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.

  0  

Careers, Family, and Gender: Managing Effectively in Today’s Shifting Workplace

Over the past fifty years, America has seen steady shifts in the makeup of its workplace. Managing these changes in career, family, and gender have needed to be addressed by both HR and workers themselves. Pamela Tolbert, professor from Cornell’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations, has been studying how social changes affect organizations and vice versa. She sat down with eCornell’s Chris Wofford to discuss how organizational leadership can address challenges for workers in today’s workplace and what they can do to create a more progressive environment that leaves everyone at the table more fulfilled.

What follows is an abridged version of that conversation.

Wofford: I think one of the through lines to today’s conversation, the thing we’re going to be talking about is work-life balance. Why is that an issue today? What’s the landscape look like? Give us some perspective.

Tolbert: So this gets into how organizations affect social life in part. And I think there are a couple of things that have led to this becoming a really big issue today particularly. I mean people have always worked, people have always had families. But there’ve been changes in both families and the workplace that have kind of lead to a perfect storm in how these two spheres relate to each other. We moved from the kind of traditional family where you have the husband is the bread winner, and the wife stays at home and takes care of things, to a place where you have dual earner couples are common place. And that change occurred pretty quickly actually. About 50% of all families, the husband worked, the wife stayed at home. By the 2000s, it was somewhere between 60% to 75% of the workforce were dual earners.

And then the workplace really didn’t change that much. You know, you have this big social change going on outside the workplace that affects it, not so much adaptation.

Wofford: I’m curious what companies are doing.

Tolbert: So there are a couple of major experiments in particular that I think are really promising. And part of the thing that makes them I think work, is that they’re really focused on rethinking how we work. Not just trying to help people manage work family relations, but the basic premise, these are a couple of experiments. One was done at Best Buy.

Wofford: What happened at Best Buy?

Tolbert: In the case of Best Buy, it was called Results-Only Work Environment (ROWE). So in that case it was started by their HR, but they were very conscious of the fact that part of what had gone wrong in the accommodations arrangements, where you have to ask your supervisor if you’re going to take a leave, or you have to make a deal to have flexible work arrangements. So it’s clear that it’s very important to get the supervisors involved in this. That it’s not something that’s just imposed upon them. So what they did was to bring together teams of employees and their supervisors, and the supervisor was responsible for helping the team come up with the ideas and to think the processes through essentially- everything is fair game. Let’s think about the meetings that we have. Let’s think about whether we could use technology more effectively to do things, rather than having all these meetings. If we made some kind of scheduling arrangements, could we then allow people to have more time off, so that they’re not having to be there constantly? Just to be more effective in thinking about the arrangements for coordinating and controlling.

Wofford: They would close the loop on a lot of their initiatives.

Tolbert: Yeah, yeah. So they could readjust. And it turned out it was a very effective program. I mean the employees were incredibly enthusiastic about it. It spread to a large number of others- it started at headquarters, and then it spread throughout the company, and actually a number of other organizations adopted it. They had data, it reduced turnover by almost half.

And the employees reported that they were getting more sleep, they had more energy, they could focus better, because of being able to control their work. So I think part of what’s important here is that because people were motivated to try and think, how can I work better? Because they have the carrot at the end, that your life would actually be improved. It’s not like, think how to work more efficiently so you can work more often.

With a national policy you could kind of provide incentives for employers to spread the work out a little bit more. Everybody would benefit. Including families. And all kinds of things. So that’s one direction that things could go. We also have model organizations to provide pathways. I mentioned the SAS corporation. There is a case study from … I think it’s in the Harvard. But anyway, it’s about this big data analytics company which has been around since, I don’t know, 1976 maybe. It’s a successful company. Always done well. This is the one where they have a 35 hour work week policy. Although people are also expected that if you’re needed you will be there. But the norm, you have a norm that work is not supposed to wake up every day of your life. They provide childcare policies. It’s a very employee centered company.

And the case makes it sound like Shangri-La. But the thing is is that it’s a private company and I think it’s easier to do that than in a public company because in a public company you start getting pressures from stockholders to cut out the fat and make it run more effectively. It is a private company but it’s had like a 10% sales growth on average every year since it was founded. Clearly it’s succeeding. It’s not like the “fat” is being wasted. You can’t make it an HR sort of project. You’ve got to get it spread throughout the company. But HR’s historically been sort of the champion of these kinds of initiatives.

So I think that the thinking about work and family as kind of integrated whole is an important thing for policy. For national policy but also for company policy.

Want to hear more? Watch the recorded live eCornell WebSeries event, Careers, Family, and Gender: Managing Effectively in Today’s Shifting Workplace, and subscribe to future events.

