The extreme income gap between chief executive officers and nearly everyone else has a corrosive effect. Under the best of circumstances, when a rising tide has lifted all boats, the impact is diminished. But, in general, the divide between those at the top and those lower down results both in lower morale and in lower productivity. Moreover it cuts into the commitment of those who feel, literally, shortchanged. As Harvard Business School professor Rakesh Khurana put it, “The greater the inequality, the less willing employees are to learn specific company ways of doing things that aren’t going to be useful to their next employer.”

Meantime many, if not most, CEOs seem oblivious to the restiveness. At a minimum, they do not seem to care about how different their lives are from those of the overwhelming majority in their employ. They do not seem to care about the concerns of the many, especially in times of escalating costs of basics such as food, gas, education, and health care. This is not good leadership. In fact, as I indicated, this is not leadership at all, not by any of the conventional definitions.

While the increase in pay to chief executives has been geometric, it happened over thirty plus years. Resistance to the increase has been similarly slow to grow – until now. Now the pace of protest is accelerating.

• Both old and new media are focusing on the issue of excessive executive compensation.

• Both old and new media are focusing on the larger issues of stagnant wages, America’s shrinking middle class, and the dismaying disparity between America’s superrich (the top 1 %) and near everyone else.

• Increased pressure from investors, lawmakers, regulators, and boards is cutting into the capacity of CEOs to set their own pay.

• Shareholder activists are getting bolder as they get angrier. This proxy season more than 90 companies are facing resolutions by shareholders incensed at corporate “leaders” – at highly placed hired hands too greedy for our own good.

• Aiming at executive pay is not only an American phenomenon. One of Germany’s leading parties, the Social Democrats, recently made exorbitant pay a political issue; they proposed limiting CEO earnings to about $1.6 million a year.

My name is not Pollyanna. I have no illusions about big change in the short run. But this train has left the station. Real leaders will get out in front of this issue, if only to avoid being dragged down and out by “followers” who won’t take it any more.

Read the original here, by Barbara Kellerman @ Harvard Business Publishing

On-Ramps
You asked: What do good on-ramps for X’ers look like?

Good on-ramps for X’ers should build capital and offer choice. That capital comes in three forms: social, emotional, and intellectual — and all three are important components of successful on-ramps.

Social capital is about relationships — helping people who’ve taken time off retain their connections.

Emotional capital is about feeling committed to the organization — creating touch points that reflect the values that drew the individual to the company in the first place.

Intellectual capital is about knowledge — keeping individuals up to date on the expertise they’ll need to do the job well once they return.

X’ers particularly value choice. Companies should offer options for work arrangements, designed to allow talented X’ers to choose the approach that will work for them. For more on the importance of on-ramps, see Carolyn Buck Luce’s recent post.

Multiple Careers
You asked: Does the longer life expectancy explain why people are retiring from two and three jobs?

To some extent, yes. However, I think other factors, such as the increase in the labor market’s instability over the past several decades, have had a more significant influence. After watching several decades of layoffs, X’ers today tend to be very wary of putting all their eggs in one corporate basket. They don’t like to be pigeonholed, or pushed out on a limb of specialization, knowing the inherent danger that, in a fit of whimsy, the corporation will saw the branches off behind them during the next restructuring. In our research, they are the generation most likely to fear being laid off and to feel at a dead end in their corporate careers. One of their highest priorities is keeping their options open and their skills diverse — to be as self-reliant as possible.

Tribal Bonds
You asked: When your company has offices in many locations, and the next higher position is somewhere other than where you are now, how do you minimize the severing of ties?

The approaches for staying in touch are fairly straightforward, although new technologies like Facebook and LinkedIn certainly make that easier than ever before. The more important question for companies to wrestle with is whether that next higher position has to be based in a new location. Many progressive firms are beginning to look at the benefits and tradeoffs of having a leadership team that is geographically dispersed. Again, with new technologies, it’s becoming more possible for people to live near their “tribe” and work anywhere, any time.

Family Values
You asked: How should an X’er communicate the need for better work-life balance in a way that an employer can accept and respond to with a positive change? Are X’ers deciding not to have children and, if so, why?

