Business Blog on The Huffington Post

When Twitter went public in 2013, it was given a 24 billion dollar valuation -- 12 times higher than the New York Times.

Yet, both companies employed thousands of people. And both companies distributed news to millions of people. Even further, the New York Times earned $133M in 2012 while Twitter lost money.

How could this be?

The answer is cash flow. Business valuations are based on a company's earning potential in the future. Investors expect that Twitter will capture profits over the next decade while the newspaper days are declining.

The value of a business today is how much money it will make in the future.

From an economic perspective, the value of each person to a business is based on their potential to help the company in the long-term.

The further into the future -- or more durable -- your game plan: the greater the value of your cause.

Unfortunately, most people -- when planning a business or anything else in life -- rarely consider the value of their endeavor 10-15 years down the road. In our radically accelerating lives, it can feel impossible to plan more than a year or two ahead.

And this is exactly the dogma we're being taught by the business "gurus." React and respond to the market. Focus on quick growth. Don't have a plan.

Of this, Billionaire Peter Thiel writes in his book, Zero to One:

"The buzzwords of the moment call for building a 'lean startup' that can 'adapt' and 'evolve' to an ever-changing environment. Would-be entrepreneurs are told that nothing can be known in advance: we're supposed to listen to what customers say they want, make nothing more than a 'minimum viable product,' and iterate our way to success. But leanness is a methodology, not a goal. Iteration without a bold plan won't take you from zero to one."

Think For Yourself

According to Thiel, innovation does not happen by reacting to culture, movements, or societal expectations for how you should act. Rather, it occurs as people challenge these reflections of the status quo.

As Mark Twain has said, "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."

Rather than pursuing what's trendy or what's been successful for other people, the best thing you can do is think for yourself. That may also be the most difficult thing to do.

2. Avoid Competition

In order to think for yourself, you need to leave the idea of competition behind. Although we've been taught our whole lives that competition leads to success, in the real world it's detrimental. It disrupts intrinsic motivation and leads to narrow-sightedness.

In the book, Tribal Leadership, David Logan explains that most organizations have a culture of competition within. What this looks like is ladder-climbing, sucking up to superiors, and backstabbing to get ahead. Every man for himself.

Far fewer companies have a culture of collaboration within and competition without. Naturally, these companies, who focus on crushing their competitors do far better than those who are at war with themselves.

Yet, according to Logan, there are those magical instances, when an organization leaves competition altogether. They enter a universe of their own with limitless possibilities. They set the terms of the market because no one else can do what they do. The gap between themselves and anyone else continuously widens with no projection of that changing in the long-awaited future.

How Far Into The Future Does Your Plan Go?

Are you merely copying the strategies of other people?

Are you responding as quickly as you can to the market?

How will you measure your own life?

What is it you really want to do?

In life and in business, a person's value is what they are worth in the future -- in the long-term. Anyone can be cool for a day. Where will you be in 10 years?

Is the path you're on a response to yesterday's market? If it is, how will you know where you're going to be in 10 years?

Or, is the path you're on part of a grand plan you've devised and are committed to? As Seth Godin has said in Tribes, "The secret of leadership is simple: Do what you believe in. Paint a picture of the future. Go there. People will follow."

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Choosing up sides in playground games can be a cruel experience.

As each player gets picked and there are fewer and fewer standing, the awkwardness grows. Finally, everyone goes out on the field to play. No doubt, there is some humiliation among those not chosen. Those left on the sideline will hang around for the next game with the hope to be chosen and it may or may not happen. I know this first hand from playground basketball since I was generally in the group not picked. Being able to dribble with the left hand is a skill. My availability was not.

At that point in my basketball career, I had a choice.

1. I could resolve to work on my left hand skills until I could confidently dribble and go to the basket from that side.
2. I could continue to hang around the court every day. Eventually, a team would be desperate enough to choose me and my lack of left-handed skills would become evident. Both the team and I would be frustrated at the mismatch.
3. I could recognize that no matter how much I worked on it, my talent in basketball would never serve me well. I should choose another sport. In my case, that's what I did.

Cruel as it is, the playground rules provide a lesson about hiring. That lesson is: just because you are hanging around and available does not mean you will be picked. Availability is not a skill. Get over it. Just like the playground, you have some similar choices.

1. Develop a skill so that you will be hired. The skill might be as simple as learning about spreadsheets or give a better presentation. Or the skill could be a much more technical or require a return to school. Even if learning the new skill may not fulfill a lifelong dream, the new skill can get you the job that will allow to get in the proverbial door.

2. Keep waiting around until an organization is willing to take a chance on you, even if you don't have the skills. Without the skill it usually doesn't take long for you to be miserable and feel like you are in over your head. For the organization, there will be some sense of "we made a mistake". There is the possibility that something good will happen once you are "in", but it's a long shot. Hard as it might be for job seekers to understand sometimes organizations are so desperate that they will take a risk on someone who is "available".

3. Change directions by choosing a different career and go deep into learning about it. In essence, repot the plant in a different career garden.

In short, what I look for in a candidate is a skill or a passion to learn that skill and be a part of the team. Availability is not one of those skills.

To quote Stuart Smalley from Saturday Night Live, "I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like Me!" is almost never enough.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

By Judith E. Glaser

When Bayer, a $7 billion multinational pharmaceutical company, acquired a smaller $300 million diagnostic company, Rolf Classon the CEO, chose to call it a "merger."

Power-with Others

He wanted to immediately establish a "power-with others" relationship with the new organization. I was part of a consulting team who facilitated a multi-day vision, values, and leadership session to help the leadership team create the new direction for the culture and the business.

"We are becoming one company," Rolf told the top hundred people from both companies at their kickoff meeting. He went on to convey that he wanted to set new ground rules for working collaboratively in a new environment in which "together we can create something that never existed before."

The executives discussed changes that needed to be made in the organization to maximize the new partnership. Then they broke into smaller teams to craft the new vision and values, with the intent of reporting their insights to the larger executive team.

When the executives reconvened, a spirit of trust and collaboration had clearly emerged. They had worked together to create a vision of shared success and in doing so released a new sense of hope for the future.

Rolf once again stood before the group and asked, "How many of you have been through a visioning session before?" Everyone raised his or her hand.

"How many of you have left those sessions and returned to the workplace, only to find that nothing had changed?" Mostly everyone raised his or hand. He then declared, "For us to be successful as an organization, we need to realize that we can't create the organization we want without making fundamental changes in ourselves."

Candor Opens a New Door to the Future

As the event unfolded, something magical occurred. Rolf, by his example, taught the executives the true meaning of leadership. "Change begins inside each person. So I want to let you know that over the past few days I have been looking at what I've been doing to unknowingly prevent change from taking place.

"I've discovered at least sixteen things I want to change about myself! Here are my top three: my arrogance, my control, and my lack of trust.

"At lunch I want you each to think about what change means to you, and what you can do personally to inspire your own growth. After lunch I want to hear from my top executives -- from the podium -- expressing their personal insights."

The CEO allowed himself to be as transparent and vulnerable as he had ever been in his life when he acknowledged the personal work he needed to do to make this merger a success. As he left behind his flaws so did the other executives, which made room for cooperation and partnership to grow.

Rolf continued his talk about the future. He engaged others in conversations about the "big challenges" and the "big picture." The key was creating a shared context for change. By setting the stage in this way, he enabled others to find a common ground on which to build the future. The Bayer merger became the most successful in the company's history.

Candor Unlocks Culture Change and Transformation in Organizations

Through our research and client projects over the past decade, we have identified that candor is the behavior that best predicts high performing teams and the single most important success factor in transformation and change. Organizations that exhibit high levels of candor produce the highest and most successful performing teams.

Here are five ways to elevate every day - and experience a release in the capacity to create and sustain change, growth, and transformation:

By setting the context for candor throughout all of your leadership interactions, you level the playing field. You set the tone for people to be candid with each other - and candor leader to trust. I trust you have my back - I trust your intentions - I trust you care. Power and hierarchy become less important than the results colleagues can create together through trust, honesty and teamwork.

Neuro-tip: Candor, truth and trust

While the words - candor and trust - are different, the meaning of these words activate the same networks in our brain. When we display the Prefrontal Cortex, our Executive Brain. This network opens the power of the Executive functions, such as strategic thinking, empathy, foresight, intuition, good judgment and handling uncertainty with less fear. So candor plays a role in elevating our capacity to work through difficult challenges with others - a core activity for change and transformation in organizations.

Candor is a door to tapping wisdom and for discovering new ways to handle the challenges we face when stakes are high and uncertainty abounds. As Rolf Classon discovered - by setting the stage for candor with his top 200 executives - he created a comfort zone for others in his team to lead with candor - elevating trust and the organizational potential for higher levels of personal, team and organizational success during the biggest transformation Bayer ever embarked upon.

CANDOR AND TRUST Are the Fabric of a Healthy Culture

Here are five things you can do, as a Leader of Change, to elevate candor and TRUST as the foundation for healthy conversations in your organization.

Success Factor #1: Elevate Candor and elevate Transparency and Trust
Our brain is highly sensitive to reading signals of friend or foe as we interact. In .07 seconds we can tell if someone is telling us the truth and when they do we label them friend and our whole mindset reconfigures to allow us to engage more deeply. Being candid sends signal we will be open transparent in our conversations, and therefore we can trust each other to had our back. These decisions are built into our hardwiring and take place in Nano-seconds and elevate the quality of our conversations.

Success Factor #2: Elevate Candor and Deepen Relationships
When we learn how to be candid with others, we engage at a deeper level of connectivity. Our brain radiates energy, and the energy of connection is more powerful than any other, yet we can't access this unless we feel safe. Being candid and focusing our candor on enhancing our relationship - such as telling the truth about who we are, or helping build relationships before focusing on task - shows we value others and want to build on each others strengthens. These decisions take place in Nano-seconds and elevate the quality of our conversations and our relationships.

Success Factor #3: Elevate Candor and Deepen Understanding
When we learn how to be candid, we are able to step into each other's world, and understand each other's perspectives rather than feeling we need to defend our own. The need to be right is and addiction which gets stronger when we are uncertain of where we stand. When we learn to deepen our connectivity by focusing on understanding others intentions, dreams, and aspirations - we communicate we have their best interest at heart. Our Prefrontal Cortex and Heart connection actually strengthen physiologically - and the quality of our conversations escalates - magnifying our ability to achieve greater results with others.

Success Factor #4: Elevate Candor and Build Shared Success
When we learn how to be candid, we are able to spend more time exploring what success looks like with others - not just my success - our shared success. Rather than focusing on 'my needs' - I am able to build a new world view that combines yours and mine in ways we would never have thought about it before. We know that our Executive Brain - our Prefrontal Cortex - has the capacity to literally build holograms of the future - when we are open enough to access this human capacity - we join our best thinking into one new world view with Shared Success as the outcome.

Success Factor #5: Elevate Candor and Elevate Courage to tell the truth
When we learn how to be candid, we elevate our courage to step up, and speak out. Human beings need to share what is on their mind. When we mask the truth, or avoid the truth, or when we avoid difficult conversations our body chemistry shifts. The word disease is 'dis-ease' and it's a chemical discomfort that blocks the vital instincts for growth. Finding ways to be candid and caring at the same creates the healthy space for truth telling while strengthening relationships with others.

Candor is One Act that Changes Everything
Learning to have healthy conversations is the most fundamental and vital skills of a transformational leader. As Rolf Classon learned when he stepped up and stepped out of his own fear, and stepped forward to connect with his team through candor. Make candor a priority and open the door to business success. On some levels, we human beings are very simple. We turn to those who make us feel good and we turn away from those who make us feel bad. Finding comfort from people who care about us is a healthy strategy. Learning to down-regulate fear at work and up-regulate the factors that stimulate growth is a winning strategy for success is a game changer.

Judith E. Glaser is the CEO of Benchmark Communications, Inc. and the Chairman of The Creating WE Institute. She is an Organizational Anthropologist and the author of the best selling book Conversational Intelligence (Bibliomotion, 2013), as well as a consultant to Fortune 500 companies. www.creatingwe.com; www.conversationalintelligence.com; jeglaser@creatingwe.com or call 212-307-4386.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

I have been trying to find the language to express my discomfort with the presumption that anyone who does not welcome very large numbers of refugees into Europe with widely opened arms is somehow resurrecting the ghost of Hitler. Or the right language to express the proscribed thought that those in Eastern Europe who want to settle only Christian refugees might have appropriate reservations about the very real difficulties of integrating very different cultural and religious practices into their distinct way of life.

According to the OECD, Europe is expected to receive up to 1 million asylum applications this year. The European Union's 500 million-strong population can surely absorb such numbers that may be small in the overall frame. But many communities are impacted in a concentrated way. By most accounts, today's refugees from the savagely war-torn Middle East or Africa are looking for a permanent place, preferably in Germany -- which expects 800,000 applicants this year -- or Sweden, to plant their future.

I have found that language not on my own tongue, but through the words of the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek, famous for his provocative stance that we should engage in "obscene solidarity" instead of patronizing "political correctness" that tip toes around hard realities by using "pretty language."

But before I get to Žižek, let me take a detour that lays the ground of what we mean -- or at least what we have meant historically -- by cultural pluralism.

refugee welcome germany

A member of global civic organization Avaaz wearing a caricature head of France's Hollande performs a satirical sketch related to welcoming refugees. JOHN THYS/AFP/Getty Images.

Some years ago I published a conversation with the great pluralist thinker Isaiah Berlin in the New York Review of Books entitled "Two Concepts of Nationalism." In that discussion we addressed the attachment to one's way of life as the very stuff of cultural pluralism that liberal civilization is meant to protect.

After examining aggressive nationalism of the kind we associate with Nazism that results from the wounds of humiliation -- "like a bent twig, forced down so severely that when released, it lashes back with fury" in Berlin's phrase -- we spoke about "non-aggressive nationalism." Here is what Berlin said:

Nonaggressive nationalism is another story entirely. I trace the beginning of that idea to the highly influential 18th-century philosopher Johann Gottfried Herder.

Herder virtually invented the idea of belonging. He believed that just as people need to eat and drink, to have security and freedom of movement, so too they need to belong to a group. Deprived of this, they feel cut off, lonely, diminished, unhappy. Nostalgia, Herder said, is the noblest of all pains. To be human means to be able to feel at home somewhere, with your own kind.

Each group, according to Herder, has its own Volksgeist -- a set of customs and a lifestyle, a way of perceiving and behaving that is of value solely because it is their own. The whole of cultural life is shaped from within the particular stream of tradition that comes from collective historical experience shared only by members of the group.

Thus one could not, for example, fully understand the great Scandinavian sagas unless one had oneself experienced (as he did on his voyage to England) a great tempest in the North Sea. Herder's idea of nation was deeply nonaggressive. All he wanted was cultural self-determination. He denied the superiority of one people over another. Anyone who proclaimed it was saying something false. Herder believed in a variety of national cultures, all of which could, in his view, peacefully coexist.

Each culture was equal in value and deserved its place in the sun. The villains of history for Herder were the great conquerors, such as Alexander the Great, Caesar, or Charlemagne, because they stamped out native cultures.

Only what was unique had true value. This was why Herder also opposed the French universalists of the Enlightenment. For him there were few timeless truths: time and place and social life -- what came to be called civil society -- were everything.

. . . In Herder, there is nothing about race and nothing about blood. He only spoke about soil, language, common memories, and customs.

Berlin then went on to express his own views:

Like Herder, I regard cosmopolitanism as empty. People can't develop unless they belong to a culture. Even if they rebel against it and transform it entirely, they still belong to a stream of tradition. New streams can be created -- in the West, by Christianity, or Luther, or the Renaissance, or the Romantic movement -- but in the end they derive from a single river, an underlying central tradition, which, sometimes, in radically altered forms, survives.

But if the streams dry up, as for instance, where men and women are not products of a culture, where they don't have kith and kin and feel closer to some people than to others, where there is no native language -- that would lead to a tremendous desiccation of everything that is human.

Enter Žižek:

"One of the great Left taboos," he writes, "will have to be broken here: the notion that the protection of one's specific way of life is in itself a proto-Fascist or racist category. If we don't abandon this notion, we open up the way for the anti-immigrant wave which thrives all around Europe."

In this regard, one should note that the largest party in Sweden today in the wake of the refugee crisis, according to polls, is the anti-immigrant Democrat Party.

pegida

A poster depicts Merkel wearing a veil during a demonstration of the Legida anti Islamization movement, an offshoot of Pegida. AP Photo/Jens Meyer.

Žižek continues:

The standard Left-liberal reaction to this is, of course, an explosion of arrogant moralism: The moment we give any credence to the "protection of our way of life" motif, we already compromise our position, since we propose a more modest version of what anti-immigrant populists openly advocate. Is this not the story of last decades? Centrist parties reject the open racism of anti-immigrant populists, but they simultaneously profess to "understand the concerns" of ordinary people and enact a more "rational" version of the same politics.

While there is a kernel of truth in these moralistic complaints that Europe has lost empathy and is indifferent towards the suffering of others, Žižek argues that this is "merely the obverse of the anti-immigrant brutality":

Both stances share the presupposition, which is in no way self-evident, that a defense of one's own way of life excludes ethical universalism. One should thus avoid getting caught into the liberal game of "how much tolerance can we afford." Should we tolerate if they prevent their children going to state schools, if they arrange marriages of their children, if they brutalize gays among their ranks? At this level, of course, we are never tolerant enough, or we are always already too tolerant, neglecting the rights of women, etc. The only way to break out of this deadlock is to move beyond mere tolerance or respect of others to a common struggle.

Žižek then proceeds to the proper framing of Europe's refugee crisis:

One must thus broaden the perspective: Refugees are the price of global economy. In our global world, commodities circulate freely, but not people: new forms of apartheid are emerging. The topic of porous walls, of the threat of being inundated by foreigners, is strictly immanent to global capitalism, it is an index of what is false about capitalist globalization. While large migrations are a constant feature of human history, their main cause in modern history are colonial expansions: Prior to colonization, the Global South mostly consisted of self-sufficient and relatively isolated local communities. It was colonial occupation and slave trading that threw this way of life off the rails and renewed large-scale migrations.

