Addressing Diversity and Inclusiveness in The Workplace

It’s no secret that many people are uncomfortable with discussing issues around race, diversity, and inclusiveness in the workplace. However, as we all know, the first step toward solving any problem is to acknowledge it.

In general, it is better to be proactive than reactive in building an inclusive workplace. Organizations that initially overlook questions of diversity, face public criticism as a result, and then make changes in response, may be accused of kowtowing to critics instead of showing a bona fide desire to become more inclusive. Likewise, the general public is unlikely to find a large organization’s claims of “meritocracy” convincing if the lack of diversity among its high-ranking officials is obvious. And in business, as in politics, public opinion matters a great deal.

Consider the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences—better known as the agency behind the Oscars. In the weeks leading up to this year’s ceremony, the Academy courted heavy criticism over the apparent lack of diversity among its voting members—and the consequences in terms of the films and performers deemed meritorious of Oscar consideration. Some high-profile critics even announced plans to boycott the Awards.

Although the Academy’s president Cheryl Boone Isaacs said her organization would take “dramatic steps” to change the composition of its membership, scrutiny of the Academy’s hiring and nomination practices will continue. The onus of demonstrating progress now falls squarely on the shoulders of Isaacs and her colleagues.

According to the Los Angeles Times, as of February 2016, 91 percent of the Academy’s 6,261 voting members are white, and 76 percent are male.

Becoming an inclusive organization

Dr. Kira Hudson Banks is a psychologist who specializes in racial identity, discrimination, diversity, and their relationship to mental health. Writing in Harvard Business Review, Banks recommends that organizations make a deliberate, long-term investment in inclusiveness. This means engaging with issues of race, inclusivity, and diversity on a regular basis, rather than merely in a one-off seminar.

For this purpose, managers can organize small study groups and/or specialized training sessions devoted to discussions among people of diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds, life experiences, and gender identities.

Items that participants might engage with include:

•  Privilege: What is it, and what role does it play both in society, and within our organization in particular?

•  Experiences of discrimination: Have you experienced discrimination or barriers to success based on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or physical ability? Have you noticed any such barriers here, within this organization? If so, what can we (as managers) do to facilitate your success?

•  Employment-related issues involving diversity and inclusiveness: Possible topics include the hiring and employment disparity between people with “ethnic-sounding” names and those with Anglo-Saxon-sounding names; the merits of affirmative action; the persistent compensation gap between men and women; and the presence (or deficiency) of infrastructure to assist people with disabilities.

•  Key questions: What would inclusiveness look like? How can we (as an organization) achieve it? Individuals within the organization may have different ideas about what inclusiveness and diversity mean. Encourage them to share these notions openly and frankly within their discussion groups, and be prepared to deal with direct criticism. A measure of conflict is okay in this situation, provided the atmosphere remains respectful and all participants have a fair chance to express their point of view.

   This process has three main goals: 1) to enable individuals to identify and confront their own biases and misconceptions; 2) to establish a common understanding and direction for the organization with respect to inclusiveness, and highlight any shortcomings in that area; and ultimately, 3) to foster a work climate in which all current and prospective personnel feel they have a fair opportunity to succeed.

Apple’s Public Dispute With The FBI, Explained

Apple has recently courted controversy over its resistance to a demand by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Namely, the FBI wants Apple to help its investigators hack into the iPhone of San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook, and a federal magistrate has ordered the tech giant to comply. Apple CEO Tim Cook has said the company plans to fight the ruling.

The bureau, with the support of the Department of Justice (DoJ) and the White House, argues that its proposal is analogous to a warrant-authorized search. FBI officials speculate that information stored on Farook’s device may help them ascertain the circumstances that led to the San Bernardino tragedy, identify any accomplices the perpetrators may have had, and possibly prevent future attacks by violent extremists. The bureau’s director James Comey has suggested that he is not trying to set a legal precedent by pursuing the Farook case.

On the other hand, Cook contends that a version of the iOS operating system designed to override security features would constitute a “backdoor to the iPhone” and would indeed set a dangerous precedent for digital privacy around the world.

