Week 14: Rights in the Workplace

This weeks readings were extremely interesting, and I particularly enjoyed the guest lecture from Bruce Barry, author of Speechless: The Erosion of Free Expression in the American Workplace, and professor at the Owen Graduate School of Management at Vanderbilt University. Mr. Barry’s lecture corresponded very much with the readings (the two chapters from his book). The introduction of the book, “Speechless at Work in America”, discusses the erosion of freedom of speech in the workplace, and the book as well as his lecture outlined several extreme, yet real, situations of workers being “legally” stripped of their freedom of speech rights both in and outside of company lines. The first example pertained to a woman by the name of Lynne Gobbell her lost her job over a political bumper sticker she had on her car (which was parked in the company’s parking lot). To me, the case seemed relatively extreme, but was an excellent “jumping off point” for subsequent discussion of workplace speech rights. Barry, who is very concerned with the increasingly blurred lines between the home and the workplace (particularly in regards to freedom of speech), believes that thousands upon thousands of workers are subjected to “unfair” yet “legal” restrictions on their freedom of speech. I however, don’t believe the problem is as pressing as Mr. Barry makes it out to be. But, in his defense, I have not had much experience in the workplace outside of summer internships and on-campus jobs. This past summer I had the opportunity to work for a very employee-friendly company (a small firm) in which the overarching company culture was “employees are the company’s biggest asset”. That being said, there is no doubt in my mind that many hourly workers in large companies are often exploited to the harsh, and often unfair, restrictions of free speech in the workplace. Perhaps the most alarming example of the erosion of free speech in the workplace was Bruce Barry’s example of the stockbroker who was forced to resign from his job at the firm Paine Webber. Although I do not believe that the victim in this particular case was committing any violations of company policy, he was indirectly harming Paine Webber’s business in such a way that they were essentially losing business as a result of his political activism. Because there were political implications (the Mayor of the city was involved) and because the issue was such a hot topic (affirmative action) I believe there are many other factors that played a role in this particular case study which make it difficult to analyze for the purpose of this discussion, and for Mr. Barry’s overall argument. Furthermore, after hearing Mr. Barry’s lecture and after reading the two chapters from his book Speechless I immediately became aware of the implications my “outside the workplace” words and actions can have on my employment and my rights as an employee.

In sticking with the current topic and readings two very controversial events that relate directly to this discussion came to mind. The first event and question I had pertained to Larry Summers, the former President of Harvard University (and now Director of the White House’s National Economic Council for President Obama). For those not aware of this specific case, Mr. Summers made apparent sexist comments about women and their overall inability in the subject areas of math and science. My question is, should Mr. Summers have been “forced” to resign because of his speculative comments that women may statistically have lesser aptitude for work in the highest levels of math and science? This questions is a particularly tricky one, and I’m sure Mr. Barry would agree that, while “legal”, Mr. Summers speculative and discriminative comments were no doubt in poor taste (and false if I might argue). However, the question of whether he should have been forced to resign is still a topic of debate among scholars in the field, and I believe that although legal, the implications of his comments were so vast and so damaging that he should, rightly, have been forced to resign. What do you guys think?

The next question I had when reading these articles pertained to ideas presented in Chapter One of Bruce Barry’s book, “When Work and Speech Collide”. I recall sitting down with one of my dear friend’s father’s, Mr. Marc Richards, who is a partner at the bankruptcy firm in New York Blank Rome LLP. He told me that ex-President Bill Clinton came to speak to the firm in attempt to convince the lawyers to make political contributions to his wife’s campaign for Presidency last summer. After the speech (which he found to be very insightful –Bill is a very good speaker and he likes Bill) the firm asked the partners to each make a personal contribution to Hilary’s campaign. Mr. Richards, a staunch Republican and “hater” of Hilary Clinton, was more or less “forced” to write a check towards Ms. Clinton’s campaign –should he have been forced to do this? Obviously Bruce Barry would say no, but what are the firm-wide, personal, and political implications if Mr. Richards had refused to contribute to Hilary’s campaign? Clearly, Mr. Richards’ free speech rights were in a sense neglected as he felt that he must, in accordance with his firm, provide a political contribution to a politician he felt was not aligned with his views. I, and Mr. Barry too probably, have a serious problem with this.

Finally, moving on to the final reading of the week titled, “Law Down the Law: Know Your Work Rights” from Joe Robinson’s book Work to Live. In this reading the author discusses various abuses of employees by employers –clear violations of workplace rights. He then moves on to outlining the various laws that govern workplace rights, namely the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which was passed in 1938. The FLSA established both the forty-hour week and the federal minimum wage (which has increased over the years). Basically, Robison’s main point was that so often many workers do not know their workplace rights, which can either cause them to breach them without knowing, or more importantly, the misperception and misinterpretation of these laws that so many employees in America have causing them to be exploited by their employers. Thus, according to the author, the best way to take advantage of your rights in the workplace is to know them and to be familiar with them. Thus, Mr. Robinson encourages employees (and I would have to agree) to familiarize themselves with the laws and policies that govern salary versus hourly compensation, severance pay, vacation time and benefits, harassment, and other very pertinent laws, ramifications, and recourses employees must live by. Furthermore, I believe that both Mr. Robinson and Bruce Barry have a very firm understanding of the law in regards to the workplace and freedom of speech, but both authors/educators (mind you they are not attorneys), in my opinion, oversimplify the legal issues and implications in dealing with rights in the workplace.

HW April 1

After having started on the 300 words for the readings alone, it got closer to 600 words. So I conveniently combined the reflection on the reading and the reflection on the class discussion, being sure to include grading standards... 

The readings and class discussion for this week call to attention three integral points for discussion: the change in identity that many blacks feel is necessary in the workplace, building social connections as a woman in the workplace, and the perception of blacks in the workplace as not being ones worthy of authority positions due to a general closed-mindedness and subsequent involuntary racism.

 As a black person, the rush hour transition to and from one’s home self to one that is perhaps more accepted in the workplace is a ritual that is common among many black white-collar workers.  To dispute the need for such transformation, one could argue that a person should be accepted for whom he or she really is, and the person shouldn’t need this mask.  This is simply not the case, as many “black” nuances are seen as too urban.  Or casual. Or simply “black.” And unfortunately, it’s too easy to derive a negative perception of the person based on these traits.  It’s already too hard for many others to view each black person in (and outside) the workplace as individuals, not able to be fully defined by a couple of prevalent traits seen in other blacks.  So as the Harris article points out, it’s just easier for blacks to deal with the pressure of having to measure each individual word and gesture that they deliver.  It’s a tough situation that theoretically shouldn’t exist but actually does- I know from experience.  Although I’m fairly even across the board, I (and pretty much ALL of my black friends) understand that one just can’t interact the same way at work as you do at home, given your personality.  The first connection between one’s home self and one’s professional self seems to be something quite common amongst people in general: one’s first name.  So, as discussed in class, many qualifying, deserving candidates for a job don’t even get considered based on the “blackness” of his or her name.  Frankly, some names just don’t seem quite professional enough (sorry La’Quandria).

The pressure of repeatedly making a ‘first’ impression, even for those coworkers with whom a black worker has already had much contact, could stem not necessarily from the sheer inappropriateness of the comfortable at-home vernacular and tendencies of black individual, but from the closed-mindedness of the individuals trying to conveniently encapsulate the black worker. This can be viewed as involuntary racism, and can be seen, as the Dawson reading shows, through the incapacity for some blacks to rise to the ranks of authority after having paid his or her dues and exceptionally excelled in their duties over a period of time.  As shown by the University of Chicago psychological test detailed in the article discussed in class, we are all at least slightly racist, whether by virtue of a flawed mentality or by victim of a longstanding flawed societal perception.  How does this apply to me?  I’m the only one that’s definitely not a racist. 

