0  

More than recovery: Examining life after depression

Host Chris Wofford (L) and Jonathan Rottenberg, professor of psychology, in the Cornell Keynotes studio.

Experiences with depression have hit record highs, with nearly 30% of U.S. adults reporting diagnoses. In the workplace, the figures present greater cause for alarm — around three in four employees have grappled with matters that impact their mental health and stigma that inhibits their access to care. The costs of this double-edged challenge are significant for workers and organizations; the latter lose billions of dollars related to mental health issues annually.

Jonathan Rottenberg believes there is a rarely discussed and remarkable silver living: A meaningful number of individuals who have experienced depression not only go on to experience well-being but flourish in their lives. Rottenberg, a professor of psychology and director of the Better Outcomes Laboratory at Cornell, shared his research and reasons for optimism in a recent Cornell Keynote.

What is depression — how do experts define it?

“Depression is a mood disorder, and it’s a profound state involving symptoms like feeling sad, losing interest or pleasure in things, and then a number of other associated symptoms. These symptoms come together, and unfortunately, depression tends to be disabling and also is accompanied by a lot of distress of people who feel quite bad, and in severe cases, people might actually become suicidal.”

What is the typical prognosis for depression? Do most people experience recovery or recurrence?

“Typically, depression is recurrent, meaning if you had one episode, you’re likely to have another. In addition to that, it’s likely that you’ll have some degree of continuing symptoms, so even during better periods, there’s still some burden of depression with you.

“For about half of people who have depression, it is recurrent, but for the other half it is not. People who have only one single lifetime episode of depression — that’s very common, and we don’t actually know so much about that very large group of people.”

Why is symptom reduction the focus of most depression research?

“The field of clinical research and treatment research is 100% geared toward symptom reduction as the main outcome, but our research suggests that depressed people have a wide variety of aspirations for their life, and reduction in symptoms is just one piece.”

How are broader recovery goals addressed in mental health treatment?

“Practitioners will have discussed with their clients these other themes because, in part, these are things that the clients will themselves bring up. As part of the nature of depression, people feel desperately cut off from their past. They have trouble even imagining times when [they weren’t] depressed, and so they desperately want this reconnection with [their former selves]. That said, researchers really haven’t studied this nearly as much in clinical practice and in real people. This is very important, but our researchers have not caught up to the reality of what the people on the ground really care about.”

What do we know about good outcomes, both historically and in present-day state-of-the-art research?

“I think it scared a lot of people off in the sense that we had all this research that suggested rather strongly that ‘not so good’ outcomes were the norm. Typically, if one had an episode of depression, one could expect to experience a recurrence and continuing symptoms, even during better times. There would often be some ongoing burden of symptoms. I think that’s partly why people maybe didn’t have the imagination to wonder whether, in addition to these not-so-good outcomes, there might also be people who not only recovered but actually flourished.

“We’ve always known that some people recover in the sense that they no longer have symptoms, which is great, but we didn’t imagine that people might be flourishing — doing really well in relationships, jobs, spiritually or emotionally. And if you don’t imagine that something is very likely, you might not research it, and that’s how it was until about a decade ago. There was virtually no research on good outcomes other than recovery, which is, of course, important. Recovery — meaning the symptoms are gone — is one kind of good outcome, and we know that many people fully recover from depression.”

What are the challenges individuals face when considering disclosing a mental health condition?

“There are some forums, in particular, where disclosure is extremely difficult. One would be in workplace settings. Many people have all kinds of negative associations and fear about mental health problems and . . . really fully empathizing with what this person is going through because that is part of the reality and we cannot ‘happy talk’ our way out of that. We still live in a society where there’s a lot of judgment. The younger generation is making progress, but there are still these domains where we haven’t made as much progress as you would think, and employment is a big one.”

Has the research at Cornell’s Better Outcomes Laboratory disrupt historical assumptions about depression recovery?

“Our research aims to challenge the bleak outlook that’s often associated with depression. We look at whether people can not only recover in the sense of losing symptoms but also go on to thrive emotionally, socially and professionally.

“So many of these outcomes you could say would be tricky to measure . . . we might have different ideas about who’s doing well. I wanted to start with a good outcome that most people think is important: happiness. We started with psychological well-being, and that had the dual good quality of a) being important to a lot of people who experience mental health problems, and b) being readily measurable.”

What did your research reveal about the likelihood of achieving high levels of well-being after a diagnosis of depression?

“The conventional wisdom would say that this is going to be pretty rare, right? These people had serious diagnosed depression . . . [we expected] 1% who are really flourishing and reporting these very high levels of well-being. What we found was that depression cut the chances of reporting high levels of well-being about in half, and about 10% of depressed people went on to report these very high levels of well-being. This really challenges the conventional wisdom that this kind of good outcome is rare. These good outcomes are real, and this is not an insignificant group of people.”

What are the next steps for your research, and what direction do you see yourself going?

“The next step is to understand what explains these good outcomes and how people transition from depression to states of well-being. My strong hypothesis is that there won’t be one single road to well-being; rather, there might be various paths involving cognitive, behavioral, biological and social factors that explain why some people experience good outcomes.”

What do you think can be done to destigmatize conversations around depression?

“Being matter of fact and really normalizing it as part of the human experience, realizing that depression is probably going to be some part of your identity — not your whole identity but part of your identity — and creating forums like this for people to engage are really important. I think that there’s going to be big changes, particularly in younger people [who] are way more comfortable talking about mental health problems. I think there are going to be some sea changes to finally get our society to less stigma.”

 

In his research, Jonathan Rottenberg, Ph.D., explores long-term outcomes and well-being after depression and other mental health issues. Rottenberg served as the director of clinical training and director of the Mood and Emotion Lab at the University of South Florida. He is the author of “The Depths: The Evolutionary Origins of the Depression Epidemic” and “Depression: What Everyone Needs to Know.” Learn more by watching Ever After, Rottenberg’s video series about life after depression.

This Q&A has been edited for length and clarity. Experience the full Life After Depression Keynote video or podcast.

If you or someone you know is experiencing mental health challenges or considering suicide, please contact the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline by dialing 988, texting “STRENGTH” to the Crisis Text Line at 741741, or visiting 988lifeline.org.

  0  

Cornell Keynotes podcast: Rethinking migration, the shared journeys of people and birds

Migrating birds

Despite changes in movement patterns over recent decades, migration has been a natural phenomenon for millennia. Climate and environmental shifts continue to profoundly influence the movement of people, birds and other species around the globe.

In a new episode of the Cornell Keynotes podcast from eCornell, Cornell Law School Distinguished Immigration Scholar and attorney Marielena Hincapié and Garvin Professor Amanda Rodewald, senior director of the Center for Avian Population Studies at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, explain why people and birds migrate — and what individuals, communities and policymakers can do to develop sustainable solutions for an interdependent world.

Read more on the Chronicle.

  0  

Master active listening to enhance decision-making

Four people, two men and two women, are gathered around a table covered with various supplies, such as notebooks, pens and coffee mugs. They are looking at two large whiteboards filled with colorful sticky notes. Picture a colleague grappling with a tough decision — they’re probably feeling the weight of uncertainty and pressure. In such moments, it’s tempting to step in with solutions or advice. But real support means resisting that urge, putting your own ideas aside and listening carefully to understand their concerns, priorities and the help or reassurance they seek.

In the Cornell Keynote webcast “Active Listening: Supporting People During Difficult Decisions,” Cheryl Strauss Einhorn, an adjunct professor at the Cornell SC Johnson School of Business and Cornell Tech, shares the four types of active listening and how utilizing them can support decision-makers.

What is active listening?

“There are two kinds of listening: passive and active. In passive listening, the responder is just taking it in, and the person speaking may not get any feedback. We don’t have a sense of whether or not the responder really got what we meant to say. Conversely, active listening is the practice of making sure you make the other person feel heard. You’re listening for cues in what they’re saying so that you can respond, not from your vantage point, but from the vantage point of what they’re truly inquiring about.”

Why is active listening essential in the decision-making process?

“Decision-making is a holistic process, and for too long, we’ve been under the impression that our decisions are ours alone. For our decisions to truly succeed, we need to be able to take into account other stakeholders’ viewpoints, which means actually asking them questions. What to ask is going to stem from what it is they’re talking to us about.

I was interested in coming up with a framework for listening to people and then asking questions that show we are responding to what they’re asking. And, if we’re unsure what that is, how can we further open up the conversation to ask them what they mean.”

What are the four types of active listening support?

“The four types of active listening I discuss are emotional, informational, analytical and reflective.

  1. Emotional support is listening with empathy, making space for the emotion and doing it without judgment.
  2. Informational active listening is about providing the information the other person needs, whether it be knowledge, facts or data.
  3. Analytical support helps them to interpret and understand what they’ve already gathered and how the information can be synthesized into something that has meaning.
  4. Reflective listening is really about mirroring. How often has someone come to you, and you think, ‘I believe they already know the solution.’ By asking questions that mirror what they’re saying, you help them prioritize and clarify their own thoughts.”

How can each type of active listening help support decision-makers?

“Emotional support can benefit the decision-maker by validating their feelings and making them feel heard. You may hear the other person say, ‘I feel,’ and you could respond with, ‘That sounds difficult,’ or ‘I hear your frustration.’ You listen for the cue the other person is giving and respond without bringing judgment to their emotion.

A decision-maker in need of informational support will ask if you have the information they need available. If you do, you can provide it. Otherwise, you can ask what information or data would be useful for them at this point. In a professional setting, speaking to what a decision-maker is asking for makes them feel like you are truly collaborating and giving them the support they need.

When offering analytical support, you can listen for something like ‘How would you interpret’ or ‘What does this mean?’ In these instances, somebody is asking for some kind of interpretation or synthesis. If you think that you have that at your ready, terrific. If not, you could say, ‘What kind of analysis would help you think this through?’ so that you can be directly responsive.

Reflective support helps decision-makers clarify their own thoughts and priorities. You might hear a decision-maker say, ‘I can’t decide’ or ‘I’m conflicted.’ This does not mean they’re asking you to decide for them. You can ask them back, ‘What’s the goal you want to achieve?’ or ‘What’s your priority here?’ and that can help them to bring forth again their own priorities and a solution that they already may have in mind.”

What are some common challenges people face when practicing active listening, and how can they overcome them?

“The toughest thing to remember when actively listening to another person is that you are not the decision-maker. The idea that the other person is a capable decision-maker and their decisions are their own is very important, and one way to pair active listening with this idea is to simply pause. We’re so trained to jump right into conversations that it feels unnatural to take an extra beat, but waiting for a moment to consider what the other person is trying to convey and having that metacognition come forward is going to make it easier for you to be in service to the other person.”

How do you see the principles of active listening evolving in the future to support decision-making across different industries?

“One of my recent research projects, which we discussed during an earlier eCornell Keynote, identified five different ways people approach decisions, each of which has a different underlying value structure. This means individuals are optimizing for different things in their decision-making process. Once you can identify which problem-solver profile somebody is, the act of listening becomes much easier.

For example, if you know someone is a ‘detective’ — like I am — when you come to them with an answer, they’ll want to see the data that supports it. So, if you say to me, ‘Cheryl, this is the evidence I have that supports this hypothesis, and I think we should move in that direction.’ I am going to feel so appreciative that you recognized my need for evidence and allowed me to assess whether that evidence makes sense to me.

That is a great way that I’ve seen companies and teams really bring this idea of active listening forward to streamline decision-making, build trust between team members and increase productivity by aligning communication styles with individual problem-solving approaches.”

Interested in learning more? Discover how you can leverage your problem-solver profile to tackle challenging problems in the Complex Decision-Making certificate program, authored by Cheryl Strauss Einhorn.

This Q&A has been edited for length and clarity. Experience the full Keynote “Active Listening: Supporting People During Difficult Decisions” on the eCornell website.

  0  

5 essential tips for interviewers

Two men sitting across a desk from one another during a job interview. One is wearing a white button-up shirt and blue tie, and the other is in a black jacket. An open laptop displaying a resume is on the desk, facing the man in the black jacket.A company’s success is closely tied to the quality of its employees, but a flawed interview process can disrupt this balance and undermine overall performance. JR Keller, associate professor of human resource studies at the Cornell ILR School, identified five key strategies to conduct better interviews that lead to more effective hiring.

1. Reduce the candidate’s anxiety.

According to a 2020 survey conducted by JDP, 93% of Americans reported experiencing interview-related anxiety, with 29% ranking interviews more nerve-wracking than a first date or doctor appointment. To ease this tension, Keller recommends clearly communicating with a job applicant well before their interview.

Disclosing who will participate in the interview is beneficial as it allows interviewees to look up their interviewer on LinkedIn. Likewise, telling prospective employees the interview timeframe and whether it will be in person, over the phone or on a platform such as Zoom helps them prepare better and manage their expectations.

Another tip recruiters should consider is providing candidates with a set of interview questions in advance so that they can prepare their answers to showcase their skills and abilities applicable to the job. “In the 2020 JDP study, the number one thing people were nervous about going into interviews was answering a difficult question. They’re really worried about ‘gotcha’ questions, and there shouldn’t be ‘gotcha’ questions in an interview,” Keller said.

“If you reduce candidate anxiety, they will come into their interview prepared to speak confidently about their skills, knowledge and abilities, and they’re going to perform better in the interview,” Keller said, noting that the better the candidate’s recruitment experience, the more likely they are to accept a job offer.

2. Value the candidate’s time.

With the average corporate job attracting 250 resumes, recruiters can be overwhelmed by the sheer number of candidates they must interview. That said, interviewers should respect each and every interviewee’s time, as the way they treat applicants during an interview is indicative of how applicants will be treated as employees.

Prospective employees have limited information to help them choose which company they want to work for. Consequently, if a hiring manager is late to an interview, the candidate may view the tardiness as a forewarning of why they shouldn’t work at the company. Keller offers two tips to give candidates the time they deserve: Don’t be late and don’t be distracted.

“If you have a 30-minute interview that starts at 1 p.m., block your calendar starting at 12:45 p.m., so you have time to read through your questions and review the candidate’s resume,” Keller said. “An interview should not be the first time you look at a resume. That’s not the impression you want to give candidates.”

3. Create quality interview questions.

An interview question intended for a software engineer position is likely different from a question designed for an editorial job. However, Keller argues that the common characteristic of a good interview question is its ability to predict performance in a particular job.

Borrowing from Mark Horstman’s book, “The Effective Hiring Manager,” Keller suggests recruiters follow a three-step process to craft an effective behavioral interview question: the helpful lead-in, asking for an expansive answer and ensuring the question relates to a behavior the job requires.

The helpful lead-in is a statement preceding the actual question. Its goal is to give interviewees a realistic job preview by subtly implying what the job requires. Then, combine steps two and three to create an open-ended situational question — typically beginning with “Tell me about a time when” or “Give me an example of” — that allows the candidate to demonstrate the skill or ability applicable to the job.

In addition to knowing how to formulate a good question, interviewers should also know which questions to avoid. Keller strongly advises hiring managers to steer clear of illegal questions (marital status, religion, etc.), brainteasers and questions like “What’s your greatest weakness?” and “Where do you want to be in five years?” A valuable alternative to the latter question is, “What skills do you want to develop over time?”

4. Ensure consistency in your approach.

With 24% of hires made internally and 42% of workers obtaining their jobs via personal connections, it’s essential that hiring managers approach each interview — regardless of who the candidate is — with a standardized process. Not only does this ensure fairness and equity, but it also allows prospective employees to be evaluated on a level playing field.

Though many recruiters find structured interviews tedious, Keller explains they are the best predictor of performance in an interview setting. According to Keller, structured interviews are formatted so that a list of questions prepared in advance, which are tied to the knowledge, skills and abilities related to the job, are asked of all candidates being interviewed for a position: “The reason this is so effective is because you are collecting job-relevant information about each of the candidates you’re interviewing so you can make apples-to-apples comparisons when it comes time to decide who you want to hire.”

However, hiring managers should not be robotic and ask each interviewee the exact same questions in the exact same tone. “If that’s the approach you want to take, you can just use HireVue or some other pre-recorded video interviewing software,” Keller said.

The key to a lively structured interview is asking each candidate similar questions in a similar manner, allowing for variety across interviewers while ensuring that every candidate has a comparable experience within their interviews.

5. Develop a comprehensive evaluation plan.

After an interview concludes, it’s important to have a detailed evaluation plan in place. This includes preparing a rubric in advance to determine which aspects of the candidate’s performance will be evaluated, how they will be scored and how notes and data will be documented to facilitate comparison when making the final hiring decision.