Technically, a backdoor to the iPhone already exists, in the sense that Apple has the ability to create and upload to its devices software that would override security features. The determining factor is whether the author possesses Apple’s secret digital signing key, since Apple devices won’t run software that doesn’t bear this signature.

 

The FBI’s proposal, and why Apple is resistant

Farook’s phone and the data stored on it are protected by a pin number that only the shooter knew. The FBI plans to conduct a “brute-force attack”—in other words, connect a device to the phone that can attempt many numerical passcode guesses in quick succession. But Farook has enabled a security feature that causes his iPhone to temporarily lock after 10 incorrect guesses. Depending on the settings, there is a possibility that data stored on the phone could be automatically erased after the tenth attempt.

The government wants Apple to design and upload onto the iPhone a version of iOS that would allow investigators to attempt an infinite number of passcode guesses without getting locked out, and without incurring the risk of data erasure.

But the company has raised several objections.

•  Cook fears Apple’s creation of “backdoor” software could have far-reaching implications. And his concern isn’t isolated to the future actions of American individuals and agencies. Apple is a transnational corporation that does business in dozens of countries around the world, including authoritarian regimes. If the U.S. government can demand that Apple help law enforcement hack an iPhone, what is to prevent a dictatorship from enlisting Apple technicians to break into the electronic devices of suspected dissidents?

•  The Farook case is not, in fact, unique. Rather, the U.S. Justice Department has requested Apple’s help to extract data from at least 12 other iPhones. Apple brass have expressed concerns that by writing security-override software on behalf of law enforcement, their company could come to be perceived as an appendage of the national security state—and thereby lose customers’ trust.

•  Security-overriding software for the iPhone could empower cyber-criminals. Cook has suggested that by creating a new version of iOS for the purpose of overriding security protections, Apple would run the risk that this software might fall into the wrong hands. However, the existence of Apple’s private signing key already poses a similar threat; armed with that signature, a skilled programmer with expertise in iOS could theoretically hack into any iPhone.

Does the government have ulterior motives?

Last fall, the Obama administration’s National Security Council formalized a “decision memo” which tasks state agencies with finding ways to circumvent digital encryption and security protections. Apple’s authorship of “backdoor” software would be a big step in that direction.

Given the significance and implications of the Farook case, don’t be surprised if an appellate court eventually rules in the tech giant’s favour. But U.S. government agencies’ efforts to gain access to digital devices will surely continue. In fact, through a tool called DROPOUTJEEP, the U.S. National Security Agency probably has backdoor access to at least some iPhones already. 

Could a Basic Income Guarantee Be Good For Business?

The basic income guarantee (BIG)—sometimes called a basic minimum income, or negative income tax—is hardly a new idea, but it is currently in vogue. National governments in Switzerland and Finland, and the provincial administration in Quebec, are all considering proposals for a minimum income. Most recently, Canada’s federal government invited one of the country’s foremost experts on the subject to discuss it at a pre-budget hearing in Ottawa.

The BIG is one of those rare policy tools that has garnered support from thinkers, activists, and policymakers all across the ideological spectrum—from the late American neoliberal economist Milton Friedman, to Canadian former Conservative senator Hugh Segal, to the centre-right coalition in Finland, to typically centre-left Green parties, feminists, self-identified progressives, even socialists.

Naturally, many people worry about the potential work disincentive, but past studies—including the Mincome experiment in Dauphin, Manitoba in the 1970s—suggest that this disincentive is not as powerful as one might expect, and may be partially offset by human capital gains. (For example, employees might take time to upgrade their skills rather than work menial jobs to make ends meet; new parents might stay home to look after their young children rather than rush off to work.) If designed effectively, a BIG could have beneficial effects on the labour market, the private sector, the overall education level of society, and public health.

It could afford numerous benefits to businesses and aspiring entrepreneurs in particular.

•  Education, skills, and innovation: By providing time for recipients to upgrade their education and cultivate new skills, a BIG could promote both a more dextrous workforce and a better educated society. Visionary individuals would also enjoy more freedom to experiment and hours to invest in long-term projects.

