I would love your feedback on these three covers.  Will you please tell me which of the three you love, which you love the least, and WHY?  Thank you!

Idea A: Lightbulb Head

Idea B: Triangle Head

Idea C: Elephant on Tightrope

Please leave a comment of email me (Jason@JibberJobber.com) what you think. Again, I’d love to know your favorite, least favorite, and WHY.

Yes, money does make the world go ‘round.  We all need money.  It is difficult to live with little or no money.  But I suggest that choosing a career solely on the basis of the money you can make is not a good idea.

John D. Rockefeller, once the richest man in the USA, said, “If your only goal is to become rich, you’ll never achieve it.”

This is great common sense career success advice.  Your goals in life should be more than just making money.  Your goals should spring from your purpose in life, your passion.  This isn’t to say that you should choose a career in which you can make little or no money.  Choose your life’s work based on what you love to do, and you’ll find a way to make money.  The old saying, “Do what you love, and the money will follow,” is true.

Michelle Schubnel is a coach to coaches.  She runs a program called Coach and Grow R.I.C.H.  Her R.I.C.H. acronym applies here:

R = Rewarded
I = Inspired
C = Confident
H = Happy

I think this is a great way to think about making money and being useful in this world.  You are rich when you are: rewarded for your contributions; inspired by what you do; confident as a professional; and happy with the way you spend your time.  Let’s talk about each of these.

Rewarded – We all deserve to be appropriately compensated for the work we do and the value we bring to others.  This means that you shouldn’t feel bad about making money, only that making money shouldn’t be your sole goal in life.  Some might say that the current financial crisis is the result of some people who valued making money at the expense of others.  Do your job, get good at it and the money will follow.

Inspired – You can find inspiration in the work you do every day.  If you’re a realtor like my niece, Morgan, you can be inspired when you help a person or a couple find the home of their dreams.  If you’re a pharmaceutical sales rep, you can be inspired by the fact that you’re helping doctors understand how the medicines your company makes can save lives.  My dad was a steel worker for 37 years.  He found inspiration in the buildings and bridges he helped build.  I find inspiration every time someone leaves a comment on this blog or tells me that one of my tweets made a difference in their life.

Confident – Doing something you love, doing it well and being useful in this world will build your confidence.  Your confidence grows as your skill level grows and you begin to make bigger contributions at work and in the world.  A world of confident people would be a wonderful place to live.  Confident people see the world from a win-win perspective.

Happy – When are you happiest?  I’m willing to bet it’s when you accomplish something – or help someone else accomplish something – not when you get your pay check.  When you do something you love everyday you can’t help but be happy.  I am happiest when I finish a book.  Writing a book takes a lot of time and effort.  And, I’m a perfectionist.  I want to make sure my books are the best I can make them, so I put in a lot of time and effort making sure they’re just right.  And, you know what?  I’m really happy when I first hold a copy of one of my books in my hand.  At that moment, I know the work was worth it.  I’m happy when I help others succeed too.  I love the moments when I can see the light go on in one of my career success coach client’s eyes.  I love it when I help other people get it.

I saw a young woman wearing a T shirt the other day that made a profound point.  On the front it said, “Wealth is not the opposite of poverty.”  On the back it said, “Enough is the opposite of poverty.”  This message goes to the heart of the message in Tweet 8.  Successful people know what “enough” is for them and their family.  They are happy with enough.  They pursue a life and career that fulfills them.  They know that being rich is more than having a lot of money.

If you read this blog with any regularity, you know that my mom passed away a little over a year ago.  She was one for schmaltzy cards.  I’m not.  But several years ago, she sent me a card on my birthday.  I cut out the message and taped it to my printer.  I look at it several times a day…

“That man is a success who is happy with himself and gives happiness to others; who makes the world a better place simply by being a part of it.”

My mother believed this about me.  I do my best to live up to it every day.

