SERIOUS ABOUT YOUR CAREER, DON'T WORK AT HOME

Yes, there are some genuine benefits to not dressing up, commuting to the office, not having people watching over you, and being subjected to time-wasting meetings. But are you willing to trade some degree of flexibility and temporary pleasure for the opportunity to advance to the next level? 

The sad truth is that invisible but truly competent people are rarely promoted as they are doing a great job as it is. 

Some of the important factors to consider when you are offered the opportunity to work from home:

• Being visible and able to demonstrate desirable character traits that mark you as competent, credible, reliable, trustworthy, and helpful to co-workers.
• Being a visible a part of the team that allows for both collaboration and stimulation. This also means absorbing and mirroring the company culture.
• Being visible implies that you are more likely to attract a mentor who can provide valuable career advice and might be the one to save your job when others are losing theirs. 

In essence, you are visible – beyond performance metrics on a spreadsheet -- and in the line of sight for recognition and advancement.
 

---

TOXIC BOSSES: IS THERE A LIMIT TO CRAZY? - 17 KEY POINTS

There are any number of difficult bosses, some geniuses and others who hold their position based on circumstances (luck) and connections. Some of the smartest ones include Larry Ellison of Oracle,  Barry Diller of IAC, and Jack Welch of GE – and then there are the others like Al “Chainsaw” Dunlap and Eddie Lampert who apparently believe they are destined for greatness as they destroy iconic companies. 

Is your boss a crazy-maker and is there a limit to crazy?

1. Demonstrates a sense of entitlement, expecting special treatment and believing the rules do not apply to them. Using a sports analogy, they were born on third-base and were batted home by another player – but tell the world they hit a home run and stole home plate. 
2. Guided more by feelings and believes that they are always the smartest person in the room and can “wing it” in any situation.
3. Manipulates presence and perception to ensure that they are the center of attention. Nothing appears too outrageous at the moment, and they often display a lack of shame, remorse, or concern over their actions. 
4. Associates with other movers and shakers at prestigious events to validate their position on the totem pole.
5. Hyper-vigilant and quick to respond to any perceived or real slight with disproportionate, and often inappropriate, forcefulness. 
6. Often arrogant or authoritarian by both presence and position, but can be personally pleasant, charismatic, engaging, and manipulative on demand. People who are not personally useful or who do not advance the agenda are transparent to the point of being ignored.
7. Demands unquestioning personal loyalty and obedience, but it is often a one-way path. Requires an excessive level of admiration and stroking when boasting of their achievements or publicity.
8. Takes undue credit for all achievements but is quick to assign blame to others. Refused to recognize or acknowledge the brilliance or hard work of others that underpin their success. Feels free to insult, undercut, or lambaste employees, opponents, or reported who “don’t get it.” 
9. Creates conflict to prevent challenges and chaos to mask a lack of knowledge or competence
10. Is known as a hard-charger, damn the torpedoes, full ahead. Responds with anger, and possibly rage, when denied action, access, or acknowledgment. 
11. Lack of attention span and ability to retain critical information. Often providing conflicting responses depending on the audience and the time of day. Their opinion can be heavily influenced by the last person to leave the room. 
12. Publicity hound – almost as if achievements do not truly exist until they are recognized and acknowledged by others.
13. Communication is often a one-way affair where a series of dictates are issued. Everyone around them, including family, are LLEs (Lower-Level Employees).
14. Attempts to shift all personal expenses to the organization. 
15. Uses and cultivates totemic symbols, lavish and ornate trappings, aircraft, cars, collectibles.
16. Maintains an obligatory “I’m so great and powerful wall” of pictures, covers, and framed articles. 
17. Is often described by employees who use psychological words such as narcissistic, compulsive, impulsive, schizoid, and paranoid. 

There is little you can do to function adequately in the presence of a crazy-making boss. Sometimes it is worth the pain and suffering if you can jump ahead of others in your career path. Other times it is more important to preserve your physical and mental health by seeking employment elsewhere.

Take a few moments and think about your boss and potential benefits and adverse consequences of remaining under their control. 

---

IS POLITICAL CORRECTNESS DESTROYING VALUE AND VALUES?

People are seriously asking themselves why a quintessential alpha-male like James Bond cannot be played by a woman. James Bond is a character who inhabits a time when there was a bright line between good and evil, right and wrong and an overarching patriotic duty to one’s country. His savoir-faire in handling danger while wooing beautiful women and vanquishing evil men is legendary. And yet, there are people who see the character of James Bond as a product of white privilege, misogyny, bigotry and project the world’s social ills on a fictitious character. 

As a book-reading Ian Fleming/James Bond fan, I find that the cinema-based story is giving way to spectacular special effects and gadgetry. The struggle between good and evil is becoming routine and cartoonish. But allowing a woman to play James or Jane Bond would severely destroy the value of the Bond franchise in the name of political correctness. 

If one wants a James Bond-like character that happens to be a woman, let them look at the role of Emma Peel so ably played by Dianna Rigg in the Avengers. Let these people create their own characters rather than sacrifice iconic characters to political correctness.

The same can be said of those whose target demographic is mostly male between the ages of 18-34 and who find themselves being pressured to turn strong male characters into metrosexuals to satisfy a tiny number of extremely vocal agitators and activists. Bond was portrayed as a gentleman with impeccable manners, a comprehensive knowledge of food, wine, and a world traveler at home anywhere in the world. In essence, Cary Grant with a gun. 

There might be something said for “refreshing a character” through dress and accessories – but one does not just dilute the battle between good and evil in an attempt to socially engineer the acceptance of minorities and outsiders in some twisted example of moral equivalence, multiculturalism, or political correctness. One look at the iconic Bond in a dress and it becomes a blurred, featureless parody of the real deal.

Keep an eye open to the type of political correctness dilutes the value of iconic properties and destroys jobs in the process. 

---