The same plight is faced with many women in corporate America, as it’s still hard to infiltrate the social ranks in the same capacity as their male counterparts.  It’s a double edged sword, too; many other women (due to the undeniable competitive nature of women towards other unfamiliar or new women, as pointed out in the Seligson article) aren’t necessarily quickly accepting of a new, unfamiliar female face- they probably feel that they themselves have paid their dues in becoming accepted as a competent asset instead of just a girl worker.  With that said, I still tend to disagree with Seligson’s notion; I am not sure what kind of misogynist workplace she unfortunately landed in at the time, but this is not necessarily the case these days as everybody tiptoes around the office trying to avoid lawsuits and such, as pointed out by a fellow classmate Monday.  The same goes for the black-worker issue.  I’m sure every other worker is too busy and nervous trying not to say or do or even imply the wrong thing that might come off as offensive towards women and blacks.  I know I am.  It’s the same reason there is always limited participation from the majority whenever the issue of race surfaces (as seen in class Monday).  Overall, it will take continuous marginal steps over a long period of time to eradicate these mentalities that are product of early societal flaws.  There is no quick, easy solution.

HW for 4/8

One of the important points from this week's reading is the issue of freedom of speech or expression. As American's we are all entitled to our right of freedom of speech, yet when we work for certain companies, that expression is not technically free anymore. Barry explains that employers have an abundant power for controlling the expressive activities of their employees. If silencing an employee's concerns will advance the company's economic interests, it is without a doubt that employer's will get rid of the employee over sacrificing a business deal. As the article shows the ridiculousness of people getting fired from their jobs based on freedom of speech via a bumper sticker, it points to the larger issue of just how free are we? If we cannot even have stickers that represent our thoughts, how can we feel comfortable voicing our opinion to a person of authority? This issue is important because it shows us that when we agree to work for certain companies, arguably not all, that we are sacrificing our freedom of speech in that we cannot outwardly speak up to our employers. They have the ability to release us from our position if we do not agree to a type of 'employee' speech. This atmosphere makes it so 'free speech' on and off the job are completely different things. In understanding this, people should better research the companies they are considering working for with the hopes that they will not find themselves in one that highly constricts their freedom of expression. As I see myself as a very outspoken and opinionated person, I am pretty sure that I would fail in a workplace that puts consequences on their employee's for certain uses of speech. With employer's having the ability to fire workers for nearly any reason, the workplace becomes an inhospitable environment. However, there are many places that free speech is valued and encouraged- companies that place creativity on a high level. As I know this, I will probably look to work in either the public relations or event planning fields where I can maximize my thoughts and communication skills that I have retained through college.

A second big point from the readings comes from the Robinson article about the inhumane treatment of workers. "Working hard goes with the territory, but you don't have to be a whipping post". Workers take unlawful treatment from their employers for the sake of saving the job, however also because they are unaware of what is stipulated in 'workplace' law to being with. You are not just salaried because you are paid by the month, rather you must meet a certain income standard. Working overtime requires being paid for overtime hours- it is not your duty as a worker to give those 'free' hours. People take abuse for the hopes of a promotion, yet at some point (as described in the article), they begin to fight back and stand up for themselves. In realizing the intense pressure that can be placed on us by our employer's, we must be able to protect ourselves and our human rights so that we are not taken advantage of. If people come together and realize that these employer violations are occurring everywhere, they will not only be able to help themselves, but also make a difference in people's lives so that workers can essentially 'have a life'. Going back to articles we have read in the beginning of the semester, I remember commenting on one about employee treatment and how that is one of the key things when choosing a company to work for. This article capitalizes on this issue as well as showing all of the frightening things that can go wrong when working for a company that does not value the personal lives of their employees.  As what is described here is a general problem, it does enough to make me aware of the problem that can ensue in certain companies. Knowing this, it is even more crucial to survey employee benefits as well as insurance and bonus packages that come along with your jobs. I considered applying for a job, however rescinded my application when it stipulated there would only be 5 'off' days the entire year. To some, that might be a big deal, however to me it was a huge sign that I could not work for a company as strict as that one and I would probably be working under a very strict management team.

The lecture from Bruce Barry was very interesting and brought up a lot of important points about free speech in the workplace. As he elaborated on what our assigned reading was, he brought up 4 questions that are relevant to asking yourself when you are an employee: Public or Private, What kind of speech, Who do you work for and where do you work? In answering these questions as an employee, you will better understand what rights you do and do not have in the American workplace. Essentially, it comes down to the reality that we are guaranteed very few rights in the workplace and even fewer when we work for a private company. Understanding constitutional law in combination with employment law encompasses the reasons of why employers are allowed to 'fire us'. Despite it being morally wrong in some circumstances, the 'employment-at-will' principle allows employers to discharge employees for virtually any reason- reasons separate from race and religion that is. However, if we work in certain states such as California and New York, we are granted more rights as employees because those individual states have made laws regarding that. Also, if working for the government, hence a public entity, our first amendment right is completely protected and our speech will not be constrained. The discussion made me think a lot about the difference between legal issues and moral issues and what I would do if I found myself in one of the situations explained. As an employer, would I fire someone because of a bumper sticker? No. If I had factual proof that an employee was engaging in out of work behavior that was harming my business? Yes. In thinking about the difference of morality and legality, I also think it depends a a significant amount on what you believe in as an individual. If I was laid back type of person in general and did not care about my employees' out of work habits- then I would turn a blind eye to their behavior. Yet, if I were a meticulously strict boss and became so involved in the lives of my employees', than I would probably be angered by some of their behaviors and would exercise my employment-at-will right far too often.

A second important point from class came from the 2nd group presentation. Synergy is an important concept as when you work together in groups, you produce better results than if you worked alone. Synergistic communication can be very helpful in classrooms and business- people work together and come up with better ideas than their initial individual ones. Understanding the importance of synergy allows people to be better at comprising and understanding the other people in their group. Also, it is easy to bring about negative synergy so it is especially important to put in a lot of effort to getting to know the people you are working with so you produce positive ideas together. Productive group work also discourages people from always believing that they alone are always right and fighting for their own ideas vs. the synergistic efforts of the group. Through past internship experiences and being included in on company meetings, I have better understood the power of synergistic work. One of my internships rarely had company meetings and the boss made all of the decisions instead of consulting with the thoughts of the employees. As an intern, it was even apparent that some of their downfalls resulted from lack of communication within the group (company). A summer later, I worked with a clothing company where they had inter-group events all of the time for feedback and ideas- public relations would talk to sales, design to marketing etc. A combination of all of those different creative minds made for a better outcome and hence for money for the company. People who didn't work in specific departments were actually really able to help them out as they had a fresher outlook/newer perspective.

HW for 4/1

One of the main points from this week's readings was African Americans and the workforce. As Dawson notes, African Americans had many problems entering the workforce as they felt several constraints were upon them that limited their ability to perform their jobs. Along the same lines, African Americans felt that they did not receive equitable treatment to their white counterparts. It is important to understand that African Americans were simply just expected to blend into the corporate world and with such expectations came a lot of issues. People treated them inferiorly and overall there was a universal lack of advancement of African Americans in most organizations. Through negative emotions and a negative environment, many of them developed feelings of isolation and lonliness. One example of a way to deal with this is the idea of 'passing' from Harrison's article. He describes his grandmother who excelled in the workforce because others recognized her as white based on her features and she never revealed her true identity. She would sit at work and hear thousands of racist slurs, yet pretend to be unaffected. She did so with the understanding that the status of being white was a much more valuable asset in the corporate world. These articles together reflect the important issue of the difficulties faced by African Americans entering the workforce and it is crucial to understand that although things are not currently like that, it took a long time to get to the point we are at right now. In relating this point to my life, I have thought about a great number of my dad's partners or friends that are CEO's and are African American. Some are venture capitalists, some heads of banks, and others who manage divisions within my dad's company of MileOne. The reality is that over the past 25 years, they have had to work much harder than their white counterparts to get to these positions, however as they have excelled they have paved the way for other African Americans in such positions with positive mentors guiding the way for them.

