Already a member? Log in

Sign up with your...

or

Sign Up with your email address

Add Tags

Duplicate Tags

Rename Tags

Share It With Others!

Save Link

Sign in

Sign Up with your email address

Sign up

By clicking the button, you agree to the Terms & Conditions.

Forgot Password?

Please enter your username below and press the send button.
A password reset link will be sent to you.

If you are unable to access the email address originally associated with your Delicious account, we recommend creating a new account.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Links 1 through 10 of 18286 Chris Yeh's Bookmarks

Say you’re in a bind, a tough one. You’ve got cancer and your only hope is chemo—the problem is, it’s wildly expensive and you’re flat broke. Do you follow your moral compass, even if it means dying? Or do you leverage your knack for chemistry and raise some quick cash selling meth? A good man, dropped into the plot of Breaking Bad, might ask himself what he should do.

Walter White is not an aberration: Most people facing ethical dilemmas reflexively ask just that, according to a new paper coauthored by Ting Zhang, a doctoral student in the Organizational Behavior Program at HBS. But that question unwittingly locks you into a tradeoff, upholding your moral principles in one way but breaking them in another. Instead, strategically asking yourself what you could do often generates an array of new solutions that might satisfy seemingly irreconcilable demands.

Zhang and her faculty advisers, Professors Francesca Gino and Josh Margolis, conducted four studies to explore how this simple shift in perspective can help people reach “moral insight,” which “entails relaxing assumptions that there are fixed options from which to choose.” According to the studies, simply asking what you could do—rather than what you should do—helped participants see existing options as less incompatible, generated a broader range of creative solutions, and led more directly to moral insight in decision-making with others. “What we were quite surprised by,” Zhang says, “was that one change in the question—literally one word—could transform the way people approach these problems.”

Share It With Others!

New research from Play Bigger, which advises business leaders on creating new markets, found that tech companies today achieve market-cap milestones--$500 million, $1 billion, $5 billion--three times faster than they did 15 years ago. Almost as soon as they are invented, major categories are dominated by what Play Bigger calls “category kings,” which own 70 percent or more of the market share. “You have this giant player and a series of weak number twos, threes, fours, fives, and sixes. And those disappear pretty quickly,” says Play Bigger co-founder Al Ramadan. “The saying used to be ‘A rising tide lifts all boats.’ That is no longer true.”

Size isn’t the only problem; longevity plays a role as well. The share of companies aged 16 or older has increased by about 50 percent since the late ’70s, according to Brookings. That includes not just the Walmarts of the world but also the major internet companies, which we tend to view as forever young. If Amazon were human, this year it could legally drink. Next year, Google would be able to vote.

Share It With Others!

As part of a “strategy refresh” last year, the company divided staff into two groups for separate surveys and candid discussions about how they fit into the company’s culture. The split was generational: Older veterans—“I call them ‘The Wise,’ ” says Kelly—and younger employees (think millennials). The results helped Kelly rethink the needs of staff. For example, Gore is known for having lifers who stay for their entire careers, but it can’t assume nowadays that young folks want that kind of path. In the past, at meetings, every associate would go around the table and say how many years he or she had logged at the company. No more. “What we realized is that that really turns people off,” says Kelly. “Young associates might think, ‘Geez, I’m not going to have any credibility until I’ve been here 30 years!’ ”

Share It With Others!

Meyer felt a deep loyalty to his staff, and some of the managers had agreed to pay cuts to keep the restaurant going. As Tabla continued to lose money, Meyer personally subsidized it for two years to keep the doors open. Finally, his leadership team at Union Square Hospitality Group, which Meyer had launched in 1998 to oversee his properties, staged an intervention. “They argued that keeping a sinking ship afloat was the worst possible way to take care of the staff,” recalls Meyer. “They said, ‘If you truly want to take care of these people, you need to close the place. It’s actually being selfish not to.’ ” 

Meyer shifted his focus from saving the restaurant to saving the people who worked there. “I started thinking, ‘What if we could get these people more uplifting job opportunities either within or outside of our company?’ ” Meyer says. “Still, I don’t think I’ve ever cried so hard in my life as the day that I went to our managers to tell them it was over.” He felt better once he was able to find other jobs for most of the team. The former general manager and assistant general manager of Tabla now run other Danny Meyer restaurants.

Share It With Others!

Tamar Elkeles (L) and Mia Michaels Elkeles attend Tribeca Talks: After the MovieCODE: Debugging the Gender Gap during the 2015 Tribeca Film Festival at Spring Studio on April 19, 2015 in New York City.

Share It With Others!

The risk of human extinction due to climate change—or an accidental nuclear war—is much higher than that. The Stern Review, the U.K. government’s premier report on the economics of climate change, estimated a 0.1 percent risk of human extinction every year. That may sound low, but it also adds up when extrapolated to century-scale. The Global Challenges Foundation estimates a 9.5 percent chance of human extinction within the next hundred years.

Share It With Others!

Share It With Others!

To understand the media send-off we give to the dead, it’s less informative to look at the merits of the dead individual than it is to check out the demographic makeup of the newsrooms providing the send-off. Had Prince died in 2000, when his artistic footprint was roughly the same as it is today, he would have gotten a lesser reception because his biggest fans were maybe 30 years old, not important enough to agitate for coverage of his life inside the newsroom. Likewise, had Prince waited until 2040 to die, the aging retirees who once bought Purple Rain the day it came out would have been too far out of the cultural current to drive massive coverage proclaiming the importance of his life. But by dying right now, in 2016, Prince left us right when his biggest fans –Prince-loving boomers and Gen Xers – make up the ruling coalition calling the editorial shots. Much the same dynamic applied in 2009, when the media similarly erupted following the death of Michael Jackson.

Share It With Others!

To understand the media send-off we give to the dead, it’s less informative to look at the merits of the dead individual than it is to check out the demographic makeup of the newsrooms providing the send-off. Had Prince died in 2000, when his artistic footprint was roughly the same as it is today, he would have gotten a lesser reception because his biggest fans were maybe 30 years old, not important enough to agitate for coverage of his life inside the newsroom. Likewise, had Prince waited until 2040 to die, the aging retirees who once bought Purple Rain the day it came out would have been too far out of the cultural current to drive massive coverage proclaiming the importance of his life. But by dying right now, in 2016, Prince left us right when his biggest fans –Prince-loving boomers and Gen Xers – make up the ruling coalition calling the editorial shots. Much the same dynamic applied in 2009, when the media similarly erupted following the death of Michael Jackson.

Share It With Others!

At the top of the list is a pair of Union Square funds, one from 2004, the other the firm’s opportunity fund from 2010. Union Square Ventures Opportunity Fund claims the honor of the list’s top IRR at 72.1 percent.

Union Square’s 2010-vintage $135 million opportunity fund invested in Lending Club, according to Thomson Reuters data.

The firm’s 2004 early stage fund, a $125 million, vehcile, backed such companies as Twitter, Zynga, Etsy, which all went public. In addition, Thomson Reuters reports that the portfolio included Feedburner, which Google acquired, and Indeed, which Tokyo-based HR services company Recruit Co Ltd purchased for a reported $1 billion.

Spark Capital II, which also backed Twitter and was an investor in AdMeld, which Google acquired for $400 million, made third place with a still impressive IRR of 53.5 percent, and OrbiMed Advisors claimed the next spot with its fourth fund.

Emergence Capital Partners II, a $200 million fund from 2007 is a standout with a 51% IRR

Share It With Others!

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT