http://www.bnet.com/5799-13609-0.html?type=18 Blog Recent Discussion Activity http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92161 Citing Sowell's credentials as an economist, as a reason he "not doubt (sic) has never believed there is a pay equity problem" is unsubstantiated and unjustified. He is an African-American who grew up in Harlem, and is widely considered an expert on gender, race and religious discrimination. He is a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, recipient of the National Humanities Medal in 2002, and the Bradley Prize for intellectual achievement in 2003. He has published dozens of books, and has served on the faculties of Stanford, UCLA, Amherst, the Urban Institute, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Brandeis, Cornell, Rutgers, and the US Department of Labor.<br><br>It's usually a better idea to analyze someone's arguments, and bring better facts than they have, than to assert what you think the person "no doubt" has "never believed." Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:26:07 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92161 2009-11-23T20:26:07Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4560#19009_92148 Totally agree with Business First Houston. If they can not afford the $675 application fee that should be their first goal to save enough to pay for it. The value of the citizenship is not in the right to vote nor being able to bring family members (even though those are very important benefits) but in being part of the AMERICAN WAY of living and living the American dream, the idea of belonging to a way of thinking and having the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness with freedom and responsibility!!! Having said that, we should not make it harder to become a citizen but they should pay for the cost of becoming a citizen (not in favor of subsidizing the application cost). Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:34:06 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4560#19009_92148 2009-11-23T19:34:06Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4528#18859_92111 Two words - Tort reform... Ok a few more words. I would like someone to name one state or federal gov't instance where they (the gov't) got involved in private enterprise and made it more efiicient and served the customer better. Having dealt with Medicare/Medicaid from the consumer end, I can tell you it makes no sense to those with "common sense" money is being wasted on a grand scale in the current system. I'll admit I don't know enough about the whole debate to comment further. What I do know is the gov't, especially the feds, have a history of top heavy, inefficient bureacracy. I want no part of the federal government having even more direct or indirect control of such importmant life decisions.<br><br>Seems to me we need to deal directly with the cost of the care, not how to cover the present (escalating) cost. Treat the causes, not the symptoms...<br><br>One more thing, will Congress adopt this bill as their own healthcare insurance, or will they keep the current sweetheart deal they voted for themselves? Seems to me, if they are public servants, they should have to use the Public Option for themselves...No? Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:17:02 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4528#18859_92111 2009-11-23T17:17:02Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92095 We keep going round and round and, aside from the observation that women are discriminated against, a major thread seems to be "women are more fully human, so they are more unhappy at work." I don't really want to argue whether women are more fully human, but focus on the need to improve the American workplace so that anyone who wants to be fully human can be happier at work. The workplace is ever more deficient in this aspect. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:08:33 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92095 2009-11-23T17:08:33Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92079 @shortc<br><br>It?s ?Manabozho,? the name of a spirit from Apache mythology, not ?Manabout,? which makes it sound as if I?m flaunting gender in my username. Please.<br><br>How can a more careful research method ??make the pay gap smaller?? and at the same time ??pick up discrimination?? That certainly sounds like a contradiction, in your own words.<br><br>Sowell and others have a serious disagreement with the methods of many of the studies that conclude that ?women are paid less because they are women, even when they are in the same jobs / doing the same work.? To address what they believe is a shortcoming in methodology, these researchers have done research that controls for more of the non-gender factors that affect pay, but were not considered by the researchers in the studies they criticize. The list is significant: same degree (precisely, not comparing chemistry with chemical engineering, which pays much higher); same educational institution; same grade point average; same time of entry into the work force; same job title; same job content; same CONTINUOUS time in the workforce; same hours spent on the job; and so on at considerable length.<br><br>That?s fundamental to the scientific method: hold all other variables constant, so that the effect you claim can be attributed only to the cause to which you attribute it. If you don?t, other scientists will do so, and may well get results that rebut your conclusions. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:48:58 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92079 2009-11-23T16:48:58Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4560#19009_92102 The cost of citizenship SHOULD be high. U.S. citizenship is not a commodity to be compared to other citizenships to attract willing "buyers". We don't compete for the citizens of other countries to come here so they can try to make our country in their image, their customs, their religions, their languages. This is America - people need to want to be AMERICANS if they want to come here, not hyphenated Americans but Americans along with the rest of us. There is no other country on earth where they call their quality of life "The (again, fill in the blank) Dream". U.S. citizenship is not for everyone. In fact no one has to buy it. It?s not something we give away (although it appears the liberal left seems to think that is the way to increase value in some way). Please, come to America and "BE" an American. It?s not something you need to do and we are glad to have you if you want to contribute to the quality of everyone who is already an American, and participate in OUR way of life. We will help you make your life beyond your wildest dreams. That what being an American is all about. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:45:49 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4560#19009_92102 2009-11-23T16:45:49Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4494#18853_92059 Mandate seems to imply an imposition. We live in a global economy and English is the universal language of business; the genie is out of the bottle. However, as a <a href="http://sites.google.com/site/mrenglish101/" target="_blank">professor <br></a> of English as a Foreign Language, English is also important in law and medicine and thus a narrow focus on business may miss the point. <br><br>I am fluent in Spanish and currently teach abroad in Brazil where I am studying Portuguese. It is very important for the English speaking world to embrace other languages. Also as a translator, I understand well that language is culture not just mere words or phrases. <br><br>So, while English is the language of business, it is incumbent upon English speakers to broaden their language ability. That is smart business and the cultural insights gained may just help close the next deal. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:29:21 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4494#18853_92059 2009-11-23T15:29:21Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92073 I tried to read many of these posts which have slowly begun to peel the onion. I am a conservative baby boomer who after many years of working in many different environments can attest to much that has been written to be true. <br><br>A few years ago, I went into business with some family members that were all male. Even though I was the one going into the venture with by far the most experience, I pretty much got zero respect even though there was play acting that pretended to say otherwise. I didn't have the final say about anything unless I really stood my ground and frankly was unpleasant. I also came with the money and the fiscal responsibility. So what was the problem?<br><br>Part of it was age. Americans do not respect their elders and most especially not aged women. Part of the problem also was a very difference perspective regarding workplace dynamics. So things that would bother me did not bother my male counterparts. Women can feel discontent and know when to have that chat and when to ask the employee to step it up and stop being a baby. Males simply do not see the or feel the workplace tension as quickly until it is often too big and too late to solve. BTW, the discontent I saw was often not workplace related, but unhappiness with one's lot in life. So I am saying to some extent way too much emotion is being brought to the job and getting mixed up with business.<br><br>Having worked with both men and women, and also youth, I prefer to work with men that can be given that "chat" without permanent damage. It is the rare woman that has stepped over the line and needs that chat that recovers and is appreciative that somebody cared enough to help them. I have seen it a few times and those young women went on to expand their world and do great things. <br><br>IMO, women at work are often plugged in to their families while men rarely are. However that can be quite annoying to work with. It is the texting, phone messages, or verbal worries that interferes with the workplace load. However women often have another gear and can really step it up and do better work than men. Men tend to have one gear which is consistent and can be relied upon, but they rarely know how to multitask and put the pedal to the metal. <br><br>Why are women unhappy at work? They beat to a more independent beat and often feel left out. I think they bore easier and frankly want to get the job done ASAP and GO HOME to the pace they have nurtured and prefer. <br><br> Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:11:17 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92073 2009-11-23T15:11:17Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92021 Manabout should be a bit more careful with his "facts". He claims: "Thomas Sowell and others have found that when the large number of factors influencing pay are held constant (major field of study, grade point average, year of graduation, year of entry in the workforce, continuous time in the workforce, job title, work content, etc), women earn 90-105% of what men earn." Thomas Sowell is a neo classical economist who, not doubt, has never believed there is a pay equity problem. I am the author of "Why and How Women were Still Paid Less 1990 to 2003 available at <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Women-Were-Still-Paid-Less/dp/3639146611/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258933937&sr=1-1" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/Women-Were-Still-Paid-Less/dp/3639146611/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258933937&sr=1-1</a><br>Of course using more variables like Sowell's study makes the pay gap smaller - but in fact what it is doing is also picking up discrimination against women and in particular the effects of anticipated discrimination - in predominantly male jobs for example. Pay equity is actually getting worse in Australia - the pay gap has widened from 14% in 2003 to 17% this year so we definitely still have a problem to fix. My study shows that people involved (employers, unions and Commissioners) in setting pay in Australia believe there is still a problem and one that is predominantly caused by very slowly changing social values about women and what jobs they should do. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:00:43 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_92021 2009-11-23T00:00:43Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4048#17740_91925 I am currently going through this right now with my Supervisor. When I first joined my company, I was excited becausee department that I was hired in was new and there were many opportunities for promotion and professional growth. I was promoted into my current position within 6 months of hire. Many people in the company tried to disuade me from taking the position because of the supervisor who was over that department. I did not listen because I feel that everyone has some good in them and I did not want to make judgement without knowing her. Well, I must say that the warnings were correct. My supervisor has a problem with people who speaks up for themselves. She intimidates her employees by reminding us that we are in a recession and we can easily be replaced. Prior to starting in her department, I was approved for vacation time and she informed me on numerous occassions that she can take the time away from me. I was asked to be on the company newsletter by her Manager because of my Journalism experience, she informed him that I can not because I have issues at home, which is not true. She has told us on numerous occassions that if we are interested in other positions in the company that we would need to let her know because it is following protocol. When I let her know a position that I was interested in, she informed me that I should stay where I am because I appear to not know where I want to go with this company. I am done with her and this company. I am finishing up my 2nd Masters degree and I plan to be in this company until August of this year. I am at the point where I am stressed, I hate getting up and going to work in the morning and I hate the situation that I am in. Many have told me to stick it out, but now this is interferring with my physical health because of the stress that I am undergoing. This is all unfortunate because this company will miss out on a great employee who can add so much to this company. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:11:29 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4048#17740_91925 2009-11-22T02:11:29Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4548#18902_91848 Great point that best practises are simply copying what someone else did in a similar situation, but if the "similarity" is not "identical" the risks of copying creating institutionalism and thus "average practise" is greater than the possibility of success. "Me too" does not create strategic advantage! Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:15:12 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4548#18902_91848 2009-11-21T07:15:12Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4539#18854_91693 The Question should be "When was the last time a recession ended with Christmas spending?"<br><br> Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:52:55 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4539#18854_91693 2009-11-20T13:52:55Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4548#18902_91593 Dead right! Best Practices always become dogma unless <br>they are treated as a guide rather than law. Where people <br>screw up is in forgetting or ignoring "worst practices". If <br>leaders had the balls to accept error as a gift to their <br>corporate wisdom, they would be able to set clear <br>boundaries defined by "what definitely doesn't work". So, <br>equipped with the compass of "best practice" and bounded <br>by "worst practice", intelligence and creativity can be set <br>free to explore opportunities, fixes, etc. Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:01:00 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4548#18902_91593 2009-11-20T00:01:00Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_91489 Regardless of whether a company is diverse and female-friendly, women are taught from childhood to seek strong and healthy providers. This originally applied to marriage but nowadays it carries over to employment in the workplace. With such powerful, almost subliminal training, women don't have to be unhappy to want to jump ship and seek new employment, it may just be the result of sensing weakness or instability on the part of their employer. Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:29:30 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=3972#17315_91489 2009-11-19T18:29:30Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4528#18859_91514 Not being a historian, I have a question: Although most Americans may want a public option, most politicians know that won't make it through Congress, which is probably true. In the past, have such political footballs been passed on to the states to deal with?<br><br>As an HR guy, I have seen insurance greed firsthand. I was hoping Congress would expand Medicare to cover everyone, since the mechanism is already in place. However, at this point their only politically viable option is "Health Insurance Reform," not "Healthcare Reform."<br> Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:59:35 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4528#18859_91514 2009-11-19T17:59:35Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4474#18798_91500 Managers' role is to understand the roles in the <br>organization, staff them with the right talent (those who are <br>good at what the roles require and passionate about doing <br>it) and then stay in constant contact to build a personal <br>connection. Regardless of the economy, managers who <br>focus on building an employee-focused workplace, create a <br>performance powerhouse to drive the leaders' vision and to <br>create a customer-focused workplace. Managers have a <br>critical role in activating performance, though most are <br>unaware of how to attract and hire the right employees, and <br>moreover, how to retain the best by creating constantly <br>challenging and growing positions, supported by strong <br>professional relationships. <br>Crisis or no crisis, managers have the responsibility of <br>creating and maintaining a high impact workforce. In good <br>times or in tough times, hiring the right employees, <br>connecting them passionately to their work and connecting <br>personally to them is the key to performance. And it all <br>starts with the manager. Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:06:51 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4474#18798_91500 2009-11-19T17:06:51Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4539#18854_91492 I think, perhaps, the "Homemade Holidays" will make a bit of a comeback. Where a box full of yummy treats or a hand-knit sweater will arrive rather than a new laptop or HDTV. <br><br><br>Or at least that's what some of us who have been foreclosed on are doing :o). The bank may be able to take away my investment home, but they can't take away 20+ years of crafting and baking experience!! Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:50:04 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4539#18854_91492 2009-11-19T16:50:04Z http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4539#18854_91479 Hey Harvard Experts- Have you seen the unemployment rate? The layofs? The rising healthcare costs?<br><br>Some common sense - We are worried about our next dime as a people and we will not be spending big this Christmas. <br><br>We will return to the spirit of the Holiday - giving of ourselves and small tokens so to speak. <br><br>Ane no Christmas ads on TV NOW are insulting and wont stimulate sales, they will remind us of how bad things are.<br><br>Please factot that into you Expert thinking. I'll bey you folks are not facing being laid off are you? Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:45:41 GMT http://blogs.bnet.com/harvard/?p=4539#18854_91479 2009-11-19T16:45:41Z