakes that could be a deal breaker if left unnoticed. This person with laser focus can also help you with the small and important details you must work on in your career action plan. Specialist — in many cases this is an area where you are going to hire a professional like a web designer, public relations expert, accountant, or lawyer because you need someone with specialized experience to help you accomplish your goals. It’s worth it to invest in these services from accomplished professionals who have proven their worth through recommendations and examples of their work. It’s not unheard of to have Board members who will provide these services pro bono but it is rare. You may also consider your health care providers and other mind/body/spirit professionals to help you navigate your journey with a team. Having a Board makes you conscious that personal and professional development is a lifelong process and that your needs change over time. Your Board should be filled with people who can advise you as certain needs arise. While there may be a unique time to convene them as a group, most often you will seek them out individually for their particular advice. It’s all about knowing who’s got your back when you need it most. Be sure to steward your Board by showing your appreciation for their expertise regularly. Whenever possible, pay-it-forward and ask how you can be of service to them. Keep the circle of wisdom continuous by serving on someone else’s Board – you will be glad you did! Check out my new video segment about Assembling Your Board of Directors. Caroline Dowd-Higgins authored the book “This Is Not the Career I Ordered” and maintains the career reinvention blog of the same name ( www.carolinedowdhiggins.com ) She is also the Director of Career & Professional Development at Indiana University Maurer School of Law.

Read the full article →

ChartWise Medical Systems Welcomes New Sales Managers

May 3, 2011

WAKEFIELD, RI–(Marketwire – May 3, 2011) – ChartWise Medical Systems, Inc. ( www.chartwisemed.com ), the medical software firm and developer of ChartWise:CDI and ChartWise:CDI Personal Edition, is pleased to announce the appointment of two new sales managers, Michael Jackson and Glen Walker.

Read the full article →

US Personal Income and Spending Report and Canada’s GDP are expected to come out gloomy

April 29, 2011

US Personal Income and Spending Report and Canada’s GDP are expected to come out gloomy

Read the full article →

US Personal Income and Spending Report and Canada’s GDP are expected to come out gloomy

April 29, 2011

US Personal Income and Spending Report and Canada’s GDP are expected to come out gloomy

Read the full article →

Nathan Newman: You’re Not Google’s Customer — You’re the Product: Antitrust in a Web 2.0 World

March 29, 2011

You think Google’s search engine is great. Gmail is easy to use. YouTube gives you instant access to funny pictures of dogs and music videos. And Google maps helps you find where you are and the nearest pizza place. And it’s all free. So you’re a happy customer and don’t understand why anyone would think antitrust action is needed against Google . Or why government officials from Europe to the U.S. Congress and, just last week, U.S. state governments are bringing antitrust investigations against Google. Except remember — it’s free! Google doesn’t make a dime of profit from you, so you aren’t the customer. In fact, all those cool products are just bait to get your information in the Google ecosystem so your attention and eyeballs can be sold to Google’s advertisers. The pleasant experience of using Google products is little different (in any economic analysis) from the pleasant massage administered to Kobe beef cattle in Japan; each is just a tool to increase the quality of the product delivered up to the real customers. What is Google’s Market in a Web 2.0 World? So here’s the key place to start in understanding proper technology policy for Google: there is no market for search engines; there is no market for online geolocation mapping software; there is no market for online video. Google, by making these products free, has destroyed those markets in favor of an alternative economic model of selling individual attention and precise information about those users to advertisers. You are the product, not the customer. That market between Google and its advertisers is where antitrust authorities ultimately have to look to understand what public policy is needed. As law professor Siva Vaidhyanathan describes in his just-published The Googlization of Everything (and Why We Should Worry) , “Google’s method of generating and selling advertisement placement is brilliant.” Through user queries and searches, as well as personal information about those users, Google can deliver a product to advertisers tailored to their exact needs — people looking for shoes are delivered to shoe sellers, people located in a certain town are delivered to local restaurants, and so on. And while individual users may think the brilliance of Google is in the technical design of its search engines, as a company, its profit is driven by its brilliance in nearly monopolizing the online search marketplace serving these advertising companies. And what profits! With revenue coming overwhelmingly from its advertising monopoly, in 2010, Google’s net income was $8.51bn, up 30 percent from 2009 on total revenue that grew 24 percent to $29.32bn. And to understand Google’s dominance, look at this chart of data from E-marketer , which shows Google’s overwhelming dominance over its competitors in delivering search advertising: Note that Google’s dominance is growing and is projected to grow more. In mobile phone advertising, Google has established a phenomenal 97 percent of paid mobile search advertising , which by itself is projected to be worth $1.1 billion by the end of 2011 and is likely to skyrocket as a percentage of advertising. And this dominance cannot easily be overcome by some alternative upstart website, even by well-capitalized competitors, since underlying Google’s enterprise is, in Vaidhyanathan’s words, a “monumental collection of physical sites such as research labs, server farms, data networks and sales offices.” Given the interplay of different Google services and customization of results based on having so many users involved in its ecosystem, there are so-called “network effects” from being dominant that any competitor has too large a challenge in displacing Google. So what are all the cool new Google products like Android, Chrome and Apps for? First, they are more ways to collect the personal information to target advertising to individuals (and new threats to personal privacy as described below). But they also serve a sinister role from an antitrust perspective. They help destroy any alternative economic base for a competitor to challenge Google’s dominance of online search advertising. Citing Warren Buffet’s observation that strong businesses are “economic castles” protected by “moats,” analyst Bill Gurley describes these free products as moats to drown any competitor who “stands between the user and Google”: Android, as well as Chrome and Chrome OS for that matter, are not “products” in the classic business sense. They have no plan to become their own “economic castles.” Rather they are very expensive and very aggressive “moats,” funded by the height and magnitude of Google’s castle… Google is also scorching the earth for 250 miles around the outside of the castle to ensure no one can approach it. To understand how this plays out in antitrust analysis, look at a top current focus of the Justice Department’s Antitrust division, namely Google’s proposed acquisition of travel software provider ITA Software. ITA provides the underlying technology used by online travel agents, travel websites and airline websites. Now, some analysts worry that Google could use its position to unfairly price access to the database to potential competitors in the travel search market or skew search results to favor key partners. But if it just destroys the business model for competing travel agents and websites by absorbing the service into its overall search system, it will undermine a whole set of potential competitors for advertising dollars. Tim Wu, a law professor and author of the book The Master Switch , argues of such a deal , “In the longer term, however, the risk is that this deal could give Google such an advantage that travel search becomes like other forms of search, dominated by one engine, which could eventually stifle innovation.” (And of course, Google may just flat out skew results in travel, given complaints across a wide range of areas by businesses involved in its search and advertising market, as I detailed in my post, The Case for Antitrust Action Against Google .) How Privacy is Threatened by Google’s Business Model: So why should individual users care about any of this if they are still getting the goodies for free? The reason this is not a dry economic issue of whether Google is cutting into the profits of a few competitors or deciding a few winners and losers desperate for a higher ranking in its search results is that Google is not giving anything away for free. Google’s whole business model is based on systematically stripping away user’s privacy to trade Google’s knowledge about you to advertisers. A former Federal Trade Commissioner, Pamela Jones Harbour , highlighted the problem of this model for both privacy and antitrust policy in the American Bar Association’s Antitrust Law Journal . Harbour, who served at the FTC from 2003 to 2009, dissented from the FTC decision to allow Google to take over the online ad display company, Doubleclick. If you understood that the relevant market was “data used for behavioral marketing,” the merger brought together two companies already controlling large amounts of personal data, so the merger left Google even more dominant in this sector. Harbour emphasizes the point made above that you miss the ball if you look at “search engine markets” or “map software markets”, but instead you have to understand that the product is aggregated personal data where: …[revenue] derives from the accumulation of data, which can then be put to myriad commercial uses… The sites are subsidized, in effect, by trading on the value of accumulated data. In many instances, the data come from individual consumers, who may or may not realize that they are paying for “free” information or services by disclosing their personal information. Companies like Google with the most specific personal data can better target ads and thus dominate these advertising markets. What this also means is that non-price factors, such as privacy decisions by consumers, can easily be distorted in a non-competitive online environment. If companies’ real constituencies are advertisers, they then have a strong incentive to violate privacy if it serves their behavioral targeting goals. Thus you end up with Google continually breaching consumer privacy, even going as far as the wi-fi spying through their Street View project , without too much worry about losing consumer support. Some neoliberal doubters of the need for antitrust and other regulatory action on Google might argue that market competition will protect privacy, but if you understand that the relevant customers are the advertisers — and it’s the advertisers who want privacy violated to better target advertising — you’ll understand that the “market”, such as it is, is driving the destruction of personal privacy online. There may be a “market” for convincing customers that companies are trying to protect individual privacy, but, to return to the Kobe beef metaphor, that’s the same incentive for hiding the slaughterhouse from the cattle. It’s only a cosmetic change in a business model driving to the same result. Why Active Regulation is Needed: What’s clear is that “the market” is not going to solve either the antitrust or the privacy problems from Google or comparable actors in other sectors of the online world. A Web 2.0 world requires new tools and analyses, where a company like Google with such dominance needs to be treated a bit more like a public utility — delivering important public benefits but also requiring public accountability to protect the public interest. Mergers by Google deserve more skepticism — and the privacy and antitrust implications of its actions need sharper scrutiny (something the judge who blocked the Google Books settlement this past week thankfully engaged in ). But that’s just the first step. More active regulation is needed to protect privacy and keep competition alive to maintain pressure for innovation on even as dominant a player as Google. One flip side of understanding how critical violations of privacy are to Google’s economic model is that enacting stronger privacy protection also will, in former FTC Commissioner Harbour’s words “directly influence how much competition is able to emerge in related technology markets.” Harbour points to strengthening the ability of consumers to port data from one service to another as an example. While it looks like a consumer protection practice, it also service competition policy as well: Imagine that a given legal regime were to encourage greater consumer control over data (e.g., through open standards), such that a market emerged to accommodate the porting of data relatively easily among applications. In that entry-friendly environment, if consumers were unhappy with the level of privacy protection offered by a popular application or service, consumers would be better able to “vote with their feet” (or, more accurately, their data) and switch to competing providers, without losing the accrued value of their personal datasets. Still, even data portability is not enough in a world where users often don’t know how companies are misusing their data. Analyst and Seton Hall Professor Frank Pasquale argues that data portability and other market-based regulations will fail: “privacy regulators’ monitoring of oligopolistic online entities will be more effective than waiting for the elusive concept of ‘privacy competition.’” That’s one reason I do think U.S. policymakers need to look at policy innovations in Europe that are demanding specific rights for consumers and even promoting key technologies that bypass the privacy-destroying process of many current online practices. They are moving towards policies that give individuals the right to remove personal data from online databases, require transparency in what data has been collected, and require explicit consent to collect personal data in the first place. Germany, for example , is requiring new central online sites where individuals can track exactly what data is being collected on them — and be able to remove it — and even promoting alternative online mapping software that eliminates the requirement by consumers to share their location to access it. Beyond Neoliberal Economics Online: Whatever the salience of the neoliberal economic argument that regulation is not needed and markets will protect consumers — and the bloody financial meltdown should make anyone question the general doctrine — what’s clear is that the Web 2.0 world has its own dynamics that make even the basic assumptions of neoliberal economics invalid. Markets online are odd multi-party affairs, where individuals (often unknowingly) trade off their private information to intermediaries like Google, which in turn market that information to advertisers, who in turn try to market products or services often from other companies back to individuals. Individual interests in privacy are at war with the interests of advertisers in obliterating that privacy and “network effects” allow a company like Google to attain greater and greater dominance, even as it uses giving away free products to undermine the business model of potential competitors. Waving the magic “market” wand seems a very weak and uncertain tool in achieving what we want as a society. Instead, what is needed are clearer mandates on all online companies to deliver what is promised — whether products, searches or social connections — while severely limiting how those companies can resell or market based on personal data without explicit consent. People deserve to be back in control of their online experience, not merely a data point in a product marketed to advertisers. Crossposted from Tech-Progress.org

Read the full article →

Innovation Over Regulation: Mozilla CEO On Protecting Online Privacy

March 11, 2011

Amidst new concerns over the safety of personal data on the web, Mozilla CEO Gary Kovacs argued that technological tools, rather than government regulation, should be used to better safeguard users’ privacy online. “I never rely on the government to lead something, it just takes too long,” he said in an interview with The Huffington Post. “Capitalism works.” Yet privacy experts counter that regulators must intervene to ensure consumers’ interests are taken into account together with companies’ priorities. “The FTC and a bunch of other folks asked industry to self-regulate over the last several years and it’s actually gotten exponentially worse,” said Mary Hodder, chairman of the Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium. “I don’t think companies can control themselves and do the right thing in the face of getting all this user data.” Mozilla is one of several companies taking note of renewed government efforts to tackle online privacy: In a report released late last year, the FTC chastised companies for their failure to more quickly address privacy issues–warning “this could be the last clear chance to show that self-regulation can…protect consumers’ privacy”–and endorsed a “do not track” system that would allow users to disable targeted advertising. Mozilla, along with companies like Microsoft and Google, responded by providing a “do not track” tool that lets people opt out of online behavioral tracking. The organization is also working on a feature that helps users identify who’s tracking them: as they browse the web, individuals will be able to monitor, in real-time, any companies watching their activity, with the option to block them. “Our position isn’t that any of this behavior should not exist,” Jay Sullivan, Mozilla’s vice president of products, said in reference to targeted advertising. “It’s that the user should understand what’s happening and be in control of it.” Kovacs noted that online privacy has taken on new urgency as more aspects of our identities–from our movie preferences to our relationships to our purchases–migrate to the web. Companies have played fast-and-loose with such consumer data, fueling privacy concerns. “What we used to do on the web is search for information. We don’t do that exclusively anymore,” Kovacs explained. “The problem is there have been some pretty egregious instances of privacy breaches that have caused lot of folks to lift their heads…People are stepping up and saying, ‘What’s happening to my identity up there?’ It’s probably long overdue.” Just as our behavior on the Internet has changed drastically, the web itself has also been reshaped by the rise of apps running on separate operating systems, such as Apple’s iOS, Google’s Android, Microsoft’s Windows Mobile, and others. “The Internet is being fractured,” said Kovacs. Kovacs warned the shift creates new challenges for developers, who must build apps for the disparate ecosystems, while consumers may also be losing out. “Users don’t get the power of millions of web developers,” he explained. “Now they have to choose: do I live in an Apple world or in a Google world?”

Read the full article →

Tony Hsieh: Zappos CEO: In Your Next Speech, Just Wing It

February 18, 2011

Excerpted from #1 NY Times Bestseller Delivering Happiness by Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh In the two years leading up to the announcement of the Amazon acquisition, Zappos started getting more and more media coverage. A lot of people assumed that we must have stepped up our PR efforts, but that wasn’t the case at all. We simply continued doing what we had always done: constantly improving the customer experience while simultaneously strengthening our culture. The funny thing is that a lot of the press we got was for things we had first done several years earlier, such as paying employees to quit during their new hire training or occasionally sending flowers to customers. We didn’t intend for any of the things we were doing to end up in the news or on blogs. But every once in a while, a reporter or popular blogger would pick up on something that we were doing, and the story would spread like wildfire. We were as surprised as anyone else by the publicity because it was never planned for on our end. We learned a great lesson: If you just focus on making sure that your product or service continually wows people, eventually the press will find out about it. You don’t need to put a lot of effort into reaching out to the press if your company naturally creates interesting stories as a by-product of delivering a great product or experience. As our media coverage increased, I started receiving more and more speaking requests for different conferences and industry events. One of my first speeches was at the Footwear News CEO Summit in 2005. I remember I was a nervous wreck, because I hadn’t really done much public speaking before. At the time, I agreed to do it because it would be a good opportunity to tell the Zappos story to a lot of footwear vendors we were still trying to establish relationships with. I wrote out my entire speech beforehand, and then spent a month memorizing it and rehearsing it. I couldn’t sleep the night before my speech. It ended up going okay, and I was relieved when it was finally over so I could catch up on my sleep. Even though I didn’t really enjoy the whole experience, it had a very positive impact on our business, so I was glad I had done it. Over the next year, a few more speaking requests started trickling in. I agreed to all of the with a feeling of dread, but I knew they would help build our business and our brand. I also thought that, as uncomfortable as I was with doing them, they were opportunities for me to grow both personally and professionally. Like anything else in life, I figured that public speaking was just a skill that required practice on a regular basis. Each speech I gave was just another practice session. During my first year of public speaking, I was diligent about writing out my speeches beforehand and memorizing them. It took a lot of time to do, and I would never sleep well the night before my talks. Sometimes, while giving the speech, I would accidentally skip over or forget a sentence or an entire paragraph, which would leave me temporarily flustered on stage as I racked my brain trying to remember the lines I had practiced the night before. With each speech, I found myself slowly improving. But I still didn’t enjoy the actual speaking itself. Even though my speaking was helping build the Zappos brand, I thought that maybe I just wasn’t meant to be a public speaker because I was so uncomfortable with the process, even after having done it for a year. And then one day, I had an epiphany. I realized that nobody knew what I had written down beforehand. Nobody would ever know if I skipped a sentence, a paragraph, or even an entire section. I had also noticed that while people appreciated the content of my speeches, they generally commented about two things afterward. They told me they really enjoyed the personal stories, and they said that, even though many of them had already read about Zappos in the press, it made a huge difference to actually hear it come from me. They told me they could really feel my passion for company culture, customer service, and Zappos in general. So, for my next speech, I tried a completely different approach. I decided not to memorize or rehearse anything. I would just wing it and see what happened. I knew I had a lot of stories I could choose from on the fly to tell, and I knew that as long as I stuck to topics I was passionate and knowledgeable about — customer service and company culture — that I would have plenty of material to draw from to fill the time. When I finally got on stage, I still had some jitters for the first minute or two as I adjusted to the audience and the room. After that, the time just flew by. The audience was more engaged than they had been in my previous talks. I even managed to get some unexpected laughs from moments in my stories when I was just trying to tell a story instead of trying to recite lines from a script I’d written. I would later learn that I had achieved the state of flow . In his book by the same name, researcher Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi describes flow as a type of happiness, in which someone loses sense of time, self-consciousness, and even self. That’s exactly what happened to me. From that point forward, I used the same formula for all of my speeches and found that most of the rest of the stuff that I used to worry about usually just fell into place. I just went by three basic rules for my talks: 1. Be passionate. 2. Tell personal stories. 3. Be real. I made the mistake once of agreeing to speak at a conference about a topic that I wasn’t actually passionate about. Even though I knew all the content inside and out, I wasn’t able to speak passionately, so my performance turned out to be only okay. But it was a good learning experience. Today, whenever I’m invited to speak somewhere, I let them know that I will only speak about certain subjects, which may or may not match the overall theme of the conference. I then leave it up to the conference organizers to decide whether they are okay with that or not. Usually they are fine with it, but occasionally not. In those instances, no matter how much money the conference is offering to pay Zappos and no matter how good an opportunity it would be for Zappos to be exposed to that audience, I always do the same thing. I politely decline.