  0  

Workplace Harassment: Making Sense of Rapid Developments in the #MeToo Era

Workplace harassment is a complex and multi-faceted issue that affects every industry. Susan Brecher and Katrina Nobles from the Scheinman Institute at Cornell University are faculty experts in the fields of conflict resolution, employment law, and employee relations. They sat down with eCornell’s Chris Wofford to discuss the various ways in which organizations can respond to workplace harassment.

What follows is an abridged version of their conversation.

Brecher: Katrina and I worked for the Scheinman Institute, which is the institute for conflict resolution at Cornell University. I am the Director of Employee Relations, Employment Law, and Diversity and Inclusion, all of which directly relate to today’s topic. Katrina is the Director of Conflict Programs for the Scheinman Institute. She works on many projects related to conflict both on and off campus. Harassment is a topic that often brings up conflict.

Nobles: In addition to our work with Scheinman Institute, we host a public workshop series. Organizations then ask us to bring the topics covered in the workshops to their offices. These training topics include employee relations, conducting investigations, and employment laws, as well as programs on cross-cultural communications and conflict. We also help build organizational structure around what was learned.

Wofford: What does harassment in the workplace look like?

Brecher: Federal law does not define workplace harassment, and therefore it is open to interpretation. The working definition of sexual harassment includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and physical contact. The other definition relates to all forms of harassment in the protected classes: race, gender, national origin, and age. Here, the focus is on verbal or physical areas of conduct, and how they denigrate or show hostility. The two areas of focus are power-based harassment, and environmental, or the existence of a hostile work environment. These all relate to federal law, but there are state and local laws with even greater protections.

Wofford: How do the workplace policies relate to the legal definitions?

Brecher: Policies contain the minimum legal standard, but many go beyond that. Companies are looking for a higher expectation of respect and dignity to bring them in line with their mission and value statements.

Nobles: For many, their mission and value statements represent the ideal. They want to represent these strong values. However, the actions and behaviors that would support this don’t often occur. Missions and values are hard to define and are perceived through multiple lenses.

Brecher: In our trainings, we encourage leaders to find out what the terms mean to the people they work with, instead of assuming they know the answers.

Nobles: We often talk about what respect and dignity looks like. For example, if you show up to a meeting late, is that disrespectful? Opinions differed.

Nobles: How do you account for differences in working style, or generational differences?

Brecher: Workplace styles don’t necessarily break down by generation. And while I know there are generalizations or stereotypes, and it gives us insights into individuals, that’s where we begin to have problems and misunderstandings. One of our goals is to really help people understand their reaction to behaviors.

Nobles: We approach each person as an individual. We try to understand employees’ working and conflict styles to determine how we work best together. We focus on individual culture, social identities, and upbringing. For example, what part of the country did we grow up in? The answers make a huge difference.

Brecher: There’s often a great “A-Ha!” moment when individuals can see you’re not attacking them, but instead recognizing that they come in with a different lens. Some of those lenses negatively impact behaviors.

Wofford: Are companies today concerned about liability?

Brecher: Most organizations are less concerned about liability and more concerned about media exposure, in particular social media. When I train managers I ask them, “Would you like to see yourself on the news engaging in these behaviors? Or on social media?” And all of a sudden another “A-Ha!” moment arrives. Managers need to know what to say because we tell managers they have to report. Some managers think, “If I don’t see it, I don’t have to report.” We now teach them that yes, they do have to do something. But we want them to feel comfortable speaking, so we teach them the words to say.

Nobles: Speaking up is powerful. We need to empower employees to speak up themselves if they’re put into an uncomfortable situation. If they’re not comfortable doing that, they need access to the appropriate channels where someone else can speak up for them.

Brecher: Too often, we’re reacting to the person that comes to us and says, “This person has been doing this for the last six months,” as opposed to supporting the culture in which that person may have said after the first time something happened, “I’d like to give you some respectful feedback.” Having those support points earlier on makes it a completely different organizational culture.

Nobles: Everybody has a different perception of what should be permissible, based on experience and culture. At work, our cultures are meeting everybody else’s culture, and we may have differences. Conversations help the shared understanding around actions and behaviors.

Wofford: Some HR managers are expected to have an enormous degree of responsibility. Is this fair?

Brecher: HR must partner with the experts in the organization to build relationships so that as a team, managers better understand their operations. Partnering opportunities are vital. You have to approach it as a group from an organizational perspective.

Wofford: Should managers learn to investigate instances of alleged harassment?

Brecher: Managers should not conduct investigations unless they know how. Sometimes this can be guided by people who have that expertise.

Nobles: The best tool is to have somebody from your organization attend a full training on how to conduct investigations, because it is complex.