A second important point comes from the Seligson article explaining how girls succeed in school, but how that all changes once they enter the workroom. It is not safe to assume that the knowledge and skills learned in the classroom will just translate effectively into the working world. This girl's story relays that it is not just college students in general having problems, but more so women. Female colleagues would undermine the new female worker and men in the company refused to take women seriously. Knowing the possibilities of this, it is important for women to first find out the odds stacked up against them before taking a job. Also, girls need to learn to build a new arsenal of skills as living in a world of equality in college may have forced them to neglect developing a set of real world skills. Girls need to develop thick skins and feel comfortable within themselves, whether it is through promoting their assets or learning to negotiate. As this article is pretty recent, it is definitely applicable to me as I am trying to enter the workforce. The advice given here is helpful as Seligson explains that perfection is not the pathway to success as well as the feminine trait of 'sensitivity' is not valuable. In trying to assimilate to the working world, I should heed this advice and understand that the knowledge and skill set that I learned in college is applicable but it is NOT all I need to get me through that first job. I should learn to create a professional network of people and feel comfortable with myself as well as unintimidated by male co-workers.

An important point from class was the issue of time management. Time management is crucial to how we organize our daily lives and it is important to understand the things that matter the most versus the things that matter the least. A lot of people's failures compared with other's successes come from the inability to effectively make use of your time. The time management matrix explained in group 3's presentation places urgent/not urgent and important/not important on the two axis. Issues such as crises, pressing problems, and projects with deadlines would be classified as urgent and important. These are the type of things we want to deal with first and put ahead of things like pleasure activities as well as busy work. It is important to be able to classify issues and activities as important, urgent, or both so people understand what they should tend to first. Inability to manage your projects and commitments carefully could cause you to oversee a deadline, miss a flight, or forget to help out a friend in need. As a college student, I am definitely guilty of bad time management. A lot of times, I find myself purposely wasting time on busy work or other activities in order to avoid doing the things that really matter or that I do not want to do- ie- study for a test the next day. My inability to focus effectively on certain tasks has definitely cost me certain grades in classes throughout my undergraduate career. As grades in college are a relatively minor thing to sacrifice in life compared to failed marriages or failed careers, however they have showed me that if I do not stay on top of my time management skills, I may oversee many more important things in life. As I am aware that I have the ability to sometimes get my priorities mixed up, I should learn to create lists for each day or for each week to list things that need to get done in order of their importance as to avoid problems in the future.

A second important point was to think 'win/win' which means understanding the difference between succeeding as an individual and succeeding interdependently. It is difficult for people to cooperate when you have ultimately set them up to compete with each other. Businesses succeed when the whole company experiences a gain (public) versus an individual making money (private). This principle is important because society is innately geared with people having the understanding that someone has to win and someone else has to lose - someone's success is someone else's failure. The reality is that it does not have to be like that and if you work interdependently in social and work settings, you will be able to achieve that 'win/win' scenario. If people understand this important concept, they will be likely to work to avoid approaching situations in a competitive manner in that they will not feed off of someone else's losses. Also, some people want to beat each other out so badly that they end up sacrificing themselves for the sake of making the other person lose- meaning they both lose as the desire to make the other lose has blind sided you in the situation. Throughout my past athletic pursuits, I have always been taught that there is no 'I' in team. It is not about you beating out a specific opponent, but more so as your team working together to achieve that success. Athletics are difficult as there is always a 'win/lose' mentality as one team is always going to outshine another. Aside from athletics, I have learned that in friendships and relationships, it is always important to work together so you are both happy. It never works out when one person's judgment and feelings are superseding another's- a balance of both people's wants have always worked better for me in maintaining personal relationships rather than trying to control the situation and impose my wants so far as to make another person 'lose'.

Week 11 Post

*Note: Due to personal reasons I was not able to attend class on 3/16. Therefore, in this assignment I was not able to relate the topics to class discussion. However, I made an attempt based on class notes I received from my peers.
BEGIN POST...
The first reading in which I will discuss is a chapter from Stephen Covey’s The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. In this chapter Stephen Covey outlines (through his many years of research) the difference and pros and cons of character ethics and personality ethics. For Covey, both of these categories of ethics are really secondary for the sake of his discussion, and he emphasizes what he calls “the power of a paradigm”. Although I found Covey’s example of the several pictures of a woman (of varying degrees of age) somewhat confusing and unrelated, his subsequent discussion of the importance of paradigms and paradigms shift was rather intriguing. According to Covey, a paradigm represents the internalization of correct principles upon which enduring happiness and success are based. While this definition may be somewhat confusing, Covey hashes out his argument quite well, and really makes a case as to the importance of paradigms in our own lives. For me, the best way to understand paradigms is in terms of a “map” of one’s life –they are the source of our combined attitudes and behaviors that direct where one is going in any aspect (or all aspects) of life. Covey then moves on to explain what he calls the “paradigm shift”, and in order for this to happen we must be fully aware of the extent to which we have been influenced by our own life experiences. Thus, the more we can take responsibility for [those paradigms], examine them and understand them, the more successful we can be.

A second aspect of the Covey reading in which I would like to elaborate on has to do with the idea of perception. According to Covey, we see the world not as it is, but as we as humans are, or, as we are “conditioned” to see it. Covey talks a great deal about conditioning and how many aspects of how we perceive things are very much influenced by our innate nature to be conditioned. One quote in which I found to be greatly noteworthy was, “Where we stand depends on where we sit”. This quote really resonated with me and caused me to think about my life and how I perceive the world around me. Basically, and I agree with Covey, as clearheaded people (which most Vanderbilt students certainly are) we all see things differently, and what we think, say, and write in some way or another describe ourselves, our perceptions, and our own paradigms. This is particularly important when we collaborate with others because as clearly or objectively as we may think we see or understand things, we must realize that others can and (and do often) see those very same things differently. Furthermore, if we come to better understand how others perceive things (i.e. others’ own personal paradigms) we can then more effectively communicate and synergize with them –be it personally, academically, or professionally.

The next reading I wish to discuss comes from Peter Drucker’s The Essential Drucker –the chapter titled “The Second Half of Your Life”. In this reader Drucker discusses what to do with the second half of one’s life –life after the age in which most knowledge workers reach the peak of their business career. According to Drucker, there are three possible paths or directions that a professional may take during the “second half” of their life. These “answers” as he calls it, are: start a second (different career), develop a parallel career, or be come a “social entrepreneur”. I found this particular chapter of Drucker’s text particularly intriguing because I see many parallels to my own family members’ and personal friends’ careers. For example, Drucker discusses how many middle-aged executives who become bored or no longer feel challenged with their career embark on a whole new, and completely different profession. My mother for example quit her job as a banker for ten years when she was raising her children (myself and my two siblings) and then decided to start her own business two years ago when my brother was applying to college. My mother started a tutoring company in an effort to help kids reach their optimal score on their SAT and ACTs in order to gain admission in to college. Although she had no previous teaching experience, she spent almost a year learning the methods and techniques necessary to tutor high school students, and now runs a fairly profitable tutoring business. The next path or “answer” to a professional’s “mid-life professional crisis”, if you will, is to develop a parallel career. My father for example was the CFO of a multi-million dollar consumer goods company. Although is no longer with the company, he sits on several boards of similar companies and is also on the board of directors of DePaul University’s Business School in Chicago. My father, like Drucker and myself, is someone who continuously feels the need to be challenged, and by serving on these various boards he is able to fulfill this need. Finally, Drucker’s third answer is to be a “social entrepreneur”. These are people who have become very successful in their first profession, as businesspeople, love their work, but also no longer feel challenged (a recurring theme). These social entrepreneurs start or help to start another (often non-profit) business activity. An example of someone I know who has pursued this path is my sister’s fiancé, Matt, who founded the company complaints.com, a website in which users can post and research consumer complaints. Although he does not fit Drucker’s profile as a mid-forties professional (he is 34), he sold his business and has begun to start other website domains names and holds a significant stake in two peer-to-peer lending firms that are not-for-profit. Thus, I found Drucker’s discussion of the three possible choices for career paths for the “second half of life” to not only be very interesting, but also very true and relevant.