Think of tech pioneers who have spent countless hours tinkering in their garages, refining the latest game-changing breakthrough. A BIG could encourage time-intensive innovation and research, and offer many more creative geniuses the opportunity to engage in it.

•  New commercial opportunities: Pro-business advocates of a BIG tend to emphasize its potential to reduce social program and public health costs, while streamlining administration and bureaucracy. In turn, this could allow the private sector to offer services for which the state had previously assumed responsibility. Many existing businesses could look forward to growth in their customer base, since more people would have disposable income.

•  Easing of downturns: When economic recessions occur, poverty typically rises, and consumers at all income levels tend to cut back on their spending. Businesses watch their revenues drop due to a lack of customers. Managers respond by laying off employees, which exacerbates the problems of poverty and too few customers. A BIG could help to stabilize the situation by dulling the sharp edges of the business cycle, and mitigating various other social ills associated with hard times.

Of course, many practical questions and details warrant policymakers’ attention. How should we finance a BIG? For the purpose of determining who qualifies, how should we define the poverty line? Would it be appropriate to distribute the BIG differently based on cost of living, or could impecunious residents of inner-city Toronto, downtown Vancouver, Dawson City, Iqaluit, Halifax, and rural Quebec all expect an equal supplement? At what age should individuals become eligible? What about new immigrants and asylum seekers? What about people with serious physical disabilities versus those with able bodies—should they receive different income supplements?

Nonetheless, encouraging results from past trials indicate that the BIG is worthy of the serious consideration some governments are giving it.

Best Practices For Firing Someone

It’s a conversation almost no one enjoys having: a member of your staff has fallen short of

expectations, and you’ve decided to let that person go.

With notable exceptions—including a certain U.S. presidential candidate and former reality TV star—many employers favour a gentle, tactful approach to firing. After all, people rarely enjoy being bearers of bad news, especially the kind that can dramatically alter an individual’s life. Nonetheless, clarity and assertiveness are crucial when it comes to firing. No wonder some companies prefer to rely on independent HR consultancies for “termination assistance”!

Be fair and transparent, and maintain a documentary record.

For both legal and ethical reasons, you should establish consistent ground rules for every person you hire, including your organization’s termination policy. If you are having difficulty with an employee, raise the issues you’ve identified in one of h/er regular performance reviews, or arrange a meeting to discuss the matter. Keep a detailed documentary record at every stage of the process. If you see no improvement in the employee’s performance over time, then dismissal may become necessary.

Double-check with the HR department (if you have one).

HR can help provide information about extenuating circumstances the employee faces, or any other relevant details that could influence both your decision and the timing. An HR professional can also provide general support, and be present in the room during The Talk. (If nothing else, it sometimes helps to have company and moral support on such a weighty occasion.)

Once you’ve made a final decision, don’t delay.

It may be that you’re indecisive about firing someone, and you’d like to give that employee an opportunity to redeem h/erself. But once you’ve reached a final decision to dismiss a member of your workforce, and you know deep down that you won’t change your mind, avoid the temptation to dither. The longer a person who isn’t up to the job stays with your organization, the more harm s/he may do, and the more extra work s/he will probably generate for your other staff.

Identify a confidential venue for the conversation (like a conference room or private office), and then get on with it.

Get right to the point.

When everyone (you, the employee, and the HR professional) is seated and paying attention, announce your decision up front, followed by your reasons. You can soften the blow slightly by formulating the statement like so: “I’m afraid I have some bad news: we’ve decided to let you go, because...”

At this point, it’s possible that the employee may attempt to bargain, or become combative. You can express regret about the situation, but avoid the temptation to become defensive, hesitate, or engage in a verbal joust. You’ve made this decision because you believe it’s in the best interests of your business, and it’s final.

Address any technical questions the ex-employee has.

There may be concerns around severance, unused vacation days, or other matters you hadn’t considered yet.

Be kind. If you believe the ex-employee’s potential lies elsewhere, offer to help.