Keller emphasizes the importance of rating candidates individually and avoiding sharing notes with team members to maintain objectivity. “Complete the rubric right away, before you’ve had a chance to talk to anybody on your team who might have interviewed that candidate. This way, your evaluations remain independent and aren’t influenced by the water cooler gossip that’s bound to happen later in the day,” he said.

Keller admits that completely avoiding the discussion of candidates is difficult in practice. For this reason, he encourages hiring teams to convene either on the same day as interviews or within the same week to ensure that teams gather information promptly and make timely decisions without the complications of evaluating candidates at different times.

By gathering everyone’s input within a short timeframe, teams can maintain consistency and coherence in their evaluation process, leading to more informed and efficient hiring decisions.

For more information on effective interview practices, experience the full Keynote for “Five Essential Tips for Interviewers: Connecting With Candidates and Making Smart Hiring Decisions” on the eCornell website.

Learn more in Cornell’s online human resources certificate programs, including the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: Building a Diverse Workforce certificate authored by JR Keller. Be sure to also check out JR Keller’s previous Keynote “Internal Talent Mobility: Posting, Slotting and Hoarding.”

  0  

Navigating DEI in a Post-Affirmative Action Landscape

Backlash against corporate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives quickly followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to end affirmative action in college admissions. However, a recent poll from The Washington Post and Ipsos found that about 60% of Americans believe DEI programs are “a good thing” for companies to adopt.

In the recent Cornell Keynote webcast “DEI, Affirmative Action and a Politically Polarized Workforce: Where We Are, Where We’re Going and What Employers Should Do,” David Sherwyn, the John and Melissa Ceriale Professor of Hospitality Human Resources at the Cornell Nolan School, hosts Paul Wagner, shareholder and chief financial officer of Stokes Wagner, and Holly Lawson, Noble House Hotels & Resorts’ senior vice president of human resources, for a discussion of the legality and structure of corporate DEI programs.

The Civil Rights Act of 1991 amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to allow mixed-motive discrimination claims. What is mixed-motive discrimination, and how does it pertain to DEI?

Wagner: “The 1991 amendment took the burden of proof from race or another protected class being the sole motivating factor . . . to simply a motivating factor. Congress significantly lowered the bar so that if an employer made an employment decision and was influenced by a nondiscriminatory, nonprotected class-based reason — such as disciplinary action by the employee or something on their resume that caused them not to hire — but the plaintiff could show that race or gender or religion or any other protected class crept into their decision as simply an element, the decision was still unlawful.

Opponents of DEI scrutinize these policies under the same amendment. You can trace today’s backlash to overaggressive DEI policies of employers in the ‘80s, ‘90s and 2000s. Perhaps as written, they were lawful, but as implemented and interpreted by the person in the interviewing room making the decision, if they had a DEI policy that was encouraging the hiring of underrepresented groups, whether it be gender, race, et cetera, they took that and interpreted it as a mission to choose that underrepresented candidate, regardless of how they stacked up against the other candidates.”

Was this law intended to protect against all discrimination or just discrimination directed toward underrepresented groups?

Wagner: “Definitely the latter because if you look at the Civil Rights Movement in the ‘60s and beyond, it was clearly to address [discrimination against Black Americans]. However, the law was not written in a way that said only the groups that had suffered from historic discrimination are actionable plaintiffs and have standing to bring a claim. It protects all of us, whether we’re in a traditionally underrepresented or discriminated against class or not.”

Sherwyn: “I agree with you completely. The purpose of the law is clear. In ‘64, it was a way to open doors previously shut by law, but it was not how it’s being applied in this conversation. The law was written with the goal of a colorblind society, and that’s how it’s applied.”

How do you build a diverse workforce without creating problematic or easily attacked DEI policies?

Lawson: “If you create a program from a place of fear — whether from legal or internal or external backlash — you’re not going to get to the core of the importance of the program. Noble House is a family-led organization within hospitality; within a family, there is inherently a sense of inclusion. We really do feel like our true north is having a culture of inclusion and leaning into that.

Last year, our program was more training-based and discussion-based, whereas this year, it’s more goal-oriented and action-based. We are emphasizing diversity, recruiting and representation at leadership levels, and representation in our partners and vendors. Next year, we want to get to a place where we can measure that action.”

How can HR professionals open doors for more diverse job candidates?

Lawson: “A lot of us within hospitality are focusing more on historically Black colleges and universities and, in general, visiting a larger network of college campuses. There’s also a great organization called Tent, which the founder of Chobani started, that emphasizes assisting refugees and getting them lawfully working in the United States. Labor professionals are thinking, ‘Where were we not looking before? What were we not thinking of? Where were we not going? How can we get amazing talent from those partnerships and opportunities?’ It’s been amazing to see more people and connect with them.”

Are there any legal issues with these recruitment approaches?

Wagner: “As described, no. Opening up your potential sources of applicants to nontraditional sources to attract qualified applicants from those groups is great. However, implementation can be problematic if interviewers give preference to minority applicants to meet diversity goals. An interviewer must take meticulous notes during the recruitment process to prove they expanded opportunities for some underrepresented groups, brought in qualified applicants and ultimately hired the best person among the group.”

How do you respond to the criticism that DEI programs are forms of charity work, and what is the inherent value of these programs?

Lawson: “At Noble House, we’ve focused on the inclusion part to gather the diversity part. We want people to feel included. We want them to tell others about our culture and that they feel included. Naturally and organically, we want these people to bring others in who see themselves represented and continue to contribute to that because it’s the right cause. It creates a higher performing culture, and it’s not for any accolades or pat on the back or to check a box. If that’s your intent and purpose, I think people see through that, and you’re probably going to work backward in your process.”

Wagner: “My point of view is that the culture war scrutiny — mostly from the right — of DEI programs accuses them of being a charity case. That’s the way that group describes them and how it attacks them. But I agree with Holly that these programs have great value, and their goal is to reach out to, attract and ultimately hire qualified candidates from those underrepresented groups. If we do that under a modern DEI program and have the evidence to prove we’ve done it, we’re still okay, despite the accusations from the right saying that this is a charity case or somehow unlawful.”

How can labor professionals ensure that discussions and decisions on DEI initiatives are genuinely inclusive and representative of all communities, especially those historically marginalized?

Lawson: “You have to intentionally allow space for others to speak up and drive DEI programs. At first, we grappled with whether to ask certain individuals to make it very specifically diverse. In some cases, we have; in others, we’ve said let people speak up. We’ve intentionally created some space and drew some people in that we wanted their voices to be heard. I think the success of your program hinges on having a representation of the voices that champion this message.”

How do you ensure that employee resource groups (ERGs) promote inclusivity rather than exclusivity within an organization?

Wagner: “If you allow self-determination among employees to create ERGs and become exclusive, that leads to a lot of problems. I’ve seen a lot of very informal ERG policies at many of my clients’ companies and some that are structured. I like the ones that are more structured and intentional by the employer so that you are driving for maximum inclusivity. The groups can be specialized when it comes to certain things, like people who are interested in the safety committee.

But when it comes to these issues of DEI, I’d recommend and much prefer an ERG where inclusivity of anyone in the workforce is the principal maxim. I think you have to really look at it with a critical eye of how is this going to support my DEI program, how is this going to support my culture, and most importantly, how am I going to get my employees to feel good about it? We want them to participate in a positive way and not see this as a series of little exclusive country clubs.”

What does the forecast for DEI programming and affirmative action look like for the near future?

Lawson: “It’s really important to allow different voices with different perspectives to guide DEI conversations. I don’t know what our DEI programming will look like two years down the road because I want our actions to guide that. I want to hear from other people what’s working and what sticks and let that guide our next step. I don’t want to be marred down by the polarized world we live in where you’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t, but rather continue to move forward and progress our policies without fear or concern.”

Wagner: “Traditional affirmative action means to go out and hire on the basis of a protected class to meet your goals or to redress past harms. Going forward, though, I predict that the executive order administered by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs will be deemed unconstitutional. I would encourage employers to focus instead on DEI programs because, if designed correctly and monitored and implemented well, you’re going to continue to withstand the scrutiny and win lawsuits or hopefully avoid them. As much as there are forces from the right in these culture wars attacking these programs, there are forces in favor of diversity and a multicultural society. For instance, look at all of the gender pay equity laws that are cropping up all around the country. I want to make sure that my clients who want to achieve those diversity goals withstand the scrutiny and win at the game because it is a game worth winning.”