Then he draws the lesson from this new reality:

The main lesson to be learned is therefore that humankind should get ready to live in a more "plastic" and nomadic way: Rapid local and global changes in environment may require unheard-of, large-scale social transformations. One thing is clear: National sovereignty will have to be radically redefined and new levels of global cooperation invented. And what about the immense changes in economy and conservation due to new weather patterns or water and energy shortages? Through what processes of decision will such changes be decided and executed? A lot of taboos will have to be broken here, and a set of complex measures undertaken.

And the solutions:

First, Europe will have to reassert its full commitment to provide means for the dignified survival of the refugees. There should be no compromise here: Large migrations are our future, and the only alternative to such commitment is a renewed barbarism (what some call "clash of civilizations").

Second, as a necessary consequence of this commitment, Europe should organize itself and impose clear rules and regulations. State control of the stream of refugees should be enforced through a vast administrative network encompassing all of the European Union (to prevent local barbarisms like those of the authorities in Hungary or Slovakia). Refugees should be reassured of their safety, but it should also be made clear to them that they have to accept the area of living allocated to them by European authorities, plus they have to respect the laws and social norms of European states: No tolerance of religious, sexist or ethnic violence on any side, no right to impose onto others one's own way of life or religion, respect of every individual's freedom to abandon his/her communal customs, etc. If a woman chooses to cover her face, her choice should be respected, but if she chooses not to cover it, her freedom to do so has to be guaranteed. Yes, such a set of rules privileges the Western European way of life, but it is a price for European hospitality. These rules should be clearly stated and enforced, by repressive measures (against foreign fundamentalists as well as against our own anti-immigrant racists) if necessary.

Clearly, the world of Herder's enclosed volksgeist, which still lives on in the reticent souls of those Europeans uneasy with the "plastic" reality of globalization, must give way to the world of Žižek. But in the transition, let's be careful not to affix a politically correct label to the nostalgia that authentically worries about "desiccation of everything that is human" as something other than it is.

Earlier on WorldPost:

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

In a speech last week, Federal Reserve Board Chair Janet Yellen inadvertently told us why Congress should set a 4 percent unemployment target for the Fed in its conduct of monetary policy, as is proposed in a new bill put forward by Michigan Representative John Conyers. The context was Yellen's dismissal of such a target.

Yellen dismissed the idea of such a target by saying:

"The maximum level of employment is something that is largely determined by nonmonetary factors that affect the structure and dynamics of the labor market. Moreover, the maximum level of employment, the longer-run 'natural' rate of unemployment, and other related aspects of the labor market are not directly observable, can change over time, and can only be estimated imprecisely."

There is much truth to this comment. Certainly the Federal Reserve Board cannot just pick any number and say it will get the unemployment rate to that level. There are limits posed by the economy that can prevent the Fed from hitting an unemployment rate target despite its best efforts.

However this is also true of the 2.0 percent inflation target that the Fed has chosen for itself as a basis for policy over the last decade. Certainly Yellen is well aware of the fact that the inflation rate in the core personal consumption deflator targeted by the Fed has been well below its 2.0 percent target for the last six years. This is due to the fact that the Fed cannot simply set any inflation rate it likes.

To its credit, the Fed has pursued aggressive monetary policy which has the purpose of boosting demand and increasing inflation. But this effort has obviously not been sufficient to reach the 2.0 percent target even after a considerable period of time. The rate of inflation may eventually accelerate and rise back to the Fed's target, as Yellen suggested in her speech, but the long undershooting of the targeted rate shows clearly that the inflation rate is not directly under the Fed's control.

The Fed could view an unemployment target in the same way. It is a goal to strive for, with the understanding that Fed actions by themselves may not be sufficient to reach the goal, or at least not in a short period of time.

The law that governs the conduct of monetary policy in fact instructs the Fed to pursue high employment and stable prices as equal goals. The law does not tell the Fed that it should prioritize a stable inflation rate. It also says nothing about a 2.0 percent inflation target. This is a goal that the Fed has decided for itself, not a directive from Congress.

This is the reason it is appropriate for Congress to pass new legislation that explicitly sets a low unemployment rate as a target for Fed policy. In the past, and it also appears to be the case now, the Fed has decided that it would place more of a priority on the stable prices portion of its mandate, even at the risk of needlessly denying jobs to millions of people.

The 4.0 percent target was not pulled out of the air. The United States in fact had a 4.0 percent unemployment rate as a year-round average in 2000, following two and a half years in which the unemployment rate was less than 5.0 percent. There is little evidence of any increase in the inflation rate as a result of this prolonged period of low unemployment. The increase in bargaining power from a strong labor market did allow tens of millions of workers at the middle and the bottom of the wage ladder to achieve strong gains for the only time in the last forty years.

This is why low unemployment matters so much. It is not just about getting people jobs, as important as that is. It is also about allowing tens of millions to be able to share in the benefits of economic growth.

For this reason, a Fed that was taking both parts of its mandate seriously would be very hesitant to raise interest rates and deliberately slow the economy in the absence of clear evidence of inflation. At this point any honest economist has to acknowledge that we do not have a very good understanding of the dynamics of inflation. Throwing people out of work based on a theory of inflation that may not even be right seems like pretty bad policy.

In this respect it is worth noting that most economists, including Janet Yellen, did not think the Fed should let the unemployment rate fall so low in the late 1990s. They were worried that inflation would get out of control. They were wrong.

Representative Conyers is absolutely right to put forward legislation clearly directing the Fed to take the employment part of its mandate seriously. The Fed should require solid evidence that inflation poses a threat before it tries to slow the economy. That evidence does not exist now.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Image by Robert Scoble via Flickr

When you are searching for the right new employee, it can be a little difficult to tell exactly who will be the perfect fit. After all, your shortlist of candidates will likely all have similar education and experience, and on paper look very alike. However, it is when you meet potential hires face to face that you have the chance to separate the real contenders from the jerks.

To divine who will be the best fit for a role, there are a number of key personality traits that you should look for. From strong interpersonal skills and initiative, to adaptability and creative thinking, there are many so-called "soft" skills that make all the difference between a new team member who is a good fit for your company culture, and one who you will end up wanting to rid yourself of in no time. Read on for some of the top signs you should look for next time you are interviewing job candidates.

Positive Attitude

Attitude can make all the difference between an average employee and a "rock-star" one. Look out for potential hires that exude a positive attitude and enthusiasm for the role and the company. Often this is displayed through body language, as well as pertinent, well thought-out questions which show they have done their research on the firm and thought about what the role may entail.

Remember, someone can have all the experience in the world, but if they do not care about the job they are doing, they are not going to be nice for anyone in the team to work with, and also won't be likely to put in extra effort to get the job done well. A happy outlook will be conducive to better teamwork and higher levels of creativity in the workplace.

Initiative

It is also important to look for team members who display initiative. This type of worker typically won't need to be micromanaged, and will be more likely to come up with new ideas and be self-motivated to go "above and beyond" in their position.

During the interview process, pay close attention to candidates who can recall examples of having worked independently in past roles. Ideally, they are workers who require little to no guidance or oversight from management and peers. For example, perhaps they created a new system after noticing a flaw in operations, or found an inventive way to save money for a company.

Communication and Relationship Skills

Another area that is particularly important is interpersonal skills. Good employees (whether entry-level staff members or top managers) know how to "play well with others" and communicate effectively. While many roles might require regular independent work, there are not really any positions that do not involve personal interactions on at least some level.

Staff members should be able to properly communicate their findings, questions, needs, research, or other important information to internal and/or external stakeholders. This generally requires excellent verbal and written communication skills, as well as the ability to develop good working relationships with co-workers, clients, customers, journalists, investors, or any other contact.

In interviews, look for candidates who know how to express themselves well, are likable and are personable. This does not mean that someone has to be an extrovert and the most outgoing person in a room, but just that they should have the ability to convey information well and know how to conduct themselves tactfully and politely.

Ability to Adapt

Finding the perfect employee is no small task. You generally want an individual who will be worth keeping on board for the long term. After all, it costs companies a lot of money to train new personnel, cover recruitment costs, and deal with the issue of lost knowledge, so it pays to employ people who will be an asset for the company for many years. This is why adaptable and flexible team members are invaluable assets.

If employees are willing to learn new skills, processes, techniques, and technologies during their career, this makes them valuable staff members who will always be contributing more to their workplace. As well, those who are flexible when it comes to working hours, variety of tasks, their environment and more, will be willing to work harder or later to finish projects, or be open to taking on new jobs when required.

When evaluating potential hires, try to find people who can demonstrate instances when they have taken on new responsibilities, have learned a new system, contributed to finishing a big project on deadline, or have otherwise shown themselves to be flexible and adaptable.

Creativity

Another trait that is becoming increasingly important in the workplace is creativity. Most companies do not have large, flexible budgets to use for emergencies or other problem-solving purposes. This means that high-impact employees must be more and more creative in their thinking when it comes to saving or spending money, predicting trends, finding customers, winning accounts, producing goods, and so on. Those who know how to problem solve effectively will make a great addition to any firm.

How do you hire the best candidates to join your team?

Danny Wong is the co-founder of Blank Label, an award-winning luxury menswear company. He is also a digital marketing consultant and freelance writer. To connect, tweet him @dannywong1190 or message him on LinkedIn.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

If you feel like you've worked all day but have nothing to show for it, time tracking can uncover some very interesting clues. It provides you with actual data about what you prioritize on a day-to-day basis, versus just guessing where your time is going. And once you notice gaps in your productivity you can either fill those gaps with important work or use that time for self-care.