The last element of the reading I wish to discuss in my blog today also comes from Drucker’s text, and is his assertion that the one requirement for managing the second half of one’s life is to begin creating it long before one enters it. Although I found the topic of life after one’s career peak to be slightly irrelevant to my own personal experiences (I haven’t even begun my career), I wholeheartedly would agree that one must also look into the future and think ahead about his or her career. Although this is not always possible (certain events such as being laid off our out of our control), it is always advisable to prepare for what comes next. Again, although I cannot relate on a personal/professional level, in today’s economic climate there must be a vast number of professionals pondering their next career move. As Drucker reiterates, in a knowledge society everyone is expected to be a “success”, but in order to be successful I, like Drucker, believe it is absolutely imperative to always be looking to take that next step, to get the promotion, or to clock the extra hours at the office to ensure that you are making a difference within your organization (or school, or any arena for that matter). In sum, I found these particular Drucker readings to be very enlightening, even though they reference a point in my own life that is quite distance from where I currently stand.

Wk 11

Three important points from the reading include the ability to manage one’s self, the differentiation between personality and character ethics, and the composition of a habit, which is essential to both self-management and employing character ethics over simply potentially manipulative personality ones.  Managing one’s self, out of the scope of retirement, involves finding a compliment to one’s daily life in order to maintain a sense of relevance and belonging.  If the mind is that which drives the rest of the body, it is to be kept sharp so that the life of the individual may be as fulfilling as possible. This principle applies even before the second half of life, as Drucker quotes it. 

Another notable point, and perhaps the most essential, is the necessary differentiation between personality and character ethics.  Covey suggests that much of the popular readings in society over the past 50 years have been concerned with the conquering of solely personality ethics, which are but mere tactics for temporary personal gain instead of lasting tools.  The first 150 years of the last 200 were indeed concerned with the development of positive character traits, elements that are firm and opaque.  As Covey writes, it’s more so about the ability to change how we view things rather than that which we view, as he illustrates with the example of his wife and how they treated their son.  The ability to be introspective versus buying a quick fix is the key to fixing problems with ourselves and with others.   In relation to the first point, it is impossible to learn to manage one’s self relative to a world full of others without first acknowledging the proper character ethics. 

Finally, one cannot expect to build any kind of self-management strategy or even make a change to focus more on his or her character ethics without establishing a healthy habit for doing so.  According to Covey, a habit is the intersection of knowledge, skill, and desire to do something.  Building or rebuilding oneself is a long term process that will require a habit (and not a quick fix- again, a common theme amongst late popular readings) to ensure proper and adequate results. 

 

These points connect not only to the discussion from the week but also the studies we’ve been progressing through during the entire semester.  The point of differentiating between personality and character ethics brings to mind the Carnegie reading, which did indeed seem like was written by a college mascot more so than a seasoned psychologist.  As a reading that falls into the category of being published within the past 50 years that emphasizes getting around people for a sole purpose instead of getting around one’s self for the sake of one’s self. 

Also, these points are applicable to my own life because I sense a continual struggle to master each of the three.  I am constantly searching for the appropriate activity to balance out my future career and be more than prepared for the second half of my life when it arrives.  I hope to have no gaping rifts in any two phases so that the transition will be smooth and adaptable to whatever circumstances may be presented.  I’ve always believed that interaction with other people starts with my own self, so I actually did find it weird that there would be a whole book dedicated to what is essentially managing and often semi-manipulating other people.  Given that this is a quick fix, it’s easy to see why the book has sold well.   Finally, I try to accomplish anything relevant within myself by creating a habit, something that I can rely on as second nature and do without deliberate decisions.  I often struggle not with the knowledge or skill (as those are usually provided readily), but by the desire; perhaps I am not convince of the need to create the habit or shy away from the effort required.   

 

HW for 3/18

From the Drucker reading, it is established how important it is to manage the second part of one's life. When men or women reach between the ages of 45-48, they usually have hit a dead-end point in their job, meaning they are not really learning anything new and they have already put in a probable good 25 years. In order to avoid the boredom and depression that could result from having this mid-life crisis, Drucker explains that its very important to come up with a parallel career; find something to do at a non-profit organization or find some other type of work that you can learn to excel at. The key to managing this second part of your life is beginning to plan for it before you reach that point. The reality is that most people are just lazy and have the belief that organizations outlive workers which is undeniably true. Although, it is way too early to begin to plan for my potential second career when I have yet to even start my first, I can do things now that will enable me to have more options. As the reading says, knowledge workers have mobility- mobility in the sense that people who have had a broad education have the ability to more freely move across the job market. Manual labor workers do not have this same liberty. In knowing this, I am grateful that I have completed a successful undergraduate career and plan to continue that education to graduate school sometime in the near future. As I will then classify as a knowledge worker, I will have a lot more options open to me when I am 45+ years of age and my children are grown up. As I am engaged within my first career, I will know to always be thinking ahead of how to continually make myself happy down the road.

An important point from the Covey reading is distinguishing the difference between dependence, independence and interdependence. Dependent people look to others to validate their happiness and to make their decisions. Independent people can function completely on their own physically, mentally and emotionally as all of their drive comes from within and are unaffected by others feelings. Independence is a huge achievement in itself, however it is important to recognize the power of interdependence. Interdependence stresses the power of 'we' as in our combined efforts can make something happen. Interdependent people have matured more as they realize that although they are self-capable, the combined efforts of 2 people could produce a much better product than if were produced by one person alone. Independent people choose to become interdependent because they have that character type whereas a dependent person cannot just choose to combine efforts with someone else to force interdependence because they themselves cannot succeed on their own. The understanding of the maturing process between independence to interdependence allows people to realize their full potential in society. However, it is not just that anyone can be either of these things, rather only some people have the specific character and personality type. Before reading this, I never really understood the difference between independence and interdependence or saw interdependence as superior. I would consider myself an independent person as I am able to think for myself, complete tasks on my own and are usually relatively unaffected to external sources. Knowing that, it would be easy for me to become an interdependent person with a co-worker or future husband. Within the corporate world, interdependent people succeed over those who are independent as they are able to work together and use double the brain power. I think it would be easy for me to fall into being completely independent instead of utilizing my capability to be interdependent as I usually like to do things on my own. After reading this, I now know I am going to have to sacrifice my desire to be completely independent for a much more profitable and successful interdependent relationship.

In class, we discussed the difference between good advice and questionable advice and the importance in realizing the distinction. An example of universally good advice would be to ask questions to someone rather than talking at them whereas questionable advice would be to be totally selfless. Being totally selfless opens up too many doors for people to take advantage of you, but at the same time it allows you to be a lot more open than if you were so consumed with yourself. Advice is being thrown at us all the time through both our personal and academic lives and it is important to sort through that advice in order to decide what is important and applicable to us. In reference to Carnegie's book, we all pretty much agreed that it was all 'good advice' such as you should never criticize or condemn people. As I consider myself a pretty stubborn person, I know I only take advice from my parents and people I am really close to just because I want to be sure that advice is looking out for my best interest. Advice that I have carried throughout the years and consider useful is 'believe in yourself'. If you do not believe and have faith in yourself and your inherent capabilities, it will inevitably be very difficult for you to trust others and reach your fullest potential in life.

I thought the class activity of the Myers-Briggs test was very helpful and interesting. It is important for people to answer questions about themselves such as these every so often to understand what kind of person they are. We all know a lot about ourselves, but having concrete facts and descriptions of ourselves in front of us helps to narrow 'us' down and put things in perspective. The personality type exercise was important as it allowed us to discuss what characteristics we need or things we need to achieve success in our 'dream job' based on our type. The test showed whether you were more of a senser or feeler, an extrovert or introvert etc. I really enjoyed reading the different articles about my personality type and thought it was important to hear that about myself. I got the type of ESFP which kind of shocked me a little bit because I thought I had pretty good intuition but based on how I answered the questions, I have now learned something new about myself. Knowing  my type helps to let me know what jobs I would perform well at and others that I wouldn't as well as it allows me to set realistic goals for myself based on certain characteristics.