The common sense career success coach point here is simple.  Successful people see money as the byproduct of their work – not as their sole reason for working.  They follow the advice in Tweet 8 in Success Tweets.  “Don’t focus just on making money.  If you do, you’ll be asking too little of yourself.  Focus on how you can be useful in this world.”  Successful people know that being rich doesn’t mean you have tons and tons of money.  They know that being rich means that you are: Rewarded for your contributions; Inspired by what you do; Confident in your skills, and Happy with the way you spend your days.

You can get her free audio and ebook here (scroll down to the bottom).  Oh wait, there is a signup form there.  She said if you don’t want to be on her list, you can download the goodies from this hidden page.  THANK YOU Margaret!  (everyone, send Margaret a thank you, and refer her stuff to project managers!)

I liked what I heard from Margaret because:

• Some people are out of work because they need to work on their soft skills, 
• Some people haven’t “needed” to but they have time to work on them now,
• Some people are having zero success in their job search because of their soft skills.

From her products page you can see she lives in the business world, helping people communicate better.  She has a soft spot for professionals in transition.

Check it out!

A new study [PDF] suggests that managers can boost team performance by offering “prosocial” bonuses. The study’s authors say that teams do better when individuals get bonus compensation which they are then instructed to spend on another team member or a charitable group.

The Harvard Business School working paper was released this month and written by Lalin Anik, Duke University; Lara B. Aknin, University of British Columbia; Michael I. Norton, Harvard Business School; Elizabeth W. Dunn, University of British Columbia; and Jordi Quoidbach, University of Liège. The researchers were looking for ways around common problems caused by traditional bonuses, which have been shown to be ineffective in increasing morale and productivity.

According to Anik et al, prosocial bonuses, or bonuses that are spent on other people, may be the answer. Teams that employed prosocial bonuses reported higher productivity and more satisfied employees than those that only used traditional bonuses. They write, “These results suggest that a minor adjustment to employee bonuses – shifting the focus from the self to others – can produce measurable benefits for employees and organizations.”

Apparently, the sense that they are doing good can motivate people to work better together – here’s how.

Bonus Methods

Bonuses have long been used to reward individuals and teams for outsized behavior – and they are effective – up to a point. But they present challenges as well. Anik and her colleagues write, for example, that “individual incentives – such as large bonuses – are often surprisingly ineffective in increasing employee morale and productivity.”

Individual incentives can cause team mates to compete against one another, rather than working together for the good of the group. “Rewarding individual employees can produce negative outcomes by eroding workplace cohesion, as employees become reluctant to share information with others even at the expense of reduced output,” the researchers explain.

Team-based bonus schemes can also backfire, causing the sense that the poorest performers are freeloaders. Top performers may become de-motivated if they feel their team will miss out on a bonus because of less successful colleagues. The researchers write, “Thus while team-based bonuses have the potential to improve relationships between co-workers, they can also lead to ‘antisocial’ behaviors – and decreased employee outcomes.”

Anik and her colleagues decided to investigate whether a team’s dynamic could be improved by changing what bonuses look like. They write:

“We examine whether randomly assigning employees to engage in prosocial behavior – via prosocial bonuses – can have a causal impact on employee well-being, job satisfaction, and job performance. In both field studies, some employees and teammates are given non-contingent ‘prosocial bonuses’ – money that they receive as a windfall that they are encouraged to spend in a prosocial manner.”

The team performed two experiments. In the first, employees at an Australian bank received bonus money to spend at a charity of their choice. In the second experiment, employees on pharmaceutical sales teams and members of sports teams were given bonus money to spend on a colleague. In both studies, prosocial bonuses produced stronger results than the traditional bonuses.

For example, in the second experiment the sales team showed a “large and significant” increase in performance after the implementation of the prosocial bonus scheme. There was no increase for teams that simply received personal bonuses. Similarly, at the Australian bank, employee happiness and job satisfaction increased significantly for individuals who received a $100 AUS voucher for charity, whereas there was no change for those who received a $50 AUS voucher or no voucher. Anik and her colleagues write:

“Across the studies, we show that prosocial bonuses can benefit both individuals and teams, on both psychological and ‘bottom line’ indicators, in both the short and long-term. Unlike some research suggesting a weak link between factors that improve job satisfaction and those that improve job performance our results suggest that prosocial bonuses have a meaningful impact on both metrics.”