X’ers are having children, although the birth rates are lower than they were several decades ago. The key to communicating any request is to address its implications for the company right up front, and of course, if possible, in a positive way. I strongly recommend using ROI language (and I talk about how to do that in the book I wrote for Gen Y: Plugged In). Don’t sugarcoat the analysis; consider all the pros and cons for the organization of the change you’re requesting; and identify appropriate remedial actions.

If you’d like to listen to a recording of the webinar, or see slides from the presentation, go here.

Original post here, by Tammy Erickson @ Harvard Business Publishing

This week we covered how effective succession planning can prevent your organization from succumbing to the talent shortage predicted in the next few years.

Ron Katz joined us to discuss what you can do to improve your performance and data management systems and make sure your succession planning efforts adequately prepare you for the jobs and challenges of tomorrow.

For more podcasts, webinars, and articles on recruiting be sure to check out ERE.net!

Original post created by: ERE Articles

In such instances, you have to look at leadership through the wants and needs of the worker as opposed to the skills of the leader. Here are some quick tips for effectively managing knowledge workers.

Demonstrate passion
In days past, working 40 hours per week and taking 4-5 weeks of vacation meant that people often focused less on loving what they do. Today people work 60-80 hours a week and it’s crucial that they love their work to avoid burnout. Those who lead by example and demonstrate passion for what they do make it much easier for their followers to do the same.

Strengthen abilities
With less job security and more global competition, it’s critical that people update and refine their skills continuously. Leaders need to look beyond skills needed today and help their workers learn skills they will need tomorrow.

Appreciate time
People have less time today, which means the value of that time has increased. Leaders who waste their workers’ time are not looked upon favorably. Leaders will be far more successful if they protect people from things that neither encourage their passions nor enhance their abilities.

Build networks
Today, job security comes from having ability, passion, and a great network. Leaders who enable people to form strong networks both inside and outside the company will gain a huge competitive advantage along with the loyalty of their workers. These professional networks allow people to expand their knowledge and bring it back to the organization.

Support growth
The best knowledge workers are working for more than money. They want to make a contribution and to grow in their fields. Leaders who ask their people, “What can our company do to help you grow and achieve your goals?” will find it comes back tenfold.

Expand happiness and meaning
No one wants to work at a meaningless job that makes them unhappy. Leaders must show their workers how the organization can help them make a contribution to the larger world and feel rewarded for doing something about which they are passionate.

Managing knowledge workers is a challenging and rewarding job. Leaders who do so must look beyond the work and think about the person who does the work if they are to be successful. By appreciating and encouraging the dedication, time, and experience of their workers, leaders help shape not only the futures of the professionals they lead but also the future of their organizations.

The original is here, by Marshall Goldsmith @ Harvard Business Publishing

I baked one loaf of carrot nut bread and two loaves of zucchini spice bread. I made a carrot-dill soup, a chilled yogurt-cucumber-dill soup, and a kale-swiss chard-carrot soup. I also shredded a beet-mint salad, cooked an eggplant-green pepper-tomato thing, and grilled peppers in the oven.

Just for the record, usually the only thing I ever bake is cookies, by squeezing batter from a store bought tube. If I make dinner, it consists of steamed veggies, rice and — my pièce de résistance for the kids — frozen pizza. Warmed, of course.

What’s even more curious is that it wasn’t a special occasion. We weren’t celebrating someone’s birthday. No guest was coming for dinner. It was just going to be me and my family.

So what possessed me? Why did I work so hard to create such a feast?

My family had spent the weekend at Isabella Freedman, a non-profit Jewish retreat center (full disclosure: I’m on their Board of Directors) that also has a ten-acre farm.

There are many things that were lovely about the weekend — we were together as a family, the setting was beautiful, the food was excellent, and my cell phone didn’t get reception.

Our kids felt comfortable roaming with more freedom and independence than usual. So when they woke up at six in the morning and asked to go see the goats, I was more than happy to let them go and get a little extra sleep myself.

Thirty minutes later, I awoke with a strong pang of regret. I couldn’t believe I would let them go by themselves like that. While I quickly got dressed, Eleanor turned over and saw I was going after them. “Relax,” she told me. “They’ll be fine.”

“I’m not worried about them,” I told her. “I don’t want to miss the goats.” She thought for a second, jumped out of bed, and we ran down to the goats together.

Now I don’t know if you’ve ever milked a goat before, but if not, I suggest you find yourself a farm and try it. Not just because it’s a cool feeling. Not just because it’s good to know how the whole get-milk-from-an-animal thing works. And not because you better know how because one day you might be thirsty and really need to get milk from an animal. It’s not a knowledge or understanding or capability thing.

It’s an experience thing. Because once you’ve milked a goat, you’ll never drink milk or eat cheese the same way again. You’ll choose your milk more carefully. You’ll want to know who milked the animal, how that person treated her, and what she ate. And when you drink the milk, you’ll have a much deeper appreciation for the taste.

In short, you’ll care more about your milk than you ever did before.

After the goats, we went to the vegetable fields where the kids (I include myself here) went crazy. We pulled carrots out of the ground. We broke off stalks of kale and swiss chard. We gathered bunches of dill. We picked zucchini. We plucked tomatoes. We collected green peppers.

That day, in the field, my kids ate more raw vegetables than ever before.

Where and when you enter a process is a strong determinant of how connected you’ll feel to the outcome. If I’m on the receiving end of a new initiative, I’ll approach it more critically than if I’m one of the people involved from the beginning.

New sales process? Don’t figure it all out yourself and then tell your sales people about it. Let them figure it out with you. If they do the seeding and weeding and picking, they’ll be far more likely to eat the produce.

Want customers to buy your service or product? Involve them in the creation of it. I never write proposals anymore and if a client requires it, I’ll take myself out of the process. Not because I’m above it — it’s the opposite actually — I take myself out of the process because I know I won’t win the project.

The projects I win — and the only ones I do now — are the ones I design with my clients. Those designs are always far better than anything I could propose on my own because they are informed by my clients’ deep knowledge of their companies — their culture, personality, and capacity to absorb change. Most importantly those projects sell — and succeed — because the people impacted by the work feel responsible for its success. Which is entirely predictable since they designed it from the beginning.

And they’re always happier with the outcome. They feel something deeper than the success of a project gone well. They feel pride of ownership. They feel satisfied by the journey that brought them to their success.

So we returned home with a car filled with fresh produce. And I spent the next day inspired — chopping, shredding, boiling, and baking — preparing more food than I had in months. I needed no external motivation. I had no sense of urgency because guests were coming (they weren’t). I had no desire to perform for money (I wasn’t making any). There was no need for a proverbial carrot or stick. My motivation came from a real carrot — one I pulled from the ground myself.

Read the original here, by Peter Bregman @ Harvard Business Publishing

Characteristics of Gen X Outside the U.S.
You asked: Are the characteristics of the generation consistent, or do they vary by country? What about Gen X in Mexico? This concept seems to be completely foreign to our clients in the Middle East, Africa, and the Caribbean. What about X’ers in India, China, or Brazil?

The characteristics of a generation are heavily influenced by events that occur during its members’ formative years, roughly ages 11 to 14. Clearly, national, cultural, socioeconomic, religious, and other differences have a big influence on the views and behaviors we each develop.

However, Gen X is the first generation for whom the global reach of technology began to allow a significant number of individuals to share experiences across national boundaries in many (but by no means all) parts of the world. As a result, I find many common themes among those born in the 1960s and 1970s (my definition of Generation X). Economic uncertainty and domestic social change were common themes in many countries. Latin American economies were experiencing persistent financial crises, and the economy in the United States and much of Europe was in the doldrums. Many of the most common names for this generation reflect the disenfranchisement that many X’ers share: “Crisis Generation” is the term often used in Latin America, “Génération Bof” (meaning “whatever”) in France, and “The Burnt Generation” in Iran.

Despite some shared experiences, it’s important to consider national influences that would have shaped unique views and assumptions. Here are two posts with additional information: one on India and another on China.

Managing Gen Y
You asked: I have a department of Millennials to manage. It is very challenging. They are very egocentric and seem to feel entitled. Their work ethic doesn’t seem as strong as the X’ers and Baby Boomers in our office. Do you have any sage advice on how to better handle and motivate Millennials?

As with all the generations, my basic advice is to look at the world through their eyes. The dominant adult conversation during Gen Y’s formative years was about terrorism — events that are unpredictable and can occur to anyone at any time. In other words, a world that is random. This sense of randomness is a critical element of Gen Y’s mental model. And, as a result, many have concluded that the best way to live is in the moment. Y’s were also reared in a very child-centric world, by Boomer parents who are devoted to assuring their success and who have reminded them at every turn that they can do anything they set their minds to. They are optimistic and confident.

It’s easy for this to come across to older colleagues as a poor work ethic, impatience, or an entitled attitude. But, in many ways, that’s beside the point. Y’s, like all of us, looked at external circumstances and formed logical conclusions about what was most important to them and how to live their lives.

So, what should you do? Here are some specific suggestions:

1. Y’s want to feel they are doing work that is challenging and important.
• Don’t over-specify how a task should be done; let them figure it out.
• Take time to help them understand the context for their work, how it relates to the bigger picture.
2. Y’s work habits are not the same as many older workers, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they get less done.
• Focus on the actual completion of tasks; hold them accountable for outcomes, not for time spent.
• Embrace time shifting, asynchronous work, and flexible schedules.
• Create a collaborative, team-based environment.
3. Y’s use technology in new and interesting ways.
• Develop your own technology skills, and experiment with new ways of doing things.
• Leverage technology to create more efficient processes.
• Communicate, particularly during the recruiting process, in Y-friendly ways.
4. Y’s like their parents and are naturally comfortable with people their parents’ age.
• Address parents as an explicit part of your recruiting strategy — create messaging aimed at parents, build awareness among parents as a great employer for young employees, and be prepared to address parents’ concerns.
• Encourage the Boomers in your midst to mentor Y’s.
5. The opportunity to learn is very important to Y’s.
• Provide frequent feedback; first-line managers should teach rather than assess.
• Redesign career paths to offer frequent, lateral moves — not necessarily up.
• Provide a variety of world-class learning opportunities.

Baby Boomers
You asked: What is the definition of Baby Boomers? Boomers faced a number of unique and extraordinary events for their time frame. Why would Gen X be so different from Boomers?

I define Boomers as those born between about 1946 and 1960 (of course, no generational boundaries are hard and fast). Many people extend the definition to include those born through 1964, but I’ve found most individuals born between 1960 and 1964 do not identify with Boomers.

Yes, Boomers were also shaped by unique and extraordinary events, but those events were quite different from the events that shaped Gen X. And those differences lead to unique mental models and life views. Key Boomer influences included the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights movement, and the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King. These tended to shape a generation that set out to change the world, filled with idealism and ideas of better ways forward. The generation was also heavily shaped by its sheer size — because there were so many Boomers scrambling in an infrastructure that had not yet expanded to accommodate the generation’s size, competition was, for many, an essential part of success.

Learning from Boomers
You asked: How do we blend our strengths with the Boomers’ experience so we can be perceived as “ready” to make a smooth transition into leadership? How do we collaborate with Boomers and minimize their resistance to accept us as “equal partners” instead of threats?

This is an important question. You’re asking, How do you convince someone that you’ll do “it” well, even though you’ll do “it” differently. In many ways, that’s the challenge X’ers face: convincing Boomers that they’ll be great leaders, even though they will probably approach the role quite differently.

President Obama offers a useful model: His operating team comprises primarily X’ers, but his Cabinet is dominated by Boomers. He seems to rely on them for their experience and knowledge, as well as their relationships with other critical players. As you build your teams, I’d recommend that you adopt a similar way of thinking about partnering with Boomers — tapping their strengths.

If you’d like to listen to a recording of the webinar or see slides from the presentation, go here.

Go & see the original here, by Tammy Erickson @ Harvard Business Publishing

As companies grow and expand around the world, diversity in the workplace increases. Successful organizations identify, recruit, and train professionals from a diverse blend of backgrounds, cultures, styles, and motivations into positions of increasing power and responsibility.

In the midst of individual contributors with such diverse backgrounds, success calls for leaders who are comfortable with diversity tension. Diversity tension is the stress and strain that accompanies mixtures of differences and similarities. The task of leaders working in the global business arena is not to minimize this tension, but rather to use it as a creative force for change, and, of course, to make quality decisions in the midst of identity differences, similarities, and pressures.

Leaders who prepare and empower their employees to understand others without judging, to be requirement-driven, and to be comfortable with diversity tension are more productive and successful. It just isn’t enough for leaders to possess these capabilities themselves; they must also develop them throughout the organization.

What are some good first steps to developing positive diversity tension in the workplace? Well, one is to not make any assumptions about the cultural base or outlook with whom you work or do business. Another is to understand the dynamics of diversity (through historical, political, and economic references), how it affects the workplace, worldviews, life and communication styles, ethics, and etiquette of co-workers.

Developing positive diversity tension takes an understanding of both the big things and the small things that form unique cultures, including leadership and work styles (for instance formal vs. informal); decision-making styles (e.g. intuitive vs. analytical); information-sharing methods (do people prefer written, oral, face-to-face, text, email, video conference, etc.); and motivations (these could be power, achievement, affiliation, money, etc.). It’s not necessary to hold everyone’s views on these matters, but it is important to accept that there are many different methods, positions, and styles by which people can accomplish goals and directives.

Utilizing diversity tension in the workforce requires that leaders understand that differences in race, culture, and background are advantages — not deficits — for effective teamwork and problem solving.

To take embrace diversity tension, leaders need to:

• Create an inclusive work environment where people feel welcomed and valued for sharing their opinions and skills
• Recognize and reward successes that result from valuing diversity
• Assess the different learning styles and strengths in people
• Involve people from a variety of backgrounds in decision-making and problem-solving processes
• Utilize the full potential of all employees and build on complementary skills, backgrounds, and cultural knowledge
• Refuse to accept behaviors that attack the self-respect of others and confront people who stereotype others or display prejudiced behavior
• Participate in diversity training
• Involve a wide variety of people in their personal and professional lives, and take the time to get to know them

Using tension of diversity as a positive, rather than viewing differences as negative, a well-rounded diverse team will be able to produce valuable brainstorming sessions, imaginative problem-solving and decision making, unique perspectives on strategic planning, and inventive product development ideas. The benefits of such a diverse workforce will be felt throughout the organization and are key to competing successfully in the global marketplace.

View original post here, by Marshall Goldsmith @ Harvard Business Publishing

“But how can we know what is correct?”

I was sitting with a group of executives, discussing the advantages of social technologies. One member of the group was quick to point out what he perceived as a major disadvantage: Too much information from too many sources made it difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain which source was right, which authority he should trust.

I gently suggested that the very nature of his question reflected a very Boomer mind-set.

Younger generations are much less likely to imagine that there is one correct answer or a single authority. Their experiences surfing the Internet have given them a better sense than many from older generations of the way situations can morph and be interpreted differently, but not less correctly, by different reporters.

Generation X, with its value of self-reliance and preference for options and choice, is particularly prone to recognizing and appreciating multiple perspectives. Recently, one of my readers introduced me to a very Gen X Web site, specifically designed to make it easy for users to compare and contrast how news sources all over the world cover the same stories. Mondokio, which means “world eye” in Italian, allows you to read the coverage of major news events in local markets by clicking on a global map.

One of my most vivid memories of time spent with my father as a little girl was watching the evening news together. Each time, after Walter Cronkite confidently closed his broadcast with “And that’s the way it is,” my father would ask me one question: What do you think the “other guy’s” point of view would be? Night after night, he painstakingly pointed out the possibility of another perspective, in doing so giving me perhaps his greatest gift.

No account represents an absolute truth. All reporting is, by definition, a retelling of the story, a conscious selection of facts to include, a decision to omit details considered extraneous or unnecessary. In most instances, I believe this retelling is done with a sincere attempt to provide a straightforward account, but it’s nonetheless shaped through the writer’s lens, based on the reporter’s sense of what will be important, interesting, and relevant to the intended audience.

To all who crave the sense of certain truth implied by Mr. Cronkite’s confident assertion, as my father’s daughter, I would argue that the information environment of 50 years ago was probably more difficult and dangerous than today’s. With fewer sources, it was more difficult to understand the perspective of the teller. Not surprisingly, there was a greater tendency to accept one report as the only reality. I find today’s potential for confusion much less troubling than yesterday’s veneer of a single truth.

Today it is obvious, painfully so to some, that there are multiple perspectives and versions of the truth. Interpreting them wisely is our responsibility.

The original is here, by Tammy Erickson @ Harvard Business Publishing

As I soon learned, they usually were the ones who taught me.

One of my most ambitious undertakings was a week-long trip to California with my then- three-year-old daughter. I was scheduled to attend board meetings in Southern California for most of the week and had made careful arrangements for a bonded sitter to be with her while I was working.