HW for 3/11

A main point from the Collins' reading was the importance of getting the right people 'on the bus' when taking a company from good to great. You should ask yourself who before you are asking what should we do? People need to know if they are able to handle what is being asked from them before they jump on board. As Collins says you need A players who will deliver A+ work. Having the right and best people for your company is important because it allows you to adapt to a changing world. Without the right people heading your projects, it does not matter what type of vision they have for the company because they were not right for the job to begin with. To find the right people for the job, it is important to engage them in debates and to ask them the right questions as that will allow you to gage their inherent capabilities. I can easily relate to this as I am looking for a job now-the whole point of the application and follow up interview process is based around a company's desire to get the right people for the job. If they took on the mentality 'we will take anyone and then teach them', they would drive the company into the ground. Based on my resume, a company would decide if I would possibly qualify for a position and then based on my interviewing and people skills, they could decide if I was the 'right' person. As all companies are striving to go from good to great, potential employees, such as myself, are striving to be those 'right' people.

An important point we can take from the Drucker reading is the importance of establishing the right financial focus for a growing new venture. The lack of an appropriate financial focus is the greatest threat to a new venture. This is important because growth in a new venture requires adding more financial services rather than taking them out, meaning profits should be one of the last focuses instead of the first as some entrepreneurs believe. Healthy new ventures require more and more financial feeding- more cash and more capital. It is important to know how to raise cash and to know how much cash a venture will need ahead of time because you do not want to find yourself in a crisis situation. In thinking about putting a new venture in the right market, not only do you need a good gage of cash flow but you also need the right management. Drucker goes on to talk about the management team and this can relate to the other reading this week as Collins' teaches on the necessity for the right people to run a company/venture. As important as the right financial focus is, the right people behind it and driving that financial focus is just as crucial. After all, a new venture will not just grow on its own, rather it needs the right people with the right focus as well to help guide it. The venture cannot sustain a large management team so the need for exactly the right people is especially crucial with a new and growing venture.

One of the important points from class this week was to be a friendly person and approach things in a friendly way. It is a lot easier to get things done when you do so in a friendly, rather than aggressive way. Having negative feelings towards others often makes achieving results you want much more difficult. When you relate to people positively and in a friendly manner, you are also more likely to be appreciated and respected. It is easy to look down upon people when they do not have positive attitudes and they are unpleasant to be around. Friendly behavior and mannerisms in society are important because it helps people reach their goals faster and in a more appropriate manner. It is common knowledge that being rude and having anger towards people really never advances you in life, never mind the fact that you become an unenjoyable person to be around. I have always been taught the importance of being friendly to everyone, to people whom you may even dislike. Personally, I would rather be friendly to people because it is easier to do than being rude as well as my belief that if I am friendly to them, they will return the favor. For me, going along with being friendly, is the importance of smiling. When you smile at people, it lets them know you are not only an approachable person, but a friendly person.

A second point from class was the importance of cooperation. Within society, we have a lot of examples of poor cooperation among business deals, meaning ones that lack consultation. There are also many examples of poor cooperation among groups of friends where one person is too pushy or one person is completely indifferent. It is important to cooperate and work together to come to decisions that reflect the good and benefit of the group. Without cooperative situations and the belief and understanding that cooperation is important within our world, people would be completely selfish, only live for themselves and we would be amongst utter chaos. Being a communications major here at Vanderbilt, one of the most important things I have learned about being an effective communicator, is being able to cooperate. For example, some of the classes I have taken here like Interpersonal Communication and Small Group Communication heavily focused on the aspect and importance of cooperation amongst peers and how effective cooperation leads to better business relationships. 

Wk 5

It seems the success of many leaders, despite the leadership style, is based on solely three qualities: self-awareness/humility, emotional intelligence, and the ability to sell a bold vision to those being lead.  There are somewhat contradictory methods of leadership within the readings, but these common themes emerge in more than one as being a definite characteristic of those leaders who have achieved greatness, earned respect, and maintained integrity all simultaneously.

 

Self-awareness and humility play a major role because they are positive constants throughout the ups and downs of company performance. Notably, a downside of many narcissistic leaders is their increasing narcissism and inability to yield to the advice of other after initial success has “proven their methodology right.”  Humility does not fade with increasing success.  The ability to be self-aware makes criticism easier to receive, which contributes to the overall goal and not just the ego-driven agenda of many leaders who lack the quality.  Humility is something I feel has always been in me, but the ability to be self-aware is more than simply that.  I find myself constantly measuring my actions, thoughts, and words against my target standards, and I hope one day this struggle will manifest itself in the form of being able to learn from my subordinates just as much as I dictate to them.

 

Emotional intelligence seemed like a nice author-fabricated qualitative description of the “stuff” of great leaders until this very phrase showed up in the other readings besides Goleman. It makes all the sense in the world that one’s personal success has little to do with their merit as opposed to the workings of their limbic system.  After all, the ones that give you a promotion or review your successes and failures are people, too. I have every intention of using this to my full advantage; not to say that I’m not smart but there are those who will most likely go long ways [before getting fired] based solely on their performance. I’m not one of those people.

 

Finally, there is the one characteristic of the narcissistic leader, the ability to sell a vision.  Narcissistic leaders are said to create the future and ask why not as opposed to predicting it and reacting to it.  This is important because the readings do point out how most great advances within a company or corporation was because of a bold vision taken by a narcissistic leader.  I don’t really like this term ‘narcissistic’ so I don’t really aspire to be like this. I do, however, aspire to be one willing to take reasonable risks to be on the vanguard of technology progression simply to garner the best possible opinion of those whom I serve or create a product. Yes, it is a bit erotic.

Despite the emphasis on the successes of the narcissistic leader it seemed that the class, in our discussion, chose some very non-narcissist like qualities in choosing which kind of leader we prefer to work for.  Humility (in combination with will/motivation), personal reflection, being quiet yet respected,  taking responsibility, giving credit, displaying good succession planning, and incorporating shared decision making were the main qualities we looked for in a leader.  A lot of these are direct qualities of a level 5 leader. This corresponds nicely with the LEAD survey in which most people were either majority sellers or majority participants.  Whereas there is an equally important time for each of the four quadrants, the participating and selling are most common because in usual business, the need for barking orders and the need for being idle (to quote the extremes) are few compared to the times of simple selling to induce change or simple participation to maintain change.   

 

The ability to exhibit the aforementioned personality traits are integral to the leadership style profile, else one would indeed be too bossy or lenient.  These qualities of the ideal leader resonate well with me because they are all qualities I hope to have to reach my desired levels of leadership.  I am narcissistic enough that I do want to lead mainly because of my ideas, but there’s a certain manner in which I aim to realize my goals; these qualities are the tools I’ll need.  Pointing out how the readings mentioned, qualities of the leader trickle down throughout the entire organization; nobody wants to be known as a hothead if the boss is a cool, fair leader.

 

In relation to the LEAD survey, these qualities make possible the leadership that will most likely be needed throughout the daily business of any company.  When one is selling and participating, as describes the lead categories of most of the class, there is a significant amount of these qualities necessary.  It is not possible to openly share and extract from others ideas if there is no humility, respect, and due credit from each participant.  Even in selling, the seller has to acknowledge the ability for others to make positive improvements to the original idea, so he or she has to be careful not to talk down to those others.  This is indicative of how I intend to run whatever operation I am put in charge of because I understand that nothing great has ever been accomplished without the enthusiastic help of others.  This brings to mind the Truman quote at the beginning of the Collins reading: “You can accomplish anything in life, provided you do not mind who gets the credit.” (which is ironic because his speechwriter was probably responsible for this quote)

 

 

 

HW for 2/25

One of the most prominent points from the readings was that of emotional intelligence and its contribution to leaders. Goleman lists several factors that make up this intelligence such as self-awareness, self-regulation, empathy, motivation, social skills, etc. Leaders who possess such qualities are deemed to have emotional intelligence and this intelligence not only distinguishes outstanding leaders but can also be linked to strong company performance. Leaders of this type are not prisoners of their feelings; they are driven to achieve beyond expectations, and their friendliness and social skills always have a purpose. Going hand in hand with leaders who have emotional intelligence is that of the quiet leader discussed by Badaracco. He says that quiet leadership is the quickest way to make the world a better place as quiet leaders possess modesty and restraint along with being practical and effective leaders. Both types of leadership discount fiery temperaments and public displays of heroism. They should never use their power in a negative way, rather learn to be the bigger person and pick their battles. Both seem to argue that leadership has a very sound emotional and modest aspect as leaders are intrinsically motivated to help themselves and their organizations. In thinking about working for a company someday, would I want my boss to be understanding or a regimented tyrant? Almost everyone would argue that leaders who lead quietly, unobtrusively, and with their hearts are the leaders that really change our world. If we think back to a leader like MLK-he possessed almost every quality of Coleman's characteristics of emotional intelligence and although his voice was always heard, he lead modestly and effectively. In putting myself in a position of leadership, I would imagine it to be difficult to restrain myself from yelling at employees when I was frustrated, but in order for to really make a difference, I would have to master that urge as abusing my power would not make the company a better place.

A general, but rather undeniably important point penetrating throughout two of the readings was personality type and how it affects leaders. Maccoby teaches us that narcissists make for great leaders. They have compelling vision for companies and an overwhelming ability to attract followers-they are so obsessed with their own success that the company they are working for is guaranteed to succeed. These leaders do not see a future, rather they create their own future. They are incredibly charismatic and powerful speakers. However, obviously narcissistic leaders have their downfalls, chief among them they are ever so dependent on constant admiration from their followers. Upon getting this admiration, they feel less constraints, become more spontaneous, are bad at listening etc. Directly opposite to this type of personality leader would be Collins' description of a Level 5 leader- one that is anything but the 'hero' and 'larger than life'. Narcissists want to be and believe they are larger than life whereas Level 5 leaders possess humility and will- the key ingredients to their type of leadership. Like the quiet leader, a Level 5 leader is modest and shy but at the same time quite fearless. Which to choose? The reality is that both these types of personalities in leaders, in direct opposition to each other, do succeed. In applying this knowledge of the importance of personality types in leaders to my future plans, I would imagine it useful to understand the leadership strategies of companies I plan to work for. Many companies have their own leadership programs that they make you go through in order to train you for the specific type of leadership and companionship that they are looking for. Undoubtedly, there are several companies our there that have CEOs that are narcissistic and CEOs that are humble yet both are part of the Fortune 500 list. In knowing my personality, I think I would choose to work for a company that has a leader that is so intrinsically into their own success that the company's success will sore. For me, I know it would be encouraging to be around such strong charisma and motivation, yet as an underdog I probably would not be listened to at all. The emotional aspect or lack there of between my employer and I would be something I would have to be willing to sacrifice. In my opinion, as leadership styles seem to be a personal thing and a matter of personality type, so is who/where you choose to be a following of.

In the first class presentation, it was taught that it is overwhelmingly important to be a good listener. You should encourage others to talk about themselves to know you are listening, you should repeat back what they have told you and always make good eye contact. While being a good listener, it is important to show that you can relate to what they are saying and care to continue the conversation. When you do not exhibit good listening skills, it makes you appear to be more focused in what you have to say than the other person. Being a good listener is one of the most important qualities of being a good leader as well. However, it definitely is difficult to always be a good listener as it takes a high level engagement in all conversations. I feel as though I have always tried to be a good listener not only in academic environments, but in social ones as well. To me, being a good and helpful listener is one of the most important characteristics of being a good friend. I always try to genuinely be interested in what a friend is talking to me about so I can offer feedback and advice- especially when it pertains to an problem. It would be highly unappealing to me to be friends with someone who was not interested in what I had to say and did not exhibit qualities of a good listener as there is no point to interact with people who only 'hear themselves talk'. Also, when interviewing for jobs, I have learned that a potential employer always wants to hear and believe that you are a good listener.

In the second presentation, an important point was to make people feel important in a sincere way and that upon doing so, life is actually made easier. You should always 'do unto others as you want done to you' which is known as the Golden Rule. You should let people know you care about them in a way that does not represent falsity or flattery. It is completely obvious when you treat people in a fake way and it usually happens a lot today. There are obviously many situations that require people to be 'fake' such as being around someone you openly do not like but you would rather be cordial than be rude. Girls have the tendency and ability to be fake to people more so than guys do. If you cannot be genuinely nice to people, you should just not interact with them at all. I have grown up with my parents continually saying to treat people how you want to be treated- it is an obvious cliche but the importance it holds is invaluable. People do not realize that treating people right and making them feel important will ensure that they treat you back that way. I do not ever try to be fake to someone as it just seems like a waste of my time and if they did that back to me, it would not only be very clear, but it would really annoy me. I think most people would agree that it has always been ingrained in our heads that you should never treat or talk to someone in a way in which you, yourself would not like to be addressed. I feel like if I continually follow this and make sure I am sincere to others, I will not only feel better about myself, but I will make it so others do not feel a need to treat me in a 'fake' way.

Week 5: Maslow Reading & Class Discusion

This week’s reading (and subsequent class discussion) centered on Psychologist Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in conjunction with research pertaining to the responses by participants in the 2007 Place and Happiness Survey. In the survey, the top community attributes (which are outlined in the text) appear to be: physical and economic security, basic needs (school and healthcare), leadership, openness, and aesthetics –the top two being aesthetics and basic needs –which is somewhat contradictory to Maslow’s research. According to the author, Richard Florida, in our society there exists a “a beauty premium”, which says that people are more attracted and pay more attention to that which is more aesthetically pleasing. The author elaborates on this concept by saying that this “beauty premium” extends beyond objects, and can even extend to people’s general preference for attractive people over unattractive people. In fact, the article sites specific evidence in which people not only prefer the more attractive person, but that there is even a greater bias against unattractive people. I would have to agree to an extent that this hypothesis of the beauty premium is indeed evident in real-life situations, everyday. With regard to interviewing and hiring there is no doubt (at least for some people) a bias for the more attractive option, all things equal. In my own personal experiences I see the preference for the more beautiful and the more attractive often. For example just the other day I sat on an Honor Council trial for a very attractive girl and, although her defense was very weak in my opinion, she was deemed innocent. In this specific case although the adjudicated student’s attractiveness did not single-handedly deliver her innocence, it certainly didn’t hurt it. This point applies to my own life because in the future I will pay more attention to my subconscious preference for the more attractive, and I will work to not allow me to pick the more attractive option solely on looks alone –I will judge many other factors in addition to looks or aesthetics.

This weeks readings also touched on the idea and need for openness within a community. According to the reading openness, defined by a communal sense of tolerance and acceptance of diversity, is the third-ranked factor in the Place and Happiness Survey. The author stated that with every amount of tolerance extended to these groups, the overall happiness of a community increases. This is a very important point because, in my opinion, it is very important to be tolerant of those that are different or diverse from oneself. America and Americans pride themselves on diversity, and we often refer to America as “the melting pot”. As a college student I am exposed to a great deal of diversity, and I believe it enriches by education and maturation here at Vanderbilt University. I came from a very homogeneous community and background. The community (suburb) I grew up in outside of Chicago is predominantly white, Christian, educated, and middle to upper-middle class, or the knowledge worker class (a discussion from past weeks in this class). Furthermore, although I greatly enjoyed my childhood, I relish a much more diverse community such as that of large city. Lastly, I would have to agree with Florida’s comment that there is considerable room for growth within our communities for openness and diversity, but clearly American cities are so well populated because of this need or want for diverse communities.

This week our class had the pleasure of sitting in on Professor Jordan’s lecture. Professor Jordan brought up many important and reflective points pertaining to the readings, but he also sparked a great deal of insightful class discussion. Professor Jordan brought up the point that while we live in an increasingly globalized and technological word, we also live in an ever increasingly isolated world. Professor Jordan cited examples of people who spend a great deal of time on their computers or people who live alone. The class discussed this point for some time and came to the conclusion that this finding is somewhat inaccurate. In my opinion, and the majority of my classmates agree, technology links many of us together –it does not isolate us. While it is true that maybe it does not link us together in person (but in many cases it does, i.e. dating websites) it certainly is a medium for communication (for example email, blogs, facebook, linkden, etc). Sure many people, including myself, spend countless hours at home in front of their laptop, I would not say that the computer isolates me –that is to say that we would be using this time socializing if the technology were not available –I would disagree with that statement. Furthermore, I believe technology is not a catalyst of isolation but rather a catalyst of communication and collaboration.