The study suggests that by “shifting the focus from the self to others,” managers can better leverage the motivating benefits of bonuses, while avoiding the competitive nature of traditional bonuses that can demotivate team members. They do caution, however, that prosocial bonuses should not take the place of traditional bonuses overnight. “In particular, it seems likely that prosocial bonuses could backfire if they were introduced by companies as a replacement for more standard bonuses.”

Finally, they add, prosocial bonuses can help bridge the growing struggle between work and life that is exacerbated as people spend more and more time in the office. “We suggest that rather than force
employees to make a losing tradeoff between social life and work life, employers can focus instead on using prosocial bonuses to create a more altruistic, satisfying, and productive workplace.”

The research indicates that by introducing elements of altruism, connection, and choice into the compensation structure, managers may be able to get more from their employees. What do you think? How would your team respond to a prosocial bonus structure?

I was meeting with a friend the other day and he mentioned these three simple words. He had heard these from an admiral while he was serving the US Navy. I thought about these three words for a while and can see why the US Navy and the admiral use them to set priorities.

Priorities are there for a reason.

If all three aren’t in balance you have a problem. However, if the ship is not taken care of first there will be no shipmates or self. Of course, self-preservation has it’s place too. Yet, self-preservation takes a back seat to the duty and honor of supporting your shipmates and the ship itself.

Applying these three words to your daily life

When interviewing or thinking about extending your career these three words can help define and describe what you should be thinking about as you seek to build your career, the careers of your colleagues and that of your business. Where self, shipmates and ship can be used in reverse order to set priorities. This is true in entrepreneurial environments and large companies.

Reality Check: The US Navy is a huge organization with thousands of men and women serving all over the world and supporting hundreds of ships…and these three words seem to work quite well for them.

The next time you are planning and thinking about what you should be doing next take a few minutes to think about these three words. Think about how you can make sure all is right with the ship first. Then make sure all is right with your shipmates. Then think about your self.

Seek to find a balance across all three. Make sure you have your priorities right so that all three can succeed.

Author:

Jeff  is a veteran in the Enterprise Content Management industry. Over the past 20 years he has worked with customers and partners to design, develop and deploy solutions around the world. Jeff is currently the Director of Strategic Alliances at Winshuttle. He has worked for Microsoft, FileNet (IBM), K2, Captaris, Open Text, Kofax and Kodak. He speaks and blogs about ECM and the Intersection between Social, Mobile and Cloud Computing.

UCLA professor allows students to cheat on game theory exam via KCRW blogs

A week before the test, I told my class that the Game Theory exam would be insanely hard—far harder than any that had established my rep as a hard prof. But as recompense, for this one time only, students could cheat. They could bring and use anything or anyone they liked, including animal behavior experts. (Richard Dawkins in town? Bring him!) They could surf the Web. They could talk to each other or call friends who’d taken the course before. They could offer me bribes. (I wouldn’t take them, but neither would I report it to the Dean.) Only violations of state or federal criminal law such as kidnapping my dog, blackmail, or threats of violence were out of bounds.

At the risk of sounding arrogant, the students missed the chance to ask me for help. Their loss

Why is Harry Reid always voting against his own plans? via Washington Post

My friend pointed out the craziness of our voting rules lead to strategic voting against your own plans!

… the short explanation we give is that Reid voted no “for procedural reasons” or because a no vote “allows him to bring another cloture vote in the future.”

…the rules provide for senators whose opinion has changed to motion for another vote, whereas those whose opinion stays the same don’t get to keep filing to reconsider.

Reid, and other majority leaders before him, have developed a clever workaround: Just change your vote at the last minute if it looks as though you’re going to lose, then move to reconsider.