If you think about it, it makes perfect sense that time tracking can be useful. Compare Watson's crime-solving abilities to Sherlock's. Sherlock doesn't just listen to the distressed client and then give it a good think, he gathers detailed evidence.

There are a few ways to track time -- I provide a paper time-tracker to the students taking my productivity course, but there are also computer-based trackers such as My Hours, Toggle, and Freckle.

No matter which system you use, here are a few time-tracking tips so you can take control of your productivity:

Set a timer. If you're not used to time tracking it can be a challenge to remember to write everything down (or to do the required steps on the computer program). I suggest setting a timer to go off every half hour.

Don't omit zoning out or "killing time" on your tracker, noting these lapses may lead you to some interesting realizations. For instance, maybe you zone out for 20 minutes at 3 pm each day, which means you should save your quick and simple tasks for that time of day.

Add just enough detail for you to see patterns. Instead of writing "Email," write "Sent three work emails." Using this example you may find it useful to know that you typically only send three emails each half an hour, whereas you may have guessed you send ten.

If you can, track your mental and physical energy as well. You may find that a certain time of day is best for physical exercise, but worse for tasks that require a lot of concentration.

At the end of the day, while the day's events are still fresh in your mind, look through your tracker and record any thoughts about how you used your time.

Note what's going to change. It's not enough to simply see that it typically takes you ten minutes to write each email. How is that information going to make your day more productive? For instance, if you'd like emails to take up less time, then your plan might be to use a timer when writing emails, limiting each email response to five minutes only.

You don't even have to track time for a long period of time. You may come to interesting realizations after only two or three days of tracking!

I hope I've convinced you how useful time tracking can be. Whether you use an app or paper system you can start gathering evidence today about how you can improve your productivity. Deer stalker and pipe optional.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

With its artifacts, participants and processes, New Product Development has undergone a revolution in the past twenty years. Global connectivity, distribution, digital tools and rapid prototyping have increased development speed while reducing the cost of turning ideas into offerings to get the most bang for our buck.

With all this change in detail and dynamic complexity, more than ever, the quality of the outcome depends on the integrated collaboration between business, design and engineering. This integration, in and of itself, can be a powerful competitive advantage that is impossible to imitate if managed well.

Teaching and practicing Integrated Design is far from a new idea. In the late '80's The Technical University of Denmark, The Royal Danish Academy and Copenhagen Business School jointly conducted corporate sponsored project courses, consisting of engineering, design and business students. Danish industry adapted the Integrated Product Development process leading to the Danish Design (The Danish Culture's Competitive Design Advantage) offerings we know today and, in the process has helped build "the happiest country in the world."

The world, at that time, was far less connected in time and space and environmental design thinking was limited to preventing manufacturing from polluting the local air and water. No one had yet thought of designing offerings with a cradle-to-cradle life cycle. Social concerns were uncommon and the only triple-bottom-line component actually being measured was profit.

Since then, New Product Development (NPD) has undergone a transformation. In the 1980s, NPD focused mainly on incremental to medium innovative product development. To consider design in a business context was still quite a new understanding and few were engaged in strategic design, breakthrough innovation or new entrepreneurial ventures. Now offerings are all about strategic entrepreneurial innovation and this is included in our methods.

In this rapidly changing world, Integrated Design needs to evolve as well. To do so, it needs to embrace New Entrepreneurial Ventures, Strategy and Breakthrough Innovations. Fortunately, recent advances in design science research offer Integrated Design new methods, processes and tools for addressing these key issues.

New Entrepreneurial Ventures require the design team to build an organization with the right capabilities while concurrently creating an offering. This means building a culture and an architectural structure together with acquiring the necessary resources so all is at the level needed within the development process.

The Design Driven Startup method (Predicting the Success of Design Driven Startups) guides entrepreneurs though the initial process of positioning their offering in a Market - Technology Risk Matrix, assessing their level of design quality and, thus, their execution risk. When market, technology and execution risk are multiplied, one has a good assessment of risk exposure and can then begin to mediate the venture's inherent risk by applying Design and Business Model Experimentation (Design and Business Model Creation) and a Design Balance Scorecard (Design Scorecard for Incremental & Breakthrough Innovation).

Having assessed the startups challenges, a strategy for navigating these challenges is essential. Strategy defines the objectives, goals and tactics of allocating resources, establishes a schedule and defines the deliverable. At this juncture, Design Driven Portfolio Management can assist in planning the path for R&D, business cases, platforms, products and their derivatives. The outcome of all of this becomes the requirements needed for an Inspirational Design Briefing, (Design Briefs' Quality Drive Design Performance) so that the design team can succeed in their objective.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

If you haven't figured this out by now, please allow me to save you some frustration: Not everyone will care about your dreams. I have been writing about this for a while on my website and shared my frustrations. Not many people really care, but there are some who will listen to your dreams just so they can tell you why you should never chase them. They are jealous. Some have failed endeavors and they don't want anyone else to be a failure, or success.

I began writing several years ago and then attended training to learn how to use a platform to build websites, including my own. I loved writing, even as a child. But, there was something more to it. I knew there had to be more. Recently, I quit my job to focus full-time on my side-business gone full-time business.

Let me lay a little groundwork here:

About six years ago I took a job some would consider a dream job. At the time, it was considered a secure job with great benefits, phenomenal retirement, you name it.

As the years passed, I realized something was wrong with me. I didn't buy into the retirement deal, and it didn't seem right. But, it wasn't just this job, but every other job I had in the past as well. I continued to do my duty until I realized; I am unemployable.

It wasn't anything against working, I am not afraid to tell you I have a strong work ethic. But misery and all its family moved in on me, so I decided to begin building my own business. For the most part, I quietly built my business on the side until it reached the point I could pay my obligations.

I know what you are thinking; There's no security in that!

Yeah, I know. I have heard that and about one thousand other reasons why I should have continued working at the "regular job".

First, there's never a perfect time to take the leap. Was it the perfect time for me? Probably not. Was there ever going to be a perfect time? Nope. Here's three things you need to know before breaking the mold and leaving your "9-5" to hustle full time on your dream:

1.) There's Never a Perfect Time: Something will ALWAYS come up to hinder you, defer your decision, change your mind, discourage you, or set you back about ten years. Screw it and move on.

2.) Having a Mentor is Critical: Why? Because if you find one with a similar thought process, it is likely they have walked in the path you are taking. Heed their advice as it can save you heartache.

3.) Having All the Details Figured Out is Impossible: There are so many things you have to do before launching out into the deep. Either way, there are risks involved. You can have all of your insecurities addressed and guess what, something will come up to screw it all up. Keep moving on. Press through it.

4.) The Closer They Are The Deeper They Stab: Not all of your friends will celebrate your change. Yeah, maybe at first they will and then they will start thinking about you working from anywhere you want to while they are stuck in a musky cubicle somewhere else. Your family will claim you are insane. Not partially insane, completely insane. I almost forgot, there will be those who would rather discourage you, tell you how you will never make it, but all the while, all they would have to do is support you. It's your dream. It's your responsibility. If you allow the words of others to keep you from it, you weren't cut out for it.

You may be in the planning stages of venturing out on your own. My point through this article is to encourage you to keep pressing through. It will not always be tough, and, no, it is not all perfect for me right now. It will be fine in the end, though. As a recovering perfectionist, I can tell you, there is no perfect decision.

Find your purpose. Seriously, I have a difficult time believing I was born to work, pay bills, and die. Maybe I am wrong but I want to leave a mark, raise the standard, conquer a mountain, Set goals and crush them. I am different and I despise being average in anything. But, I will not die with dreams and goals inside of me.

What will you do with yours?

Photo Credit: Flickr/Paxson Woelber

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

If anyone could demonstrate expertise in "beating the market," you would think it would be hedge fund managers. They get paid hefty fees (often 2 percent of assets under management plus 20 percent of profits) to generate "alpha." Successful hedge fund managers make obscene amounts of money. The top hedge fund managers earned in excess of $1 billion in 2014.

Don't get me wrong. I do believe they are among the savviest people in the universe. They have managed to persuade sophisticated pension plans, endowment funds and wealthy investors to entrust more than $2.6 trillion in assets to their management. This is quite an accomplishment, given their generally dismal record of underperformance. Let's take a look at the data.

2014 was a disaster

The most interesting record set by hedge funds last year was in the category of "dismal performance." A total of 904 hedge funds closed in 2014, which was a five-year high.

Returns were pathetic. Hedge funds earned an average return of 5.5 percent, less than half the 12 percent return of the S&P 500 index.

Let's put this in context. On Jan. 1, 2014, investors had a choice. They could buy into a hedge fund and pay 2 percent of assets and 20 percent of profits, or they could purchase an index fund that tracks the S&P 500 index (like Vanguard's 500 Index Fund Admiral Shares (VFIAX), which has an expense ratio of only 0.05 percent). The hedge fund is run by a well-compensated fund manager who attempts to beat the market. The index fund simply invests in 500 of the largest U.S. companies and is probably largely managed by a computer.

The returns of the index fund clobbered the returns of the hedge fund.

Long-term results are no better

A recent study found that, when the inherent biases in the way hedge fund databases compile returns are removed, long-term returns of hedge funds don't live up to their billing. The study found the average annualized return to hedge funds since 1996 was only 6.3 percent.