Read the full article →

Shira Hirschman Weiss: ‘Are You There God? It’s Me, Jobless’

February 17, 2011

Last Thursday, the Labor Department released data stating that the number of new unemployment applications is at its lowest since July 2008. While this indicates the economy is picking up speed, the news can either be a beacon of hope or salt rubbed into wounds for the presently unemployed. Faith is in a precarious perch for the religious and jobless. While some become despondent from repeated rejection and thwarted efforts, others cling to faith and turn fervently to prayer. Deirdre McEachern is a career coach who says she sees clients “whose faith has been enhanced and re-affirmed by the job hunt.” One of those clients, Jennifer Bindhammer, was a flight attendant with United in September 2011. “She came to me in early 2002 re-evaluating her life,” explains McEachern. “We worked together for several months and in the process she reconnected strongly with her personal faith. Once she deciphered her life purpose, she felt as if God was opening doors for her — helpful coincidences kept appearing — like the sign she spotted on a subway platform advertising an MBA program.” This literal and figurative ‘sign’ led the flight attendant to pursue her MBA. In the process of contemplating the switch to a corporate profession, Bindhammer — no stranger to the friendly skies — turned to the heavens . “I enjoyed flying and I enjoyed my job, she writes in a testimonial, “It just wasn’t the challenge that I wanted it to be, and realized that I needed to be challenged. When I thought about changing careers, I prayed about it — I actively prayed .” Bindhammer followed her passion, received her MBA and kept praying. She is now working with an international air transport consultancy that focuses on aviation. While the former flight attendant’s faith was reaffirmed, Fiona (not her real name) reflects on how she sunk into a deep depression when she was laid off from a Public Relations start-up during the late 90s “dot bomb” era. She stopped praying and began spending Friday nights at local bars instead of the synagogue. She could have benefitted from an organization like Project Ezrah, had it been around at the time. The North Jersey based organization was founded in 2001 to aid members of the Jewish community (and now helps Jews and non-Jews alike) who were suffering from the hardships of unemployment. Rabbi Yossie Stern, Executive Director of Project Ezrah, has seen individuals like Fiona who have been turned off to the synagogue experience, who are angry with God, and who are depressed about their situation to the point of losing faith. His organization has put together programs to help those who feel despondent. Notably, it developed initiatives to professionally retrain unemployed baby boomers. “When your brother is impoverished, you have to be able to empower him to be self sufficient,” he explains, “The highest form of charity is being able to afford someone a job, to help him achieve the same sense of self-esteem and quality of life that you have.” His organization provides a wide range of services including a popular job board, career counseling services, financial counseling, mental health counseling, job training, and “in the box and out of the box services. We try to provide it all,” Stern says. There is also a LinkedIn group that includes seminars on how to use social networking to find a career and much more. “We empower people to network, which is the best way to find employment.” Fiona eventually found her way back to a public relations career and to the synagogue, but admits that she felt at odds with her faith when things were uncertain: “I didn’t feel it was God’s fault,” she explains, “It was related to a sudden, dark depression, which came about from my unemployment.” And which, she admits, also may have been related to the fact that she was in a bad relationship at the time. “When life is unstable, it contributes to the instability of unemployment.” Rabbi Stern stresses that it is critical that spouses be encouraging and not place blame due to unemployment. He emphasizes that a support system and building of confidence is essential to one’s job hunt. While Fiona received counseling for her depression, she realized she needed to make significant efforts to find a new job. “The Hebrew word Hishtadlut kept flashing through my head,” she says. Hishtadlut means that one must make their own efforts. It relates to the universal concept of “God only helps those who help themselves.” We frequently hear news stories of people who take out billboards on major highways declaring “Hire Me!” While some may cringe, others applaud the bravery of these individuals … Then suddenly, they’re on Oprah. There’s no question that personal efforts need to be extended, that while you may pray for a miracle, divine intervention is a hand reaching across to meet the other hand — that of personal, human intervention. This may be the reason why video producer Richard Lucas is going public with his job hunt: “I’m using my faith to find my next job and blogging about it ,” he tells me, “I’m letting God lead me to new people and places (driving from New Hampshire to Southern California) in the belief that He will lead me to my next job. I’m not there yet, but the journey has just started and I’m only as far as Virginia.” Prior to his big road expedition, Lucas held jobs in radio, television, high tech marketing and sales. He also owned a repair business in Southern California and most recently, a small video production house in New Hampshire. “I couldn’t drum up enough business to get a profit out of the video business so I moved to southern New Hampshire and stayed with my brother for 4 months, looking for work but no joy,” he says. “My plan was to go back to Southern California where there are more video jobs and I have a larger personal network. My faith in God is strong and I believe that on the road trip back to LA, God will show me opportunities along the way. In fact, He did just that at a church in Virginia. I’m staying here now (in VA) for a few days to do video projects while recording segments for a documentary project on miracles.” Lucas says that he believes “God is guiding me to do these things. He will lead me to a new job or even a new career. It may be in Southern California or it or it may be somewhere else. I’m completely walking in my faith here. I’m quite certain that without that faith I would not have the direction and optimism that I currently possess with regard to the future.” Rabbi Stern and other religious leaders applaud this type of optimism. As Stern says, “Everyone in this world gets challenged and there are bumps, the question is ‘how do we deal with the bumps’?” As a clinical psychologist, Dr. Randy Gilchrist is able to make his own observations about faith and unemployment: “From what I have seen, people who are unemployed do tend to go through a definite trial of their faith. Common questions they may ask themselves during that period: ‘I’m a good person, why would God allow this to happen to me?’, ‘Am I being punished’, or ‘What did I do to deserve this?’ (as if God were punishing them personally). In these cases, one’s faith is tried, strained, and sometimes lost if a resolution is not forthcoming. On the other hand, others who have a belief in God that better allows for apparent unfairness tend to do much better in challenging circumstances like job loss and extended unemployment. They may even have their faith strengthened through the experience. In these cases, they may ask themselves an entirely different question, such as, ‘how will this situation strengthen me?’, ‘what better opportunity is God preparing me for’, ‘how will this help me develop character?’, or even, ‘how will this circumstance allow me to better serve God or others?’. ” In other words, Gilchrist feels that different conceptualizations of God and varying extents of belief will largely determine the response, which “could go either way.” Bob Pautke of the Cincinatti, Ohio based Job Search Focus Group (JSFG) which meets in the Hyde Park Community United Methodist Church, says he doesn’t see a loss of faith in members but the opposite: “They are taking the time to better understand their selves and their gifts, bringing them to a stronger faith.” He says he has seen congregants, who are frustrated and seemingly desperate, turn to faith as a source of hope and direction as they attend weekly support meetings to hear advice from experts and peers. Across the U.S., other churches, synagogues and places of worship now offer programs and services to the unemployed, ranging from networking events to career and mental health counseling, motivational speakers and more. Rabbi Aharon Ciment of Congregation Arzei Darom in Teaneck, NJ, jokes that he is like Sy Sperling, the president of Hair Club for Men, who famously declared in the late ’80s commercials “I’m not only the hair club president, but I’m also a client.” Ciment can relate to congregants in need because there was a time when he too was out of work. Now about to receive his Masters in Mental Health while teaching high school students, Ciment says he would not have considered the idea of going back to school had he not lost his old job and realizes now that it was divine intervention. He echoes what Fiona stresses about Hishtadlut . During his period of unemployment, he made every effort to look for a new job. In addition, he says, one must have Emunah — belief, to go along with one’s personal efforts. “Never lose hope,” he stresses, “God remembers all of us.”

Read the full article →

Naveen Jain: Manage Your Company’s Online Identity — Or The Competition Will Manage It For You

February 15, 2011

Your LinkedIn profile is diligently maintained, your blog is free of comment spam, and you tell your kids to wipe their Facebook pages clean of party photos. You work hard to maintain control of your personal online identity. But do you give the same attention to how your business is portrayed online? The online identity, or “o-dentity,” of your business can help or hinder its bottom line. Yet, too many executives fail to safeguard their company’s online reputation. If you allow disgruntled customers or bloggers with a grudge to speak out unhindered about your company, rest assured your competitors will pounce on this opportunity to spread the (negative) word. Following are the five most common mistakes top executives make regarding the management of their company’s o-dentity, and some advice on taking control to prevent a downward spiral. 1) Delegating o-dentity and holding steadfast to the “it’s not my job” attitude. Many top executives see managing the link between CEO voice and corporate brand as something their PR and marketing firms do, along with managing a blog and the company’s Twitter feed – that’s why you hired them, right? However, control of a company’s online reputation can no longer be outsourced without further thought — or worse, kicked downstairs to IT and the SEO management team. Noise from the online world is too loud, complicated, and fast-moving to delegate this task. CEOs need to proactively communicate with potential customers or investors in social media outlets such as blogs, Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. If you’re not making a connection between your voice and views as a CEO, and your company’s brand, you’ll become a corporate dinosaur. Think of Steve Jobs and Apple Computer, or Jeff Bezos at Amazon, execs who truly live and breathe their brands. The presence and voice of the CEO is now more important to branding than the right logo, tagline or campaign. 2) Clinging to one-way communication with customers. In the old days (that is, before 2003 or so), you talked to your customers and they didn’t talk back – or at least they didn’t talk back in a way that could result in a crisis in a matter of hours. If customers were unhappy, they called customer service, their problem was solved, and the CSR rep closed the file – end of the story. Nowadays, customer communications has morphed from a one-way street into a multi directional super highway, and CEOs who ignore this fact do so at significant peril. Top executives who are engaged with customers and online influencers on a daily basis can rectify problems before they turn into crises. To get a handle on the dialogue surrounding your company, you need to spend time reviewing the top 10 thought-leader blogs and Twitter feeds covering your industry – don’t rely on summaries from assistants or wait until they tell you about the negative buzz. You and your company should be engaged daily in two-way conversation with the top influencers in your industry, whether these are executives of other businesses or vocal customers. Granted, this won’t be an easy transition for executives who aren’t comfortable with such direct (and possibly confrontational) contact with influencers – it’s easier to deliver a speech and be done with it. Nevertheless, you need to ask questions and listen to what influencers are saying. Don’t talk “at” people — talk “with” them. 3) Underestimating the power of insights from unhappy customers. Building on the last point, not all CEOs are willing to accept the fact that today the power of one voice – that is, a customer – can provide valuable insights on products and services. Before social media changed the world, a disappointed consumer could only tell a handful of other people about their experience. Today, one viral posting about lousy service (like the infamous recording of an AOL member’s argument with a customer service rep) can result in thousands of social media posts or even stories in The New York Times or Wall Street Journal . Learn from Dell’s example of retooling customer service: After getting hammered in the blogosphere about poor response to online customer complaints, Dell created a “social media swat team” that monitored blogs for negative posts about Dell’s products. The posts are routed to this team, which can then quickly respond before the negative post gains traction. And be proactive: Don’t wait for complaints to come in through the toll-free number before you do anything about them – contact unhappy customers before they can negatively influence other customers. Airlines, often roundly criticized for poor service, are getting smarter about fast response to customer problems via Twitter and other social networks. Delta Air Lines now has a special team, @DeltaAssist , that monitors Twitter for passenger complaints. 4) Believing that customers understand the difference between The Wall Street Journal and a blogger. Executives think consumers can differentiate between a respected media outlet like The Wall Street Journal or The New York Times – whose staff are governed by a code of ethics, and whose lawyers ensure reportage is fair and accurate – and a blogger with a few readers who could be backed by your competition. Today everyone with a Internet access can be a “journalist,” regardless of whether they have had training and answer to a team of editors, or simply started a blog using free software. Don’t assume consumers can discern the nuances of journalism – if your customers take bloggers or Twitter users seriously, then you should too. When Sean Parker, an entrepreneur and the first president of Facebook, was concerned at how his portrayal in the movie “The Social Network” was damaging his online reputation, he didn’t just sit still. He reached out to Henry Blodget, CEO of the online business publication Business Insider and a Huffington Post columnist, to tell his side of the story . Thanks to Blodget’s posts, as well as tweets to his 24,000+ followers, Parker was able to present an alternate picture of his life and accomplishments. 5) Sending out inconsistent messages to external and internal audiences. Do you tell customers that you pride yourself on exemplary customer service, then fail to offer them a toll-free number for questions so they can speak with a real person? Do you proclaim your company as an innovator, yet tell your employees that you’re pulling back on R&D? You need to represent the company internally in the same way you do to your customers. Two excellent examples come to mind: Nordstrom and Gilt Groupe . Nordstrom is legendary for its in-store customer service, and has successful extended this experience to the web. Likewise, Gilt Groupe, the discount designer fashion website, projects an image of exclusivity and stellar customer service. Both embrace consistent messaging. There’s no disconnect, because the image is reality. When you make a mistake — like shoe retailer Kenneth Cole did recently by tweeting, “Millions are in uproar in #Cairo. Rumor is they heard our new spring collection is now available online,” — quickly apologize and communicate that the message is at odds with the company’s image, both inside and out. Cole tweeted : “I apologize to everyone who was offended by my insensitive tweet about the situation in Egypt. I’ve dedicated my life to raising awareness about serious social issues, and in hindsight my attempt at humor regarding a nation liberating themselves against oppression was poorly timed and absolutely inappropriate.” Avoiding the “don’ts” above can help you gain visibility into and control of the online dialogue surrounding your company. Remember, if you don’t take charge of your o-dentity, the competition will be happy to do it for you.

Read the full article →

Naveen Jain: Manage Your Company’s Online Identity — Or The Competition Will Manage It For You

February 15, 2011

Your LinkedIn profile is diligently maintained, your blog is free of comment spam, and you tell your kids to wipe their Facebook pages clean of party photos. You work hard to maintain control of your personal online identity. But do you give the same attention to how your business is portrayed online? The online identity, or “o-dentity,” of your business can help or hinder its bottom line. Yet, too many executives fail to safeguard their company’s online reputation. If you allow disgruntled customers or bloggers with a grudge to speak out unhindered about your company, rest assured your competitors will pounce on this opportunity to spread the (negative) word. Following are the five most common mistakes top executives make regarding the management of their company’s o-dentity, and some advice on taking control to prevent a downward spiral. 1) Delegating o-dentity and holding steadfast to the “it’s not my job” attitude. Many top executives see managing the link between CEO voice and corporate brand as something their PR and marketing firms do, along with managing a blog and the company’s Twitter feed – that’s why you hired them, right? However, control of a company’s online reputation can no longer be outsourced without further thought — or worse, kicked downstairs to IT and the SEO management team. Noise from the online world is too loud, complicated, and fast-moving to delegate this task. CEOs need to proactively communicate with potential customers or investors in social media outlets such as blogs, Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. If you’re not making a connection between your voice and views as a CEO, and your company’s brand, you’ll become a corporate dinosaur. Think of Steve Jobs and Apple Computer, or Jeff Bezos at Amazon, execs who truly live and breathe their brands. The presence and voice of the CEO is now more important to branding than the right logo, tagline or campaign. 2) Clinging to one-way communication with customers. In the old days (that is, before 2003 or so), you talked to your customers and they didn’t talk back – or at least they didn’t talk back in a way that could result in a crisis in a matter of hours. If customers were unhappy, they called customer service, their problem was solved, and the CSR rep closed the file – end of the story. Nowadays, customer communications has morphed from a one-way street into a multi directional super highway, and CEOs who ignore this fact do so at significant peril. Top executives who are engaged with customers and online influencers on a daily basis can rectify problems before they turn into crises. To get a handle on the dialogue surrounding your company, you need to spend time reviewing the top 10 thought-leader blogs and Twitter feeds covering your industry – don’t rely on summaries from assistants or wait until they tell you about the negative buzz. You and your company should be engaged daily in two-way conversation with the top influencers in your industry, whether these are executives of other businesses or vocal customers. Granted, this won’t be an easy transition for executives who aren’t comfortable with such direct (and possibly confrontational) contact with influencers – it’s easier to deliver a speech and be done with it. Nevertheless, you need to ask questions and listen to what influencers are saying. Don’t talk “at” people — talk “with” them. 3) Underestimating the power of insights from unhappy customers. Building on the last point, not all CEOs are willing to accept the fact that today the power of one voice – that is, a customer – can provide valuable insights on products and services. Before social media changed the world, a disappointed consumer could only tell a handful of other people about their experience. Today, one viral posting about lousy service (like the infamous recording of an AOL member’s argument with a customer service rep) can result in thousands of social media posts or even stories in The New York Times or Wall Street Journal . Learn from Dell’s example of retooling customer service: After getting hammered in the blogosphere about poor response to online customer complaints, Dell created a “social media swat team” that monitored blogs for negative posts about Dell’s products. The posts are routed to this team, which can then quickly respond before the negative post gains traction. And be proactive: Don’t wait for complaints to come in through the toll-free number before you do anything about them – contact unhappy customers before they can negatively influence other customers. Airlines, often roundly criticized for poor service, are getting smarter about fast response to customer problems via Twitter and other social networks. Delta Air Lines now has a special team, @DeltaAssist , that monitors Twitter for passenger complaints. 4) Believing that customers understand the difference between The Wall Street Journal and a blogger. Executives think consumers can differentiate between a respected media outlet like The Wall Street Journal or The New York Times – whose staff are governed by a code of ethics, and whose lawyers ensure reportage is fair and accurate – and a blogger with a few readers who could be backed by your competition. Today everyone with a Internet access can be a “journalist,” regardless of whether they have had training and answer to a team of editors, or simply started a blog using free software. Don’t assume consumers can discern the nuances of journalism – if your customers take bloggers or Twitter users seriously, then you should too. When Sean Parker, an entrepreneur and the first president of Facebook, was concerned at how his portrayal in the movie “The Social Network” was damaging his online reputation, he didn’t just sit still. He reached out to Henry Blodget, CEO of the online business publication Business Insider and a Huffington Post columnist, to tell his side of the story . Thanks to Blodget’s posts, as well as tweets to his 24,000+ followers, Parker was able to present an alternate picture of his life and accomplishments. 5) Sending out inconsistent messages to external and internal audiences. Do you tell customers that you pride yourself on exemplary customer service, then fail to offer them a toll-free number for questions so they can speak with a real person? Do you proclaim your company as an innovator, yet tell your employees that you’re pulling back on R&D? You need to represent the company internally in the same way you do to your customers. Two excellent examples come to mind: Nordstrom and Gilt Groupe . Nordstrom is legendary for its in-store customer service, and has successful extended this experience to the web. Likewise, Gilt Groupe, the discount designer fashion website, projects an image of exclusivity and stellar customer service. Both embrace consistent messaging. There’s no disconnect, because the image is reality. When you make a mistake — like shoe retailer Kenneth Cole did recently by tweeting, “Millions are in uproar in #Cairo. Rumor is they heard our new spring collection is now available online,” — quickly apologize and communicate that the message is at odds with the company’s image, both inside and out. Cole tweeted : “I apologize to everyone who was offended by my insensitive tweet about the situation in Egypt. I’ve dedicated my life to raising awareness about serious social issues, and in hindsight my attempt at humor regarding a nation liberating themselves against oppression was poorly timed and absolutely inappropriate.” Avoiding the “don’ts” above can help you gain visibility into and control of the online dialogue surrounding your company. Remember, if you don’t take charge of your o-dentity, the competition will be happy to do it for you.

Read the full article →

Robert Creamer: No Mr. Boehner, America is Not "Broke"

February 15, 2011

Once again on the Sunday news shows, Republican Leader John Boehner declared that “America is broke” — his premise for why we “can’t afford” important investments that are critical to America’s future. In fact, of course, America is far from “broke”. It is the largest economy in the world. After collapsing as a result of the recklessness of the big Wall Street banks — and Republican economic policies in late 2008 — the economy has, in fact, grown for six consecutive quarters. The stock market has almost doubled since the crash — regaining most of its value. Corporate profits are soaring. And American corporations are now sitting on close to two trillion dollars in cash. What’s more, we still have the same highly-skilled, productive labor force and the same stock of plants and equipment that we did before the financial meltdown — the same ability to create the goods and services that are the real measures of economic wealth. The problem isn’t that America is “broke.” The problem is that economic growth is not being shared with most Americans. The problem is that the very rich are wealthier than ever and everyone else is falling behind. Not only does that mean that the massive store of wealth that we create today is not widely shared. It also means that — taken together — we have less wealth as a nation because so many Americans who could be creating goods and services are unemployed, creating nothing. Of course the implication of the “America is broke” mantra is that we have to make massive cuts in programs and services that benefit the middle class and poor because we “can’t afford them” — us being broke and all. Frankly, you have a hard time taking that kind of talk seriously from a guy who just recently demanded that America continue to give massive tax breaks for the wealthy for the next two years — and who wants to flat out abolish the estate tax that, by definition, benefits only the sons and daughters of multimillionaires and billionaires. Is America broke? Have a look at John Paulson. In 2007, as the financial crisis descended, he made $4 billion in personal income betting against subprime mortgages that helped sink the rest of the economy. Last year he made a record $5 billion in personal income as the manager of a hedge fund. By the way, had he somehow managed to make that astronomical sum of money laying bricks or sweeping floors, he would have paid taxes at a rate of 35% on the bulk of that income. Instead, he paid at a rate of only 15%, since he earned his money by speculating as a hedge fund manager instead of making a useful good or service. Makes sense, right? Last year Mr. Paulson made as much as 100,000 of his fellow citizens who earned $50,000 per year. Paulson’s haul may have been a record, but Appaloosa Management’s founder David Tepper and Bridgewater Associates chief Ray Dalio each did pretty well too — between $2 and $3 billion each. And the rest of Wall Street was back in the money as well. Boehner’s attempt to justify massive cuts in investments that will grow the economy in the future — like education and infrastructure; or his insistence on cutting money that is used by the states to pay firefighters and police; or cuts in programs that take food out of the mouths of poor children — are outrageous so long as most of our economic growth goes into the hands of the wealthy few. Let’s remember a few key facts about our current federal deficit: The last time the federal budget was actually in balance was not under the Republicans — but rather under Bill Clinton. The current deficit was caused exclusively by the Bush tax cuts, two unpaid-for wars that cost trillions, and the largest recession in eighty years — caused by the same Republican economic policies Boehner is trying to sell today. Between 2001 and 2008, the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress rolled up more federal debt than all other Administrations in the history of the United States combined. It is entirely possible to deal with the federal deficit without making the middle class and poor pay the bill. My wife, Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, who was on the President’s Fiscal Commission, outlined precisely such a proposal last fall. It makes many cuts to spending that go for unnecessary tax expenditures like subsidies to Big Oil and it relies on making the wealthiest among us pay their fair share. It makes the people who had the economic party over the last two decades pay the bill — not middle class and low income Americans who didn’t even get an invitation. The deficit is not some inevitable consequence of our being “broke” — or some law of nature. It was caused by human decisions to allow wealthy people to reduce their contribution to our common activities and to use them, instead for themselves. For example, it is entirely possible to raise the same amount that Boehner has proposed cutting in the 2011 (this year’s) federal budget simply by adding a few new tax brackets to the tax code for those who make more than a million dollars. You bump the tax rate up at a million dollars, at ten million, at fifty million — and a billion. You don’t even have to raise them that much. Right now people who make5 billion per year — America’s economic royalty — pay taxes at the same rate as upper middle class professionals who make360,000 — where the current highest tax rate of 35% kicks in. Often, because of tax loopholes — or because they’re hedge fund managers — they actually pay less. The reason why this approach works so well is that all the new income is going to that tiny percentage of the population. To fix the deficit, you have to go where the money is. Yesterday the President proposed his fiscal 2012 budget. It makes major investments in precisely the areas that will help us out-build, out-educate and out-compete the rest of the world in the 21st Century. His budget includes new investments in education, clean energy and infrastructure. Many of these initiatives have already been attacked by Republicans because “we can’t afford them — after all, American is broke.” We may not be broke now, but we really will be broke if we don’t invest in the future. The President also proposed cuts in a number of areas that we truly can’t afford (and really never should have done in the first place) — like subsidies to the oil and gas companies that are making record profits. He also proposes $78 billion cuts in military spending over the next five years. But the President was also forced to propose cuts in important programs that benefit average Americans. He proposed cutting the home-heating program, community block grants that are critical to low-income communities, and even the fund to clean up the Great Lakes. These are important programs that are critical to real people and to our future. The President himself supports these programs. He was not forced to propose the cuts in programs like these because America is broke — he made these proposals because the Republicans insisted on continuing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy for the next two years and that limits investment in important priorities. Think of it. It is outrageous that we should cut money that assures that people don’t freeze in the winter so that the likes of John Paulson — the $5,000,000,000,000 dollar man — will not have to pay a couple of percentage points more on his income taxes. But that is exactly the consequence of Republican insistence that the Bush tax cuts for the rich continue. And it is just the beginning of the menu of Republican “priorities” that we will see laid out over the next several weeks. All of this “America is broke” — “just stop the spending” — rhetoric sounds very appealing until you start looking at who is hurt by the cuts, and who benefits by not paying their fair share to finance government — the things we do together. Over the next few weeks, the budget debate will shift from the rhetorical and abstract to the personal and concrete. If progressives can make that happen, the Republicans will be forced into a full retreat when it comes to the budget debate. It’s about time. Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com .

Read the full article →

Caroline Dowd-Higgins: Knowing When It’s Time To Fire Your Boss

February 6, 2011

If I had a dollar for every person who told me they were frustrated with their boss, I would be a very rich woman. In a decade of career coaching, I have learned that people don’t leave jobs, they leave bad bosses. Good Managers Don’t Always Make Good Leaders In many organizations, managers who are given the responsibility to complete predetermined goals or projects are rewarded for their success with an upgraded role in a leadership position. Many managers fail as leaders because they lack the skills and competencies to develop relationships with their employees and build loyalty with their team. They cannot evoke a compelling image of success by empowering and cultivating the talent of their subordinates because they are classic micro-managers and fail to instill buy-in and accountability. These folks are not bad people but they are not gifted leaders, which often translates to being a bad boss. If your boss fits this description then you should consider firing your boss and hooking your star to a talented and dynamic leader. In reality we know this does not mean to literally fire your boss — although that would be gratifying for some during the most frustrating of bad boss moments. But I do encourage you to begin seriously looking for a new work environment that will empower you with a strong leader who in turn will help you grow your career if your boss is zapping your potential at work. Find a Great Boss A really good boss and a great leader can take you upward with them inside or outside of your current organization, if you prove your worth. If you have the trust of the rising star in the company — keep it and maintain it, for this is your insurance policy. If your current boss is not star material, it’s time to look for one that is. If your boss just doesn’t get it and there is no hope of a change in mindset, you need to stealthily devise your exit strategy. Don’t ever leave a job unless you have another to go to, especially in this economy. But if your boss is not a good leader and there is no system in your organization that will help change that, then you deserve to be in an environment where you can grow and develop your career. Even in the most blissful job environment, you should be thinking about your five-year plan and where you see your career going in the future. A great boss will help you on your way but alas, not all of them are so enlightened. Interview Your Future Boss The next time you are interviewing for a position make sure you interview your prospective boss thoughtfully. By asking compelling questions about their leadership style you will be able to ascertain if they are going to grow or diminish your talent on the team. I suggest you read a great book by Liz Wiseman before your next interview. Liz Wiseman, worked at Oracle for 17-plus years and considers herself a genius watcher. She was the VP responsible for the company’s global talent development strategy and ran the Oracle Corporate University. Her book: “Multipliers: How the Best Leaders Make Everyone Smarter” teaches valuable lessons for current and aspiring leaders. During Wiseman’s leadership watching and developing experience at Oracle, she discovered that some leaders drain intelligence and the capabilities of the people around them. Their focus on their own intelligence and their narcissistic need to be the smartest person in the room had a diminishing effect on everyone else around them. For them to look smart other people had to look dumb or incompetent and in turn, the Diminishers created a vacuum suck of all the creative energy in a room. Meeting times were doubled and other people’s ideas suffocated and died in their presence. Coping with a Bad Boss If your boss is not helpful in assessing your strengths, seek outside assistance from a personal Board of Directors that you assemble beyond the walls of your workplace. In reality, we don’t always have the support system in-house that we need but this should not stop you from reaching out to others for mentorship and advice. And, it just might help you get to the next mile marker on your personal career journey that includes a position with a great leader as your boss. While I believe that some leaders are born, most are developed and our current professional marketplace does not place enough emphasis on training effective leaders. This leads to discontent amongst the troops and ultimately low morale and low productivity. Recognizing the Multipliers In an ideal world where you land a dream job with a fabulous boss, you would want a Multiplier at the helm. The Multipliers use their intelligence to amplify the capabilities of others on their team. People get smarter and better in their presence and ideas flow freely and challenges are overcome. When these leaders walk into a room the energy level goes up on the team and difficult problems are solved because every team member has a say and is involved. The Multipliers bring out the intelligence in others by building collective and viral genius in an organization. By extracting people’s full capability, Multipliers get twice the resources from people than do the Diminishers. Wiseman identified five disciplines of Multipliers: The Talent Magnet: Attract and optimize talent The Liberator: Require people’s best thinking The Challenger: Extend challenges The Debate Maker: Debate decisions The Investor: Instill accountability You Deserve a Great Leader This is a difficult lesson for many of today’s unsuccessful leaders who don’t have the professional development resources to learn to become Multipliers. Others don’t have courageous team members to call them out on being ineffective leaders so they continue to diminish and dysfunctional teams plod along. If confronting your diminishing leader is not within your comfort zone, or you fear job security, perhaps a mysterious copy of Liz Wiseman’s great book in an office mailbox will plant the seed anonymously. As you plan your next career move be sure to consider your future boss’s role in your success and happiness in the organization. You deserve a Multiplier! *** Caroline Dowd-Higgins authored the book “This Is Not the Career I Ordered” and maintains the career reinvention blog of the same name ( www.carolinedowdhiggins.com ) She is also the Director of Career & Professional Development at Indiana University Maurer School of Law.

Read the full article →

Fred Whelan and Gladys Stone: Where Will You Be A Month From Now?

February 4, 2011

You’re a month into your New Year’s Resolution, everything is going great and you’re putting your friends to shame. Good for you. Your “no excuses” strategy has paid off and if you keep this up you’ll reach your goal by the end of the year. Problem is you have a last minute business trip this week and an unexpected house guest next week which is going to throw you off. Still it’s only a couple of weeks and you can get back on track by mid-February. Riiiiiight. Think of what plagued you the last time you couldn’t achieve a goal. No matter what the reason was, you didn’t accomplish it because you stopped taking action towards it. Things may have started like this time. You had a good month, and then a couple of things got in the way and you lost all of your momentum. Unfortunately, you never regained it. It’s okay to get temporarily derailed. The key is to keep temporary from becoming permanent. This sort of thing happens all the time at work. You have a project with a corresponding deadline and something urgent comes up. You either work around the clock to get both done or negotiate for an extended deadline on the project. The project gets done, it doesn’t get dropped. CEO’s know that unexpected things will occur – everything from product recalls to a key executive leaving. Things might get delayed but they’re not given up on. Part of succeeding in business is overcoming the hurdles, dealing with the unexpected and getting the thing done. While you can do that for work, it’s sometimes harder to do that for your own personal goals. One reason is that it’s easy to slough off if you’re only accountable to yourself. Why do we let ourselves off the hook so easily? Mainly because we’re only letting ourselves down. Too bad there can’t be a project meeting about your personal goal. Since being accountable to yourself is more difficult, the best way to get back on track is to think about your motivation around the goal. Tap into the desire that you had at the outset – the reason you wanted to be promoted, lose10 pounds or write that book. Here’s how to reignite your motivation: look at a picture of your end goal every day. Keep it fresh by getting a new visual every month; keep taking steps towards your goal. Even if the steps are small, each step has you moving forward and puts you in a rhythm. People who consistently reach goals aren’t necessarily smarter or more energetic. What they are is persistent and everybody has that ability. So, the next time you have the flu or a holiday intervenes – like Presidents Day :) – use the suggestions above to get back into the rhythm. Then you’ll know where you’ll be a month from now – tracking towards your goal! “Vitality shows in not only the ability to persist but the ability to start over.” ~F. Scott Fitzgerald Fred & Gladys Whelan Stone Executive Search and Coaching Authors of GOAL! Your 30 Day Career Plan for Business & Career Success

Read the full article →

Charles Gasparino: Does Morgan Stanley’s James "Don’t Call Me Jim" Gorman Have What it Takes?

February 3, 2011

Here’s something you should know about Morgan Stanley’s chief executive officer James Gorman: Never call him “Jim.” I’ve been covering Wall Street now for two decades and never before have I been corrected by a CEOs’ handlers about a first name as much as I have when it comes to Gorman, who took the top job at Morgan about a year ago, and is now struggling to recreate that bank in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, which it barely survived. Of course, Gorman should go by whatever name makes him feel comfortable, but there is something unsettling about someone in charge of so much worrying about something so trivial (it wasn’t like I called him “Jimbo”). And that’s starting to become the general consensus on Wall Street, both among his fellow CEOs, analysts who cover the firm and even people inside Morgan Stanley. Most admit that Gorman is a nice enough fellow, very intelligent, and in person doesn’t come across as the the type of stuck-up jerk who gets crazy when you call him Jim instead of James. But there’s also a worry from these quarters that Gorman and his PR handlers are spending way too much time convincing people he’s a serious CEO to compensate for what some on Wall Street believe is a serious lack of the right kind of experience to run a major investment bank. “The problem with not having a background in the markets is because Wall Street is still a business involving the markets, and Gorman doesn’t have that experience,” said one prominent analyst who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was afraid of losing access to key executive at the firm. Here’s what this analyst means: Gorman didn’t come to the CEO job the traditional route. He spent many years as a consultant for McKinsey & Co. before going to work for his biggest client, Merrill Lynch to run its brokerage unit, and then to Morgan Stanley to run its brokerage department. In other words, unlike his peers, Gorman has never really worked in a revenue producing job, only as a manager of revenue producers, and before that as a consultant to the managers of revenue producers. Without the more typical banker-trader-broker experience, some analysts worry whether Gorman thinks too much like a micro-managing technocrat, and not enough like a salesman, thus lacking the personal touch needed to run a company that makes its money selling investments to small investors, and finance advice to major corporations. To be sure, there’s a good case to be made that the traditional Wall Street experience of rewarding the people who make the most money and take the most risk set the stage for the 2008 financial crisis in the first place. But Gorman hasn’t really made the case he’s the right guy to be CEO. For all the worry about his image, Gorman’s obsession (and the obsession of his PR staff) with being called James doesn’t help convince investors and analysts he’s a serious executive. “We all call him ‘James don’t call me Jim Gorman,’” said another analyst with a laugh. Then there’s his performance, which on paper is middling at best. Morgan’s earnings jumped 60% during the fourth quarter of 2010, thanks in part to investment banking revenues, but only after other lackluster results. To be sure, the firm’s banking business has had some notable successes, but a chunk of that can be attributed to winning deals from the government’s various corporate bailouts, and the firm’s ties to the Obama administration that was in charge of unwinding those bailouts through various stock sales. One of the firm’s top political players was Tom Nides who recently resigned as chief operating officer to take a job with the administration as Deputy Secretary of State. The stakes for Gorman — and Morgan — are of course huge. Morgan Stanley is one of Wall Street’s most storied franchises (half of the venerable House of Morgan; the other half being JP Morgan). After Morgan Stanley survived the 2008 financial collapse, albeit with taxpayer help, it shifted its business model away from risk taking in the bond and stock markets to giving advice, and some analysts now worry that Morgan’s business model of focusing on clients won’t generate enough money to satisfy investors. As part of its new business model, Morgan acquired Citigroup’s brokerage unit known as Smith Barney. Gorman, first as brokerage chief and now Morgan’s CEO is taking the lead role in the unit’s integration to create the largest brokerage firm on Wall Street, with close to 20,000 salesman selling stocks, bonds and mutual funds to small investors across the country. But that integration hasn’t always gone smoothly; some people at Smith Barney worry about losing their jobs to less qualified people at Morgan, and there have been some layoffs and office closings in order for the firm to squeeze at least $1 billion from the move. My sources tell me that Morgan’s PR staff clearly understand the doubts surrounding Gorman faces and they have begun a carefully orchestrated “charm offensive” making Gorman available to some selective publications where he can explain his strategy in a controlled setting (a profile of him is expected in Fortune as soon as next week), while keeping him away from others. He’s dodged numerous requests to be interviewed by me; indeed the last time I approached him for an interview while at a conference in New York City, I was quickly surrounded by his security detail, who whisked him away. One problem with the PR campaign is that some of those doubts surrounding Gorman can be found inside Morgan Stanley as well, people close to the firm tell me. Before Mack became CEO, Morgan was run by Phil Purcell, another consultant who was widely despised inside the ranks for his sour disposition and because Morgan lost ground to rivals. Morgan executives openly worry that they’re being led by “another Purcell.” Indeed Gorman didn’t make many friends inside Morgan’s investment banking ranks when he publicly attacked Wall Street’s “star system” — or paying people based on how much money they bring into the firm — and asserted he would make cuts compensation even for those who stars who perform. Even worse for Gorman is the continued presence of John Mack, the firm’s long time CEO. Mack relinquished the top job to Gorman in 2010, but remains as its chairman. Such splits between CEO and chairman rare on Wall Street and publicly Morgan says that it’s Gorman’s call on whether Mack stays or goes. Maybe so, but people close to the firm say it’s Morgan’s board of directors who want Mack to stay around because they don’t have the confidence in Gorman’s ability to run the firm by himself. “They’re keeping John Mack around for good reason,” said another analyst. How long does Gorman have to show he’s the right guy to run the firm? Its hard to know. Among investors in bank stocks, patience runs thin. Of course, much depends on the stock price, which is trading at $30 a share — about the same level as when Gorman took over a year ago reflecting an overall indifference with his performance. “Morgan is good firm, but there’s a question: Is Gorman up for the task,” said on executive at a rival bank. “No one knows for sure, not even people inside Morgan Stanley.”