For long-term employees in particular, being fired is a traumatic experience: it can damage their self-confidence, entail the severing of personal and professional relationships, and result in loss of income and abandonment of plans. It is appropriate to show compassion for people facing such circumstances, especially when you are the proximate agent thereof.

Sometimes a staff member who shows talent and potential in certain areas just isn’t the right fit for the position s/he occupies at your business. If you simply can’t find a place for that employee in your organization, you can still offer to ask around or provide a reference.

Parting on amicable terms isn’t always a realistic possibility, but it certainly makes for more pleasant professional relationships down the road.

Optimize the Employee Performance Review

In today’s technology-intensive business climate, employers must be able to accurately gauge the evolving needs of their enterprise, how individual employees are coping with change, and how each staff member’s role is shifting relative to h/er original job description. The individual employee performance review can be an effective tool for measuring progress, and for improving productivity, morale, and relations between managers and staff. But it can also be a waste of time if the participants are unprepared.

Prepare for the performance evaluation in advance and pay attention to details. Here are some areas you may want to consider:

•  the employee’s professional rapport with h/er co-workers, superiors, and subordinates

•  skills and execution in key areas like organization, timely response to e-mails and phone messages, courtesy toward clients (barring exceptional circumstances), and completion of tasks ahead of deadlines or key dates

•  any comments or feedback, whether complimentary or otherwise, about the employee from h/er colleagues or immediate supervisors

•  opportunities for professional growth, on-the-job training, and skills upgrades

It is wise to give an employee plenty of notice that a performance review is forthcoming, and remind h/er a few days before the meeting. This will give h/er time to identify issues that s/he may want to raise, including h/er goals within the organization, and areas where s/he may need additional support.

Hold the evaluation in a confidential space, and set an agenda.

 

Dedicate a certain number of minutes to each area you’d like to discuss; aim to stay more or less on topic and on schedule. Confidentiality is important. You don’t want everyone in the office to know your opinion of the employee, and the employee won’t want rumours about h/er strengths, weaknesses, impressions of relationships with colleagues and professional goals to spread.

Don’t leave compensation to the end.

Employees are understandably interested to know the level of compensation they can expect today and in the future. If the individual you’re evaluating senses that you’re glossing over the subject or avoiding it, it could become an elephant in the room. And distractions of that magnitude during an evaluation are never helpful.

Whether you believe a raise is in order or not, state your position and your rationale. If possible, try to put a positive spin on a non-raise by hinting at actions your employee can take to qualify for a salary bump and increased responsibility. Staff who feel that their pay is arbitrary, or that their career is stuck in neutral, may become discouraged and contemplate moving on.

Ask questions, and provide opportunities for your counterpart to do the same.

You may have formed a certain impression of the employee and h/er performance already, but it’s still important to hear the other person’s point of view. You could even begin the meeting by asking the employee to evaluate h/er own performance, and compare that assessment to your own.

In the event of an underperformance, there may be confounding factors you haven’t accounted for. On the other hand, if an employee is enjoying success, s/he may offer an explanation that will enable you to foster h/er continued success.

Finally, just as you would at the end of a job interview, reserve a few minutes for the employee to ask questions, raise concerns, and pitch ideas of h/er own.

Make sure you’re on the same page.

Review the key points raised during the evaluation as it draws to a close, and ensure that you both (employee and manager) understand and accept your expectations of each other, and your responsibilities moving forward.

Which Comes First: Happiness Or Success?

We all know the paradox of the chicken and the egg—historically, one must have preceded the other. Drawing on Darwin’s theory of evolution, we can surmise that the familiar chicken must have evolved in phases, first from reptile to bird through natural selection, and then from wild pheasant to domesticated fowl through artificial selection. So the first “chicken” probably hatched from an egg laid by a pheasant-like animal that wasn’t quite a chicken. But then, what distinguishes a chicken from a not-quite-chicken? It’s all very complicated.

Happiness and success are also strongly correlated, and at first glance, the question of which occurs first would seem to pose a similar intellectual challenge. In fact, much academic literature supports the presence of a causal relationship that may seem counter-intuitive: happiness promotes success, but success doesn’t necessarily promote happiness.

Why is this? And what are the implications of this relationship for the way we organize our personal and professional lives?

The evidence

 

In his bestseller The Happiness Advantage and in his popular 2011 TED Talk, positive psychology expert Shawn Achor draws on his own extensive research—including case studies at Harvard University and in the private sector—to argue that happiness is a catalyst for success in both academic and professional endeavours. He also alludes to a growing body of knowledge in the fields of neuroscience and positive psychology that buttress this conclusion.

An explanation Achor offers for the failure of measurable success to consistently induce happiness, is the problem of moving goalposts. Once we reach a particular goal, we tend to immediately adopt a more ambitious one. While goal-setting and ambition are generally desirable traits, aspirations can become unhealthy if we view them from a glass-half-empty perspective, don’t take time to acknowledge our achievements, and constantly berate ourselves over a perceived failure to attain “real” success. To paraphrase Achor, by framing happiness as a product of success, we indefinitely push both happiness and success beyond our cognitive horizon. And in turn, the absence of life satisfaction here and now can actually hamper our future prospects.

Tips for boosting your day-to-day positivity

•  Show gratitude to the people who contribute meaningfully to your life, including colleagues, friends, and loved ones. Reflect on your accomplishments with pride, and  take time (3-5 minutes) to actively appreciate the positives. Try making a daily journal entry of three things for which you are grateful. Over time, this exercise will train your mind to seek out opportunities rather than dwell on hazards.

•  Keep calm and manage your schedule so as to mitigate stress. Chip away at long-term projects incrementally to avoid procrastination-induced deadline anxiety. Focus on conserving energy throughout the workday, so that you keep some in reserve for recreational activities, quality time with friends and family, and hobbies while you’re away from the office. When stress shows up (and it occasionally will), embrace the challenge and think about how great you’ll feel once you’ve conquered it.

•  Be kind to others. This is a win-win: agents and recipients of compassion both tend to experience higher levels of life satisfaction. Random acts of kindness, which could be as simple as sending a brief e-mail to show appreciation for the efforts of an employee or co-worker, can make an enduring beneficial impact on the culture of your workplace.

•  Clear your head. Sometimes in order to refocus, we need to temporarily un-focus. If you experience a feeling of stagnation at work, try stepping away for a while and enjoying a pleasurable activity. Upon your return, you may be pleasantly surprised by the ease with which your work flows, and by the new insights and creativity your mind generates.

•  Eat healthy, balanced meals and allocate enough time for them that you avoid constantly “eating on the run”. Feelings of burnout, irritability, and energy lapses are often at least partly attributable to inadequate nutrition.

Five Business and Economic Trends To Watch In 2016

Challenges and changes will be the hallmarks of 2016, but this year will also present great opportunities to far-sighted, innovative individuals and organizations.

1.  Economic headwinds intensify

Canada has been hit hard by the continued fall in the price of oil and other commodities, on which our economy depends heavily for investment and revenue. Not surprisingly, the province of Alberta has suffered disproportionately, with tens of thousands of jobs lost; the provincial government has also seen its tax and royalty revenues drop, inducing a large fiscal deficit. A lower loonie is the inevitable consequence of a fall in foreign investment to Canada’s extractive industries.

Of course, the global economy is highly integrated, and difficulties in one nation are usually indicative of broader trends. The weakening of commodities owes largely to a slowdown in the Chinese economy, due in part to persistent soft demand for Chinese manufactures in the most lucrative consumer markets: the U.S., the European Union, and Japan. China has managed to sustain a relatively high growth rate since the 2008 Great Recession with the help of public expenditures and private credit. But this tactic seems to be nearing the end of its rope, and investors are nervous about the implications—hence the volatile stock market.

All in all, 2016 is likely to be another year of economic uncertainty, and recession is a distinct possibility for many industrialized countries, China included.