Another topic deliberated heavily in class on Monday that was mentioned in the text is people’s basic needs within a community. It is not surprising that the higher people ranked a community’s basic needs, the higher their satisfaction is with that community. Obviously, one basic need for any community is access to public and secondary schools. Professor Jordan brought up that in the text the author mentions that the people who place the highest value on proximity to schools are, interestingly enough, those with less formal education. The class discussed why this might be, and many people believed it was because people of lesser education (and probably of lesser means as a result) do not have as much mobility as those who have attained a high degree in schooling. I would agree with this theory, and I would further stress that many people of greater needs are able to afford (or their parents are able to afford) private school or to travel further to a different (perhaps public, but not necessarily) school. For example, many wealthy people are able to send their children to schools in which it is necessary to fly or drive long distances to attend the institution. At Vanderbilt many students are from all over the country, and in some cases, the world. Lastly, the class also deliberated the idea that families of lesser means relish having schools in close proximity because of aspirations or dreams to one day enroll in that institution –sort of a physical representation of the American dream to finish high school and go on to college or some other secondary school. In conclusion, I found the class discussion on community needs to be very insightful, and I was able to relate many of the ideas to my own life and experiences.

HW for 2/11

One of the most important points from the reading, in my opinion, was that of the relevance of aesthetics in our lives. Humans do not merely require food, water and air anymore, but now there is this emphasis on the aesthetically pleasing. The higher people rate the beauty of their community means apparently the higher they will rate their overall level of community satisfaction. As we expect basic services to just be provided for us, we tend to place a higher value on the need for pretty parks, streets and community organizations. People are just naturally drawn to and will pay for things that are more pleasing to the eye--hence the 'beauty premium'. In relating this to my life, it seems completely applicable as I am constantly going from city to city and comparing them. When I am at school, I miss specific aesthetic aspects about home that Nashville could not even begin to compare to--such as country clubs and highschool campuses. Downtown Baltimore is huge with a gorgeous marina front and thousands of restaurants-something that is important to me and something that Nashville is unable to compare to. It only seems natural that when picking a place to live as we graduate, we want to be somewhere where our surroundings are not only beautiful and comfortable, but that that beauty makes us want to be there. Throughout the hustle and bustle of NYC, there lies the tranquility of Central Park- something extremely necessary and important to the residents of the upper west side. If that were not there, it would only be logical to assume that people would rate their happiness there very differently.

A second point was that of meeting people and the culture of an environment. A person's ability to make friends is one of the most important factors in determining how happy we are in our communities. Going hang in hand with the importance of human interaction is that of sociability and having a fun nightlife. People want to be able to have schedules that are flexible and allow themselves freedom to be able to do fun things and go out if they choose to. When people are confined to their workplace and are on restrictive schedules, overall happiness declines. Time is one of our scarcest resources, yet a resource that is so important to us for personal satisfaction. As I am a very social person, this point is particularly relevant to me and I intend on applying it in the future when I again, pick a place to live. It is obvious that not only me, but that most people would be unhappy in an environment if they had no friends to relate to there or they were stuck in a place where it was difficult to make friends. Happiness is always better when it is shared and the thought of being alone n a big city, even with beautiful surroundings, seems completely undesirable for me. Along with the need for friends, the need to go out and have a good time every once in a while is equally important. I would not pick a place to live where I knew the nightlife was mediocre at best, rather aspire to live somewhere that has a thriving nightlife with a wide array of opportunities- somewhere such as NYC where obviously nightlife is not limited solely to bars. In comparing both important points, I know I would rather live somewhere that would more greatly cater to my social needs rather than my aesthetic ones as social interactions are imperative to one's happiness.

One of the most important points in class this week was discussing what motivates people. It is important to know what motivates people as it allows you to better understand why they are where they are, what makes them happy, and what makes them upset. Knowing these things allows for a stronger partnership not only in the workforce, but in the personal realm as well. As you better understand why people work for you, for example, as an employer, you can work harder in making sure their needs are met. There are all different types of motivating factors such as money, self-interest, love, sexual desires etc. In relating this to myself, both in the workplace and within personal relationships, I have found it helpful in talking about what I hope to gain out of my endeavors. In starting my internship this summer, I sat down with my boss and told her why I was there and what I had hoped to gain out of that summer experience. That discussion better enabled her when it came down to whether or not she would assign me a certain task. In looking to personal relationships and evaluating friendships, it can be very helpful to think and decide whether you are in that relationship for the right reasons, what motivated you to begin with and if its worth it anymore. I have been friends with a few people over the years that I am not currently still friends with as I decided that what motivated me to originally be friends with them is not there anymore-whether it be because of social reasons, personality reasons, etc.

A second point that I thought was very relevant was the principle that negative attention is better than no attention at all. This means that our innate drive for attention is so large that we would rather have negative attention upon us instead of 'staying under the radar'. If people feel that they are being ignored or are not standing out in some way, they will attempt to stand out positively and what that fails, they ultimately crave this negative attention. It seems logical as people have this desire to be recognized-no one wants to go through life without people realizing that they are there, however it is strange that we resort to negative attention to get people to see us. I can't say that I have ever consciously tried to cast a negative light on myself to stand out, but I probably have been unconsciously guilty of doing so. As far as the Vanderbilt social scene goes, many girls come to my mind as attention cravers and when they do not get it, they undoubtedly resort to some drunken antic that will gain them recognition-for at least a week or so until the next person outdoes them. In thinking about any prominent social scene, it becomes clearer and clearer how deeply people want to be recognized and what lengths they will go to achieve that.

HW 3

The readings for this week primarily dealt with the topics of consumerism and competitive acquisition, mostly in regards to the middle class (i.e. the middle class “squeeze”). In the article titled The Overspent American Schor discusses Americans’ obsession with spending, or as he calls it upscale spending –the new consumerism. He outlines how advertising and the media have played a pivotal role in “stretching our reference groups vertically (3); the need to compare oneself with people of a higher social class –sometimes of 4 or 5 times greater wealth or income. The author discusses the pitfalls of having these sorts of reference points and the implications on Americans’ savings and standard of living. Aside from the role of the media, product innovation and its accelerating pace also adds to this “arms race” of American upscale spending. Schor also illustrates just how dissatisfied Americans are, and why so many middle-class Americans feel materially dissatisfied. I would have to agree with Schor in this regard, as I believe that everyone I know who is a professional (my father, mother, sister, Vandy alums, etc) aspire to attain more money and monetary reward for their efforts in the workplace. While I do agree with many of the author’s arguments in The Overspent America, I feel that Schor has oversimplified this obsession with consumerism to define the entire middle-class. In the Nation of Rebels, authors Joseph Heath and Andrew Potter offer a somewhat different perspective –that not all middle-class people are status-seekers and social climbers. These authors paint a picture that I believe is much more analogous to my life experience, that which the authors call “defensive consumption”. This idea paints a very different view, and is much more in line Heibroner –the idea that people may not be particularly interested in outdoing their neighbors, but who want to maintain a more “respectable” standard of living. The authors make the analogy of “keeping up with the Jones” –a concept I feel myself and my family can very much relate to. Finally, Nelson’s pages fron Love and Money: The Question of Individual Motivation, suggests that many middle-class Americans are motivated by basic greed. Although he later picks apart his argument by saying that people inevitably need money (and that’s not always selfish), I do not completely agree that most Americans are motivated by greed, but rather that many Americans see money and salary as a measure of their performance, and it always feels good to be successful in what one does.