To learn more about creating an inclusive work environment, explore Cornell’s HR in Hospitality, Hospitality Labor and Employment Law or Business Law programs — all authored by David Sherwyn — or one of our Diversity & Inclusion certificate programs.

This Q&A has been edited for length and clarity. Experience the full Keynote for “DEI, Affirmative Action and a Politically Polarized Workforce” on the eCornell website.

  0  

Beyond winning and losing: Reframing negotiation as a collaborative journey

Mastering negotiation is essential in both personal and professional settings. While typically perceived as a win-lose battle, reframing negotiation as a collaborative process can allow all parties to reach their desired results.

In a recent Cornell Keynotes webcast, “The Art of Negotiation,” Tarcisio Alvarez-Rivero, a lecturer at Cornell’s Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy and retired senior staff member of the United Nations, shared his strategies for successful negotiation, including approaching negotiations with empathy and recognizing the underlying interests of your counterpart.

How can people view negotiations as opportunities for mutual gain instead of confrontations?

“When you shift your view to make negotiation an exercise in cooperation, you get to the point where you understand why the other person is there, what they need and why they need it. Oftentimes, depending on how well you prepare and who the other person you’re talking to is, I recommend telling the other person, ‘I want this because of this.’ Sometimes, a show of vulnerability puts a little bit of onus on the other person to be just as vulnerable and just as honest.

You need to give the other person space to be in their position. It’s okay for them to want what they want for the reason that they want. You’re not there to judge them. You’re there to try to find a way to satisfy your and their respective interests as much as possible. And that’s your purpose in negotiations. It’s not extracting value. It’s you getting value.”

How can you turn an adversary into a partner during negotiations?

“Part of being a good negotiator is having a significant amount of humility. When my U.N. team dispatched me to Germany to ask for funding, my job in that conversation was to – as quickly as possible – establish why the woman in charge of funding gave me an audience. What was the need she was hoping we’d satisfy? After asking her a few questions, I understood that their business model was changing and that they were being encouraged to find more partners in the field as opposed to having their own teams in the field.

Once I realized that she was talking to us to explore if we would be good partners, the conversation shifted. I was no longer looking for money. Now I’m looking for a partner. So, what I chose to talk about from that moment on was completely different from what I prepared. But it was from the point of humility to understand that I wasn’t entitled to have that conversation. She wanted me in the conversation. It was my job to figure out why she wanted me there.”

How can you prepare to negotiate when you share little common ground with the other party?

“Most people have online profiles. At some point, I realized that if I went into people’s – back then, Twitter, now X – or any other account, I could learn a lot about them. In particular, you learn a lot about them in their use of emojis. Emojis tell you whether they like something or they dislike something. They don’t have to write it. They just have to show you the face.

I found that one person I had to negotiate with liked dogs, and I grew up with dogs, so we had something in common. I realized I could now talk to this person at a level that I would otherwise not have known. If the situation got to the point where there was nothing to talk about, I could talk about dogs. So that’s one opportunity that you have to sort of soften the situation.”

How do we account for profound cultural differences among negotiating parties?

“I always recommend creating a persona for the person you’re dealing with. Depending on the culture, you will find that certain things are more or less a pattern. For example, certain cultures are more fixed on timing, right? They want to start at a specific time, finish at a specific time. They want structure in the negotiation. They relish more formal conversation than informal conversation. In some cultures, people like negotiating more in groups or not making decisions immediately. Some people value a handshake more than a written contract. Those things tend to run on a cultural basis.

Now, you’re also talking about biases. And you also understand that certain cultures come with certain sets of biases. It doesn’t mean that you bless the bias. It just means that you accept the fact that you might hear something from that person that sounds like a bias to you. But if you’re prepared to hear it, then you know how you’re going to react to it.”

Why is it important that negotiators view compromise as a last resort?

“Compromise is when we give up 10% and get nothing out of it. If you offer someone a 10% discount and they immediately accept it, you start wondering, ‘Did I give up too fast?’ It is completely unnecessary to compromise as a default position.

If you prepare correctly, make an effort to understand where the other person is and know where you want to be, then there’s a lot you can do to avoid that moment of compromise. Compromise should only occur with full awareness that you did everything you could to avoid that process, but I don’t recommend it.”

How can negotiating parties avoid a power struggle in their conversations?

“I always recommended standing up, getting coffee. I like walking with somebody. I like having a situation where people are not fixed to the ground. They tend to take positions if they’re sitting across the table from you. They don’t take the same position if you’re just talking to them with a coffee in your hand.

Most of the time, I recommend going to a neutral place that’s nice and close to food so that people relax. Then, you can have a different level of conversation. Putting somebody on the defensive by taking them to your own office is probably going to be counterproductive.”

Interested in learning more? Explore Tarcisio Alvarez-Rivero’s Negotiating Policy Solutions course offered by eCornell. For a deeper dive into negotiation skills, consider eCornell’s certificates Persuasive Communication or Negotiation Mastery.

This Q&A has been edited for length and clarity. Experience the full Keynote for “The Art of Negotiation” on the eCornell website.

  0  

New Cornell Keynotes podcast features faculty experts

Cornell Keynotes podcast logo

According to the Pew Research Center, more than half of American podcast listeners tune in to learn. eCornell recently launched the Keynotes podcast to deliver a new audio option for audiences seeking knowledge from Cornell experts on current events and trending topics.

Episodes highlight content from the Keynotes webcast series which launched in 2018 and has aired more than 750 livestreamed video events to over half a million viewers. Guests include Cornell faculty and leaders from a diverse range of industries.

“Through the Keynotes podcast, we aim to bring the rich expertise of Cornell’s faculty and network of industry leaders to audiences in a manner that fits the busy lifestyles of lifelong learners,” said Molly Israel, senior director of communications and brand at eCornell. “We’re excited to provide an on-the-go experience to listeners around the globe to keep them informed on timely topics.”

In the podcast’s first release, “Demystifying Funky, Trendy Natural Wines,” international wine authority Cheryl Stanley joins senior producer Chris Wofford for a tasting tour and discussion of evolving consumer tastes.

Other featured Cornell faculty include:

  • Director of the Criminal Justice and Employment Initiative at the Cornell ILR School Timothy McNutt on addressing employment barriers for formerly incarcerated people.
  • JR Keller, assistant professor at the Cornell ILR School, and Angela Cheng-Cimini ’92, chief human resources officer for Harvard Business Publishing, on hiring from within an organization.
  • Cornell Nolan School of Hotel Administration professor Jan deRoos on industry trends in commercial real estate.

“It’s wonderful to have a platform for sharing the vast and varied knowledge of our professors with our university community and others,” Israel added. “Each episode offers their nuanced insights on current events and trends. We look forward to connecting with many more faculty members and sharing our conversations with listeners.”

A special episode “Holiday Drinks to Dazzle Your Guests” featuring Stanley and Doug Miller, senior lecturers in the Nolan School, is now available just in time for this season of celebrations.

The Cornell Keynotes podcast is available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts and Simplecast.

  0  

Bringing New Science to Market

Medical supplies and drugs, including a syringe, surgical mask, and pills

Medical innovation is reaching new heights every year. What scientific breakthroughs can we expect on the market in the coming decade? What challenges will we face in adopting them?

Professor Sean Nicholson, director of the Cornell Sloan Program in Health Administration, welcomed Wyatt Gotbetter, SVP and worldwide head of Parexel Access Consulting, and Dr. Gregory B. Franz, MD, MPH, MHA, hematologist and medical oncologist at the Kirkland Cancer Center, to explore answers to these questions in the recent Keynote webcast “Bringing New Science to Market: Innovation, Adoption, and Health Policy Challenges.”

Biotech and pharmaceutical firms spend about $80 billion each year on research and development in order to try to bring new therapies to the market. What is in the pipeline that might have a big positive effect on the health of the population in the future?

Gotbetter: “If we think just about the past five years, and of course that includes the pandemic, I think the rate of innovation and the number of launches has been remarkable. We can’t have this discussion without acknowledging the validation and the importance to all of us of the RNAi vaccines from BioNTech and Moderna. Moderna, on the heels of that success and being flush with sales of their COVID vaccine, is really advancing a number of therapeutic products as well as vaccines – really advancing their RNAi technology into the therapeutic space and oncology specifically.

In the same time, we’ve seen the approval of a couple of CAR-Ts truly advancing life-saving therapy in hematology and oncology. I think we’ll see gene therapies becoming safer and easier to manufacture, hopefully at lower costs. There’s just a pipeline of literally hundreds of programs where we’ll see gene therapy go from rare disease and disease that has very, very high morbidity perhaps into things managed more chronically with small molecule drugs – like heart failure.”

We have a couple of CAR-T therapies on the market that are Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved. Are there similar kinds of classes of compounds that have yet to be approved that you think might potentially have a similar health impact?

Franz: “Leveraging the immune system to identify and kill cancer cells – that’s really what’s going on here. This is T cells doing what T cells do against cancer cells. I know that’s a very simple explanation. It’s very difficult to develop these compounds and to do this safely, but I think that’s where the money and the future is.”

It takes a long time, and it’s very expensive for biotech and pharmaceutical firms to run clinical trials and, even preceding that, to identify compounds that are promising enough to start a clinical trial. The current estimate is about $2.6 billion in investment across a portfolio of compounds in order to statistically assure a company that they’re going to have one approved compound. Where do companies come up with that money, and in the current climate, is it difficult for companies to raise the funds they need in order to invest in those drugs?

Gotbetter: “That $2.6 billion figure also includes the cost of failure. Even if we think about a successful drug compound, if you boil down the numbers, hundreds and hundreds of drug candidates will be considered before you start your phase one and then roughly one in ten of those will make it through to approval. It’s fraught with risk. But even if you could streamline that process, you’re probably looking at hundreds of millions to a billion dollars.

The amount of money that’s poured into the biotech sector over the past few years has been remarkable. We’ve seen, though, a massive sea change in the past year. Biotech has been the engine of discovery and innovation for large pharmaceutical companies. The largest companies in the world that certainly have formidable R&D engines employing thousands of people still turn to biotech to find innovation, to find a compound that has been tested, that shows a proof of concept, and can move forward.

The headwinds of the past year or two – interest rates and some of the perceived threats of the Inflation Reduction Act, which could reduce pricing power of the industry – has really slowed down [venture capital] funding.

I think what that means is that probably the rate of innovation will slow down a little bit in the sense that there may be fewer programs being pursued simultaneously, so a company may really focus on the crown jewels instead of many at once. Then biotech may again have to be more reliant on Big Pharma once they’re in the middle of their development versus a period where they probably could see funding to go all the way through.”

What are the factors that make a drug widely adopted?

Franz: “In the medical oncology world, it’s really all about safety and efficacy. Is the drug difficult to give? Does the patient have a lot of adverse side effects? How do you manage those side effects? But most importantly, you’re looking at endpoints: PFS, or progression-free survival, and OS, or overall survival. Duration of response and response rate are biggies and, of course, the toxicity profile. All those together are important. The better the PFS and OS, the more successful the drug is going to be.”

Are biotech and pharmaceutical firms doing anything to try to run their trials differently – to be less expensive, to be shorter, to have higher probability of approval?

Gotbetter: “The FDA provides a rubric that says for very life-threatening diseases, it will work with the industry sponsor to find a way to streamline the therapy. We have names for that in the U.S like breakthrough therapies and accelerated pathways, where you get more support and guidance from the regulatory agency, but you’re also partnering with them along the way to find a way to expedite the study.

There’s a lot of companies that are using all sorts of AI, computational methods and synthetic biology to [speed up the trial process].”

Historically, clinical trials have been dominated by white men. Are biotech and pharmaceutical firms trying to diversify those trials? What are the implications potentially of a more representative group of patients in the testing phase?

Gotbetter: “There are mandates coming from the FDA and other governments, and I think very sincere efforts from the pharma industry and from clinical research organizations who enroll and operationalize the studies to really bring diversity into studies. There’s an awareness in society for many reasons, for many historical wrongs, we need to bring more diversity into everything we do. It’s to really ensure that when we study a drug, we’ll be able to show efficacy in different populations because we’re not all the same. Historically, if you were to develop a drug for people of European descent, across the globe in Asian markets, they would want to know that there was a study being done in populations for which the results were meaningful for them. As we take that to other populations, to different age groups, different genders, it’s the right thing to do.”

 

This post has been edited for length and clarity.

Want to learn more about the future of biopharma? Register for Cornell’s Biotech and Pharmaceutical Management Immersion Program and watch the full Keynote “Bringing New Science to Market” webcast online.

  0  

Post-Zoom: shifts in the work space

BY  

As of July 11, 2021, more than 89 percent of Cornell’s Ithaca, Geneva, and Cornell Tech campus populations is vaccinated, including more than 10,100 faculty and staff. Only a single case of COVID-19 infection was identified via surveillance testing in the month of June—an encouraging sign as the university looks forward to resuming operations in the fall.

The pandemic reminded us that, in an instant, anything can change. The exact timing differed for each of us, but we can all remember the moment in 2020 when we felt the world shift. Many in-person classes and jobs transitioned to remote status, as we sought to limit the spread of the virus by staying home. Everything from spring break plans to the Summer Olympics was cancelled or postponed. As career and personal plans were put on hold, our sense of control over the future wavered.

Eighteen months later, as many of us plan for a return to in-person work, Cornell has offered its employees a wealth of resources to help with this next big transition. On June 24 and 25, the university hosted a webinar called “Managing the Anxiety of Returning to Onsite Work.” Dr. Gabriel Tornusciolo, assistant director of the Cornell Faculty and Staff Assistance Program (FSAP), shared strategies and tips for coping with anxiety around returning to the workplace.

Whether or not you’re experiencing anxiety about returning to the office, I highly recommend taking an hour to watch. This gave me deeper, valuable insights into the diversity of concerns and sparked some reflection on my own situation. I hope you find it useful too.
—Chris Kelly, graphic designer at Cornell
“Some truths” slide from FSAP webinar
“Some truths” slide from FSAP webinar

On June 24, eCornell hosted Transforming Our Lives Through COVID-19’s Lessons, a keynote focusing on the larger societal shifts which occurred as a result of the pandemic. Four thought leaders from the Cornell Institute for Healthy Futures (CIHF) highlighted some of the lessons we’ve learned and how these lessons might inform the future. The speakers shared key takeaways from their research on how the pandemic has changed the way we think about work, health, equity, and working and living spaces.

As you envision your own return to in-person life, we hope you find value in these tips and insights from Cornell experts.

Making matters more certain

Screenshot of Gabriel Tornusciolo, assistant director of FSAP
Screenshot of Gabriel Tornusciolo, assistant director of FSAP

Dr. Gabriel Tornusciolo began his talk by reminding the audience about the fears many of us had at the start of the pandemic: Would our families be safe? Would we have enough PPE? Would we lose our jobs? Gabriel pointed out that concerns about our survival and security are near the base of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Only when these basic needs are met can we move on to addressing needs around self-fulfillment, such as making a career pivot or finding new opportunities for self-growth.

Gabriel asked viewers to think about the big challenges they faced in March 2020 and compare them to the current challenges of returning to work. “If you think about your safety then and now and the demands on you then and now, which is more challenging,” he asked, “leaving or coming back?”

People may want to avoid the workplace, but avoidance over time increases anxiety.
—Gabriel Tornusciolo, assistant director of the Cornell Faculty and Staff Assistance Program
“The power of avoidance” slide from FSAP webinar
“The power of avoidance” slide from FSAP webinar

Gabriel explained that over the past year and a half, many of us have become accustomed to working from home, and that has become our new normal. “The office is a place that was once ordinary but is now challenging,” he said. “We’re being asked to change again. People may want to avoid the workplace, but avoidance over time increases anxiety,” he added.

To counter our tendency to avoid risk (and the workplace), Gabriel suggested a technique known as habituation, or prolonged exposure to that which makes us anxious. “It’s better to start off and decide not to avoid,” he said.

Taking five steps forward

Gabriel shared five strategies to help employees manage their anxiety and ease back into in-person work. The five steps are:

1. Define what is making you anxious

“We got used to it” slide from FSAP webinar
“We got used to it” slide from FSAP webinar

Gabriel said it sometimes take a bit of digging to figure out what the underlying issue is. Possibilities include fear of losing your job, fears for your safety, fears around loss of freedom, or fears around the meaningfulness of your work. “As you worked from home, you had to consider your values,” he said. “What do you truly want from life? I suggest that you ponder this a bit,” he suggested.

 

 

 

 

2. Define the landscape of your workplace

Landscape slide from FSAP webinar
“Landscape” slide from FSAP webinar

This includes your work hours, the layout of the physical space, measures to ensure worker safety, and employer policies about medical leaves and working from home. Gabriel encouraged viewers to access reliable information to help manage your anxiety, from sources like employer websites and supervisors. Gabriel suggested that employees write an email to their supervisors to share their concerns and potential solutions. He advised employees to “be prepared with concrete suggestions,” and supervisors to “create real two-way communication,” involving candid conversations and active listening.

 

 

 

3. Define a roadmap for your return to work

“A good plan” slide from FSAP presentation
“A good plan” slide from FSAP presentation

Gabriel encouraged viewers to be like Spock on Star Trek, and “lean into your curious, cognitive, intellectual side as you examine whether there’s any proof to back up your fear.” He suggested making a plan that includes exposure to the various components of a typical workday. “Begin to experience your onsite workday now,” he said. “Take the bus or drive to the parking lot, dress in work attire, visit the office to see the space. Identify points of anxiety and you may come up with some simple solutions,” he added. For example, if you’re worried about making lunch without having access to your home kitchen, Gabriel suggested thinking through how to bring foods you enjoy to work.

 

 

 

3. Find the good in returning to onsite work

Analysis of collaboration activity across Microsoft 365 tools from February 2020 to February 2021, from Microsoft’s report, “The Next Great Disruption Is Hybrid Work—Are We Ready?”
Analysis of collaboration activity across Microsoft 365 tools from February 2020 to February 2021, from Microsoft’s report, “The Next Great Disruption Is Hybrid Work—Are We Ready?”

Gabriel shared several positive outcomes associated with returning to onsite workplaces. These include easier communication and collaboration among team members, more positive social interactions, an increase in alone time (time away from family), and a reduction in work hours. “About 70 percent of remote workers work on weekends,” Gabriel said, and 45 percent of them work more hours. “It’s clear we’re working more hours, and in the long-term that can be negative,” he added. In a 2021 report, Microsoft found that time devoted to meetings each week has more than doubled for Teams users since February 2020, and 41% of the entire global workforce could be considering handing in their resignation.

4. Engage in stress-reducing activities

“Examples of stress reducers” slide from FSAP webinar
“Examples of stress reducers” slide

Gabriel also recommended that everyone incorporate what he called “healthy distractors,” such as a favorite Netflix show, talking with friends, and exercise into each day. “It’s really important to exercise,” Gabriel said. “It blunts your stress response. If you can work out in the morning, you have a better chance of managing your anxiety throughout the day.” He also suggested trying one of the many meditation and relaxation apps, and, last but not least, he reminded everyone to “show kindness to one another, and we’ll get through this much better.”

Watch Managing the Anxiety of Returning to Onsite Work on demand now.

 

 

Solving big problems

Screenshot of presenters from eCornell June 24 keynote
Screenshot of presenters from eCornell June 24 keynote

Late in 2020, a few faculty members at the Cornell Institute for Healthy Futures began reflecting on life in the aftermath of the pandemic. Working independently, each of them recognized that the difficult realities of COVID-19 and social justice issues in the U.S. have deeply impacted us as individuals, as families, as communities, and as workers. These experts examined their own sectors and began writing about emerging trends. As they shared their notes with CIHF colleagues and board members, they saw broad areas of overlap.

“We were doing exactly what we founded the institute to do,” said Mardelle Shepley, executive director of CIHF and Janet and Gordon Lankton Professor in the Department of Design and Environmental Analysis in the College of Human Ecology (CHE), “(which is) using these disciplines simultaneously to solve big problems in the world.” The CIHF faculty joined forces to draft two papers summarizing their findings, which they hope to publish soon. Here are a few takeaways from their research.

Better built environments: Mardelle Shepley

Screenshot of Mardelle Shepley
Screenshot of Mardelle Shepley

Mardelle Shepley’s research focuses on the impact of the physical environment in healthcare, hospitality, and senior living settings. Mardelle said that the pandemic quickly highlighted shortcomings within healthcare settings, like the need to increase space available for storage of PPE and delivery of vaccines, and to increase access to outdoor areas for both testing and destressing.

“The concern is that we’ve become so tech focused, we’re losing our humanity,” she said. One way to counter this is “giving people the opportunity to interact with or view nature, by stepping outside for 15 minutes,” she explained.

We were doing exactly what we founded the institute to do, (which is) using these disciplines simultaneously to solve big problems in the world.
—Mardelle Shepley, executive director of CIHF

Emerging needs in hospitality settings include how to incorporate robots, better accomplish cleaning, provide safe wellness opportunities, find alternative uses for hotel spaces, isolate family members as needed, and provide contactless food services.

Mardelle said that senior living facilities are “the ultimate platform for bringing hospitality and healthcare together.” She cited the need to reimagine these spaces in the post-pandemic era to provide visiting rooms that allow families to maintain relationships without endangering one another, common spaces that reduce clustering among residents, and circulation routes that reduce the number of people passing back and forth.

She advocated for integrating end users into the design process so that the facility reflects their perspectives and needs. “We need to get the right information to begin with, to make sure we do it right in the end,” she said.

Better working conditions: Nicolas Ziebarth

Screenshot of Nicolas Ziebarth
Screenshot of Nicolas Ziebarth

Nicolas Ziebarth, associate professor of Policy Analysis and Management in CHE, is a labor economist and leading expert on paid sick leave. Nicolas said that many employers don’t offer this benefit, but he anticipates that in the aftermath of the pandemic, “employees will demand this to care for their children. Other countries are doing this,” he added, “and the U.S. needs to, too.”

He noted that people who are not satisfied with their workplace flexibility and fringe benefits are now more likely to quit. “They have the bargaining power to ensure they are happy at work,” he said. Nicolas also forecasts that we will travel less and do more from home. “It’s cheaper, environmentally friendly, and convenient,” he said. He views this moment as a great opportunity to increase equity and improve everyday working conditions.

Nicolas pointed out that virus variants will continue to emerge, and that “COVID-19 will not go away.” He noted that we have learned a lot about how diseases spread, and he believes that this knowledge will result in more interventions to stop the spread. Nicolas predicts lasting changes in workplaces, including growing unwillingness to allow employees to come to work sick.

“There will be a change of behaviors and norms that will require more distancing in labor and healthcare, and more mask wearing,” he said. He also said that “the time is ripe for productive discussions around vaccine hesitancy,” among employers, employees, and clients, as they try to find solutions together. “The pandemic proved that telemedicine works,” he added, and he thinks that, moving forward, a significant share of medical appointments will be done via telemedicine.

Better food systems: Heather Kolakowski ’00

Screenshot of Heather Kolakowski '00
Screenshot of Heather Kolakowski ’00

Heather Kolakowski ’00 is an alumna and lecturer in Food and Beverage Management at the Cornell School of Hotel Administration. During the pandemic, Heather turned her expertise in the food and beverage sector to focus on increasing access to healthy food. “Many families need support,” she said, citing data showing that one in eight Americans accessed SNAP benefits in February 2021. “I anticipate levels will stay high,” she said.

“What can we do policy wise?” she asked. She noted that the federal government extended free school lunches through this summer, and that conversations are ongoing about making school lunches free year-round. She also noted the rise of mutual aid societies, where neighbors help neighbors by stocking food cabinets in their communities.

To pay workers a fair wage and offer better benefits to the humans who work for and with us, there is a cost involved.
—Heather Kolakowski ’00, lecturer in Food and Beverage Management at the Cornell School of Hotel Administration

Due to concerns about personal safety, low wages, and long hours, Heather said that many food industry workers are reluctant to return and are instead choosing other types of work. “To pay workers a fair wage and offer better benefits to the humans who work for and with us, there is a cost involved,” she said. “This is an opportunity to disrupt the industry and make changes, like abolishing tipping and creating a fair wage across the board,” she added.

Heather sees potential for the ex-offender population to transition into the hospitality sector. “We need to give populations that have significant barriers to employment the tools they need, and create pipelines for individuals who want to change their lives. It’s kind of like dating,” she explained. “What are the unspoken rules of engaging with mainstream employers? You need to get to know their expectations. In the past, organizations didn’t want to invest the time in this transition process,” she said, “but now we have to.”

Better things to come at Cornell: Brooke Hollis MBA ’78

Screenshot of Brooke Hollis MBA '78
Screenshot of Brooke Hollis MBA ’78

Brooke Hollis MBA ’78 is co-founder and executive director emeritus of CIHF and has worked in both the public and private sectors, serving in senior management positions in health and financial advisory consulting. Brooke moderated the panel and called attention to the new Cornell Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy, which will investigate many of the issues discussed in the keynote. He noted that Cornell students have access to the data produced by the institute’s multidisciplinary experts and invited viewers to keep abreast of the latest CIFH news on Twitter (@Cornell_ihf).

Watch Transforming Our Lives Through COVID-19’s Lessons on demand now.

More tips and resources

Screenshot of Michelle Artibee, director of workforce wellbeing at Cornell
Screenshot of Michelle Artibee, director of workforce wellbeing at Cornell

Michelle Artibee, director of workforce wellbeing at Cornell, says to expect that it will take time to adjust to working in-person. “The amount of time needed will vary,” she says. “Before returning to the routines of February 2020, consider the newer habits you’ve developed and what good things you will carry forward,” she suggests.

These two articles from Weill Cornell Medicine (WCM) provide some additional tips to support your physical and mental health during this time of transition.

Give Yourself Time to Ease Back into Fitness

Going back to working out—no matter how fit you were—should happen slowly, says Asad Siddiqi, DO, sports medicine physician and assistant professor of Clinical Rehabilitation Medicine at WCM.

Life Is Returning to Normal, So Why Do You Feel Anxious?

You’re fully vaccinated, New York is reopening, and life is getting back to normal. Instead of joy, you feel overwhelmed, stressed, and can’t stop asking yourself: How should I behave around others? Get tips to manage your anxiety from Dr. Susan Evans, professor of Psychology in Clinical Psychiatry at WCM.

  0  

Everyone’s in the hospitality business, every day

In today’s competitive market, the customer experience is everything — and not just in the hospitality industry. From the very first impression until the customer walks out the door, there are countless opportunities for making their experience memorable.  As part of eCornell’s Keynote webcast series, customer service expert Elizabeth Martyn from Cornell Hotel School joined eCornell’s Chris Wofford for an interactive discussion on understanding the customer mindset, how to exceed expectations — and even when offering guests a warm cookie might backfire.

What follows is an abridged version of that conversation. Watch the full keynote here.

Martyn: I feel like I always have to tell people that I’ve never actually worked in a hotel, which throws people off a little bit when we start talking about hospitality. But I take a broader view and believe that hospitality is really everywhere. If you have clients, or customers, or patients, or anyone who buys anything from you, you’re really in the business of providing a service and therefore you’re in the business of hospitality.

Wofford: The two of us were talking a little bit about the modern tech-savvy consumer and their expectations.

Martyn: I think whenever I start to talk about these things, I ask people to think about themselves. Because I know I’m one of these people. I’ve got my phone attached, I’ve got my computer ready. And whether you’ve thought about it or not, we’re all becoming really highly trained by our devices and by technology to have information at our fingertips. You expect that you’re going to be able to get everything done on your phone. Now, not everyone prefers to do it on their phone, don’t get me wrong. Some people are more traditional. They want that phone call or they want to do it on their computer.

But that’s where we’re moving to, because we’ve been trained that we’re always going to get exactly what we want, and there’s so much on our phones that we can use to make it exactly how we want it. But it’s not like we’re all issued the same phone with the same apps or the same email provider. Everybody can pick and choose what’s going to work for them and to create a digital experience that reflects who they are as a person. But now that we’re so used to having this thing that’s like attached to our bodies all day, every day, these ideas, preferences and expectations start to come out of the digital experience and into everything else that we participate in.

The second that your organization or your business doesn’t have a digital experience that allows people to get at those commonly asked questions with key information, or your digital information is out of date, that starts creating some conflict really quickly because now people feel disappointed. Because if other companies can do it, why can’t yours?

Wofford: As service providers, the next question that comes up is: well, what can we do about that? How do we manage these expectations?

Martyn: Start by paying attention to the questions people are asking. If you’re hearing the same question over and over, you should be thinking, “Whoa, this is a trend. We have an opportunity here.”

Wofford: If something comes up time and time again, it should really be searchable information on your website, right?

Martyn: Exactly. You should be thinking about how to make it more present on our homepage, whether that’s in the FAQs or the About section. You want to have that information available. I think a lot of service organizations tend to make the mistake of thinking that high-quality service is high-touch service. The second that you make the mistake of thinking that the only way to provide high-quality service is to force me to interact with someone on your team, you’re missing the mark because that might not be my preference.

You want to offer a choice by putting things online for the people who are going to go to your website and navigate there. It should also be easy to get ahold of someone who’s going to talk to me and engage with me maybe over the phone or in person, if that’s my preference. But you don’t want to choose for your consumers what’s going to be best for them. No one likes being told what they like.

Wofford: I really relate to that. Sometimes when you’re out to dinner and the server has come to you twenty times unnecessarily, it gets to be a little bit much. I understand that it comes from a genuine place of wanting to help, but it can be a little much. Now, let’s take on the idea of establishing operational systems. When you come to an organization and start working with a hospitality group, how do you get everybody up to speed and on the same page?

Martyn: You cannot climb the mountain the first time you ever go on a hike. It’s really important to identify your core problems and tackle those first. What can you put in place right away that will impact at least some guests?

Oftentimes, it’s an issue of bandwidth. You can’t see really great solutions if you’re behind the curve all the time. So start with a triage approach and identify the fast and easy things that will impact some folks and give you a little more space to start to then tackle the next, maybe more sophisticated, version of this solution. Don’t feel like you have to solve everything perfectly right away.

Wofford: What are the greatest opportunities that you can see with technology being able to help?

Martyn: I think it’s so easy to think that technology is going to solve it. That’s really not the right viewpoint. The viewpoint should be about how it supports us and supports anyone who’s interacting with our clients, our customers or our guests.
We talked about getting information up on your website, making your FAQs more available. What are those common questions that you’re hearing several times a day on the phone or over email? You need to get that information more quickly into the hands of your consumer so they can find it and move on with their day. That way, your frontline teams have more time and space to provide really meaningful interactions to the guests who really need it rather than anxiously trying to rush them through the conversation because there are ten people in line or the email inbox is filling up. You want your workers to feel like it’s acceptable and appropriate to take more time to work through those more complicated solutions. So it’s not only solving problems, but also making those investments to grow the relationship between your organization and your consumers.

Wofford: How do you see big data and analytics helping face-to-face interactions?

Martyn: You have to understand who the person is you are interacting with. Can you get a jump on some of that through the use of profile information? Does this person have a family? Are they a single business person? Where are they based? The faster I can get at that, the more sophisticated my engagement with them is going to be.

But there’s one thing I want to caution everyone against – and I feel very strongly about this – and that is that I’m a different person every time I interact with your brand. I am not the same person from my first purchase to my last. Travel’s a really great way to illustrate this. I’m a very different person with different needs and different expectations when I’m traveling alone for business than when I’m traveling with my husband for a getaway. It’s still me, so my profile’s going to say all the same things, but what I’m looking to get out of the service interaction really shifts depending on the context of my trip.

Wofford: What’s the takeaway on that?

Martyn: I think that’s one of the values of human interaction. The thing that’s emerging out of all the technology advancements is that there is still a very, very important place in the world for the human-to-human component of service delivery. And that’s true regardless of what industry you’re in. So, how do you take out all the perfunctory pieces?

Checking in or checking out of a hotel is a classic example. The process can be very perfunctory, focused only on the room number, the key, getting the customer to sign the waiver. But what if that interaction could be about something else entirely, and the room key and the waiver signature and the credit card are more like afterthoughts? What would be most helpful for the guest to have a wonderful stay? If there’s one thing the property could do for them over the next two days, what would it be? In my case, when I’m a business traveler, I might say that it’s providing bottled water. When I’m with my husband, I might say it’s letting us decide when housekeeping should come.

Wofford: Let’s say you’ve inherited staff who have worked for twenty plus years under one brand and they now find it difficult to follow a new training plan under a rebranded hotel. What do you do?