2.  Millennials move up; Gen-Zers enter the workforce

It’s hard to believe that fears over “Y2K” came and went more than 16 years ago, yet here we are. In 2016 and in the years to follow, we will witness a major demographic shift in the workforce: Baby-boomers will continue to retire or cut back on their hours; Millennials will scale the professional ladder into positions of greater authority and prominence; and members of Generation Z—also called Post-Millenials or iGens, born in the era of boy bands and Spice Girls—will increasingly fill entry-level posts.

The visibility of this shift toward youth in business and politics will grow, as will its influence on consumer-market dynamics. Businesses that cater effectively to the preferences of the under-35 cohort by embracing mobile technology, values like social justice and environmental sustainability, and somewhat non-traditional work environments, will prosper.

3.  Departures from “business as usual”

Infused with youthful vigour and an innovative mindset, many organizations are adopting new ways of working.

Some workplaces have introduced elements of fun and relaxation into their office environments—like ping pong tables, recreation areas, and even dedicated spaces for taking naps. Others offer flexible work schedules, including unlimited vacation, conditional on employees completing all of their assigned tasks within a set timeframe. And last year, CEO Dan Price of Gravity Payments made headlines when he announced a minimum annual salary of $70,000 for workers at his business, and cut his own compensation by 90 percent.

With more young, socially conscientious individuals in the workforce and greater diversity in the executive suites, the trend away from traditional corporate structures and workplace dynamics will continue.

4.  Growth of the “gig economy”, and friction with the old order

The phrase “gig economy” is largely a misnomer, since a lot of “gigs” are really short-term employment stints, often in the service sector. For example, a customer who commissions a driver through a ride-sharing service is effectively hiring both the motorist and the company to provide transportation. But because of the informality of “gigs”, the temporary employer typically needn’t pay a minimum wage, or cover expenses like health insurance, workers’ compensation, payroll taxes, or job training. As a result, “gig” workers’ labour costs can undersell those of their counterparts in established industries by a wide margin.

In many major cities, taxi companies and drivers are lobbying municipal governments to either nullify certain regulations on the taxi industry to enable taxis to “compete” with ride sharing, or outlaw ride sharing altogether. Either way, the consequences for customers could be significant. Last year, the California Labor Commission ruled that an Uber driver was an employee rather than a contractor, and thus was entitled to claim certain out-of-pocket expenses. If this ruling encompassed all such drivers, ride sharing could lose a big chunk of its cost-competitive edge.

The inherent conflict between traditional work and “gigs” is far from settled.

5.  Opportunities in mobile services

Mobile technology has both greatly improved and become ubiquitous over the past decade, and accordingly, a healthy bottom line awaits companies that ride this wave successfully. A mobile-friendly web presence is more important than ever before, and businesses should strongly consider developing their own apps to facilitate access for customers with smartphones and tablets.

Conquer the Fear of Saying No

If you ask a person on the street which word is likelier to contribute to personal and professional success—yes or no—that individual will probably choose the former. But as many leaders in the world of business and politics will tell you, learning to say no can be every bit as important as knowing how to say yes. The reasons for this are largely intuitive: by turning down some engagements, you free up time, energy, and mental focus for the endeavours you find most inspiring.

However, many of us feel distinctly uncomfortable with saying no, often because we worry that doing so may cause offence or otherwise lead to negative social consequences. Insofar as it compels us to take on more commitments than we can handle at any one time, this anxiety can hamper our pursuit of the professional and life goals that are most important to us.

Establish and respect your own boundaries.

Your work is surely a high priority for you—but so are your health, quality time with friends and family, leisure time, and other hobbies or avocations. Think of your lifestyle as analogous to a meal: nearly everyone would prefer a flavourful medley of high-quality, healthy ingredients to a monochromatic, humdrum dish of little nutritional value. Likewise, if you devote all of your time to a single work-related project, you probably won’t enjoy a wholesome existence.

Once you set parameters like the number of hours you’re willing to devote to a new project, and commitment versus expected benefit, you’ll find it easier to distinguish the undertakings that really interest you from the also-rans.

Be honest with yourself.

Before you dive headfirst into any significant assignment, ask yourself the following questions:

1)  Am I genuinely passionate about this project?

2)  Five years from now, will I look back on my efforts with pride?

3)  Is it consistent with my values?

4)  Why is it important to me to take this on?

5)  Will I be able to dedicate sufficient time to this?

6)  Do I have the necessary technical expertise, and/or can I partner with someone who does?

Unless you can answer all or most of those questions, you’re better off saving your talents for something that’s more up your alley. Otherwise, you’ll likely either feel stretched too thin, or a sense of regret about the opportunity cost.

Know your strengths.

We all have strengths and weaknesses. The first step on the path to success in any field is to identify your own. Once you know where your own aptitudes and deficiencies lie, you can work to refine the former and improve the latter. You’ll also know which of your personal attributes you can rely on in high-pressure situations.

The willingness to venture outside one’s comfort zone is often an admirable quality. But if a project either isn’t your cup of tea from a technical standpoint, or you sense that your time would be better spent elsewhere, you should consider either turning it down or delegating it.

Strategies for politely declining:

“I’d like to know more. Can you send me more information?” This serves two purposes. First, it provides a test of the other individual’s commitment; if you never hear from h/er, you will know. Second, it gives you the opportunity to learn more about the endeavour itself before deciding whether to take it on.

“Let me check my calendar and get back to you.” This is not an explicit demurral, but it does enable you to buy time. It is possible that the person who pitched the idea to you will forget after a while. Alternatively, on further reflection you may decide that the project is right up your alley.

“This seems like an excellent, worthwhile idea, but unfortunately...” Shortage of time is an excuse that most people will accept, particularly if they’re not close friends of yours who happen to be conversant with your schedule.

How to Keep (For Real) Your Professional New Year’s Resolutions

The standard tale of the unfulfilled new year’s resolution—an ambitious goal that one articulates, commits to, and promptly abandons—has become a cultural cliché in our society. In fact, many fitness professionals joke that January is the busiest month of the year at the gym, whereas February usually brings a normal volume of customers. Regardless of the area in which we see room for self-improvement, thinking of a new year’s resolution is one thing; actually following through is another.

What is true of personal goals is equally true of professional ones—setting a work-related resolution is easy, but actually fulfilling our ambitions requires commitment, perseverance, and consistency.

Friends and colleagues can hold you accountable.

“Will power” needn’t merely be a matter of individual steel and grit; you can enlist the help of others

to hold you accountable for your commitments. If your goal is to keep yourself in better physical shape this year, try joining a running group or scheduling exercise sessions with a friend. If you have particular professional ambitions—such as finishing a project ahead of a fixed deadline—announce them to your colleagues, staff, and anyone else who will listen. Although most people won’t go out of their way to remind you of your shortcomings, the desire to avoid the shame of breaking a public promise can be a powerful motivator.

Set manageable targets.

If you have an ambitious, long-term goal, you may find yourself daunted by the thought of what you need to do in order to reach the finish line, and the massive amount of effort and commitment involved. Instead of approaching a challenge this way, you may instead find it helpful to identify intermediate landmarks.

For instance, if your office is disorganized and you’d like to rectify that, don’t allow the scariness of tidying up an entire room to overwhelm you; aim to keep a corner of your desk clear of clutter, then another corner, etc.

Create a roadmap for yourself, including a clear understanding of the process involved in reaching your final goal, and reward yourself as you surpass each milestone. Of course, you can expect that some days will be easier than others, but remember that even slight progress toward your desired outcome is better than none.

Foster new habits.

As human beings, we all tend to be creatures of habit. This partly explains why committing to a new year’s resolution is so difficult; unless we continue a particular activity long enough to cultivate a new habit, we easily slip back into familiar, comfortable patterns of behaviour. Our habits are like molds that shape our personal characteristics and abilities, and it takes time and dedication to restructure those molds. But fortunately, it can be done.

In the quest to develop new habits, planning and intentionality are valuable allies. Establish your intentions, write them down, and commit them to memory. To help manage your time, set temporal boundaries for yourself—for instance, “I will check my e-mail inbox at 11:00 a.m., but no sooner, and I will finish with that task by 11:20.” Personally, I find it helpful to work in segments of 20-30 minutes, and time myself with a stopwatch.

Don’t let a slight shortfall deter you.

Even after an honest effort, you may find that you’ve fallen short of your new year’s resolution. But don’t let that disappointment dissuade you from setting ambitious goals and pursuing the professional success you desire. Even if you don’t quite attain your goals this time, you will learn valuable lessons that will help you in your next attempt.

Can Corporations Halt Climate Change?

In an article published in Harvard Business Review, science historian Naomi Oreskes and green business advocate Auden Schendler argue that we can’t count on large, for-profit corporations to undertake meaningful climate action on their own.

One take-away from Oreskes and Schendler’s piece is hard to dispute: in order to combat climate change, a binding and meaningful international climate accord is essential. But is the authors’ pessimistic assessment of major corporations vis-a-vis the climate also warranted? That depends.

The profit motive versus the climate?

By providing an incentive for business leaders to respond to the forces of supply and demand in the marketplace, the profit motive plays an integral role in all capitalist market economies.

In theory, robust demand for a given product or service causes its price to rise, which motivates businesses to supply more. Firms that respond nimbly to consumer demand are rewarded with increased profits. In the world of natural resources and commodities, scarcity drives prices higher, which encourages investment in research and development, and drives the search for alternative fuels and material inputs. In a competitive marketplace, consumers theoretically gain access to innovative, high-quality goods and services at the lowest feasible cost.

The idea that the pursuit of self-interest is conducive to the collective welfare of society has a long history, with famous exponents including Adam Smith, Ayn Rand, and Milton Friedman. Large corporations of the present day generally adhere to a similar principle; in fact, courts in the U.S. and other countries have ruled that publicly traded businesses have a fiduciary responsibility to pursue profit on behalf of their shareholders. This framework saddles the state with enforcing laws and regulations, deterring and prosecuting crimes, dealing with externalities, and generally safeguarding the public interest.

           

Whither externalities?      

Externalities are costs or benefits that are not embodied in the market price of a good or service. Industrial belching of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere contributes to the negative externalities of pollution and climate change. Health care, by contrast, yields positive externalities by promoting a a more salubrious society. As long as they remain external to market prices, externalities can seriously undermine the ability of our economic system to advance human welfare.

Governments can partly redress climate externalities by taxing or regulating polluters, and providing incentives for non-polluters. But since there is only one atmosphere, and climate change is occurring at a global scale, policies of this kind must be internationally harmonized in order to be most effective.

Moreover, governments are never disinterested actors; they are subject to lobbying by various parties and interest groups (including major corporations with significant investment in the status quo). The appropriate price of carbon emissions, for example, is a contentious issue. No government is omniscient, and uncertainty invites differing perspectives, interpretations, and geopolitical tensions.

For instance, U.S. representatives might argue that meaningful progress can’t occur on the climate file without hefty emissions reduction commitments from China. China’s representatives might retort that relatively inexpensive Chinese manufactures benefit western corporations and consumers—so the developed world shares partial responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions in China. Both arguments contain a kernel of truth, and there is no simple way to ascertain which kernel deserves more weight.

The “free” market

Even the most elementary functions of government influence private market interactions. There is no such thing as a “free” market.

By levying taxes, the state encourages its citizens to change their behaviour in order to avoid those taxes. By commissioning the construction of roads and highways, it facilitates private automobile transport, and in turn, props up the automotive industry. With its police force and judiciary, it enforces private property and enables accumulation. Through public education, it contributes to the productivity of private enterprises. Unemployment insurance programs enable risk-taking and entrepreneurship by mitigating the costs of failure. Every successful capitalist economy has included significant government intervention, and public policy is thoroughly enmeshed in market dynamics and outcomes.

In a sense then, “Can corporations help solve climate change?” is the wrong question. Instead we should ask “Can the world’s governments structure market incentives so as to internalize externalities, and make fossil fuel combustion less profitable?” As long as cutting greenhouse gas emissions is more expensive than continuing to emit them, profit-seeking corporations will be unreliable partners (at best) in the campaign for a stable climate.