But my last stop on the trip was a visit to Stanford University for a breakfast talk to what I thought was a group of university students. I imagined a fairly informal affair — students in jeans and fun conversation — and thought it would be the ideal opportunity for my daughter to join me in the meeting. The students surely wouldn’t mind, and it would give her a chance to see a bit of what her mother actually did.

When I arrived, I was horrified to discover that I somehow had gotten the details all wrong. This was not a blue-jean-clad audience of students but a business-suit-attired assembly of 200 Silicon Valley senior executives. A sea of tables was set with crisp linens and formal place settings. And, to make it even worse, a camera crew was in place, ready to record my speech for use in Stanford’s Video Series. Yikes! And here I was with a three-year-old and no sitter.

My heart beating wildly, I showed my daughter where she would be seated at the head table during the breakfast and, with a steely, this-is-an-imperative tone, told her she was to sit in her seat throughout my speech — no noise, no interruptions, under any circumstance. As an afterthought, I also showed her where the restrooms were and told her that the only thing she could do, if necessary, was leave the table quietly for that purpose.

I probably gave the most adrenaline-packed speech of my life that day. Throughout the seemingly endless 45 minutes, I watched my daughter out of the corner of my eye. At one point she did slip away from the table but returned a few minutes later and sat quietly.

As it became more clear that nothing disastrous was occurring, my confidence soared. I was filled with excitement and pride that my daughter was seeing me at my best. Unlike parents who can point to the tangible results of their labor, I had never found a good way to explain what I did to my children. Now, she was seeing me in action — surrounded by a very receptive audience of senior executives, with cameras recording every word.

As I concluded the session, I could hardly wait to talk with her; I wanted to hear what she thought of this significant event. More than the positive feedback from any executive there, I was looking forward to her reaction.

“So what did you think?”

My daughter’s eyes glistened with excitement. “Mom,” she whispered in a delighted, conspiratorial tone, “. . . you’re never going to believe the bathrooms in this place!”

I’ve chuckled at the lesson she taught me many times over the years. Whenever I’ve been tempted to feel overly important, I remind myself that I am always subject to being upstaged by the bathrooms in this place.

What business lessons have your children taught you?

See the original post here, by Tammy Erickson @ Harvard Business Publishing

What is shared leadership?
Shared leadership involves maximizing all of the human resources in an organization by empowering individuals and giving them an opportunity to take leadership positions in their areas of expertise. With more complex markets increasing the demands on leadership, the job in many cases is simply too large for one individual.

Sharing leadership isn’t easy, but it’s definitely possible, and in many cases, highly successful. For instance, at a company that creates user interfaces for web design, the role of CEO was too extensive for one leader. As a result, it was split into two positions with equal status and complementary skills sets and responsibilities. After splitting the role of CEO, the leaders built on the new team, hiring experts to head up research and development, architecture and design, and sales. Using the shared leadership model gave these leaders the opportunity to focus on the areas in which they are most talented, to hire team leaders, and thus develop a successful, well-rounded and somewhat “flattened” company versus a more hierarchically structured company. For this organization, flattening has also meant that power, authority, and decision-making are more widely and deeply dispersed, both laterally and vertically, giving each individual an opportunity to show his or her prowess in certain areas of the company. It has meant deferring to others when they have more expertise. This is not always the easiest thing for leaders to do.

Here are some suggestions for sharing leadership and maximizing talent.

• Give power away to the most qualified individuals to strengthen their capabilities.
• Define the limits of decision-making power.
• Cultivate a climate in which people feel free to take initiative on assignments.
• Give qualified people discretion and autonomy over their tasks and resources and encourage them to use these tools.
• Don’t second guess the decisions of those you have empowered to do so.
• Consider yourself a resource rather than the manager.
• Set appropriate follow-up meetings to review progress and take corrective action if necessary.

If you do delegate more to people who are closer to the customer and allow them to take on challenging responsibilities, you will find that you have more time. You will spend less time directing their projects and you may even develop a sense of accomplishment from the achievements of your people rather than from your own direct efforts. Even better, your employees may feel they are more like partners and become more engaged ultimately paving the road for greater success for the organization, the team, and themselves.

See original here, by Marshall Goldsmith @ Harvard Business Publishing