HW WEEK 3

One of the most prominent points throughout the readings was obviously that of consumerism and our spending habits as Americans. Schor identifies the shift and increase in spending as the 'new consumerism'. No longer should our benchmark of success and happiness be that of our neighbors, why not it be that of celebrities or that of people who receive an income 5x greater than ours. What happens when we look to these people for our happiness? Obviously, someone making 30,000 a year should not and ultimately will not be able to keep up with someone making over 100,000. As Schor notes, however, people are doing just that and it is called an 'upward comparison'. As individuals look to a 'reference group' outside of their league, they are ultimately trying to buy things to continually reiterate their status, not just to themselves, but to the outside world. The interesting thing about all of this is that the true 'millionaires' of society are living frugal lives compared to how the rest of America views spending. For some reason, the people who have all of the money feel less of a need to identify with it, whereas the ones that are slaving away in the office making a 5-figure salary are the ones with the designer clothes and certain types of cars. For those type, money means everything, money means status. This relates to Heilbroner's article about the profit motive. People no longer are trying to maintain their lives as they did in earlier times, but now are trying to advance themselves. With this advancement, not necessarily at all meaning working harder, they hope to advance material possessions and their standard of living. It seems like it will always be a competition with the mentality that everything is about a profit and gain. It is also interesting to note that the idea of gain is hardly as universal as we think it is and can really be pin-pointed to more modern times.

Homework Week 2

The articles for week two most certainly relate to my life. As a college senior ready to embark on my professional career I no longer consider myself to be in the same class as my parents. I did not work for my family’s money, my father did, and I believe that is it time to define my own place within the American class system. Certainly American classes today are not as rigid as they once were in Europe or even at the conception of our country, but nonetheless a caste system still exists within our country and we are all subjected to it. I would have to argue that as a college-educated soon-to-be graduate I would be considered a member of what Drucker calls the knowledge worker class. Seeing as though I am going to attend law school next year, I am moving my way up the social mobility ladder, gaining more knowledge, so that I can attain even greater success and greater wealth. One comment of Drucker’s that I do not agree with is that knowledge workers view their jobs as their life. While an occupation or profession certainly defines a worker to some extent, I would never say that my job would one day fully define me. I do argue that a job is more than just a means of acquiring money, however, my family and friends play an important role in defining my life and cannot be ignored.

Week 1 Homework

This weeks readings placed particular emphasis on the question, “what’s the purpose of a business”. In my opinion Charles Handy explored the question quite well. Although I would say that a company or corporation is certainly first and foremost in place to turn a profit and to meet the demands of it’s owners and shareholders, a company exists and thrives in part because it is able to turn this profit, but also for another reason –to give back to the community/society –the idea of social responsibility. As Handy so eloquently writes, “it is [the purpose] to make a profit so that the business can do something more or better. According to Handy, and I would have to agree, that “something” is the real true justification for a business. Later in the same article the author quotes Dave Packard who describes the purpose of a business to be sort of the fruits of collective action and effort. He states that a group of people gets together and exists as an institution that we call a company so that they are able to accomplish something collectively that they could not accomplish separately. Thus, a company makes a contribution to society through collective action –an idea not explored by the other authors in the texts but that I particularly relish and agree with. Lebowitz and Freidman also touch on this idea of collectivity, but there theories are much more rooted in socialism than my own personal views. In my opinion, Drucker would most certainly agree with Handy and Dave Packard’s notion of the purpose of a business. In his text The Dimensions of Management Drucker writes that companies do not exist for their own sake, rather “to fulfill a specific social purpose and to satisfy a specific need of a society, a community, or individuals. Drucker also does not dismiss the notion of profits and sustained profitability. Rather than see profit as the overarching purpose of a company, Drucker sees it as an indicator of its success and a test of its validity.

Personal Reflection:
The articles assigned for this week most certainly play a role and connect to my own life. As a student who has just completed applications to law school I hope to one day work for a corporation (i.e. law firm) and manage employees. Without a firm grasp of the question, “what is the purpose of a business?” I don’t think I would be a very effective component in my organization’s/law firm’s success. Handy spoke a great deal about the difference between best practice and the law (or standard/required practice). Handy spoke to how the law always lags behind best practice –something I agree with but will one day strive to correct. In my opinion businesses need to take a lead in areas such as environmental and social sustainability –rather than be profit obsessed. I hope to one day in the future own and manage my own law practice, and I will set aside valuable time and money to undertake pro-bono work in order to give back to my community. In my opinion, there exists very few companies that sustain and grown without giving back to the community. Philanthropy is an enormous aspect of business, particularly in American business. Furthermore, if one were to only pull one message from these readings that message should be that companies do exist to turn a profit, but they will not continue to exist if profit is the only purpose for which that company is in existence, and that there exists a great social need that must be fulfilled in any business or industry.

A second point that was discussed heavily throughout the readings by Eichenreich and Metzgar was that of the subjectivity of the middle class. It seems that people cannot really be defined as middle class unless they see themselves as that or they feel that they live 'comfortably' in that class. The tables given in the Metzgar reading which break up the 3 classes gives an almost ridiculously large range for the middle class going from $18000 to $82000. Obviously, the lower echelon of that group is not living comfortably and would hardly consider themselves middle class. Yet, some people within that lower bracket would be living very comfortably as a member of the middle class if they did not have children to support or many expenses. I have always thought of class lines as somewhat of a objective thing and never really considered that it was more so based on how people view themselves. The middle class also can be broken down once again to the larger inclusive class and the smaller exclusive or professional class as Eichenreich refers to it. He explains this professional class as difficult to write about as they seem to represent such a distinct minority. I would agree with him in that the term middle class becomes highly unsatisfactory in our society as it scope attempts to become too broad and essentially just excludes the extremely poor or extremely wealthy. Such a general labeling of the middle class does a disservice to people within it as it wants to group together simple factory workers with established managerial professionals. It does not seem like there would be a creation of a new class any time soon to deal with the gap between the members of the middle class but perhaps a new system of labeling that is more concrete would help to deal with the problems that stem from a loosely defined 'group'.

Week 1 HW

I cannot say that these readings currently coincide with my life, as I am still a student, however that will not be for long. Within the next 6 months, I will be shoved into the work force and the issues discussed in these 4 readings will become my issues. Although, I do not foresee myself delving into the financial world, I see these issues discussed as real for almost all companies. As a worker, I clearly am not going to want to be battling with the management over 10-12 hour workdays- sacrificing my well-being for the success of the company. I have many friends who work at banks and for the sake of what they could maybe be/have in 2 years, they sacrifice their current happiness. Companies too often take for granted the intellectual capability of their employees and too often see workers as a means to an an end. As I become one of these workers in the near future, I know that when picking a company to work for, I will highly consider their treatment of employees and commitment to social responsibility. Although, I do not aspire to work at Starbucks, when thinking of social promise, that company immediately comes to mind. They are committed to helping out our community, providing superb service to customers, and maximizing employee benefits. The combination of those 3 things tells me that they are not an organization that exists solely to make money. As I look down the road, I want a company who values the intellectual property of their workers and prides itself on the fact that a good business is a community with a purpose, not something to be owned. I am now more attuned to the practice of businesses- ones who see the purpose of business as business and ones who see it as a sufficient condition. Keeping these aspects in mind are going to be really important for me in the next coming months as I continue my job search and will hopefully have enough liberty to choose a company that matches my own principles and beliefs.

GM Documentary

As difficult as it was to watch the documentary on the town of Flint, it was very eye-opening to what was going on during that time and in the lives of those living through it. Much of the documentary was very disturbing such as the scene with the de-furring of the bunnies as well as having to see the sheriff evict people from their homes on Christmas eve. It was disappointing to see that Michael Moore never really got to talk to Roger Smith, although the whole video was about him trying to locate him and speak with him about the plant closings. I don't think that what GM did was completely wrong because they were trying to advance their company. As the king of the auto-world, they were simply trying to make their business better and to keep providing service to their customers. Yes, in doing so, they put 30,000 people out of jobs and arguably destroyed the appeal of an entire city, however they were not bound to honor the citizens of where the business originated. Moore and others argued that Smith and GM owed some sort of tribute to the town of Flint and its people because it originated there, however Smith and the companies pleaded they were only doing what was essential to helping their business. Their expansion did put people out of jobs in Flint, but it opened up jobs elsewhere and overseas...I think the people of Flint could have done a better job of looking for other jobs instead of just complaining about their existing situation. It is really sad to see what closing that plant did to the city of Flint, however I do not think it was GM's intention or Smith's intention for that matter to do that to those people. I am sure they thought that there would be some type of other employment for them to find, however, their main goal was obviously just to help out the company and in doing so they unfortunately did not accurately/adequately assess the effects it was going to have on an entire town.