Read the full article →

Dan Dorfman: Lady Dracula Sees Gobs Of New Jobs

February 2, 2011

For the moment, at least, America’s biggest economic worry — the lofty unemployment rate — may finally be taking a decided turn for the better. In December, 103,000 new jobs were created in non-farm payroll employment. The January number, to be reported Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, could double that with a gain of between 175,000 and 215,000 jobs, according to Madeline Schnapp, the economics chief of West Coast liquidity tracker TrimTabs Research. “We expect the job growth reported by the BLS to surprise on the upside,” she says. Interestingly, Schnapp, who got the moniker “Lady Dracula” in economic circles for being exceptionally bearish on the economy in recent years, has had a change of heart. No longer, like last October, is she warning of a gory jobs story. The reason for her positive shift, she tells me: the trillions of dollars in freshly printed and borrowed money pouring into the system, which she thinks could be a boon for new job creations.. Given her altered economic stance, maybe she should undergo a name change, say to Glinda, who was the good witch of the north in the Wizard of Oz . Why the creation of gobs of new jobs in January? Schnapp offers a slew of reasons, namely: – The TrimTabs online jobs posting index rose 4.5% in January, the biggest monthly gain since October of 2010. – Initial unemployment claims have been trending lower since August of 2010. – Commercial and industrial loan growth accelerated to 1% in the past month. Such strong growth often accompanies a pickup in job growth. – The Federal Reserve’s senior loan officer opinion survey reported the demand for business loans picked up in the fourth quarter of 2010, while demand for commercial and industrial loans was the strongest sine 2006. – Fed manufacturing surveys for New York, Philadelphia, Richmond and Kansas City all reported rising employment. – The Institute of Supply Management business conditions indices for Chicago and New York have both showed job improvements, – The Fed’s “beige book” (a Fed commentary of current economic conditions) reported that labor markets rose in most districts. Temporary staffing firms in six of 12 districts gave positive reports, while eight of 12 said their business contacts planned to hold hiring steady or increase hiring in 2011. – Personal consumption expenditures rose 4.4% in last year’s fourth quarter, the largest hike since the first quarter of 2006. Meanwhile final sales jumped 7.1%, the strongest growth since 1984. – The ISM manufacturing index component surprised on the upside, pointing to strong employment growth. – TrimTabs withholding tax data was strong the last two weeks of January. Because a lot more discouraged workers are coming back into the labor force, Schnapp figures we may not see a sizable improvement in the unemployment rate (presently 9.4%) despite her projected jump in new jobs. In fact, she says, we may even see the unemployment rateactually increase. While bullish now on the economy, Lady Dracula hastens to point out it’s too soon to uncork a fresh bottle of champagne, given her two biggest long-term concerns: the question of whether the economy will be able to grow without extraordinary government support and the additional uncertainty of whether there are sufficient buyers of U.S. treasuries at low yields. What do you think? E-mail me at Dandordan@aol.com

Read the full article →

Goldman’s Cynical Assurances Notwithstanding, The Decade is Lost Already

February 2, 2011

Step back from the ledge, America. Scotch the gloomy talk of a Japan-style Lost Decade in which we sink into decline and marinate morosely there for years. We’re back, baby! So says a cheery depiction of these times from the wizards at Goldman Sachs (a firm that, come to think of it, played a starring role in trashing our economic security). The report from Goldman’s Investment Strategy Group, and served up here as evidence of happy times by the credulous folks at Politico’s Morning Money, dismisses suggestions that the American economy might yet confront substantial problems. “The U.S. Will Not Face a ‘Lost Decade,’” declares a subheading in the report, which later calls the odds of that prospect “very remote indeed.” Instead, “America’s structural resilience, fortitude and ingenuity will carry the economy and financial markets in 2011 — and beyond.” Lest this hyperventilating prose fail to provoke the intended response, that last clause sits beneath a picture of George Washington crossing the Delaware. (Hats off to the creative geniuses inside Goldman’s public relations machine, who apparently aim to redefine doubts about the economy — and Goldman’s lucrative cheerleading — as downright un-American.) But one problem with all this soothing talk: As millions of ordinary people can readily attest, we are already deep into a Lost Decade and then some. Rescuing ourselves from this era of diminished expectations is going to require far more than disseminating rosy projections about this year’s stock market while touting the innate power of American business. It demands a serious-minded plan to get people back to work so we can wean ourselves off the investment fantasies propagated by Goldman and its Wall Street cohorts. A brief consideration of reality comes in handy here. The U.S. economy slipped officially into recession in December 2007 and remained there until June of 2009, not for nothing earning the moniker “the Great Recession.” During those 19 brutal months, the economy lost a net 7.3 million jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In the year and a half since, the economy has gained back a grand total of 72,000 jobs — not even half what most economists say we need in a single month just to absorb new entrants to the labor force. And that concentrated period of pain landed on top of a so-called economic expansion that was as weak as any on record. In 2000, at the tail end of the last so-called boom, the median American family claimed annual earnings of about $61,000, according to federal data. By late 2007, as the Great Recession began, that same median family had seen its earnings dip to $60,500. Never before in the half-century during which the government has tracked such figures had the data offered up such clear evidence of declining fortunes: An expansion had run its course with the typical American family rolling backward. Add this up: Seven years of times so lean that lowered incomes became the American norm, followed by a year and a half of terrifying decline — with millions of foreclosures and trillions of dollars in lost wealth — followed by a similar interim of tepid economic growth leaving the unemployment rate above 9 percent. That’s a Lost Decade right there. Set aside the fluctuations that have made the economy manic in recent time — a technology bubble propelled by Wall Street financiers and Silicon Valley venture capitalists; the real estate bubble, pumped up by banks that turned mortgages into casino chips — and focus instead on what matters most to ordinary people: What do we bring home from work? In that context, “Lost Decade” seems like a mild description of the American experience. The data offers up the Lost Three Decades. At the end of 2010, the average weekly earnings for American rank-and-file workers sat at roughly the same level as at the end of 1979 in inflation-adjusted terms. (Have a look at the raw Labor Department data here .) A lot of caveats go into absorbing that number. Large numbers of women and immigrants entered the labor force in those years, which has tended to pull down average wages. But a central truth cannot be dismissed: More than a quarter-century has gone past — a sweep of history that has seen the personal computing revolution, two wars in the Persian Gulf, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War, the integration of China into the global economy — and yet the average American worker has gotten nowhere. This while the costs of health care, education and housing have skyrocketed. You won’t encounter any of this sort of analysis in Goldman’s delightful report, which is aimed not at people who work for a living, but people who are inclined to conflate the stock market and the real economy. And the stock market, according to Goldman, is poised for a boffo 2011. Who can argue with that? Savvy U.S. corporations are making enormous sums of money by boosting their sales abroad and keeping a lid on their costs — which is to say, by not hiring people. Companies like General Electric, whose chief executive Jeffrey Immelt was just named to head a task force that is supposed to encourage job growth, have netted record profits by selling product overseas and laying off workers at home. This formula pretty much describes how the economy has grown robustly for most of the last three decades, while opportunities for working people have withered. Its perpetuation fairly ensures no need to worry about a Lost Decade if you are an executive at a multinational corporation, a shareholder seeking hefty dividends, or a Wall Street chieftain counting on a bonus. But the words at the top of Goldman’s report — “Stay the Course” — amount to a threat for the rest of the nation. The course is untenable. For most people, it leads to credit card debt, ulcer medication and, perhaps, bankruptcy. Japan imploded and then stagnated at the messy end of the real-estate speculation that filled out the 1980s by dithering about the needed fix. Tokyo tried modest stimulus spending packages, then austerity, then public works spending and then export-led growth — always too late, always inadequately and usually amid political discord over how to proceed. Here in the United States, the most striking similarity with Japan’s years of decline is the way in which political dysfunction continues to be a powerful barrier to needed action, rendering impossible the muscular investments required to pull us out of the ditch — investments in renewable energy, education and infrastructure. Goldman’s dismissal of Lost Decade fears is brazenly self-serving. When people are afraid, they tend not to hand their money to Wall Street gamblers to manage. Worse, its words heap fresh disinformation and a false dose of reassurance into a conversation that ought to be centered on an honest reckoning about where we are and how to claw our way back. We are very much lost, and have been for decades. And we will remain so for as long as influential people pay attention to the cynical assurances of Goldman, which has mastered the art of digging us deeper into a hole, all the while selling us the shovels.

Read the full article →

Rich Lesser: Are Knowledge Workers Being Replaced by ‘Insight Workers’?

February 2, 2011

Peter Drucker coined the phrase “knowledge workers” in 1959 to describe the shift in workforce trends and the increasing value of those who accumulate expertise within a given domain. The term has served us well for half a century, but it will become increasingly obsolete in the years ahead. We are in the early stages of the decline of knowledge workers — because knowledge is becoming increasingly ubiquitous. We see this in our personal lives already: “Are you smarter than a 5th grader?” used to be a slam dunk for most educated adults. Give a sharp 5th grader an iPhone or an Android and that same adult has no chance. Expertise was and, in many places, still is highly valued. Drafting a legal brief, closing the financial books, or writing a market research report are all important tasks that provide thousands or even millions of well-paying jobs. Yet within each of these professions and many others, there are really two different sets of activities. The first is the ability to gather and synthesize knowledge into coherent and useful observations. The second is translating those observations into insights that can deliver impact — win a trial, improve the economics of a business, take market share from competitors. While the aspirations of most professions are concentrated on driving outcomes, much of the actual work, particularly by entry- and mid-level workers, is on creating and synthesizing knowledge. And here is where the challenge will be greatest. Knowledge workers are coming under siege, and this trend will accelerate as computers enhance their abilities to analyze vast amounts of data, process language, make real-time judgments and integrate different data sources. It will not happen overnight and it will move at different paces in different areas, but we are at the beginning of a trend that will accelerate in the years to come. This change will have a profound impact on many professions and in turn will place new challenges on educators and employers. If what we need are insight workers more than knowledge workers, then we need to develop talent of all ages differently — with more emphasis on problem-solving, more emphasis on collaboration, more skills in translating information and ideas into impact. Many educators and employers are already identifying these needs, but most are probably not recognizing how fast these new requirements will be upon us. Last month, an IBM computer beat the top two Jeopardy! champions of all time in a practice match. As this technology expands and approaches ubiquity, how will the average knowledge worker compete?

Read the full article →

Nancy F. Koehn: Davos Diary: Day Three

January 28, 2011

The day dawned clear and cold in Davos, but most participants in the World Economic Forum here had little bandwidth for the weather. Typically, Thursday and Friday are the days when some of the most powerful leaders come to town. This means larger entourages (and bigger traffic jams to accommodate convoys), higher energy levels in the Congress Center, the Forum’s main hall, and greater attention to who’s who in formal sessions and those behind closed doors (I, for one, could not help staring when former U.S. president Bill Clinton walked by as I was standing at one of the two coffee bars). During the lunch break, the substantive buzz was about French president Nicolas Sarkozy’s morning address and his unflagging support for the European single currency in the wake of Greece and Ireland’s pressing fiscal problems and broader mass protests. Over a cheese sandwich, I eavesdropped on an animated conversation about how important it was (or was not) for Sarkozy to send such a signal at this moment. I left this debate midstream to scurry on to an interactive session on Shakespeare’s lessons for leadership. For more than an hour, about 50 men and women analyzed several passages in the Bard’s plays, looking for insights and assorted “takeaways” to apply in our respective lives. The arts, our discussion leader explained, appeal to the heart as well as the head, so the lessons we glean from understanding literature and other similar pursuits stick (“Here, here,” I said under my breath, relieved to find myself in a professional setting without PowerPoint slides). I have long been drawn to Shakespeare’s stories, particularly the characters that shape and drive these stories. In my leadership work with MBA students and executives, I often use examples from Shakespeare, finding that these instances resonate with most people. As our discussion leader said, we “learn best from stories.” The conversation in the afternoon about three Shakespeare excerpts had a number of takeaways. The passage from Hamlet , for example, in which Polonius, a courtier in Hamlet’s uncle’s court, sends his son, Laertes, off to school in France, is full of important lessons for business and life, including: listen more than you speak; make friends carefully and keep those you have close; be careful with your personal finances; dress well, but do not be flashy; and perhaps most significant, “to thine own self be true.” A second excerpt, from Julius Caesar , between two angry Roman leaders, Brutus and Cassius, dealt with conflict management. Avoid getting personal in stressful encounters, don’t assume another person’s motivations, and be mindful of outside influences were several of the insights from this dramatic exchange. The final, and most famous excerpt, was the St. Crispin’s Day speech that Henry V delivers near the end of the play named after him. The short speech, intended to rally the English king’s troops before the Battle of Agincourt, is elegant and moving. Behind the power and unforgettable language are a number of lessons for those trying to motivate others in difficult situations: appealing to a worthy mission that is bigger than any one individual, instilling pride in colleagues and comrades, bringing the future into the present to help others understand the broader impact of what they are doing, offering one’s team a choice about whether to invest in a particular undertaking, and fostering a sense of collective enterprise. I left the session engaged and heartened, not only by what I had learned from the session but by how I had learned it. Late in the afternoon, I filed into the largest auditorium in the Congress Hall to hear a conversation between Bill Clinton and Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum. For 45 minutes, Clinton answered a range of questions about Haiti, the global economy, job creation, U.S. politics, and the shifting geopolitical order. He looked thinner–by some measure–than he has and as a result perhaps a bit less robust. But his answers were thoughtful, confident without being arrogant, and consistently supported by relevant facts. At several moments during his remarks, I marveled at his speed and breadth of thinking, all powered by great engagement. Unconstrained by the limits imposed on officeholders, Clinton talked about the mistakes the Democratic Party made in the midterm elections by not offering up another narrative to that told (relentlessly) by the political right. When asked for his advice to leaders, he said individuals should not just talk about particular challenges; they should go out and do something, no matter how small, about these challenges. The world, he continued, is “so hungry for examples of things that work.” I was most struck by Clinton’s implicit call for a revised version of capitalism, one that accounted for the interconnectedness of our global village, that no longer regarded aspects of economic activity such as environmental concerns as externalities but rather as critical parts of a viable business model, and that recognized a broader breadth of stakeholders than do older, narrower conceptions of free markets. Late in the evening, a friend in Boston sent me a text message about a small explosion here in a Davos hotel. It was the first I had heard of this although the blast, which happened in an underground storage area of the Morosani Posthotel, occurred about 9 a.m. Blessedly, no one was injured, and authorities are saying little about causes or circumstances. Security will no doubt be very tight for the remainder of this gathering. Yesterday, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner is speaking in the morning. And in the afternoon–in what was the Forum highlight for me–so did Bono. Coming up: Stay tuned for my World Economic Forum recap on Monday and keep following my tweets live from the event.

Read the full article →

US 4Q GDP Expands 3.2%, Personal Consumption Marks Biggest Advance Since 2006

January 28, 2011

US 4Q GDP Expands 3.2%, Personal Consumption Marks Biggest Advance Since 2006

Read the full article →

Microsoft Earnings Edge Down On Slow PC Sales

January 27, 2011

SEATTLE — Microsoft Corp. said Thursday that its net income for the latest quarter fell slightly from a year ago, and it beat Wall Street’s expectations despite the weak personal computer market. Sales of Office 2010 to consumers and businesses buoyed the results, as did the popularity of Kinect, Microsoft’s new motion-sensing controller for the Xbox 360 video game system. Microsoft’s net income for the October-December quarter was $6.63 billion, compared with $6.66 billion in the same period last year. Thanks to stock buybacks, its net income rose to 77 cents per share, from 74 cents. Analysts surveyed by FactSet were expecting net income of 69 cents per share for the fiscal second quarter. Much of Microsoft’s business depends on selling copies of the Windows operating system and Office desktop software, products that usually rise and fall with fluctuations in the personal computer market. Microsoft launched Windows 7 in the same quarter of 2009, making for a tough comparison. Revenue plunged 30 percent in the Windows division to $5.1 billion. Worldwide personal computer shipments only grew about 3 percent in the latest quarter, as Apple Inc.’s iPad and the promise of more tablet devices to come made consumers think twice about what kind of device to buy. However, the division that sells Office software and other programs saw revenue rise 24 percent to $6 billion. Big companies that put off buying new technology during the worst of the recession are more willing now to upgrade their systems. Microsoft said the division’s revenue from businesses rose 18 percent while revenue from consumers jumped 49 percent, both because of sales of Office 2010. Strength in the entertainment and devices division, which is responsible for Xbox 360, also helped make up for weak Windows sales. Microsoft says it sold 8 million Kinect controllers, helping push revenue for the segment up 55 percent to $3.7 billion. In all, Microsoft’s revenue edged up 5 percent to $20 billion, topping analysts’ expectations for $19.2 billion in revenue. The software maker rushed out its earnings report a few minutes early, just before the markets closed for the day. Shares spiked to more than $29 per share in heavy trading about 15 minutes before the closing bell, before dropping back to $28.87, a 9 cent gain for the day. They slipped 16 cents to $28.71 in extended trading. “A preproduction draft of our earnings release was discovered by one or more media sources who then published our results to the Web before market close,” Bill Koefoed, Microsoft’s general manager of investor relations, said in a statement. Microsoft posted its official numbers after consulting with the Nasdaq stock market, he said. The company is reviewing its procedures to avoid a repeat of the earnings leak. This has happened before to other companies, including The Walt Disney Co. last year. A reporter accessed the quarterly report by guessing the Web address Disney would use before the information was made public, based on the pattern used in past quarters. Microsoft did not immediately say whether the media used a similar tactic to obtain the early results. Despite a successful holiday season for Kinect, Microsoft still needs to prove it is heading in the right direction in areas where it currently lags behind market leaders. Thursday’s report included a wider loss in the online division, which is mostly made up of online advertising. Google Inc., which makes almost all of its money from online advertising, saw its earnings in the same period rise 29 percent to $2.5 billion. Devices running a new smart phone system, Windows Phone 7, went on sale during the quarter, but in its quarterly filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Microsoft did not mention its contribution to the entertainment and devices division, which also houses Xbox.

Read the full article →

Les McKeown: Stop Trying to Find Your Passion and Get to Work

January 24, 2011

Let’s get something straight: passion is not a requirement for business success, and the seemingly 24/7 ‘passion-in-business’ industry is selling you a pup. Despite the ever-multiplying “find-your-passion” gurus and the breathless profiles of passionate leaders by never-ran-a-business-in-their-life journos, possessing passion is about as relevant to business success as possessing Steve Job’s black turtleneck: try hard enough and you can get your hands on either (or both), but neither will guarantee you business success. There are two significant ways in which this fixation on passion as a prerequisite for success in business is seriously damaging: it deludes new and potential entrepreneurs into believing that if only they can find their ‘true north’, then their business venture will surely succeed; and it is hijacking (or at least hobbling) the development of serious leaders with genuine depth. Here’s the problem with selling passion as a fundamental of business success: 1. It’s largely a fiction : Sure, there are a cluster of usual suspects who get rolled out in every ‘passionate leader’ discussion: the aforementioned Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, Tony Hseih and (insert your personal favorite here). There are any number of problems with this roster, but let’s focus on just three: First, every one of these people are successful because they’re brilliantly competent, not because they’re passionate. Second, most of these folks, brilliant as they are, know how to mix great PR and communication skills with a laser-like focus on a world-class strategy, which is a complex and nuanced skill. Reducing it to ‘passion’ demeans them and their accomplishments. Third, for every poster child for passion, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of counter-examples — business leaders that only you or I or their employees or their immediate family have heard of, because they’re just quietly getting on with being successful. If we all had to be like Tony Hsieh to succeed, the economy would be screwed. 2. It gets in the way : Have you ever actually worked with somebody who is driven, night and day, by raw passion? It’s tiresome in the extreme and highly ineffective. It makes everything a drama, posits challenges where there need only be action, and disrupts needed rhythm and focus from the daily routine that ninety percent of business tasks are composed of. Don’t get me wrong. I love meeting ‘permanently passionate’ people. I even enjoy the odd cup of decaf coffee with them. Maybe even lunch (maybe – so long as it’s two courses, max). After that, I want to get back to the real world, where the rest of us live. 3. It doesn’t do the job : There are times when passion is an important part of a leaders job, but those times are limited. If I attended spin class (which I don’t) I’d want my spin class leader to be passionate, but for one reason only — that’s part of the deliverable. Don’t get me up on my toes and this thing isn’t going to happen. But my muffler replacement guy? No thanks. I just want him to be competent. And my top sales person. And my GP. And my VP Accounting. And my CEO. I want competence over passion, any day. When you’re 24-3 down in the playoffs, it may be great to see your team barreling into the next huddle like viking invaders with their hair on fire, but it only means something when they step up and competently execute a 14-play drive that ends in a touchdown. Soaring oratory in a difficult time can help raise morale, but it actually means something only if you have an effective strategy and world-class execution to back it up. And in both cases I know which one – passion or competence – is optional. The passion-driven leader may be pretty to watch, but selling people on the concept that passion means everything for business success? No thanks. I’ll take competence — even mercenary competence – every time.

Read the full article →

Michael Port: How To Develop A Personal Brand Identity

January 21, 2011

Brands are not just for big corporations. In fact, a personal brand will serve as an important key to your success. A personal brand will help clearly and consistently define, express, and communicate who you are. Personal branding is far more than just what you do or what your web site and business cards look like. It is you–uniquely you. It allows you to distinguish yourself from everyone else: what is unique about who you are and what you do. Your brand is about making yourself known for your skills and talents. More than that–your brand is about what you stand for. Successful people find their style, build a brand based on it, and boldly express themselves through that brand. To let the world see your true, authentic worth is powerful and it makes you memorable. There are three components to your personal brand identity: Your who and do what statement. Your why you do it statement. Your tagline. I want you to laser-beam your focus on these three aspects of your personal brand until you feel totally and fully expressed when you put words to your who and do what statement, your why you do it statement, and your tagline. Your Who and Do What Statement. Your who and do what statement lets others know exactly who you help and what you can help them do. It is the first filter that people will put you through when considering your services for hire. Your potential clients will look at it to see if you help people like them in their specific situation. Your Why You Do It Statement. After potential clients identify with your who and do what statement, they will want to know if they connect with you on an emotional, philosophical, or even spiritual level. They’ll want to know if they connect with your why you do it statement: the reason you do what you do, what you stand for and why you get up every day to do the work that you do. Those who resonate with your why you do it statement will feel it on a deep level and be emotionally attracted to you. Many others in your industry will share your who and do what statement. Similarly, your why you do it statement and even your tagline don’t necessarily need to be wildly unique. Just deeply meaningful to you–and to the people you’re meant to serve. Your Tagline. Your tagline, based on your why you do it statement, is something you’ll never get tired of hearing. And the first time you hear someone refer to you by it, you’ll want to cry tears of joy. You’ll formulate one simple sentence that allows people to define you in a manner of your own choosing. You’ll never get tired of saying it or hearing it because it’s based on what you stand for and what’s important to you. And, most importantly, not only will it very deeply and truly mean something to you, it will resonate with the people you’re meant to serve. Your tagline lets others know what it’s like to be around you. It says something about who you are at your core, and it’s the essence of what you want to achieve or experience in the world. Think of it as the bigger vision that is the inspiration for what you do in your business, Your why you do it statement and associated tagline is the way in which you want to touch others’ lives in a positive and meaningful way. Your Turn to Develop Your Personal Brand Identity. Your Who and Do What Statement. Written Exercise : Start with the basics. Keep it simple and straightforward. What is your who and do what statement? Who do you help and what do you help them do? The first time around, just come up with something accurate and clear for now–make sure a child can understand it. Finish this statement, “I help…” My example: I help service professionals get booked solid . Your Why You Do It Statement. Written Exercise: Set aside that inner critic and give yourself permission to think big– I mean really big, bigger than you’ve ever dared to think or dream before. Be your most idealistic, inspired, creative, powerful you. What is your purpose? What is your vision of what you hope to achieve through your work? Remember, your work is an expression of who you are. Keeping the preceding in mind, craft a possible why you do it statement. My example: I want to help people think bigger about who they are and what they offer the world. Your Tagline. Written Exercise: Craft a possible tagline that represents and demonstrate your why you do it statement. Example: I’m the guy to call when you’re tired of thinking small.® The more bold, authentic, and concise your personal brand is, the more easily you’ll attract those you’re meant to work with. That’s how a personal brand works–it defines you, but first you must define it. Your personal brand will give you the ability to attract fun and exciting clients who understand and get you. And you get them. —————– Called “an uncommonly honest author” by the Boston Globe and a “marketing guru” by The Wall Street Journal , Michael Port can be seen regularly on MSNBC and is a New York Times Bestselling author of four books including Book Yourself Solid , Beyond Booked Solid , The Contrarian Effect and The Think Big Manifesto . Get free chapters from the new, updated and expanded, edition of Book Yourself Solid at www.BookYourselfSolid.com

Read the full article →

Meg Whitman Resurfaces, Joins HP Board

January 21, 2011

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Former eBay Inc. CEO Meg Whitman is resurfacing after months of silence following her loss in the California governor’s race. Whitman is one of five people named to the board of Hewlett-Packard Co. on Thursday. The action was part of a shake-up at the world’s largest technology company by revenue. Whitman, a Republican, spent $144 million from her personal fortune in what became the most expensive statewide political race in the nation’s history. She raised an additional $30 million, mostly from corporations and wealthy individuals. The Harvard alumna also was scheduled to speak privately Thursday to 20 young female Harvard graduates in San Francisco. Later this month, she has agreed to speak to a group of women business leaders during a private event in Redwood City.

Read the full article →

Peggy McColl: Is There No End in Your Weekend?

January 19, 2011

Weekends used to be just that, the end of your week. The end of your work for some well-deserved rest and relaxation. As a solo-preneur or entrepreneur it seems so much harder to have established work days and hours. I have the luxury of working from home, but that also blurs the line between work and home. Even if I close the office door and completely turn off my computer I still have the sense that emails, orders, questions and new ideas are just behind the door, waiting for me. The great news is we are connected 24/7 — yea! The challenge is to create the balance that allows you to live a life, not just a career. If we look at the world today and the way it was 20 years ago, even if you had your own business you could still leave your work and be disconnected. On my website I list the hours for phone calls in an attempt to create clear business hours and availability for my clients. I am not a 24/7 shop and I do what I can to remind people there are boundaries for my business. It still surprises me when I get a follow up email on a Monday morning asking me to reply from their original message sent Friday afternoon or even Saturday. Really? One of the strategies Tim Ferris talks about in the 4-Hour Work Week is to let people know when you are working and when you are out of reach. You can create an auto-responder to emails saying you are in the middle of a project and will check email once a day, twice a day, etc. You can also post a status update on your social networking sites that you do not have access to email during a particular day, etc. (Without telling them that you are vacationing in Jamaica and your house is empty for burglars.) A nicely worded Do Not Disturb message will be well received and respected. I love my work but I don’t make it my life. Too often I see people in restaurants who have their phone on the table while they are having dinner with friends and family. As difficult as it is, schedule time together, cherish the connection and the conversation and leave the phone alone. That email can wait, the text is not an emergency and the phone call is better enjoyed when they have your full attention. To all entrepreneurs I say “take back your weekends and evenings!” Schedule time off in your calendar. Make sure you have entire evenings and days without work commitments. Turn your computer completely off and close the office door. You need time to recharge and let your brain relax. The more down time you get to enjoy the more aware you will be about respecting other people’s time. I am waiting to see who will be the first person to develop a 12-step program for internet addiction because I think I need a sponsor. Until that time, I set my own limits, establish boundaries and respond to people in a very timely manner without completely losing myself in my work. Give it a try. You may surprise yourself with how great it feels – without the guilt. If you are reading this in the middle of the week, what will you proactively do to make time for yourself this weekend? What boundaries are in place to make sure there is an end in your weekend? Please share your comments. Peggy McColl is a New York Times best-selling author and an internationally recognized expert in the field of personal and professional development and Internet marketing. As an entrepreneur, business owner, mentor and professional speaker Peggy has been inspiring individuals to pursue their personal and business objectives and achieve ultimate success. She provides effective Internet marketing solutions for entrepreneurs, authors, publishers, professionals, and business owners, who want to establish an online presence, achieve bestseller status, build their brand, grow and/or expand their business online. You can find out more about Peggy at her website, Destinies.com .

Read the full article →

Dan Solin: Fools Rush in…

January 12, 2011

Many market trends are “obvious” to readers of my books and blogs. Here are some of them: The U.S. will become a third world country; The dollar is doomed; Inflation is inevitable; Interest rates will rise dramatically; Municipal bond defaults will rise at an alarming rate. Now is the time to dump municipal bonds. The stock market will continue its recovery well into 2011, and probably longer. I don’t understand why anyone is interested in my opinion on any of these issues. They could be right or wrong on any or all of them. I don’t have a clue. I believe the markets have taken all of the facts that underlie these beliefs into consideration and have priced the dollar, stocks and bonds accordingly. I also know that most investors make terrible investing decisions based on whatever their beliefs may be. Here’s my take on a prudent course of action. If you believe the U.S. is doomed (and even if you don’t), your portfolio should have exposure to international stocks. Most experts recommend a range of 30%-50%. If you believe the dollar is doomed (or not doomed), consider a globally diversified bond portfolio for that portion of your assets allocated to bonds. The SPDR Barclays Capital International Treasury Bond ETF (BWX) is a good place to start. As for inflation and interest rates, whether or not you believe these are risks, your bond portfolio should consist of short or intermediate term bonds (with maturities five years or less) in an index fund or an ETF. As those bonds mature, they will be replaced by new ones that will reflect current interest rates. It’s your personal hedge against inflation. What about the municipal bond issue? If the market perceives municipal bonds as risky, issuers will have to offer more interest to compensate for the higher risk of default. Historically, riskier assets have higher returns over time than less risky assets. If you can afford the increased risk, and are prepared to hold on for the long-term, maybe this is the right time to buy a low cost municipal bond ETF, like the iShares National Municipal Bond ETF (MUB). Many investors are fleeing bonds and going back to stocks, now that the pundits are predicting a continuation of the stock market recovery. The fact that they failed to call the recovery when the markets bottomed out in March, 2009 does not stop them from making more predictions. It also doesn’t deter investors from believing they have the ability to predict random events. Net inflows to bond funds (and out of stocks) peaked in October, 2009 at $231 billion. Think of all those hapless souls, relying on the financial media and their brokers and advisers, who “fled to safety” and missed out on the dramatic market recovery which continues to this day. Your asset allocation shouldn’t change with the latest survey of self-styled experts, economists or others. Endless talk and conflicting opinions fuel fear and uncertainty. Fear compels investors to make trading decisions. Trading decisions benefit brokers and their firms. It’s a crazy cycle, which repeats endlessly. Only advice based on long-term data qualifies as investment advice. If you’re paying for any other kind of advice, understand the price may far exceed the fees you are paying. The views set forth in this blog are the opinions of the author alone and may not represent the views of any firm or entity with whom he is affiliated. The data, information, and content on this blog are for information, education, and non-commercial purposes only. Returns from index funds do not represent the performance of any investment advisory firm. The information on this blog does not involve the rendering of personalized investment advice and is limited to the dissemination of opinions on investing. No reader should construe these opinions as an offer of advisory services. Readers who require investment advice should retain the services of a competent investment professional. The information on this blog is not an offer to buy or sell, or a solicitation of any offer to buy or sell any securities or class of securities mentioned herein. Furthermore, the information on this blog should not be construed as an offer of advisory services. Please note that the author does not recommend specific securities nor is he responsible for comments made by persons posting on this blog.

Read the full article →

Don Tapscott: Macrowikinomics: Privacy in the Age of Facebook

January 10, 2011

This article is part of a series written by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams, authors of the newly released book Macrowikinomics: Rebooting Business and the World . Mark Parker, the CEO of Nike calls it “A masterpiece. An iconic and defining book for our times.” The Economist says it’s a “Schumpeterian story of creative destruction.” The book argues that many of the institutions of the industrial age have finally come to the end of their lifecycle, and are now being reinvented around a new set of principles and a networked model. Today’s blog looks at the threat posed by social media to our concept of privacy. **** Every business needs to design privacy principles and practices into their operations. An excellent candidate for such a process would be Facebook, because there’s no doubt its Achilles heel is privacy. In the past we only worried about Big Brother governments assembling detailed dossiers about us. Then came what privacy advocates called Little Brother — corporations that collect data from their customers. Companies such as Amazon want to know more and more about what makes each of us tick — our motivations, behavior, attitudes, and buying habits. The good news is that they can use this intimate knowledge to give us highly customized services. The bad news is that once these digital mirror images are compiled they are rarely, if ever, deleted. They can be used inappropriately and even end up being sold to third parties. Now there is a new unexpected threat — ourselves. Call it Baby Brother. With the meteoric rise of social media, we are increasingly willing accomplices in undermining our own privacy rights. Before Facebook arrived, who would have predicted that hundreds of millions of people would voluntarily log on to the Internet and record detailed minute-by-minute data about themselves, their activities, their likes and dislikes, and so on? To make things worse, some social networking leaders confuse the right to privacy with transparency, arguing that transparency is good for individual relationships. In the book The Facebook Effect , David Kirkpatrick explains that some Facebook executives think transparency is not just an opportunity for companies and other institutions to disclose pertinent information about themselves. (This is the definition of transparency.) They believe it’s an opportunity for individuals to do so as well. The Facebook founders believe that “more visibility makes us better people. Some claim, for example, that because of Facebook, young people today have a harder time cheating on their boyfriends or girlfriends. They also say that more transparency should make for a more tolerant society in which people eventually accept that everybody sometimes does bad or embarrassing things.” Some at Facebook refer to this as Radical Transparency — a term initially used to talk about institutions, and now being adapted to individuals. “Our mission since Day 1 has been to make society more open” says Dave Morin, one of Facebook-founder Mark Zuckerberg’s inner circle. In other words, everyone should have just one identity, whether at their workplace or in their personal life. This is misguided. Transparency applies to organizations, not people. Organizations are increasingly obliged to communicate pertinent information to their customers, shareholders, business partners and so on. This is not the case for individuals. Indeed, individuals have an obligation to themselves to safeguard their personal information. And institutions should be transparent about what they do with our personal information. This situation poses an unprecedented challenge for government and regulators because it has turned traditional privacy laws and regulations upside down. Privacy and data protection laws ensure that organizations collect, use, retain and disclose our personal information in a confidential manner. But today the biggest threat is not other organizations, it’s us. There are probably thousands of recent university graduates who didn’t get that dream job because the employer did a “reference check” online and found them doing something inappropriate. At the same time, new risks and threats such as identity fraud and theft are growing in a networked world, along with new forms of discrimination and social engineering made possible by the surfeit of data. Personal information, be it biographical, biological, genealogical, historical, transactional, locational, relational, computational, vocational or reputational, is the stuff that makes up our modern identity. It must be managed responsibly. Ultimately, in order to properly protect privacy, all of us will need to be vigilant about our own online behavior. Macrowikinomics available at: Macrowikinomics.com Follow Anthony Williams on Twitter: www.twitter.com/adw_tweets

Read the full article →

Steven B. Smith: 11 New Year’s Resolutions to Achieve Financial Fitness in 2011

December 31, 2010

In 2010, we saw the average American household slip deeper into financial distress. Fortunately, the start of a new year offers a great opportunity to be proactive about getting our financial lives in order and experiencing financial peace of mind. So if your personal budgeting skills need refreshing, or if your portfolios and insurance policies have not been recently reviewed, then committing to the following eleven resolutions can help make 2011 the year you achieve financial fitness. 1. Resolve to spend less than you make. The oldest financial advice is still the best — spend less than you take in. This will keep you out of debt and help you build fiscal stability. 2. Automate your finances. If something isn’t easy, most of us simply won’t do it. Make it easy on yourself by using a secure online budgeting system, like Mvelopes , to track and categorize your expenses. You can save hours of work every month while also taking control of your spending habits. 3. Create a spending plan. Determine how much you plan to spend and divide that money among your different spending or expense categories. Give yourself some flexibility to allow for some of those impulse buys without ruining your overall plan. Individuals who successfully create and follow spending plans often save as much as 10% of their income during the year – simply because a spending plan guides them in making good spending decisions. 4. Save at least ten percent of your income. If you don’t pay yourself first, there won’t be any left over at the end of the month to save. Set up an automatic transfer to a savings account to make it easy. 5. Start an emergency fund. Use part of your savings to create an emergency fund. You should have three to six months’ worth of expenses set aside in an easily accessible account to cover mortgage, food, car payments and other necessities in an emergency. Keep it separate from other funds to avoid spending it. 6. Pay at least the minimum on your credit cards. And pay off as much extra as you can. Making at least the minimum payment on time accounts for 35 percent of your credit score. Resolve to take control of your credit card usage and set a goal to pay off outstanding balances as soon as possible. Paying off the entire balance each month can save you hundreds of dollars in interest. 7. Begin paying off your debts as quickly as possible. In today’s economy, the best investment you can make is to quickly pay off all your debts. Use the debt roll-down principle to accelerate how you pay down your debt. Used correctly, the debt roll- down doesn’t require any dramatic changes in your spending habits while cutting years off your long-term debts and dramatically decreasing how much interest you will pay. 8. Contribute enough to your 401(k) to get the maximum company match. Your kids can get help to pay for college, but no one will help pay for your retirement. If you’re not taking advantage of a company match, you’re turning down a yearly bonus from your employer. 9. Review and readjust your portfolio. Make sure that no single stock comprises more than five percent of your portfolio. As your different investments perform differently, your distribution will become skewed. Readjust your holdings to match your desired distribution. 10. Check your credit reports. You’re entitled to one free copy of your credit report from each of the three credit-reporting agencies at your request each year. Stagger the reports receiving one every four months to keep an up-to-date view of your credit throughout the year. 11. Review your insurance policies and update as needed. Review your life, health, home, auto, and disability insurance policies. Make sure you have cost replacement coverage on home and auto insurance, as well as good liability coverage. Make sure your home insurance reflects the current value of your home. While it may seem daunting at first, almost anyone can get their financial house in order by following these basic steps. Imagine the success and relief you’ll feel next year at this time if you commit to these resolutions. You have nothing to lose but your frustration and debt, so make this the year you become financially fit! Steven B. Smith is the author of Money for Life: Budgeting Success and Financial Fitness in Just 12 Weeks! and creator of Mvelopes (www.mvelopes.com/save), the award-winning online envelope budgeting system, and Money4Life Center (www.money4lifecenter.com/debt), a debt assistance and money management coaching program.

Read the full article →

Smart Card Alliance Identity Council Announces New Officers, Plans for Educational Resources on Trusted Identities

December 22, 2010

PRINCETON JUNCTION, NJ–(Marketwire – December 22, 2010) – Guiding the creation of strong identity management foundations for citizen and government identity programs is the focus for the coming year, the Smart Card Alliance Identity Council said recently. The Identity Council also announced new officers and a steering committee, and recently held a workshop on the Personal Identity Verification (PIV) Interoperable (PIV-I) card at its 9th Annual Smart Cards in Government: Identity, Security & Healthcare Conference in November in Washington D.C. 

Read the full article →

Drugmaker Lays Off 1,700 Via Conference Call Ahead Of Holidays

December 17, 2010

On Nov. 30, employees at Sanofi-Aventis pharmaceuticals, the world’s fourth-biggest drugmaker, received an email from the company wishing them a happy Thanksgiving and telling them to check their email again at 5 a.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 2. A.R., a Sanofi-Aventis sales representative in California who wished to remain anonymous, as her contract forbids publicly disparaging the company, said she and her coworkers each received one of the two mass emails the company sent out that Tuesday morning. Both emails contained a code, an 800-number and a call time, either 8:00 a.m. or 8:30 a.m. The employees who were instructed to call in at the earlier time were told they could keep their jobs, but the 1,700 employees who called in at 8:30 a.m. weren’t so lucky: They were laid off by a voice on the other line that told them to stop working immediately, and had no opportunity for question or comment. Unfortunately, A.R. found herself in the second group. “The way they did this was so brutal and inhumane,” she told HuffPost. “We were each assigned an employee number when we started working there — an ‘NM’ followed by five digits — and that’s how I felt that day. Like a number, rather than a valued human being with feelings.” Sanofi-Aventis told its employees they would be paid through Dec. 31, and gave them a modest severance package. A.R., who had only been working at the company a year and a half, received 13 weeks of pay and benefits. A.R. says a representative from an outside company hired by Sanofi-Aventis to repossess materials came by almost immediately after the layoffs to take back the company car she had been driving. “My manager had convinced me to sell my personal car three months earlier because he said the company was in really good shape,” she said. “So I sold it. I might have to use my severance pay to buy a new one now, so I can drive around to job interviews.” Jack Cox, the senior director of media relations for Sanofi-Aventis, said the company acknowledges that its method of laying off employees “wasn’t ideal.” “Rather than cascade these announcements and stretch the notifications over the course of days, we decided to address these colleagues at one time, to explain the rationale for the reductions and express appreciation for the contributions they’ve made to the organization,” he said. “We acknowledged in the call that delivering this news on a teleconference wasn’t ideal, but given the scope and scale of the reductions, there was no other way to share this news quickly and consistently.” The automated call seems to have had a ripple effect in at least one employee’s life. A.R. says she was so “shaken” by the whole process and is so worried about the possibility of finding employment in this economy that she can’t sleep at all, and it’s affecting her ability to perform in job interviews. “I’ve gone through a roller coaster of emotions, angry to panicked to sad, and the feedback I’ve gotten on interviews is that I seem too anxious, like I’m more interested in getting any job than that particular job,” she said. “I say, ‘I’m sorry, I just got laid off.’”