Here's the conclusion of the study's authors: "In summary, the historical data show that hedge funds have not, on average, meaningfully outperformed traditional portfolios of stocks and bonds after fees."

You have to wonder: If hedge funds haven't "meaningfully outperformed traditional portfolios of stocks and bonds after fees," why are they so popular?

Misleading marketing

Don't ever underestimate the power of Wall Street's marketing machine, or the apparent gullibility of even the most sophisticated investors. According to an article in The New York Times, two affiliates of Citigroup agreed to pay $180 million to settle charges by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that they concealed serious problems at two now-defunct hedge funds.

The funds allegedly were represented as being as safe as traditional bond funds, although they used large amounts of borrowed money to leverage returns (and thereby increase risk). Investors in these funds weren't told about liquidity issues and margin calls from lenders, which resulted in the sale of billions of dollars of assets.

The SEC also alleged investors were misled into believing the funds' potential losses would be minimal, even when the bank's internal analysis demonstrated these losses could be as much as 48 percent. Just before the situation became so dire that the manager of one fund prepared a "liquidation scenario," the fund sold as much as $110 million in additional shares to investors.

According to Andrew Ceresney, director of the SEC's enforcement division: "Advisers at these Citigroup affiliates were supposed to be looking out for investors' best interests, but falsely assured them they were making safe investments even when the funds were on the brink of disaster."

The affiliates did not admit or deny the findings of the SEC.

The takeaway

The initial takeaway is that hedge funds have not demonstrated the expertise to justify their obscene fees. Investors would likely be better off in a globally diversified portfolio of low management fee index funds.

A more significant observation is the willingness of hedge fund managers and brokers to distort returns and otherwise mislead investors. I believe it reflects a culture of greed and ethical bankruptcy that is systemic in segments of the financial services industry. Is it any surprise that brokers are fighting so hard to avoid being fiduciaries to retirement plans, much less to individual investors?

It would be hard to put the interests of your clients first while you are ripping them off.

Dan Solin is a New York Times bestselling author of the Smartest series of books. His latest book is The Smartest Sales Book You'll Ever Read.

The views of the author are his alone and may not represent the views of his affiliated firms. Any data, information and content on this blog is for information purposes only and should not be construed as an offer of advisory services.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

National Work and Family Month (October) was launched just twelve years ago, and lots of people are still just learning about it. In fact, the whole concept of "work-family balance" -- or however you choose to phrase it -- often feels like a peculiarly modern concern, born of feminism, economic changes and other factors that led to the predominance of two-earner households and/or single parent homes. But of course, this is a strictly middle class view; many families have had to struggle along without a stay-at-home parent for generations. As it happens, though I was raised in a middle class family in the era of "Mad Men," both my parents worked throughout most of my childhood.

My mother got interested in early child development while in college. She started a nursery school for the children of veterans returning from World War II, and continued teaching preschool for years. I am the youngest of three -- my brother and sister are six and eight years older than I, respectively. When each of us was born, my mother would briefly stay home, then return to teaching, at least part-time. None of us can remember how this worked exactly, but I believe she relied on a series of part-time babysitters. Then, as soon as we were old enough, she'd enroll us in whatever "nursery school" she was teaching in.

My sister vaguely remembers my mother, her nursery school teacher at the time, bringing my brother -- then an infant -- along with her to school. (Whether that was on one occasion or the norm we don't know.) Another story goes that at age 5, my brother was a latchkey kid, letting himself into an empty house after school and waiting by the window -- coat and cap still on -- until my mother came home a short while later. Personally, I was told that at age 3 I called my mother "Mrs. Hardman" right along with the other kids at school.

By the time I was eight, a brand new experiment called "Head Start" had been launched, and my mother got a job teaching there. Some years later, "nursery school" began to get a whole new branding with the rapidly-spreading phenomenon of child care centers. (The concept was looked upon with suspicion at first, at least in my house. I believe my mother thought -- not without justification in some cases -- that any place focused on meeting the needs of the parents could not also be fully focused on meeting the needs of the child.) In any case, by the time I was in what was then known as junior high, my mother was co-administering a very small chain of day care centers.

Meanwhile, throughout this entire time, my father worked a series of traditional, full-time jobs. He was a chemical engineer, doing research for large companies, like Westinghouse.

All of this (except for my father's job) was pretty unusual in the middle-class Pittsburgh neighborhood where I was raised. Most of my friends' mothers stayed home, at least through elementary school. This was such an accepted fact of life in those ancient days that my own elementary school had no cafeteria -- it closed for an hour at lunchtime and we were all expected to walk home, where it was assumed a mother would be waiting to feed us. Of course, as is still the case with most schools today, it closed again at 3-ish in the afternoon, but the concept of after-school care was literally unheard of -- home we all went once more. Needless to say, PTA meetings, school plays and other such events all took place during the day. (Surprisingly, I think parent-teacher conferences -- what we called "Open House" -- were scheduled for the evenings.)

Somehow, despite this indifferent, if not downright hostile, environment, my parents managed to make it all work. Looking back, I'm amazed at how they seem to have worked it all out with so little fuss, in part by completely ignoring the era's assumptions about gender roles. Here's what I remember:

Elementary school lunch-time coverage for me was cobbled together in one of three ways -- at least once a week, a cleaning woman came, whose job apparently included a certain amount of child care. I don't remember much about her, I'm afraid, except that she introduced me to the concept of the cheese sandwich. One or two other days a week, I was a latch-key luncher. (To be honest, these were my favorite days, when I could eat my sandwich in front of The Match Game or wile away the time improvising my own make-believe TV commercials, featuring my smiling face and the peanut butter jar.) And then, at least a couple days a week, my father actually left his job and drove home to make me lunch.

When my mother moved from teaching jobs to day care administration, her hours became longer. My father, being an early-riser, had somehow managed to arrange a 8-4 schedule long before the word "flextime" was invented, and he promptly became the family's primary grocery-shopper and cook. (One advantage to those halcyon Mad Men days was that he was apparently genuinely expected to work no more than a 40-hour week.)

Other scrambles and trade-offs were made. Once a month during elementary school, I'd be given a quarter to attend the hot dog lunch a local church. My mother somehow continued to be at least somewhat active in the PTA. Once my brother and sister went off to college, I came home after school to an empty house (where I treated my friends to my father's home-made root beer, known for its ability to take the finish off the kitchen cabinets when over-shaken). But my father continued to arrive home by 5 or even earlier, and head to the kitchen to prepare dinner.

When it comes to figuring out how to meet the needs of both their jobs and their families, women and men in the U.S. today are on their own to an unconscionable degree. But it's nothing compared to what my parents must have dealt with, facing a world in which their reality was not even a blip on the collective radar.

Robin Hardman is a writer and work-life expert who works with companies to put together the best possible "great place to work" competition entries and creates compelling, easy-to-read benefits, HR, diversity and general-topic employee communications. Find her at www.robinhardman.com.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

It takes determination, informed planning and time to successfully break into a new market. No matter which sector you operate in, you will face hurdles such as limited market knowledge, a lack of a local track record and perhaps unfamiliarity with cultural practices and sensitivities.

In our increasingly globalized world, companies seeking to grow are tackling these challenges with more regularity, as we did when we recently launched finder.com here in the US. Like any expansion into a new geographical market, we faced two options across a number of areas of our business: rely on in-house capabilities to build it from the ground up or outsource to a reliable third party.

The answer will vary depending on the company's core business, but the considerations remain the same. Here is what we learned on our journey.

Human resources
HR is a critical function of any company, and one that has traditionally worked best when in-house. When breaking into a new market, however, an HR department's concerns become more complicated than recruitment, retention and workplace culture.

A key question would be whether your organization has in-house experience with local laws and regulations around issues such as wrongful termination, sexual harassment and workplace safety. But there are also other considerations, such as familiarity with cultural intricacies on how people work and what their expectations are of their employer.

Unless you already have this expertise in-house through an employee with direct experience in that market, turning HR over to outsourced experts can help you transition into a new market more smoothly.

Marketing and social media
There are strong arguments either way for marketing and the increasingly important platform of social media. However, if your primary channels are online you can retain control of your marketing efforts from anywhere in the world. As the custodian of a brand, I would argue in favor of in-house marketing capabilities.

On the other hand, while the best social media accounts are handled in-house, it's a different case when you are attempting to crack a new market. Social media management involves a lot of work and commitment and outsourcing can free up your organization to focus on the task at hand. Of course, you'll have to trust your chosen social media partner to nail the tone and personality of your brand, before you bring it back in-house in the longer term.

IT
IT encompasses so many varied and diverse aspects of business that it's difficult to prescribe a one-size-fits-all approach. While tech development and construction can be done from anywhere in the world, there are specific intricacies to project management and the customer experience that require the input of people with on-the-ground presence in that market. So unless you can hire locals and bring them internally to perform this function, this is another case of leave it to an outsource partner.

Training & development
Every organization is defined by its company culture, a fact that is now widely - and wisely - accepted in the corporate world. The training and development of your employees is a crucial element in the nurturing of your company culture, and it's something that should not be outsourced. It is doubly important when launching a new operation: handling staff training in-house will preserve your company ethos and facilitate better relations and knowledge sharing between markets.

Sales
When it comes to sales, an on-the-ground presence that can facilitate a face-to-face relationship is critical for success when entering a new market. Rather than being restricted by your in-house sales expertise and location, local sales experts can provide you with instant access to potential customers. And, if you choose your partners wisely, they will give you an insight into those customers' needs, frustrations and behavior - more quickly and more efficiently than an internal sales department starting from scratch.

For any company that embarks on geographical expansion, the key is to implement the processes and solutions that work for your organization, remembering that successful outsourcing depends on good communication. If you go down the outsourcing path, be clear on your aims and the means of reporting.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

"You got to. This America, man!"
-Opening scene of the TV series The Wire

"Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam, in full glory reflected now shines in the stream: 'Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave...O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!"
-Francis Scott Key, the largely-ignored second verse of the Star Spangled Banner

This week, we'll be blogging from the fourth launch of the Rise of the Rest tour--an initiative launched by Steve Case, founder of AOL, and his firm Revolution which we at my firm Village Capital are partners. The Rise of the Rest initiative's flagship activity is a bus tour, which this week covers five great Northeast cities: Baltimore, Philadelphia, Buffalo, Manchester, and Portland.

Why this tour? Entrepreneurs have the opportunity to build the world we want to live in. Despite this promise, not everyone is fulfilling the promise of entrepreneurship:
• 75% of venture capital in the US is invested in three states: New York, California, and Massachusetts, but there are great entrepreneurs everywhere;
• For entrepreneurship to truly change the world, it needs to include everybody, yet less than 10% of venture funding is invested in companies with women co-founder, and less than 5% are invested in under-represented minorities.

The Rise of the Rest tour, which launched over a year ago and has now traveled to 15 cities, celebrates communities with great histories--and also great futures--while bringing together the people who dedicate their lives to helping startups.

We kicked off the fourth Rise of the Rest tour Monday morning with Steve Case and the presenting startups at Fort McHenry, most famous for being the site of the battle in the War of 1812 that inspired the "Star-Spangled Banner." Ranger Vince, fully aware of the historical context of the moment, told the gathered startups of Baltimore the state of America in 1812: the founders promoted a radical idea--democratic governance--and at the time of the War of 1812, it wasn't a sure thing that America was going to make it.

Washington had fallen to the British, and it seemed that Baltimore, the 3rd largest city in the U.S., might go next. The Star-Spangled banner was written when Francis Scott Key, who was on a boat in the Baltimore Harbor, couldn't truly see the American flag flying over the fort, but thought that after a night full of battle, he could potentially make out "the gleam of the first morning's beam." The flag still flying over the fort gave Francis Scott Key--and a startup country--hope that the country would make it.

Steve Case then reminded the gathered entrepreneurs that "250 years ago, America was a startup--and what will keep our country great is continuing to innovate and support promoters of new ideas." America has always relied on startups--the industrial revolution built great cities such as Pittsburgh; the automobile revolution created Detroit as the wealthiest city in the country, and while we now revere the excellence of Silicon Valley, the rest of the country has outstanding potential. And in Baltimore we saw an early gleam of what was to come:

Strong Sector Focus

While many startups try and re-create Silicon Valley, Baltimore has a strong sense of who the city can be. The infrastructure in Johns Hopkins University has created an outstanding ecosystem for health; an influx of education reformers have created an ed-tech ecosystem similar to what we have seen in New Orleans; and great organizations such as Startup Maryland and Betamore have sourced, trained, and curated the best startups we can find in Baltimore. In some cities we have visited, this tour has introduced ecosystem players to each other; in Baltimore, the level of collaboration already existing is encouraging.

"Startups have children and grandchildren"

"Startups have children and grandchildren," Steve Case always says, and often cites the examples of the startups that AOL and its extended ecosystem has created in Washington, DC. Baltimore has a major success, UnderArmour, occupying a spectacular old factory on the harbor and doing much more. We had a pitchfest of wearable technologies on the Under Armour docks, and Kevin Plank, UA's CEO, and team have purchased 300 acres of old industrial buildings to support future startups. We see cities thrive when people who have been successful invest in the next generation, and Baltimore provides hope.

Inclusive entrepreneurship

One conversation that was refreshingly front-of-mind: inclusive entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship runs the risk of expanding the gap between the successful and the left behind if we only support technology entrepreneurs from great schools who have access to resources; Baltimore's gap between rich and poor is one of the largest in the country, and recent headlines such as the Freddie Gray incident only highlight how far startups have to go to include everyone.

Fortunately, leaders such as the Impact Hub Baltimoreand Kapor Capital have made consistent investments in Baltimore to level the playing field, and we see more dedication and promise here than most areas to make sure entrepreneurship works for everyone.

Baltimore: "Gleam of the Morning"

Baltimore has a little bit to go to catch up with its Acela Corridor neighbors Boston, New York, and DC, but the enthusiasm, collaboration, and embrace of inclusion here gives promise. As we kick off the fourth Rise of the Rest tour, we're encouraged that the future of Baltimore--and the US--is bright.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

If you're a small business owner chances are you spend several hours per week developing strategies that will increase revenue. You're pouring in tons of hard work. I GET it. I own a small business that provides trainings, workshops and consultation services. Through personal experience and the scope of my work I've noticed a theme. It's not uncommon (particularly for businesses in the early stages) to overlook a few steps that are potentially costly. While factors that impact the financial earnings for a business cannot be reduced to a single article, below are 3 things small business owners do that may be costing them money.

1) Dispensing FREE information. "Can we grab some lunch?" "I would love to pick your brain about a few topics." Once upon a time I was flattered by the idea of business owners wanting to get my opinion on a new venture. In my state of flattery I would dispense tons of advice from how to obtain corporate sponsors to effective marketing strategies. I was too green to realize that I was providing FREE consultation. Scratch that, it wasn't exactly free because they typically paid for the meal. So actually I was providing amazing consultation in exchange for a chicken salad and water. Which is probably more embarrassing than providing a free consult. If you're a business owner chances are you are pretty knowledgeable about your service/product. Inevitably people are going to want to chat you up for information. Weather people realize it or not they are asking for a free service. If you are faced with this situation a great way to respond would be to say something like "actually I would be happy to sit and discuss this with you. This is one of the areas I typically consult on and I have the availability to add you as client." Chances are you may gain a client or create an additional revenue stream.

2) Forgetting the barter system. While an immediate financial payment is the preference for any business owner, bartering also has its share of benefits. If your business is low on capital it's smart to consider what services you can offer another company in exchange for something that will fill one of your business voids. Before I continue let me be clear. I am not suggesting having a business lunch at a restaurant then offering to wash the dishes as payment when the check is presented. Nope. In fact that may result in an arrest. What I am suggesting is analyzing your business for strengths and struggles. If you recognize that a section of your business is struggling it would be helpful to engage in a mutually beneficial agreement with another small business owner who thrives in that area. Please note, that bartering also offers tax advantages and tax reporting requirements.

3) Too many discounts and free services to friends and family. Extending a discount or the occasional free service/ product to family and friends is perfectly fine. In fact, this can help generate business if said person will eventually become a costumer that pays your asking price or will spread the word about how great your business is. However, be careful to navigate this in a way that is beneficial to your bottom line. If a great portion of your time or service is being allocated to non-paying costumers (or costumers that pay a discounted rate) this can become dangerous. I am not advocating a Nancy Reagan "just say no" policy, I am just suggesting that you perform a cost benefit analysis on how they are allocated. While the recipient of the service (or product) may view this exchange as a "favor", you should view it as potentially giving away money. If guilt is your dilemma and you're afraid of hurting their feelings just remember that genuine supporters seek opportunities to help your business, not continually ask for freebies.

It goes without saying that building a small business is time consuming. However, regardless of the size and years of operation it's helpful to pause and conduct an internal analysis to help ensure that the empire you are building doesn't have a few holes in the bottom. If it does just redirect for a moment, plug the holes and keep building.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

I was recently asked this question...

"Most advisors in the industry have short-term goals as well as long-term goals. For advisors that are still developing their practice, long-term goals may include becoming proficient in markets we don't already have strong connections in. What is your advice on effective ways to branch into new markets and becoming the "go-to" individual in that market?"

What a great question! But really, these are a few different (but important) questions. Let's handle each question separately.

How do I branch into new markets?
It's more important to branch into the right markets than it is to branch into a new space just for the sake of it. And by market, I mean target industry, profession, market segment, niche, geography, dynamic, and/or circumstance. The more specific you are about your chosen market, the more effectively you can find and go to the right places, say the right things, and meet the right people. It's about being right! (As opposed to wrong.)

What is the right marketplace for you?
It boils down to passion and profit.

Are you passionate about an industry, profession, marketplace or niche? By passion, I mean are you driven into a certain industry or profession because you feel a calling to help? For example, my niche is working in the financial services industry because frankly, I'm passionate about consumers making sound financial decisions about life insurance, retirement planning, and long term care.If I can teach enough firms, and therefore their advisors, to simply be better at meeting more and better clients, I feel I've done my part.

What's your passion? Is there a profession that fascinates you? Do you have a background in a specific marketplace that lends itself to your interest? Do you have family or friends that work in the same profession? Are you already passionate about an activity (maybe fitness or golf, as an example) that lends itself to a marketplace that you should explore? Do some soul searching and find your passion.