Martyn: Change is so hard for everyone. I think with all things, everybody wants to be a little bit in control. As an employee that means they want to know what their job is, how to do it well and how to do it in a way that is well respected. What’s really hard about what you’re going through is you have new expectations that maybe haven’t been completely explained to your team. And you’re probably sitting there going, “But I’ve said it ten times.” But that doesn’t mean that they’ve understood it or that they’ve bought in.

Companies have things like mission, vision, and values that help explain why they are doing the things that they are. In your re-flag situation, the answer can’t just be because the new brand says: “This is what we do.” If that’s the answer, or if that’s how it’s presented, there’s no incentive for employees to make an emotional investment into that adjustment.

Hypothetically, let’s say you re-flagged because the hotel wasn’t performing financially under the old brand. It’s important to explain that you were at risk of closing and ended up moving brands to better align with where you’re located, what your amenities are or whatever, so that you can keep the hotel financially viable and keep everyone employed. That’s a level of trust and transparency that also helps people understand why are they being subjected to this change. But how do you gain an emotional buy-in? And how do you work toward understanding what’s important to people in terms of what they’re really looking to get out of their job? Those are really two critical components in driving any change.

Wofford: What do you feel is more important, recruiting new employees or continuing to train existing ones?

Martyn: People say that you can’t train attitude. I actually don’t believe that. I believe training is incredibly valuable. I think that so often folks get written off as not caring or having a bad attitude, but I feel like you cannot say that that’s the case if you haven’t talked to them about the issue. I like to say “No one’s trying to be the worst.” It’s a bit sarcastic, but it means that until you feel 100 percent confident that you’ve sat this person down and explained what they’re doing, how it impacts other people, or how it’s being perceived, you can’t know that they are aware the problem exists. Until you’ve told them what they’re doing is wrong, you can’t assume that they know it.

My experience with a lot of training is that there are some people who are terrific with guests. I’m sure you have your rock stars and your people are amazing and everyone feels the love when they work with them. But if you ask them, “What did you do with Mr and Mrs So-and-So to make them so happy?” They’re going to give you a really bland answer because they don’t know what they’re doing. They’re just being themselves and fortunately for them it is perceived really well by the people to whom they’re providing service. But for people who don’t have that innate ability and want to do their job well, someone has to tell them. And some of the things that I think often go untrained are the things that don’t fall into the book of standards.

I’m sure at your property you have standards or guidelines about how you do certain things, what the rules are, how often you reach out to guests, how you communicate with them, or how many rings are allowed before you pick up the phone. All of that stuff oftentimes is documented. That’s like the ‘what’, the technical aspects of delivering your service. But the part that’s a lot harder is the ‘how’, which is actually what service excellence training is all about.

Wofford: What are your thoughts on maintaining an appropriate level of guest service when much of your staff is provided by third-party employment agencies? There are conflicting loyalties in terms of employment and focus.

Martyn: A lot of people have this, and if you have any kind of third-party contracts, or you have a management group interacting with an ownership group, it can be very, very complicated. But it goes back to what we were talking about before: getting people to understand the ‘why’.

Now, there could be a situation in which you are giving one set of directions and then the other manager that the employees technically report to is directly contradicting you, and that’s tricky. But that’s a technical piece that you have to work out between the two managers to make sure that the messaging is really consistent.

What is helpful is to make it less subjective and not about one person’s opinion versus another’s, because there’s not one person on this planet who isn’t going to say that their opinion is better. That’s just human nature. So you need to make it more objective by creating a rather vanilla, opinion-free approach to the decision-making process.

So with your different stakeholder groups, I would encourage you to go back and figure out those things that everyone is in alignment on. Maybe it’s financial incentives, maybe it is about guest experience. Once you figure out what the common point of departure is, you start to look at every situation and scenario through that common lens.

Wofford: How do you communicate metrics to frontline staff and turn it into something actionable?

Martyn: First off, hopefully everyone out there is measuring their guest experience. If you’re not, make sure you’re collecting those post-experience surveys. Consumers around the world are well trained, so there are pretty reasonably high response rates. So if you’re not yet doing a post experience survey, that’s a huge opportunity for you.

So, how do you take that information and make it into something real? Something I’ve seen done really effectively is figuring out a way to provide accolades to the people who are your stars. You might have to write questions into your survey like, “Was there any member of our staff who was particularly helpful to you?” Once you start getting that information, make a point of celebrating that Anna got three comments this last month or Sean was mentioned five times. So first off, make it personal. The scores themselves are hard to connect with and quite frankly, they’re really arbitrary benchmarks. We can’t even be sure they’re interpreting our questions correctly. But if you start to look at your qualitative data, your open-ended questions, then you have this opportunity to really raise up employees that are doing well.

Wofford: Do you have an example of a recent service interaction that really blew you away, that we could sort of look to as an example to follow?

Martyn: You know, I really see a lot of examples of great customer service, but for me I’m not really looking for some sort of special gesture. I don’t want anything comped. I don’t want a complimentary dessert. I really don’t want any of those things because so often they are a sign that the basics were not well executed. The best experience for me is when everything just happens. I don’t need anything special. I just want to pay for the thing or service that I wanted, and it all just happens smoothly so that I can pay my bill and leave. That is truly the best experience. As soon as you get into talking about ‘surprise and delight’, which is a common industry term, or these ‘above and beyond’ gestures, they actually don’t hold a lot of value for me.

So often, these gestures are nice and thoughtful, but they’re not really what I want. As an example, let’s say I’m unexpectedly delivered a cheese tray. Well, okay, that’s nice, but I’m not hungry now and I’m checking out at six am tomorrow, so I’m not going to eat it. I think it’s so hard to get gestures right in a way that’s actually very meaningful and relevant to the individual because what they need at any given time is constantly shifting. For me, I’d really rather have that energy and time invested in just doing what I originally asked for extremely well.

Wofford: Do you have any thoughts and strategies on first impressions?

Martyn: Picture this. You’ve just driven eight hours with your children and they were crying for the last hour of the journey. How do you feel when you get to that hotel? Do you feel great? No, you feel exhausted and at the end of your rope. The same could be said after a day of air travel or even a long day of work. So you’ve got a guest who is coming into what’s supposed to be this restful thing or happy thing. But so often we as guests are carrying our own baggage, or maybe we really need to use the restroom because we haven’t stopped for hours. Whatever. Then you arrive and you’re given the check-in information, the Wi-Fi password, and all that. So the guest is already feeling tired and overwhelmed and the warm cookie just isn’t going to be as effective as it would be when the guest is relaxed, isn’t lugging around their 50-pound bags and so on. Then all of a sudden the cookie would create a much larger impression because the guest has more bandwidth to absorb it.

So I would say that it’s important to really think about those first impressions. There is so much already going on during that arrival experience, so how can you take the non-necessary things out of the experience so it feels less overwhelming?

Wofford: Has your research revealed any meaningful generational differences when it comes to employees delivering amazing guest experiences?

Martyn: The research I’ve done hasn’t focused on that directly, but I can offer some of my impressions. I think generationally, what is different, goes back to the beginning of our conversation, when we talked about identifying ‘the why’. Why should I care? What’s in it for me? That’s what’s really different generationally.

Your oldest group and cohort in the workforce might not be super comfortable with tech but they have a ton of experience. They used to think customer service just meant smiling, and now you’re trying to tell them it’s all these other more sophisticated things. You have to be able to really help them understand how the changes that you’re recommending are actually going to impact the guests. Oftentimes that group in particular is so emotionally invested in the guests. They just want them to have the best time. They are so committed to that, so you have to be able to connect the dots for why that’s important.

The younger employees are going to find the tech part so easy. They’re really flexible and nimble and they want to learn. They have a different ‘what’s in it for me’ reason to adjust what they’ve already been told. On the other hand, the younger employees might need help making better connections with the guest base, who might not be just like them. Trying to better communicate with 40, 50 or 60-year-olds can be a struggle because those people aren’t like them. So although I don’t have formal research on this, what I would recommend is kind of stepping back and thinking about the different groups in your workforce and what’s important to them in terms of feeling satisfied with their job and like they’re doing the right thing and then helping to connect the dots between what you’re asking of them and the values that they hold, because they could be very different based on generation.

Wofford: Beautiful advice. A big thanks to Elizabeth for joining us today.