Read the full article →

Drugmaker Lays Off 1,700 Via Conference Call Ahead Of Holidays

December 17, 2010

On Nov. 30, employees at Sanofi-Aventis pharmaceuticals, the world’s fourth-biggest drugmaker, received an email from the company wishing them a happy Thanksgiving and telling them to check their email again at 5 a.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 2. A.R., a Sanofi-Aventis sales representative in California who wished to remain anonymous, as her contract forbids publicly disparaging the company, said she and her coworkers each received one of the two mass emails the company sent out that Tuesday morning. Both emails contained a code, an 800-number and a call time, either 8:00 a.m. or 8:30 a.m. The employees who were instructed to call in at the earlier time were told they could keep their jobs, but the 1,700 employees who called in at 8:30 a.m. weren’t so lucky: They were laid off by a voice on the other line that told them to stop working immediately, and had no opportunity for question or comment. Unfortunately, A.R. found herself in the second group. “The way they did this was so brutal and inhumane,” she told HuffPost. “We were each assigned an employee number when we started working there — an ‘NM’ followed by five digits — and that’s how I felt that day. Like a number, rather than a valued human being with feelings.” Sanofi-Aventis told its employees they would be paid through Dec. 31, and gave them a modest severance package. A.R., who had only been working at the company a year and a half, received 13 weeks of pay and benefits. A.R. says a representative from an outside company hired by Sanofi-Aventis to repossess materials came by almost immediately after the layoffs to take back the company car she had been driving. “My manager had convinced me to sell my personal car three months earlier because he said the company was in really good shape,” she said. “So I sold it. I might have to use my severance pay to buy a new one now, so I can drive around to job interviews.” Jack Cox, the senior director of media relations for Sanofi-Aventis, said the company acknowledges that its method of laying off employees “wasn’t ideal.” “Rather than cascade these announcements and stretch the notifications over the course of days, we decided to address these colleagues at one time, to explain the rationale for the reductions and express appreciation for the contributions they’ve made to the organization,” he said. “We acknowledged in the call that delivering this news on a teleconference wasn’t ideal, but given the scope and scale of the reductions, there was no other way to share this news quickly and consistently.” The automated call seems to have had a ripple effect in at least one employee’s life. A.R. says she was so “shaken” by the whole process and is so worried about the possibility of finding employment in this economy that she can’t sleep at all, and it’s affecting her ability to perform in job interviews. “I’ve gone through a roller coaster of emotions, angry to panicked to sad, and the feedback I’ve gotten on interviews is that I seem too anxious, like I’m more interested in getting any job than that particular job,” she said. “I say, ‘I’m sorry, I just got laid off.’”

Read the full article →

5 Money Myths That May Be Fouling Up Your Finances

December 15, 2010

Certain money myths may be getting in the way of how you handle your personal finances. Does your financial belief system include any of these?

Read the full article →

Walgreen Says Customer Email Database Breached

December 13, 2010

NEW YORK — Walgreen Co. says a list of customers’ e-mail addresses has been breached and spam may have been sent out directing customers to enter personal data into outside Web sites. The company notified customers on Friday that their e-mail had been compromised, but said no other personal information was at risk. Walgreen warned consumers to be aware of potential e-mail scams that ask for personal information. It reminded customers that Walgreen will not send e-mails asking for credit card, Social Security, or other personal identification information. The company would not disclose the number of customers affected. “We want to assure you that the only information that was obtained was your e-mail address,” the company said, in an e-mail statement to customers. “Your prescription information, account and any other personally identifiable information were not at risk because such data is not contained in the e-mail system, and no access was gained to Walgreens consumer data systems.” Walgreen was not the only company hurt by hackers. On Sunday, Gawker warned subscribers that its database had been hacked and urged them to change their passwords. The company runs a series of blogs on media, technology and other issues and allows subscribers to comment. On Monday, McDonald’s Corp. said some of its customers’ private information may have been accessed during a data breach. That information included e-mail and other contact information, birthdates and other specifics provided when customers signed up for online promotions. The compromised database did not include any financial information or Social Security numbers. McDonald’s did not detail the timing or scope of the breach but says it is working with law enforcement.

Read the full article →

Marc Stoiber: Innovation in a Crisis Economy

December 10, 2010

I recently spoke at a marketing conference in Athens, Greece. Predictably, the conference theme was creativity in the face of austerity. Although the mood was dour, it was fascinating to hear delegate perspectives on what would heal the economy. I asked many for their take on green innovation. Most thought it was a luxury for more prosperous times. Few made the connection between sustainability and cost savings, although they knew the story of Wal-Mart’s rise to green fame with eco-efficiency. That said, I unearthed some great innovation stories, like the imaginative (and popular) subsidies Piraeus Bank was offering customers for everything from solar power to organic farming. There were also rumblings that ‘old school’ public officials were being drummed out in favor of younger, more innovative thinkers. But on this front, the opinions seemed to reflect wishes more than facts. The feeling overall was surreal. Although everyone sensed a pending emergency, nobody could paint a picture of the future or see the innovation opportunities the coming upheaval might bring. Greece’s situation is anything but unique. Ireland has signed up for EU bailouts, with Spain and Portugal on the brink. Closer to home, Detroit’s demise and reinvention has been the subject of a yearlong reportage by TIME Magazine. Throughout North America, there is an incredible sense of uncertainty. What will the new normal be? Less Is More Necessity is the mother of invention. Desperate times breed desperate measures. Diamonds form under pressure. If these old saws are to be believed, innovation should accelerate in bad economies. After all, teams with tight budgets and tough goals make critical decisions more quickly than teams with abundant resources and no pressing agenda. Recessions are also wonderful for clearing the forest of competitors. Large, cumbersome companies fall, while small wily upstarts gain ground. And recessions lead to rethinking. When the status quo fails, it makes you question your beliefs. Should my product even be a product? Or should it be a new business model, or service? The examples of recession success are legion. Instead of boring you with them, I’ll simply guide you to some examples that will make every recession-weary entrepreneur smile. Lessons From Detroit While it’s too early to say how economies like Greece and Ireland are going to react to austerity, Detroit provides a successful example of radical rethinking. As TIME writers Daniel Okrent and Steven Gray write , “Detroit once thrived on bigness, but now it has to leave that idea behind. The secret of Rust Belt urban revival: smaller is better. If you want a healthy, bustling city, huddled masses are better.” Necessity has forced Detroit to abandon sprawl — servicing vast, deserted suburbs simply isn’t viable. Instead, the city is focusing on building density. Tighter, interconnected communities that are easy to navigate on foot are bringing a flourish of small business with them. And big business. Drawn by the reinvigoration, Quicken Loans chairman Dan Gilbert moved 1,700 employees into downtown Detroit. Gilbert’s business incubator Bizdom U was launched in Detroit in 2007. Detroit’s rebirth warrants a closer look for more than economic reasons. Abandoned suburbs are quickly turning into green corridors, with the promise of urban agriculture. And smaller live/work hubs mean fewer cars — and a healthier pedestrian populace. Of course, the transformation is messy, and there are casualties. School systems need to be overhauled to draw young families. And people isolated in the suburbs can’t simply be abandoned. But Detroit is proof that innovation does flourish in a crisis economy. Innovation Learnings There are consistent innovation themes that can be seen in examples like Detroit. For example, the key to innovation is getting outside your personal comfort zone, your status quo, your jar. Outsiders have an incredible power of perception when it comes to spotting root problems, consumer needs, and potential solutions. It’s one of the reasons clients turn to us for solutions, instead of working exclusively with in-house innovation teams. It’s also the reason companies like P&G mandate 50% of their innovations come from outside sources. Another learning is that innovation needs champions as much as great thinkers. Working in green business innovation, I have seen again and again that the mandate for change needs to come from the top. Otherwise, challenging new ideas will be killed by the defenders of the status quo, and progress logjammed. Finally, innovation should not be expected to turn a crisis economy into a utopia. In fact, idealists and utopians are often the worst agents of change . A crisis can’t be solved through social engineering — instead, the process involves co-creation, brainstorming and support from a wide swath of constituents. Yes, it could get messy. But economies and communities are living, organic things… not intellectual theories.

Read the full article →

Peggy McColl: How to Chart Your Course for Finding Affiliate Partners

December 10, 2010

In my previous blog post, I introduced you to the basics and now I want to show you how to plan and execute your efforts to find affiliate partners. Create a chart to track your efforts . This can be done in either a Word program or Excel, whichever you are most comfortable using. Here are the columns I use: Website address Keyword search used to find website Contact name, address, e-mail address Do they have a newsletter? Subscribe? Do they accept articles? Do they do giveaways? Comments and observations about site? Date contacted Date to follow up (2 repeat columns as you may need to do it twice) Response from site owner? Commitment? When and how? Send personalized thank you Set up individual affiliate link Create a second chart once affiliates are on board: Date sent email copy for their subscribers with affiliate link Received confirmation that they will send email on launch day Agreed upon percentage of sale (this may vary) Date commission was paid (keep your own records in addition to what your shopping cart software provides for you) For those of you who resist the structure of charting your actions, I highly recommend you move outside your comfort zone. You will be amazed at how easy it is to quickly scan your next move as well as reduce the time you spend retracing your steps. You don’t want to make the mistake of sending duplicate email requests or the wrong content to potential partners. Being organized and professional in your approach will help you land the big affiliates who screen out amateur requests. If you need help drafting your email to potential affiliate partners, you can find samples in my book, Viral Explosions . What strategies have YOU used to approach affiliates? What approach has proven to bring in the best results? Please share them in the comments below. Peggy McColl is a New York Times best-selling author and an internationally recognized expert in the field of personal and professional development and Internet marketing. As an entrepreneur, business owner, mentor and professional speaker Peggy has been inspiring individuals to pursue their personal and business objectives and achieve ultimate success. She provides effective Internet marketing solutions for entrepreneurs, authors, publishers, professionals, and business owners, who want to establish an online presence, achieve bestseller status, build their brand, grow and/or expand their business online. You can find out more about Peggy at her website, Destinies.com.

Read the full article →

Inder Sidhu: Profiles in Doing Both: How Cutting-Edge Thinking Keeps Gillette Sharp

December 10, 2010

There’s a movement under way in India that has led to some dancing in the streets . No, I am not talking about some up-and-coming political revolution, but a simple change in consumer behavior instead. It all has to do with a new razor unveiled in October by Gillette. The single-blade razor may look like a throw-back to shavers from another era, but in fact is one of the most significant product launches ever by the company, according to Gillette Chief Technology Officer Bruce Brown. Recently, I had an opportunity to participate in a webinar with Bruce, Emory University Professor Jagdish Sheth and Harvard Business Review contributor and venture capitalist Scott Anthony. Our topic: ” Innovate or Adapt: The Challenge of New Markets .” More than a study of a company’s efforts to grow sales in one emerging economy, Bruce’s story of how the Guard came to be and, moreover, how it could help Gillette in other parts of the world, is a powerful lesson in business strategy. While some only look to the emerging world for new customers or cheap labor, Gillette, Heinz and a growing number of organizations now leverage the creative energies and innovative thinking from there. When Gillette tapped these capabilities, for example, it produced one of the world’s most-effective and yet most-affordable razors. Unveiled in May, the Guard costs less than 35 cents. It provides a clean, close shave for as little as a few pennies each. And thanks to its unique design, it doesn’t nick, scratch or cut men the way that double-edged razors–the most widely used shaving tools in rural India–do. To produce the Guard, Gillette rethought everything it had learned about razors in its 173-year history. Instead of adding more, thinner blades to cartridges as it does to razors sold in the United States, Gillette went back to a single-blade design after spending thousands of hours with Indian men. The company watched them shave, accompanied them as they shopped and discussed with them their personal preferences. What they told Gillette convinced the company to develop the Guard in India, where needs and habits are very different than in America. Consider: In many parts of India, men don’t shave every day. Nor do they have an abundance of water to rinse their razors. Because of these and other considerations, Gillette designed a product that would work with longer hair and require less cleaning. Gillette also reduced by 80 percent the number of parts that go into a razor–a move that helped keep costs down. The net result is Gillette’s first product designed from scratch that features technology and design inputs from customers in the emerging world. It’s a significant milestone for a company that traditionally develops razors, batteries and dental care products in one part of the world and then adapts them to another. And it is just the beginning. Recently, Gillette expanded its research and development center in Beijing, and announced plans to open a new facility in Singapore. Engineers there will collaborate with counterparts in the U.S., Japan and India. The goal? Transfer the best ideas from one part of the world to the other so Gillette can more easily enter new markets and disrupt existing ones. “There are significant synergies between markets that can be tapped,” says Bruce, “and learning from one market can be a foundation as we move to additional markets.” Does this mean you will see some of the thinking that went into the Gillette Guard in a product near you? You might. A low-cost razor for European men who camp in the wild? An affordable, one-time use product for American Emergency Medical Technicians who need to clean wounds quickly? Thanks to doing both–adapting products developed in the established world and innovating new ideas in the emerging one–the possibilities for Gillette are endless. The virtuous, back-and-forth cycle of idea sharing and innovation exchange is helping to make the company one of the sharpest in its industry. When you make razors for a living, that’s a good thing indeed. Inder Sidhu is the Senior Vice President of Strategy & Planning for Worldwide Operations at Cisco , and the author of Doing Both: How Cisco Captures Today’s Profits and Drives Tomorrow’s Growth . Follow Inder on Twitter at @indersidhu .

Read the full article →

Don Tapscott: Macrowikinomics: Thriving in the Age of Hyper-Transparency

December 10, 2010

This article is the fifth installment in series to be written by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams, authors of the newly released book Macrowikinomics: Rebooting Business and the World . Mark Parker, the CEO of Nike calls it “A masterpiece. An iconic and defining book for our times.” The Economist says it’s a Schumpeterian story of creative Destruction.” The book argues that many of the institutions of the industrial age have finally come to the end of their lifecycle, and are now being reinvented around a new set of principles and a networked model. Today’s blog looks this new age of WikiLeaks and hyper-transparency **** The arrest of Julian Assange doesn’t change the new reality faced by governments and corporations that have always craved secrecy. Even if Assange is put behind bars for an extended period, others will be happy to take his place. Think of the whack-a-mole game at the arcade. Hit one on the head and another will pop up. The WikiLeaks episode is just a hint of the world to come. We are entering an era of hyper-transparency. Courtesy of the Internet, people everywhere have at their fingertips the most powerful tool ever for finding out what’s really going and informing others. They are gaining unprecedented access to all sorts of information about governments, corporations and other organizations in society. Assange has announced that WikiLeaks is going after private-sector corporations next, starting with the financial services industry. This will undoubtedly unleash a new round of whistleblowers keen to reveal what they see as evidence of duplicity and moral turpitude by their corporate masters. But forced transparency goes beyond revenge by disgruntled employees. Customers can evaluate the worth of products and services at levels not possible before. Employees share formerly secret information about corporate strategy, management and challenges. To collaborate effectively, companies and their business partners have no choice but to share intimate knowledge. Powerful institutional investors today own or manage most wealth, and they are developing x-ray vision. Finally, in a world of instant communications, whistleblowers, inquisitive media, and Googling, citizens and communities routinely put firms under the microscope. Overall this is a positive development. Whether you’re a government or company, when you’re increasingly naked, fitness is no longer optional. Survival will force you to get buff. To be sure, all organizations have a right to secrecy. Companies have legitimate trade secrets. Transparency should refer to the release or exposure of pertinent information — information that can help stakeholders if they have it or harm them if they do not. Employees should not violate confidentially agreements or the law as in the case of WikiLeaks. But rather than defaulting to opacity as was done in the past, increasingly it makes sense to default to openness. Consumer electronics retailer Best Buy has adopted the principle that “our customers should know everything that we know” including data about the defect levels of the products they are selling. CEO Brian Dunn says this is not just a matter of building trust but rather “customers have a right to this information.” Nike has decided to reveal information about its patents and through launching the Green Exchange shares critical environmental data so that other companies can benefit. Fedex has built transparency into its supply chain as the company has found that free and open flow of information reduces transaction costs. Accenture CEO Bill Green has shocking candor with employees about everything from their financial performance to his personal struggle and tough decision to terminate the company’s contract with Tiger Woods. “Transparency with employees builds trust; it speeds up the metabolism of collaboration and increases loyalty,” he says. “Being open makes us better, and it’s just the right thing to do.” Rather than something to be feared, transparency is becoming central to business success. Every company needs a transparency strategy. It has to rethink what new information should be made available to employees, customers, business partners and shareholders. Corporations that are open perform better. Transparency is a new form of power, which pays off when harnessed. Embrace transparency as a force for good. It will result in high-performance business operations. Create good value because value is evidenced like never before. Embrace the principles of integrity, honesty, consideration and accountability as part of your organization’s DNA. In doing so you can build trust — the sine qua non of the networked world. Don’t confuse transparency with the lack of privacy. Transparency is an opportunity and increasingly an obligation for institutions. But transparency applies to institutions, not to individuals. Individuals have no such opportunity or obligation; they have a right to privacy. So while you’re becoming more open as an organization become more scrupulous to protect the private information of customers, employees and other people who are stakeholders. Much of this transparency argument also applies to governments. They are also becoming more open, which is good. Fifty years ago, few countries routinely released information about their economies. Indeed, many treated such information as state secrets. Now scores of countries post detailed economic statistics on the IMF’s website. A half-century ago, no country had laws specifically requiring government officials to provide information to their citizens. Now, nearly seventy countries do, and the number is still growing. Until as recently as the late 1990s, environmental regulation consisted largely of governments telling corporations what production processes to use. Newer regulations are increasingly about directing companies to tell the public the pollutants they are creating. By throwing thousands of raw cables out in the open, WikiLeaks has invited the world to sift through the details and draw its own conclusions. Washington’s elite may be discomforted by the notion that journalists and interested citizens alike can now hunt for embarrassing and perhaps even incriminating interchanges among diplomats. But in a world of hyper transparency, it turns out that many things including war and diplomatic relations will be subject to scrutiny. Even the world’s most ardent freedom-haters — including the despotic regimes in countries like Burma and Iran — cannot restrain the nascent forces of openness that are percolating in their societies. As the Iranian youth mobilization for freedom so vividly demonstrated, an explosive combination of youthful demographics and the spread of the Internet is helping oppressed peoples everywhere wrest open the authoritarian stranglehold that hangs over their social and economic destinies. Smart companies and governments understand that becoming more transparent is in the best interest of the public. Macrowikinomics available at: Macrowikinomics.com Follow Anthony Williams on Twitter: www.twitter.com/adw_tweets

Read the full article →

Small Business: Tax Cut Deal Won’t Spur Hiring

December 10, 2010

CHICAGO (By Deborah L. Cohen): Extending Bush-era tax breaks won’t be enough to encourage business owners like Brad Schulman to begin hiring. “They’ve got a noose around small business,” said Schulman, founder of Northbrook, Illinois-based Green Planet Bottling (www.greenplanetbottling.com) , a maker of eco-friendly plant-based water bottles. “I’ve got no money to reinvest.” Schulman is a proponent of extending tax relief across the board, arguing it would act as a psychological boost to the small business community. But he added other policy changes must occur before he expands his 10-man operation, which has been growing steadily despite the down economy and is set to post revenue in excess of $5 million this year. Foremost, there must be substantial moves to improve small companies’ access to capital at a time when banks are still reluctant to lend, Schulman said. A life-long Democrat, the 45-year-old broke ranks and voted Republican in last month’s midterm elections. He added he won’t be enticed to hire new employees now based on the prospect of better tax returns in the future. “That thought process will remain front and center because we need to keep the lights on,” said Schulman. This week President Barack Obama unveiled a deal with Republicans that would extend the Bush-era tax rates for all Americans. The compromise followed a largely symbolic bill passed late last week by the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives that limited extended tax cuts to dual-income households earning below $250,000, the threshold originally promoted by the Obama administration. HOT-BUTTON ISSUE The tax issue has been an emotional one for many in the small business community, ranging from struggling mom-and-pops to the more well-heeled entrepreneurs that Democrats argued could afford floating additional tax dollars to the Feds. Longtime small business advocacy groups such as the National Federation of Independent Business and the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council lobbied for extended relief with no income limits. On the other side, a network of business owners called Business for Shared Prosperity is opposed to extending the cuts for those in the top income brackets. “I think it makes financial sense and I think it’s also the right thing to do in terms of my personal philosophy,” said David Bolotsky, a Business for Shared Prosperity petitioner and the CEO of New York-based Internet gift retailer UncommonGoods (www.uncommongoods.com ). “We’re focused on the long term in terms of growing the business, so a change in the tax rate is not going to alter what I need to do for competitive and strategic reasons to grow the business,” said Bolotsky, 47, who declined to share financials. Others were less political but equally opinionated about what they perceived as an issue that would have little bearing on their day-to-day decisions. They include John Jordan, a long-time Washington-based publicist who has run his own one-man shop since 2003. He said paying higher taxes would not have influenced his business decisions in the coming year. Jordan, who also supports letting the cuts expire for wealthier owners, said his combined household income exceeded the $250,000 Obama relief threshold. “I don’t gain or go after clients, or try to reach retainers with an eye toward marginal tax rates,” said the 47-year-old. “You do what you gotta do. You don’t worry about running the tax numbers.” MOVING PARTS Tax attorney and small business expert Barbara Weltman is skeptical that members of Congress understand what it takes to keep a small company going in a rough economy. “If a business owner has to pay higher taxes on net earnings, it’s that much less available to do other things we want businesses to do – hire, buy equipment, expand,” she said. “I just don’t think they understand how businesses work.” Weltman, herself the owner of two small businesses, favors longer-term solutions that will remove the uncertainty plaguing many small companies. She supports making permanent extensions of the tax relief at all income levels and longer-term tax reform. “These year-by-year extensions don’t make it possible for people to plan,” she said. “Congress has to meet and deal with this over and over again.” Schulman agrees there are still too many moving parts in the current economy to prompt significant capital outlays for his business. The value of his home – among his largest assets – dropped 30 percent during the recession. Meanwhile, Green Planet Bottling is facing higher healthcare costs and the first of his two teenage children is set to head off to college next year. “Why would I want to invest money in a down market unless I know it’s close to being an up market?” said Schulman. “I’m still not hiring anybody. They got to take the noose off of me.” Copyright 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

David Gorodyansky: Even Savvy Shoppers Can Get Scammed — Tips for the Holiday Shopping Season

December 7, 2010

Last week marked the official beginning to the holiday shopping season. More people will be buying their stocking-stuffers online than ever before this year. comScore predicts online spending this holiday season will grow by at least 9%, two times last year’s pace, and the National Retail Federation (NRF) is expecting 2010 holiday retail sales to rise by 2.3% this year to $447.1 billion, compared with a rise of only 0.4% last year. In fact, the NRF reported that 33.6% of Thanksgiving weekend sales (Thursday-Sunday) were online, the highest percentage ever. Yet as the number of Internet shoppers rises, so do the threats to both personal security and privacy. We are voluntarily putting more of our personal information out there than ever before through social channels like Facebook and Twitter and the associated purchasing mechanisms which have latched on to these communities — but are we being smart about our online activity? Not really. The average consumer remains negligent to the fact that their information is not automatically protected when online. Security breaches come in all shapes and forms, from sidejacking — where someone on your Wi-Fi network literally hijacks into your internet session to steal your info — to lesser known tactics of fake e-coupons that allow hackers to gain access to your credit card information. The recent release of Firesheep shed light on the fact that, despite some protection, we all still need to take measures to protect our personal information online. What many people don’t realize is that while your credit card numbers might be made public when shopping online, so can your behavior — which can be even more frightening. What’s even more alarming is that these privacy violations don’t just come from rogue hackers. Rather, big companies are in the practice of violating individuals’ online privacy everyday by monitoring and storing what you buy. Recently in the news there has been a resurrection of noise around Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), intrusive technologies for profiling and targeting Internet users with ads which goes beyond monitoring just Web browsing and literally tracks an individual’s behavior online. Creepy isn’t it? Even some of our favorite websites are getting into the game, such as Facebook passing your data to third party sites and Google’s Wi-Fi data collection. The point is, the general need to raise awareness around online privacy is all around us. Rest assured that not all hope is lost as there are a number of simple ways that you as a consumer can take your privacy and security into your own hands. Here are some simple tips and tricks that make it possible for anyone — tech savvy or not — to stay safe and private when hunting for the big deals and surfing the Web this holiday season: 1. Antivirus: Invest in antivirus software like McAfee, Symantec or Webroot, which helps to blocks viruses, spyware, spam and lesser known threats to consumers like trojans, worms and rootkits, encrypting critical passwords and making your PC invisible to hackers. 2. Download and be done: While antivirus technology is critical, it remains the case that only 40% of people are actually protected by their antivirus. To help ensure that you are completely secure and protected online, combine this with a tool like as Hotspot Shield, a completely free download (Virtual Private Network — VPN) which keeps you secured and blocked from outside eyes. 3. Stamp of Approval: Look for accredited seals of approval from third party entities. And wherever you enter your credit card or other personal information, make sure that there is an “s” after http in the Web address. This means that it is encrypted. 4. Lock and key: Make sure there is a tiny closed padlock in the address bar, or on the lower right corner of the window. This lets you know that the site is secure. 5. Too Legit? This one can be a bit tougher, but take a minute to look for signs that the business is legitimate. Goes without saying that the Amazons and Targets of the world are legit, but for smaller shops, double check that it’s a credible business by calling the main number or doing a quick online search for other user reviews. Online shopping provides an easy option for savvy shoppers, but make sure you’re smart about how you buy. Follow these tips and protect your identity, information and right to online privacy this holiday season.

Read the full article →

TAX CUT MYTHS: Fact Checking The Showdown In Congress

December 4, 2010

NEW YORK — As debate rages on extending tax cuts set to expire at the end of the year, politicians are making misleading statements about who might be hurt or helped. Before the midterm elections, President Barack Obama insisted that lower income-tax rates should be permanently extended only to those he called the “middle class.” People in the top two tax brackets would face higher rates. Now, with Republicans triumphant, the White House is trying to hash out a compromise so rates don’t automatically revert to their higher, pre-2001 levels for everyone in the new year. One possible deal: extending all the lower rates for a yet-undetermined period of time, perhaps two or three years. Time is running out, as is patience. In a purely symbolic vote, House Democrats on Thursday passed a bill extending lower rates for everyone but those in the top brackets. House Republican leader John Boehner said the vote ran counter to efforts to forge a deal, dubbing it “chicken crap” political maneuvering. Here are a few myths, half-truths and short-hand distortions that have marred the debate: _ Under the Obama plan, taxes will increase for families making more than $250,000. Wrong. Actually, a family could make a lot more and still not face higher taxes. Obama wants to raise the top two brackets from 33 percent to 36 percent and from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. The first of the two – 36 percent – is widely assumed to kick in at $250,000. Obama says that himself. But that’s not right. The higher rate would apply to families with $232,000 or more of taxable income, or what’s left after personal exemptions and deductions have been subtracted from income. Deductions can be sizable, especially for wealthy people. Think state and local taxes, mortgage interest and charitable contributions. The result is that a family making $300,000 or even more could have taxable income of less than $232,000. “A lot of people making more than $250,000 won’t be paying higher taxes,” says Clint Stretch, a managing principal of Deloitte Tax. So where does the $250,000 come from? That’s a number for “adjusted gross income,” which is total income minus a few things like 401(k) contributions and alimony payments. A family that had adjusted gross income of $250,000 and took two personal exemptions, plus a standard deduction instead of itemizing, would have taxable income of $232,000. So $250,000 is distorting. It refers to adjusted gross income, not total income. And most people in that income range itemize their deductions. The key number for families is taxable income of $232,000; for individuals, it’s taxable income of $191,000. Only 2 percent of U.S. households would face the 36 percent tax rate, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank. _ Tax hikes would prevent small businesses from hiring. Well, maybe. But the numbers cited as proof are flimsy at best. Critics say Obama’s plan to raise taxes on the highest earners would hobble the businesses that generate most of the nation’s new jobs. Yet fewer than 3 percent of small businesses produce enough income to face the higher rates, according to the Tax Policy Center. Some Republicans note that this tiny slice accounts for half of total small-business income. So the damage to the economy would be more than you’d think, they say. But many of these businesses aren’t what most people would consider small anyway. The IRS doesn’t have a category of tax filers called “small business.” Analysts who study taxes use the next best thing, which isn’t very good at all: business owners who use their personal 1040 to file taxes instead of a corporate return. For example, some hedge funds and law firms pay their taxes through the personal returns of their individual partners. While these are lumped in as “small businesses” and would pay higher taxes, they are far different from the retail stores and small manufacturers that most people associate with the term and which would not pay higher taxes. _ Keeping Bush’s tax cuts for the top earners would swell U.S. debt by $700 billion, unconscionable in an age of budget-busting outlays. Somewhat misleading. The lower tax receipts would accumulate over 10 years – not one year. On average, that means $70 billion less for the government each year, or about 1/30th of all federal receipts. _ Bush tax cuts for millionaires average more than $100,000 a year and should be eliminated. Misleading, again. The term millionaire can include people making tens of millions or even billions. Their tax breaks are much larger. An average doesn’t capture the benefit for most millionaires. According to Deloitte Tax, a typical family making exactly $1 million pays about $50,000 less each year in federal income taxes than it would if the Obama plan were rejected and the tax cuts expired. _ The rich would pay 36 percent or more of their income in taxes under Obama’s plan. Wrong. A rich family would pay 36 percent – and 39.6 percent – only on taxable income above $232,000. The family would continue to benefit from the other four brackets established earlier this decade – 10 percent, 15 percent, 25 percent and 28 percent – on taxable income below $232,000. A family with taxable income of $350,000 would pay a higher rate on $118,000. The family would pay $42,480 in taxes on that amount, or $3,540 more than it pays now. Of course, for the really rich, the two higher brackets would take a bigger bite. A family making $2 million would pay about $100,000 more in taxes under Obama’s plan, according to the Tax Policy Center. _ The tax debate is all about income tax rates. Wrong. For all the attention given to higher taxes on earned income if current rates expire, the big hit to some families will come from taxes on capital gains and dividends. The government now takes 15 percent of both. If the Bush cuts aren’t renewed, the tax on long-term gains would rise to 20 percent. And the rate on dividends would shift to your income tax rate, or a maximum 39.6 percent. Under Obama’s plan, the tax on dividends would rise to 20 percent for everyone. If Congress doesn’t act to stop taxes from reverting to their pre-2001 levels, new limits would be placed on deductions and exemptions, too. And a $1,000 child credit would be halved.

Read the full article →

Mining CEO Defiant After West Virginia Disaster Announces Retirement

December 4, 2010

RICHMOND, Va. — Massey Energy Chairman and CEO Don Blankenship announced Friday that he will retire at the end of the month, finishing a nearly 30-year career that included big profits for the company but also labor conflicts, battles with federal regulators and a 2010 mine explosion that killed 29 people. A millionaire who rose from obscure beginnings in coal country, Blankenship oversaw an ongoing plan to expand the production of Appalachian coal for growing Asian markets, but will leave behind a company that was badly shaken by a history-making mine disaster. The company’s board of directors named current president Baxter F. Phillips Jr. as Blankenship’s successor, effective Friday. Blankenship’s retirement date is Dec. 31. “After almost three decades at Massey it is time for me to move on,” Blankenship said in a prepared statement. “Baxter and I have worked together for 28 years and he will provide the company great executive leadership.” Blankenship, who has served as chairman and CEO since 2000, leaves at a time when Massey’s safety practices are under scrutiny by the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration and the West Virginia Office of Miners’ Health, Safety and Training. It also comes at a time when Massey’s board is viewing its strategic options. In recent weeks there have been reports that Massey is a possible takeover target for rivals such as Alpha Natural Resources and steel industry giant ArcelorMittal SA. Based in Richmond, Va., Massey is the nation’s fourth-largest coal producer by revenue. It operates 19 mining complexes in Virginia, West Virginia and Kentucky. Massey is under investigation for the April 5 explosion at its Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia that killed 29 and injured two. The blast was the worst U.S. coal mining disaster since 1970 and the subject of civil and criminal investigations. Blankenship was expected to meet with state regulators on Dec. 14 as part of their investigation. Last month, Blankenship blamed the explosion on a sudden rush of natural gas into the underground coal mine. He added that the infusion could have been mitigated if MSHA had not forced Massey to change its ventilation plan in the mine. MSHA investigators have said a buildup of coalbed methane and coal dust might have contributed to the blast. Massey said it lost money in the third quarter of this year because of tougher federal regulations after the mine blast that hurt production Blankenship grew up beside the railroad tracks a tiny town in the Tug Fork River valley along the Kentucky-West Virginia border. He was raised by his single mother, who owned a gas station and grocery store. He was an accountant who worked for two baking companies before joining Massey’s Rawl Sales & Processing Co. in 1982. Bill Raney, president of the West Virginia Coal Association, called Blankenship “one of the most aggressive, intelligent and certainly one of the most outspoken leaders in the coal industry. “I don’t think it’s any of my business whether it’s good or bad, I’ve just observed that Don’s been quite a leader over the years,” Raney said. Blankenship rose in the company’s ranks, in part, for his handling of a labor dispute involving the United Mine Workers of America. Massey has been strongly anti-union under Blankenship’s leadership. He keeps a television set in his Kentucky office that was hit by a stray bullet during a dispute. And as he rose through the company, his personal fortune increased as well. According to Associated Press calculations, Blankenship earned $17.3 million in total compensation last year, including salary, perks and performance-related bonuses. That was down from $19.7 million in 2008. The bulk of Blankenship’s 2009 compensation came in a performance award of $11.5 million, nearly double the $6 million he earned in 2008. UMW spokesman Phil Smith called the announcement the end of a long, difficult chapter in the coal industry’s history, “one that all too often been associated with human tragedy.” The UMW, which has fought with Blankenship for decades, called for his removal at the company’s annual meeting this spring, after the April explosion. A number of Massey’s shareholders also asked that Blankenship’s role be re-examined. The board voiced its support for Blankenship in April, saying it would not be a good time to change leadership while the Upper Big Branch investigation was continuing. “We are gratified that this action has finally occurred,” he said, adding that it’s an opportunity for the industry to step away from its negative image. Since the Upper Big Branch explosion, public attention has been focused on Massey’s underground safety record. The company also has a history of environmental violations at its surface mines. Pittsburgh attorney Bruce Stanley, who has sued Massey at least five times over the years in cases ranging from personal injury and pollution to wrongful death, said Blankenship has left a legacy in the Southern coalfields, where his mountaintop mansion sits high above his neighbors. “He poisoned his own back yard,” said Stanley, one of the lawyers behind a case involving some 700 people who blame their polluted wells and wrecked health on coal slurry that Massey and subsidiary Rawl Sales & Processing pumped into worked-out underground mines. Blankenship’s retirement has few implications for the pending lawsuit, he said. His presence wasn’t just felt in the coalfields. Blankenship also used his wealth to try and influence West Virginia politics and public policy. In 2006, he spent more than $1.8 million to promote 41 hand-picked Republican candidates through contributions and his personal political action committee. He also spent $3.4 million to help elect the first Republican to the state Supreme Court in 2004. The U.S. Supreme Court would late cite that campaign in a ruling involving Massey Energy and the West Virginia Supreme Court. “All he’s done in the past few years is bring negative attention to Massey,” said environmental activist Larry Gibson, who has long battled Massey Energy and the practice of mountaintop removal coal mining in Appalachia. Lorelei Scarbro, a coal miner’s widow from Rock Creek, has fought for years to stop Massey’s planned mountaintop removal operation on the Coal River Mountain, where many residents say their health, property values and quality of life have been hurt by dust, vibrations, water pollution and more. “The citizens of the mountain communities can only hope that Baxter Philips will be a man of honor – a man who puts the health and safety of miners and communities above profits,” she said. “I know coal companies are in business to make money, but we must no longer be asked to pay such a high price for cheap energy. Blankenship did not immediately respond to a call seeking comment Friday night. ___ Smith reported from Morgantown, W.Va.

Read the full article →

Marian Salzman: Net Gain

December 1, 2010

This is the third in a series of 12 posts expounding on the 2011 forecasts in the annual trends report from Salzman, president of Euro RSCG Worldwide PR and an internationally respected trendspotter. There’s a loss-of-faith crisis, and it’s as movement-ready as the one that led Jerry Rubin to pen the Yippie manifesto in 1968. That was the genesis of the famous “Don’t trust anyone over 30″ message that went viral in the election that ushered in President Richard Nixon (aka Tricky Dick). Today, our trust deficit feels just as hairy. In the United States, people say they don’t trust politicians, institutions, the media, the schools or the direction of the country. In ceremonial Japan, which has one of the world’s fastest-growing divorce rates, divorcing couples gather for a ritual smash (with a hammer) of their wedding rings, while toasting to never seeing each other again. Even trust by institutions is lacking: Trust icon Standard & Poor’s assigned the U.K. and its skinny austerity budget just a one-in-three chance of working this summer. To compensate for this trust shutout, citizens of the world (who haven’t lost trust in self-reliance or technology) are increasingly looking to their networks. They’re building on the cascades of bonds that connectivity promises to keep flowing. They’ve already learned to trust in e-commerce for what it offers (timeliness, convenience, price), as demonstrated by the ongoing popularity of eBay, Amazon and even the “crazy business idea” that was FreshDirect’s appeal to shoppers for urban groceries. (The strategy extended to FreshDirect’s developing an iPhone app–in New York, some 66 percent of its users have smart phones–for mobile ordering .) Now, increasingly, global citizens are turning to the Internet to find the people they want in their lives. It’s a needs shift from consumption to communication with other real beings, and it’s proving that online, thanks to the Network Effect, there’s a virtually unlimited supply not only of stuff but also of the people you need in your life. Spin this web from macro to micro. Web-in-use numbers are staggering and on the rise; there are almost 2 billion Internet users worldwide (239 million in the U.S.), 51 million in the U.K., 45 million in France, 81 million in India and a whopping 420 million in China (which is adding 600,000 broadband users per month). But of the top four places where Internet users are spending their time–Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and Facebook, respectively–it’s Facebook that wins the lion’s share, at more than seven hours per month. That exceeds the time people are spending on the other three combined. But it’s not distraction that people are seeking in their online match-ups; it’s real human connections. Can it be any accident that one of the hottest dance songs in Europe this month (by Duck Sauce ) has just one lyric–”Barbra Streisand”–in homage to the chanteuse who brought us “People Who Need People” back in 1964? We can’t forget to thank social media for nurturing the where-to-find-your-new-BFF quests. Twitter has held the dialogue to 140 characters or less, but players on this field of dreams have us communicating on non-space-restrained sites, from LinkedIn (“Relationships Matter”) and Google’s networking platform Orkut to Foursquare (microcosm’d to the level of finding others in your city) and Chinese IM site QQ, French school-reunion site Copains d’avant, and Gowalla, which lets you “stamp your passport” on your phone. On all these new force fields–not to mention Match.com, eHarmony or Chemistry.com–are scads of humans wishing and hoping and dreaming of meeting their fellow enthusiasts, sufferers, travelers, worshipers or partners, and using their networks to make that entirely real. That plugging-in now affords us unlimited possible partners for everything from hobbies to work to networking to marrying–or just finding people to hang out with–and might manifest the single biggest social change we’ve experienced since the Summer of Love. Really what’s at work is a lot more than the old saw that loneliness is the most entrenched of human emotions. Keyboards and mobile devices have become touch extensions for many Americans, a phenomenon that might have helped Thumb Man , a Facebook public figure ( “the bloke that looks like a thumb” ), amass more than 12,000 “likes” between March and April last year. Given that the interactivity value is no longer just human-to-product but human-to-human, I predict that one new and huge ideal applied to time spent online will be reciprocity (which goes hand in hand with people calculating just how precisely they’re expressing their values to their networks). This should all come as no surprise to brands that found out with YouTube that group amusements would reliably generate a following , at least for a short while–as Mentos saw in 2006 when its YouTube video of a mint exploding in a glass of Diet Coke upsurged its fan base on Facebook (temporarily). Next year, the do-as-your-friends-do phenomenon will find people abandoning false personas on social media and moving into a calculated but real projection of their values–people showing each other online what they’re really about. What they’ll share with others–whether a passion for guitar picking or the game of Go , recovery from addiction or an addiction to dog training –will show that you are your networks and your networks are you. The more niche the passion, the more social the match experience will be. As time goes by, expect these rich connections to increase an ambient awareness about the environment of networks, where it feels good to be (virtually) and to be connected (actually). And expect innovative individuals to increase their net worth as they use their own power of influence to generate revenue–their personal CPMs, a phenomenon I have been predicting and waiting for for nearly three years–by recognizing the power of their social cachet, then leveraging it and charging for access to it. Previously: “Mad as Hell–and Only Getting Madder” “Talk to the Hands” Tomorrow: “Public Mycasting System”

Read the full article →

Marian Salzman: Mad as Hell–and Only Getting Madder

November 29, 2010

This is the first in a series of 12 posts expounding on the 2011 forecasts in the annual trends report from Salzman, president of Euro RSCG Worldwide PR and an internationally respected trendspotter. Despite the relatively peaceable environment abroad–there’s a successful coalition, for now, in the U.K., and Australians still appear confident despite debt problems–the U.S. in 2011 is going to flash even red-hotter than the map of the country at midterm elections. Temperatures at home are pushing up the mercury, and not because of global warming or climate change. It’s a trend that extends from politics to domestic life: Expect men at home to be angry at their wives, working women to express ire over being their household’s sole wage-earner, and everybody to be furious about taxes, privacy, individual freedoms and more. Ordinary Americans will have their feedback loops set on tantrum. We maybe haven’t seen so much anger since 1976 when Peter Finch, playing anchorman Howard Beale in Network , came in from the rain to exhort his audience to express themselves. (“I want you to get up right now and go to the window. Open it, and stick your head out, and yell, ‘I’M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!’”) Headlines show banks once again making billions (and well-connected bankers aren’t doing so poorly, either), while the middle class have lost savings, homes, health care, jobs, prospects. The millennials can’t find jobs. The poor have less faith than ever about staying in school (1.2 million Americans drop out ). Washington talks about solutions, but for many Americans, government itself plays out as the problem. Listen in on Rand Paul’s acceptance speech in Kentucky, the new purple-grass state. His chorus of ” Deliberate upon this ” had the ring of a schoolyard heavy premeditating a rumble at the noon bell. During the race, even MSNBC liberal pundit Chris Matthews flashed plenty mad at Paul’s opponent , Democrat Jack Conway, whose attempt to smear Paul with an anonymous source in the “Aqua Buddha” ad toppled as hard in the heartland as the statue of Saddam Hussein once did in Baghdad. On Twitter, AT&T users get really upset at how frequently iPhones drop their calls . AT&T’s SoMe strategy– mapping angry tweeters’ locations to try to restore service and confidence–is, depending on your point of view, either another noxious example of “eavesdropping” or a positive response to a negative. The Gap felt the blowback of contagious wrath on SoMe after it tried redesigning its logo. Even though business press critics called the company ” spineless ” for backing down, the detractors asking for the old Gap back–in droves on social and digital media–won. Don’t doubt it: Consumers are mistake-intolerant for brands and causes. As for what used to be called “customer satisfaction,” Frances Allen, EVP and CMO of Denny’s, offers that “insight” and “innovation” are among the few things you can do when they’re losing it. You can also plan ahead. Before the urge to attack strikes, brands must know what “insightful” means, from extracultural preferences to all-American nostalgia, and anticipate the defensive game plan. You don’t want to wind up with fingers pointing every which way, as Samsung did when its Lebanese ad agency FP7 Doha took a creative prize for a spot the client had never seen. The trouble started when the public saw it–a robed Jesus snapping a picture of a group of nuns–and went berserk. Anger, it turns out, just isn’t that easy to unstrand even by the most evolved among us. The Dalai Lama tweets that the energy of anger feels like progress but is “almost always unreliable,” as emotions go. It’s Buddhist theology that it’s possible to have compassion without attachment and anger without hatred. But don’t try telling that to Rep. John Yarmuth, a Dem whose win of a House seat in Kentucky he called ” bittersweet ” because of the flavor of the harsh language heaped on Nancy Pelosi and President Obama all year. What is sure is that anger is the color of the zeitgeist now, and anyone who isn’t tapping it risks appearing out of touch. When MSNBC network star Keith Olbermann got suspended without pay earlier this month for making three Democratic political contributions, including against Rand Paul, one gloating headline read: “Time to Feast on a Delicious Second Helping of Schadenfreude.” After Election Day, pundits on the right weighed in about Olbermann and MSNBC’s commentators, while other sites noted that the staff of some defeated Democrats had talked to grief counselors after the election–a soft touch seemingly tailor-made for the very angry to dis. Indeed, this emotion–anger–which has been analyzed by everybody from Sigmund Freud to 12-step gurus as sublimation of fear, anxiety or grief, doesn’t feel the need today to get deeply in touch with its masks. Like Bill Clinton trying to parse what “is” is, anger is the new “it.” And being angry makes for dynamics. Seth Godin has noted that angry people grab attention because they are interesting, and interesting people will get more air time for their angry message, helping them in turn set agendas and get elected. In the new movie Skyline , futuristic warmongers descending on Los Angeles first appear as so many dropping points of light. They’re robotic cyberwarriors, metal hulks that first dazzle, then destroy. How ’bout this new phrase: light-rippin’ mad! Back in Prohibition (the era for the new HBO series “Boardwalk Empire”), shrinks thought angry people should dispel their emotion at the piano, by banging out “The Devil’s Sonata.” Not having any was boardwalk boss Enoch Thompson (Steve Buscemi), who skipped go (and did not go directly to jail) by setting his childhood house (and bad memories) literally on fire. With the casualties of voter anger feeling the chill winds of Alaska, and the Tea Party steeping those enmities as one serious kind of ” flippin’ fun ,” look for a kinder, gentler era to become itself an object of public ire. I expect, in the personal sphere, we’ll see more and bigger cases of domestic violence and the faceless menace that is cyberstalking . Meanwhile, expect the political arena to roil ever hotter. Barack Obama’s cool, calming rhetoric hit the spot for many Americans in panic-stricken 2008. In retrospect, his no-drama persona appealed just long enough to get him elected, but now it’s very two years ago. Tomorrow: “Talk to the Hands”

Read the full article →

Carolyn Ziel: Taking Failure Off the Table — Really!

November 27, 2010

My father helped me get a summer job on a movie my first year in college. I was excited to be working on a major motion picture and a little nervous. I wanted to be a success, not a failure! My Dad gave me some great advice. He said, “No matter what anyone asks you to do, just say yes, even if you don’t know how to do something, say yes. Then go and learn what you need to learn to finish the job”. I took this advice to heart. On that movie set I learned what it meant to be solution-driven. I learned how to be creative and resourceful by focusing on solutions. On movie sets, there is only yes for an answer, it is all about finding a solution. Failure isn’t even an option! Now, if I find myself presented with a challenging situation, I don’t get discouraged or feel defeated. As long as I’m working toward my dream, I’m OK. Most successful people know on some level that they’re going to achieve their dreams. No matter how out of reach their dreams might seem, they take steps each day to move forward. If things don’t go exactly as planned they still keep moving forward. Adapting this mindset will allow you to succeed in big ways. Failure is never the option; the only option is finding a workable solution. That is what Allison Maslan, CEO of Blastoff Life and Business Coaching , did when she had an idea for coaching software: Blastation Interactive Goal Setting and Life Coaching Software . Allison wanted to create an online software experience for her clients. Rather than buy someone else’s software, she developed her own. Although she didn’t know the first thing about software development, she didn’t let that stop her. Allison takes failure off the table. It is never one of her options, period. Allison developed Blastation when she was unable to find adequate goal setting software to use with her coaching clients. “It’s a lively software that helps keep you organized, optimistic and inspired so you can stay on track to make your dream life a reality”. This unique web-based software can be accessed anywhere there is an internet connection. ” Blastation will help you to clarify and attain your large and small life dreams and visions in an exciting and stimulating way”. The software enables users to break their goals down into easy-to-follow incremental steps, called ‘Mini Feats’, that allow bigger projects to be more easily achieved. These steps are then posted on your personalized online Blastation Calendar to keep your personal and professional life organized. Allison thought of everything: Blastation can even send e-mails and host your online address book. “If you are creating something new and you have a fear of failure, you can take a different approach. Whatever happens, whatever wall I hit, I just have to figure out a solution and then I can never fail, I just find a solution”. Allison’s right, when you shift your focus to finding a solution, you rewire your brain. According to David Rock in his book Your Brain at Work , “unmet expectations often create a threat response” and the “brain is built to avoid threat, people tend to work hard to reinterpret events to meet their expectations”. In other words, if we tell our brain something, it listens. Look for solutions and adjust your expectations. David Rock recommends the following: “stay in a positive state of mind, find ways to keep coming out ahead of your expectations over and again, even in small ways”. And maybe most importantly, “when a positive expectation is not being met, practice reappraising the situation”. Direct your brain’s energy into finding solutions. Focus on learning new tools to support your goals. Explore new ideas and new ways of doing things. Allison’s solution was simple: she reached out to an expert software designer. Allison had an idea. She didn’t know how to develop software, but she knew what she wanted and focused on that. She found a solution and her dream materialized in a big way: her software is used internationally! First say “yes” to yourself and your dreams, then take the necessary steps to achieve them. Allison’s motto is, “keep your head pointing towards your dream, walk towards it daily and don’t let anyone tell you it can’t be done”! With this kind of solution-driven attitude anything is possible.

Read the full article →

Peggy McColl: When the Going Gets Tough… A Note to Entrepreneurs

November 24, 2010

Before we get started, I just had to share this Insight poster with you. I loved its sarcastic yet poignant message. You can find it on www. Despair.com which specializes in humorous quotes that are the opposite of Successories products. What do you do when the going gets tough? Is it simply a flight or fight response? Do you buckle down and forge ahead or justify why things are not working? You will always find (or focus on) evidence that supports your beliefs (for better or worse). In my mentoring programs, I work with many clients who have contacted me because they are struggling with their businesses. What happens is they listen too much about the future of our economy and they get caught up in fear, which restricts their ability to be innovative. What people should be doing and what they are doing are two different things. What they are doing is shriveling up and going into a corner. Their thoughts are centered in “why bother.” They are getting consumed in negativity which is very destructive. These beliefs are stifling their enthusiasm and energy that used to be directed towards creating great products and effective marketing efforts. What they should be doing is putting a little more creative energy into it. Rather than retreat with fear that there is too much competition, they should be making connections and engaging their community on various social networking sites and through their blogs. The sheer fact that there are more people online actually means you have more of an opportunity to connect with people. I have been doing internet marketing for close to a decade and yet everyday I am seeing a new website who could be a potential partner. Of course, there are some that have been around for a long time and are successful because they have a big following. They might not ever respond to an email or a phone call (if you can find a phone number to call.) At the end of the day, they are not the only ones online. They are not the only ones that are reaching your potential target market. There are 118 million websites online and an estimated 35 billion web pages (please don’t hold me to that number!). The possibility for collaboration is enormous. With more people unemployed and deciding that they don’t want to go back into the corporate world, you have a larger audience looking for solutions. History has proven that when there are recessionary times there are more entrepreneurial small businesses that launch than another other time. What I recommend people should do now is really study. If you are not creating new products then spend your time studying effective, creative marketing techniques. What offerings, landing pages, or websites have caught your attention? Why? Think about how you can adapt those techniques to your own business. That is what I really love about marketing. We will never get to a point in which all marketing ideas have been tried and there is nothing new to learn. I continuously buy books about my industry and watch what others are doing online that have been successful. I do this not only to improve my marketing efforts, but the efforts of my clients. I love to share success stories with my community so that we can all learn and prosper together. That is why I came up with the idea for The Center for Viral Marketing and launched it with my dear friend and colleague, Gay Hendricks. Every month I present a case study and dissect exactly what aspects of the company’s efforts led them to success so that my members can duplicate the techniques for their own businesses. What are you doing to invest in yourself and your business? How are you keeping your creative energy up so that you can be innovative and successful? Please share your strategies by posting your comment. Peggy McColl is a New York Times best-selling author and an internationally recognized expert in the field of personal and professional development and Internet marketing. As an entrepreneur, business owner, mentor and professional speaker Peggy has been inspiring individuals to pursue their personal and business objectives and achieve ultimate success. She provides effective Internet marketing solutions for entrepreneurs, authors, publishers, professionals, and business owners, who want to establish an online presence, achieve bestseller status, build their brand, grow and/or expand their business online. You can find out more about Peggy at her website, Destinies.com.

Read the full article →

Tony Greenberg: Break Out the Buggy Whips: Is This the Tipping Point for Streaming Video?

November 17, 2010

Who’s in the buggy whip business in technology these days? By that, I mean, what companies are about to become obsolete thanks to major shifts in media delivery and consumption caused by the rise, the serious rise, of streaming? More than a dozen years after the launch of the Streaming Media conference, which is now filled with dozens of content-management systems and practically no CDNs (content distribution networks), the show is creeping back to success showing its best growth numbers in years. Meanwhile, the CDN business is still a rug-dealer’s market, facing a death spiral toward $0 bandwidth, with individual vendors providing widely varying price, quality and value. “We’ve seen this all before,” observes Steve Lerner, RampRate’s Media Technology Specialist, “by 2003 there were over 25 dead CDNs all who followed the same pattern of selling ‘cheaper’ rather than selling ‘better’. It is hard to make a living marking up bandwidth that has a continuously collapsing marginal cost.” Thankfully, there’s still a market, as my firm, RampRate, mediates deals in this space). Somehow, the CDNs continue to develop new tech to stay in business, but I have to think they’ll eventually bow to Google and Microsoft, the only firms with enough scale to survive in the long term. That said, there’s more happening in streaming than in a long time, with more mainstream content and more kinds of devices that can access it. My partner David Bloom has just published a piece in TheWrap.com listing some of his top candidates for Industries Soon To Be No Longer Needed. He writes: “What’s it all mean? To start, I’d sell off that optical-disc duping factory if I were you. And you may want to get out of the hard-drive and home networked-storage businesses, too. They’re on the way to buggy-whip status and fast.” Just to top it off, he throws in the makers of shelving for all the DVDs, CDs, books and more that we soon won’t be collecting to show visitors how cool our tastes are. Now we’ll have to do that by sharing our culture preferences online with friends through programs such as GetGlue and Apple’s Ping (well, maybe). Why are all these industries suddenly endangered? David rightly says it’ll be a while before things completely shake out, of course, but a series of recent announcements and developments are accelerating the long-bubbling transition to streaming for much of content that we consume. “The resulting shifts likely will change the kinds of entertainment we consume (it will be a while before that shakes out, I think), but those shifts definitely are already beginning to change the way we consume them.” Big companies such as Apple, Google and consumer electronics makers have made a series of recent announcements that will make it easier than ever to get brand-name content for a cheap price, stream it smoothly and at high quality on all kinds of devices and platforms, and not worry about keeping it on hand on some vast hard drive forever after. Mark Suster of GRP Ventures smartly asserts Hulu is the OPEC of the online Industry (though I wonder if they soon become yesterday’s fish wrapper as Skype becomes en vogue as their founders return to shake it up). Reversal of Fortune? There are some caveats: For instance, at least some people will need local hard drives and optical drives for the stuff they already have, like the CDs and DVDs they already own and the personal stuff they’re now creating by the boatloads. Will big content creators actually free up their good programming enough to avoid what I’ll call Chronic Consumer Frustration, a condition that drives tech-savvy audiences back to the latest illegal tools to access all that locked-away content. As an example: Look at the broadcast networks’ ban of their content from the much-ballyhooed Google TV service. That uniform opposition means Google TV users will only see some basic cable networks among the online offerings of the service. It doesn’t mean users won’t get that programming somewhere else (and Google TV’s Internet access and search capabilities may make it easy to find). Over at iTunes, only Disney/ABC and Fox are selling their TV shows at 99 cents a pop. That doesn’t mean people aren’t watching shows from CBS and NBC, et al. They’re just going to get it in other ways. But I digress. For tech companies, the string of recent announcements and developments show that cloud computing is rapidly becoming mainstream, undergirding the business plans and major new offerings of some of the biggest companies in media and entertainment. As David says, “It’s kinda already here”: We’re seeing significant changes in distribution through mainstream devices, for mainstream audiences, involving low-cost content that people won’t own, and won’t store on their own machines, but can access nearly anywhere, on a wide variety of devices, from cell phones to TVs to computers. The only question for you to consider is whether you’re suddenly in the buggy whip business, or transforming your company to leverage the opportunities that are quickly presenting themselves. So are you moving forward? Or looking back?

Read the full article →

Stacie Nevadomski Berdan: Living Abroad Has Its Challenges

November 16, 2010

Living in a foreign country excites the imagination, ignites the adventurous spirit, and inspires you to explore. It can also scare the pants off you. Learning to live in another country is more than simply learning to get to the office, making yourself understood in a local language, and eating different food. You have to learn how to do many new things while unlearning old that have become second nature. You must accept your new home on its terms — not yours. Living abroad successfully also involves a subtle but important change in your expectations of yourself and others. More importantly, you have to cope with the loss of identity and familiarity and get along without some of the personal perks in your life that provide encouragement, meaning and fun ! And so every now and then when I read a piece about an expat sent abroad who discovers that “it’s not what I expected” or the spouse gives an ultimatum “me or the job” as noted in this article on ” What To Do When Relocating Abroad ” in Forbes , I’m baffled. Was it the allure of Paris? Didn’t anyone tell the spouse that although there may be opportunities to ride in Paris — similar to those in New York City — but that it’s not the wide open grasslands of Texas? With the sheer cost involved, both financial and human capital, why are companies still making mistakes in choosing employees and not working with both the employee and spouse/partner to make sure it’s not a career buster? Most of the large corporations I consult with on global relocation and cross-cultural management issues have wised up to the importance of preparing professionals. So, too, are employees. Although a stint abroad can do wonders for fast-tracking your career as I wrote in my book Get Ahead By Going Abroad , it can also be a career buster if you turn down an assignment, leave early, or don’t adapt or adjust to deliver for the company. According to HR professionals I’ve worked with, a spouse’s reaction to the relocation is the number one reason such international transfers are successful or not; a spouse’s happiness is critical to your ability to do your job. I know. My husband was a “trailing spouse” — a terrible term — when we moved to Hong Kong years ago. He left a job as a researcher/writer at Washington, D.C.-based environmental think tank to follow me and my career. He had rough ride at first, trying to find a job working on environmental issues (no green movement in sight at the time) and so he reinvented himself as a travel writer. It was a great gig that took him all over Asia spending time in the Kingdom of Brunei, watching the orangutans in the forests of Borneo, and biking through most major cities in China. But he had to make it work. He did it for me and, when my three years was up, he asked that I not extend or move on to Tokyo or Kuala Lumpur. I agreed despite my desire to continue globetrotting. I grew to appreciate that because we had left our network of family and friends behind, the two of us became everything to each other, which was a bit overwhelming. Moreover, it’s usually even harder on the spouse because the employee has work, colleagues, activities — an instant culture into which to assimilate. A partner has to begin everything from scratch — that’s tough enough with an in-country relocation and even harder in another culture, possibly even a second language. But we can learn from others. In Get Ahead By Going Abroad , I interviewed more than 200 professionals who moved abroad, soliciting common advice on issues critical to a successful stint working abroad. One of these is to make sure that you and your spouse take a look-see trip if at all possible. Imagine yourself living there, how would your life fit into your new home city. What would be different, perhaps the same. And then, once you move, another critical piece of advice involves how to handle your first week on the ground because many times this first week sets the tone for the overall experience, kind of like first impressions; they’re hard to get over. To enhance a great first impression, make sure you do the following six important things the first week on the ground without going into the office, if at all possible: Nail down your personal must haves , be it a gym, a massage therapist or a particular brand of coffee, appreciate the importance of those “little things.” Make contact with at least one other international contact , who can be an on-the-ground source of information and assistance. Make sure you have at least one local contact because sometimes only local help will do. Familiarize yourself with the transportation system be it your own car, the subway or a system of commuter trains. Set up house with the clothes you have, photos and stock the fridge to begin to make it like home. Explore your new home , get a feel for the place, stroll the streets, be a tourist. But it doesn’t stop here. There’s practical advice on the first month, the first year and so on — even practical and tried-and-true tips on ensuring a successful return. Others have done it and successfully. Why not profit from their experiences to ensure the best outcome for your international assignment. It could be the difference between fast-tracking your career and fast-talking to save it.

Read the full article →