Why It’s Smart to Be Reckless on Wall Street via Scientific American Blogs

In 2000 a young PhD in mathematics approached me about a job before eventually landing at a European bank in research. In 2004 he started proprietary trading, where traders bet with the bank’s money. Pay was 15% of the profits. In 2005 he bought obscure and high-yielding corporate bonds, which generated profits of $40 million. He took home $6 million. In 2006 he made $80 million and took home $12 million. In 2007 the world turned and the group was disbanded as losses mounted. He was dismissed, and his trades eventually lost the firm close to $300 million.

What was his PhD thesis about? Game theory, or using math to find the optimal solution to complex systems.

Coalitional Games for Real via Theory of the Leisure Class

This is bit more technical but a fine example of using game theory to analyze voting coalitions.

Israel is a parliamentray democracy; our president has but ceremonial role, and the prime minister (and his government) is the one who actually makes all important decisions. After elections, each party recommends to the president a candidate for prime minister, and the person who got most recommendations is asked to form a government. To this end, he/she should form a coalition with at least 61 parliament members out of the total of 120.

Game Theory and the Treatment of Cancer via MIT Technology Review

Specialists have long known that invading viruses and bacteria can change the balance in healthy tissue causing it to become cancerous. Other changes, such as the formation of mutant cells, can do the same. The new thinking is that in these scenarios the environment is a crucial factor in the development of cancer.

Ecologists have a powerful mathematical approach called evolutionary game theory for studying these delicate balances. This shows how certain combinations of creatures, a small number of predators among a large number of prey for example, settle down into evolutionary stable strategies but also how others form systems that are highly unstable.

How to Manage Motorway Tolls Through the Game Theory via ScienceDaily

The team led by Jose Manuel Zarzuelo, Professor of Applied Economics, has applied the co-operative Game Theory to calculating motorway toll charges. The results of the study have been published in the specialised journal European Journal of Operational Research. In this study, the authors propose that sophisticated mathematical methods could be used in traffic management.

(More on traffic and game theory: Essays on Operations Research Games and Cautious Behavior, see Chapter 2, “Sharing costs in highways.”)

Are We in Danger of a Beer Monopoly? via NY Times. Hat Tip: Cheap Talk

For decades…Anheuser-Busch has been employing what game theorists call a “trigger strategy,” something like the beer equivalent of the Mutually Assured Destruction Doctrine. Anheuser-Busch signals to its competitors that if they lower their prices, it will start a vicious retail war. In 1988, Miller and Coors lowered prices on their flagship beers, which led Anheuser-Busch to slash the price of Bud and its other brands in key markets. At the time, August Busch III told Fortune, “We don’t want to start a blood bath, but whatever the competition wants to do, we’ll do.” Miller and Coors promptly abandoned their price cutting.

Recent ‘momentum’ influences choices of baby names, psychology professors find via PhysOrg. Special thanks to long-time reader Joe S. for pointing this out. You can also read the full paper online.

“Parents in the United States are increasingly sensitive to the change in frequency of a name in recent time, such that names that are gaining in popularity are seen as more desirable than those that have fallen in popularity in the recent past,” the authors noted. “This bias then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: names that are falling continue to fall while names on the rise reach new heights of popularity, in turn influencing a new generation of parents.”

Herb Vogel never earned more than $23,000 a year…

Today, more than 1,000 of the works they purchased are housed in the National Gallery, a collection a curator there calls “literally priceless.” J. Carter Brown, the museum’s former director, referred to the collection as “a work of art in itself.”…

Herb and Dorothy developed a methodical system for scouting, assessing, and purchasing art. When it came to mastering their hobby, the Vogels were self-trained professionals. This is how they did it.

This is a great read. What’s interesting is they didn’t try to predict based on the artist’s reputation. They instead considered factors like if they enjoyed the art, if they could afford it, and if it would fit into a cab or subway so they could bring it home!

Imagine if speculators today only bought what was affordable and practical…

Read the full text here: How a Working-Class Couple Amassed a Priceless Art Collection