Once you do, you're half way there. Then, you have to look at the profit side. Is your chosen marketplace profitable or simply a labor of love? Will your chosen market generate more business for you? The labor of love thing is fine as long as you're growing your practice with other marketplaces. But if this is not the case, your market needs to be fruitful. If you can't grow a successful practice, you will lose your passion and it will be more difficult to help your clients. In the end, isn't that what it's about?

How can I be the go-to person in those markets?
Network at the professional associations representing your target market. Write articles in their publications. Be interviewed by the power players in that industry. Deliver free webinars (approved, of course, by your compliance department). Speak at industry meetings. Make sure everyone you know in your target market knows that you serve their marketplace without necessarily pitching your services to them.

Establish referral relationships with those that serve your marketplace but don't compete with you. Become a resource in your marketplace on social media. Make sure everyone you talk to knows that you specialize in an industry rather than simply being known as an insurance agent, financial advisor, or sales professional. Create a brand or image (mine is boxing and "knock out" networking!) that resonates with your market.

Choose your market wisely while implementing some of these strategies and I promise you'll be a "knock out" in your market in no time!

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Business today can feel like being transported to the pages of the Louis Carroll classic Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. The potential solutions for meeting today's challenges are just as confusing as the problems: Change your computer systems, become more customer-centric, start doing social media; stop doing social media; change your processes; build a culture of service ... commitment ... accountability ... or fun.

No wonder you are left repeating the words of Alice, "It would be so nice if something would make sense for a change."

The truth is there is no one single change that will ensure your organization's long-term success. And even if there was one today, it will most likely be different tomorrow.

There is one change, however, you should never make if you want to thrive in today's chaotic world: You should never change your focus on treating your staff as valued partners. Doing that one thing builds and sustains trust and engagement to achieve your vision.

What it Means to Feel Like a Valued Partner

Valued partners look out for each other's success. They hold each other accountable for performance and behavior that energizes the organization. They consider others when making decisions. Their positive energy helps everyone focus on how to make a change work rather than why it won't. They can turn a mediocre plan into a smashing success.

Most important, they contribute to an environment where every person at every level can be trusted to do what they are supposed to do when they are supposed to do it the way it is supposed to be done.

Feeling like a valued partner is not the same as being happy and upbeat about your job. Morale can fluctuate based on the situation. It would be normal, for instance, for people not to have a high level of enjoyment about the job in the face of a severe business downturn. But, they can still have the high degree of trust and engagement that comes from knowing that you are a valued partner.

Likewise, there is no guarantee that an organization's values will or should not change over time based on the business model, new leadership, or even where the organization is in its life cycle of maturity.

Trust in where the organization is headed, how they will be treated, and the recognition of contribution should never be in doubt. You want everyone to see themselves as crucial members of a committed, engaged team that is willing and able to execute in pursuit of the vision - regardless of the type of change you are experiencing.

Here are three things you can do right now to ensure that every person feels like a valued partner who is engaged to achieve success:

Examine and adjust every process and system. Most organizations say something about employees as their most important resource in their value statements - and then they implement human resources processes and systems that communicate just the opposite.

Train supervisors and managers and then hold them accountable. It doesn't matter what the company policy says if your boss treats you as an enemy not a partner. A skill set that includes coaching, feedback, recognition, and effectively holding difficult conversations is a must. Supervisors and managers must be held accountable for modeling behavior that demonstrates a partnership.

Be as open and transparent as possible. Nothing contributes to partnerships based on trust more than open, honest communication. There may be a few things that you cannot share because of business or legal issues, but minimize those as much as possible and be transparent about your inability to share confidential information.

Once you treat people as valued partners, you earn the right to expect them to act that way. And, there is nothing more critical for your success that in a world where nothing is what it is because everything is what it isn't than knowing everyone is in it together.

Randy Pennington is an award-winning author, speaker, and leading authority on helping organizations deliver positive results in a world of accelerating change. His keynote seminars and workshops are informative, engaging, and memorable. To learn more or to hire Randy for your next meeting, visit www.penningtongroup.com, email info@penningtongroup.com, or call 972-980-9857.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

It crossed my mind that I've not just hired one coach this year, but four. Four business coaches.

I have a coach for DIY PR, brand building, marketing and social media.

When I launched my first company at 23, I thought I didn't need a coach. I knew I could figure everything out via trial, error and research. And I did that for a while, puttering along.

The reality of hiring a coach is that you're paying someone that is better than you at a specific skill to help you navigate avoidable disasters. The path to success doesn't have to be painful. There will be challenges, but why should you struggle for a decade to make six figures, when you can hire someone that has experience to lead you to make six figures in a year?

Hiring coaches, listening to podcasts, reading books are all investments in yourself. You're investing time and money to improve yourself. Working with a coach adds an element of accountability, which lights a fire under your tail.

Here are the 5 reasons why you need a coach:

1. Coaches tell you when to remove your head from your arse
Yes, I said it. Being an entrepreneur and building a business can be very ego driven. We put our blood, sweat and tears into our businesses every day. This often leads us to see our company in a certain light. Having a no-nonsense coach is excellent when you have a problem that needs solving and you think there's only one way to do it. Shut up, listen and do what your coach says. That is the reason that you've hired them.

2. Coaches inspire you to go further and do more
Only 6% of entrepreneurs ever reach 6 figures. My PR coach made 6 figures her first year in business. Do you know how fired up that makes me? I know because she did it, I can do it. Coaches take their experiences, good and bad, distill them and pass on their lessons to you. If you listen to a successful coach, you're one step closer to attaining your goals.

3. Coaches push you to become a better you
Think of it as hiring a personal trainer. Instead of making your body stronger, you're making your business stronger. You're paying someone to tell you to keep going. Your coach will push you to finish those 3 last three business push ups. We all need someone telling us to be like Nike and just do it.

4. Coaches give you a game plan
Would you impulsively decide to run a marathon the night before or would you train for several months? Obviously, you would train for several months. Training is essential to business success. Starting a company isn't as simple as having an idea and releasing it into the world. You need a strong foundation to build your business on. When you're neck deep in your idea it's hard to create a foundation and systems. That's where your coach comes in.

5. Coaches give you a set of success tools
Sometimes those tools are as simple as telling you to write down 5 things you are grateful for every morning. Sometimes that tool is a set of guides that help you analyze who your ideal audience is, create an avatar which you then build your entire marketing plan around. One of the best pieces of advice I have ever gotten from a coach was to be selfish. If I don't carve out time to take care of myself first thing everyday, who else will? Yes, you're paying a coach to help you with a certain skill set, but always pay attention. You never know what jewels they will share that can change your life.

What's holding you back from hiring a coach?

Follow me on Instagram to receive daily, actionable business tips!

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

2015-09-28-1443484199-4111804-meetingboardroomprofessionals.jpg

Technology has had a considerable impact on the judicial landscape in America. The discovery process once relied primarily on droves of lawyers sifting through documents looking for evidence. This manual process has at least partly been replaced by advanced software. Software consisting of complex algorithms that search and produce documents. The amount of stored data requiring review has also increased exponentially over the years.

These changes are accompanied by an increasing number of cases being settled outside of court. Some argue it is because the intensive eDiscovery process allows ready access of information and case details. The process allows court decisions to be more predictable. Others argue that litigants are settling cases based on cost rather than merit. The cost of eDiscovery is driving everyone but the rich from the courts.

Whatever the case, electronic discovery (eDiscovery) has become a norm in the litigation process and organizations need to align their legal strategy to be better prepared. General Counsel need to familiarize themselves with emerging tools in eDiscovery and the evolving legal landscape. Being better prepared can reduce costs during litigation and provide a strategic advantage.

Better preparation for unanticipated litigation requires being better prepared to comply with eDiscovery obligations. There are three key areas a company can focus on:

Records retention policy

Litigation response strategy

General Counsel Training

Records Retention Policy

A good records retention policy reduces a company's risk by ensuring the proper handling of electronic data. Companies should have a formalized plan for document retention and destruction. Policy should include electronic data and take into account statutory and regulatory obligations. Failure to enact a sufficient policy can undermine a company's position in litigation.

A good retention policy requires appropriate records retention personnel. While the head of a company's IT department may understand the technological landscape, they do not have the prerequisite knowledge to decide what should be retained and how. Staff responsible for records retention should be well-versed in eDiscovery and litigation. Other company employees should also be well versed with the retention policy. Companies should have procedures in place to ensure the policy is understood and implemented.

Setting up a records retention committee can be beneficial to help keep ancillary staff informed. The committee can meet regularly and include legal, IT, records retention and executive staff. General Counsel should also be encouraged to consult outside counsel regarding retention policy and appropriate response to anticipated and actual litigation.

Litigation Response Strategy

A good litigation response strategy should include eDiscovery protocol. This can include setting up a response team to preserve documents in the event of litigation. Sometimes it is advantageous to retain outside vendors to assist in litigation holds. Employees are often too close to the situation and are prone to over or under preservation. A good strategy can include building relationships with prospective vendors.

Once litigation ensues, records retention becomes even more crucial. A good response strategy provides that personnel are careful to avoid destruction of documents once it is clear that duty to preserve has attached. A company risks sanctions if documents are destroyed once they have a duty to preserve them.

General Counsel Training

A company's General Counsel is a key player in eDiscovery strategy. Outside counsel is often retained during litigation but having lawyers on staff who are aware of the nuances of eDiscovery and records retention can provide a competitive legal advantage. This can be as simple as requiring general counsel to attend eDiscovery training workshops on a yearly basis or hiring personnel with eDiscovery experience.

General Counsel should be educated on company's records and the available technology for records storage and retrieval. This should include the cost of storage and retrieval for any particular technology.

A good eDiscovery strategy does not ensure success, but it helps.

It is important to remember that there is no fail-safe plan for avoiding liability at the hands of electronic data. It is also important to remember that a good strategy is never stagnant. As an organization changes - so should its strategy. As new eDiscovery tools emerge, as the courts develop new precedent and as the discovery process evolves - so should a company's eDiscovery strategy. Being better prepared for litigation means constantly educating yourself and refining policy and procedure.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Extraverted or introverted; serious or humorous; approachable or distant; leaders come in many different styles. Unfortunately, unlike purchasing a car, you can't pick what style best suits you, nor can you trade it in for a different model, and there is definitely not a lemon law. Reality dictates, that we adapt to leaders, rather than they to us. So, how about we check out of reality for a bit and pretend we can design our ideal leader? What traits, skills and style would best fit your needs? Let's have a little fun. I will go first and then you can use the comment section below to add your thoughts. Hopefully, we start a unique dialogue with a large range of responses.

I will use interchangeable pronouns in my description, since gender has no bearing on my view of what constitutes an ideal leader. I will list out below the key building blocks of that leader.

Visionary
My ideal leader sees the future state and has a clear definition of what success looks like. He can paint that picture clearly for everyone in the organization and is absolute in his conviction in our ability to achieve that vision.

Innovative
I want a creative out of the box thinker who welcomes new ideas, challenges current thinking, and believes in the benefit of the collective intelligence. She never expects her staff to present just a problem, but rather to bring forth a challenge paired with a recommended solution.

Purposeful
There is a reason for everything. The ideal leader provides strong strategic guardrails that help to maintain focus, and also helps us to see that our individual contributions make a difference. He is the champion of our purpose, ensuring as an organization that we are taking action steps and measuring their impact everyday. We all understand how we add value.

Authentic
This may be an overused term, but it does capture my point. My ideal leader is vulnerable, empathetic, friendly, funny, flawed, scarred and real. She doesn't hide from any of the above and doesn't ask others to either.

People oriented
My ideal leader believes that the power is not in the numbers but in the people. He recognizes that people are the engine of any organization and that a fundamental duty of his is to make them feel heard, cared for, valued and respected. He never refers to people as working "for" him, rather people work "with" him.

Macromanager
She doesn't have to control every outcome. She doesn't manage from 5 feet; she manages from 30,000. She recognizes that in order for someone to succeed, you must give them the room to fail. Further, she understands that failure is life's great teacher and believes firmly that if her people don't have a few failures, they are not taking the needed risks to move the organization forward.

Presence
My ideal leader is fully present when we meet. I am not competing for his attention with emails, phone calls or spreadsheets. He meets me in this moment and I am left to feel that I was the recipient of his complete attention. He believes that as Thich Nhat Hanh, a famous Zen priest said, "The most precious gift we can offer others is our presence".

Humor
Although I included this in my description of authentic, to me it is worthy of its own call out. Humor is a great unifier when administered in a way that brings people together. Work at times can frankly stink, and being able to laugh together at a difficult situation can bolster the resolve to change it. My ideal leader can laugh at the absurdity of work life, and she encourages others to do the same.

Mindfulness
This is just simply being aware. My ideal leader checks in with himself. He knows where his head is when he is about to enter a situation. Similarly, he attempts to bring to bear that awareness on the others with whom he is about to interact. He slows things down and by doing so is far less likely to overreact, underreact or just miss out on a need to act.

Together what I just described is what I would term an Integrative Leader. This is someone who blends the logical and linear with the mind and spirit. It is a combination of a leader with a strong understanding of their purpose, vision and values, applied in a way that makes people feel heard, cared for, valued and respected. I am passionate about this form of leadership and if you are interested in learning more about this approach, please reach out.

Okay, now it is your turn. How would you describe your ideal leader? What are your feelings about what I outlined above? Let's have a discussion.

Thanks for reading.

Elliot Begoun is a Business Growth Consultant and the Principle of The Intertwine Group. His purpose is to help businesses and business leaders grow. He works to solve real issues, establish strategic guardrails, develop integrative leaders and foster employee enlightenment.

Grow your business - Solve real issues - Establish Strategic Guardrails - Develop Integrative leaders - Foster Employee Enlightenment

Connect with Us:

GROW | Website | LinkedIn | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ |

This article first appeared on www.TheIntertwineGroup.com

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Being your own boss is at the heart of the American Dream. No wonder it is such a common fantasy. The idea of ownership taps into our profound longing for riches and freedom -- freedom from bosses, restrictive policies, glass ceilings and everything else that robs you of rewards, both financial and creative.

Starting your own business sounds like a great idea especially when we hear such promising stories: a laid-off mid-manager selling her artisanal marmalade to local shops; a lawyer starting an online legal firm; a teacher leaving a franchise fair with a check in her hand. These tales sound oh-so-tempting.

Being your own boss is at the heart of the American Dream, and it's no wonder it is such a common fantasy. The idea of ownership taps into our profound longing for freedom -- freedom from bosses, restrictive policies, glass ceilings and everything else that robs you of rewards, both financial and creative.

But is it really right for you? Do you have what it takes to become an entrepreneur? The French root, prendre, means to take. When you start your own business, you must take on massive responsibility and all risk for any future gains or profit, however delayed they are. Can you do it? Yes or no?

Here are some quick questions that might resolve whether you have what it takes. Be brutally honest with yourself. Recall your past experiences -- or lack thereof -- to support your answers to the following:

1. Do I initiate projects and execute them through successfully?
2. Have I managed projects well without supervision?
3. Have I enjoyed being in charge?
4. Can I hire and fire others when it is necessary?
5. Can I delegate work?
6. Can I criticize others' work and get what I need?
7. Can I negotiate and compromise without feeling that I am selling out?
8. Do I have energy?
9. Can I delay gratification to attain a goal?

If you answer mostly No, you need to recognize that being an entrepreneur is not your style, at least not yet. Most of us are used to the discipline of structure and fulfilling what is required of us by our job. Don't berate yourself if you not only work for a boss, but thrive under a boss. Remember, there are surely more jobs and opportunities.

If you answer mostly Yes, your risk-taking skills suggest that you can be adept at taking chances. But don't go out on your own first. Experiment by working for an established entrepreneur to see how it's done and test the process to see if you relish it.

But if all your answers are Yes, you can be ready to go out on your own or are ripe for an even higher level of management. Consider that position now. It could work in surprising ways, taking you out of your comfort zone, a good thing, but not out of your career.

Business owners and entrepreneurs are not just born. I coach many such people and witness the process. Business owners develop a set of skills that they will practice throughout their lives. I call this skill set, Risking Linking. Linking, of course, is connecting to people -- in person and online -- in meaningful ways of exchange. Risking is difficult to understand, requires much more than just time and money, though it will take plenty of both. It demands that we act despite our lurking and profound fears that we aren't good enough. There is no cure for such anxiety or timidity except to keep practicing this skill, which will, in time, prune terror. Working with a career coach can help you overcome your own self-imposed limitations -- invaluable lessons.

There is more to opening your own business than your entrepreneurial and leadership skills. Ensure not only that the business has the capacity for profit, but also that it's a fit for you specifically. Women start a business based on something they like, whereas men typically buy a business, without much regard for their interests other than being in charge. NAWBO's (National Association of Women Business Owners) stats prove that women's small businesses succeed at far better rates than men's.

If you are ready, find groups that will support your ideas. Sample local networking meetings, powerful places, but only if you become an active member. Just attending doesn't do it. Use your entrepreneurial spirit to start an exchange that can lead you to your next step. Find and use a civic or professional association to practice leadership and sales skills and meet others who can become or lead you to investors. Interview members, including the group's officers, for their own success stories. Volunteer for a committee or task relating to the business you want to start or buy in order to segue into brainstorming and planning.

Learning to pay attention to your own heart and experience is a fine guide for success.

Make your luck happen!

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

How Billionaires Pursue Startups

Availability Is Not a Skill

Neuro-tip: Make Candor a Priority

Wanting to Preserve Your Way of Life Does Not Make You Racist or Fascist

Janet Yellen Shows the Need for a 4 Percent Unemployment Target

5 Essential Personality Traits to Look for in Job Candidates

Positive Attitude

Initiative

Communication and Relationship Skills

Ability to Adapt

Creativity

A Time-Management Tool That Takes Away the Guesswork

Integrated Design: A Co-Creation of Business, Design and Engineering

4 Life Lessons From an Entrepreneur

Hedge Fund Myths and Misdeeds

How My Parents Put the Lie to Mad Men

Outsource or In-House: How to Break Into New Markets

Rise of the Rest Tour in Baltimore: Catching the Gleam

3 Basic Mistakes Small Business Owners Make That Impact Revenue

How to Generate More Business by Opening New Markets

Here's The One Change Your Company Should Never Make

5 Reasons Why Coaching Is Essential to Business Success

How to Better Prepare Your Company for Litigation and eDiscovery

Hands Down, This Is the Best Kind of Leader!

Are You Really an Entrepreneur?