Want to hear more? Watch the recorded live eCornell WebSeries event, Workplace Harassment: Making Sense of Rapid Developments in the #MeToo Era, and subscribe to future events.

  0  

Order Out of Chaos: A How-To for Hospitality Planners and Developers

While project management is important in many occupations, for some it is especially crucial and can be a determining factor for success. Brad Wellstead, professor from Cornell’s SC Johnson College of Business, has over thirty years of experience in architecture and project management and has seen first-hand the importance successful project management means for planners and developers. He sat down with eCornell’s Chris Wofford to discuss the importance of leadership and management abilities in hospitality today.

What follows is an abridged version of that conversation.

Wofford: If you’re getting started in this field, what are the particular skills and ability that would benefit one most?

Wellstead: Good project management skills include understanding and getting your hand around scope of a project and being able to schedule and budget and build teams and so on. But then that works into the characteristics where you, as the leader of a project, it’s about team building and significantly excellent communication skills. You have to be a motivator and you have to be a coacher.

Wofford: Budget creation seems like it would be a particular challenge. Any advice on how to deal with that?

Wellstead: Real estate development is interesting because there’s usually one team that comes up with how much money we have to spend on a project. Then, it’s handed over to the group that has to actually execute the project. They say, “Okay. Here’s your budget and your scope, and, oh, by the way, a schedule and make sure it happens in all those conditions.” That handover, that nexus right there, is always a challenging one, particularly if there were any last-minute changes based on feasibility or needs of the project or so on. That gets smoothed over by having the involvement of a project manager who is running it throughout the entire project so, when in fact you are creating budgets, they are able to contribute and add-in the necessary factors of contingency, both time and money to incorporate those so that they’re in as part of it from the very beginning.

Wofford: When you’re involving stakeholders, what are the expectations as far as presenting the state of the project?

Wellstead: When you’re in the implementation stage, when you’re spending 60, 70% of your overall budget, design fees, and construction, that’s when the real money is getting spent. There should be often weekly meetings between the owner and the architect during the design phase and the project manager, of course.

That keeps them up to date and/or the project manager keeps the owner up to date on a weekly basis that way. As you move into construction, typically weekly, sometimes biweekly, meetings of the owner, architect, and contractor. Again, with the project manager representing the owner. That keeps everybody up to date with what’s going on.

Wofford: Tell me what somebody might get out of your course as it relates to what we have been discussing today?

Wellstead: It starts with the understanding of the project and getting your arms around it, the skills of creating a schedule and a budget and running through the whole impact management point of view with some … I don’t want to call them detours, but we talk about creating RFPs and team building and such.

And quality schedule and budget. I’ve never had an owner say, “You know what? Scope and schedule are critical thing. I don’t care about quality. Give me a bad project. It’s fine.” No, that never happens. It’s always come more down to schedule and budget.

Then, there’s this whole other part of that culture that we talk about in the course where it analyzes who the leaderships are and some of the things we talked about when we’re talking about contingency because it leads to understanding how you address contingencies. Is it white hot construction? Is it crazy municipality? Is it a community that’s going to be anti or for development? Is it a difficult site to work in and a whole lot of internal things that are happening as well as external things that could be happening so it gives you this really comprehensive, holistic view of the project that once having done that, you have a sense of how you’re going to move forward.

All of that pulls all that together. Those are the main things: the culture, schedule, budget and the team building and then the impact management aspects.

Want to hear more? Watch the recorded live eCornell WebSeries event, Order Out of Chaos: A How-To for Hospitality Planners and Developers, and subscribe to future events.

  0  

Why the ability to read data is just as important as the ability to read

Working with spreadsheets and analyzing data is no longer reserved only for those who crunch numbers. Today, all fields are relying more heavily on making data-driven decisions and utilizing spreadsheet modeling as a tool for growth. Donna Haeger, a Cornell professor of economics and management, sat down with eCornell’s Chris Wofford to discuss the growing impact spreadsheet modeling is having on business.

What follows is an abridged version of that conversation.

Wofford: How does spreadsheet modeling relate to business analytics? How do we distinguish the two?

Haeger: The spreadsheet modeling piece is really taking the unstructured data. We’re structuring it into an organized fashion. The business analytics piece is really the data-driven decision-making that we’re doing, so making the decisions on the model are what we’re doing when we’re performing business analytics. If we’re using optimization, we want the result of the model to tell us what we should do – how many of a particular product we should produce based on our criteria and our goals. We could also do predictive which is a forecast, like a simulation.

Wofford: What are some typical obstacles? For some people, this is very fresh and if you’re really starting to take your analytics and your modeling seriously, what are the typical obstacles that people run up against when they’re first starting to think about this as a strategy for their company?

Haeger: I think the biggest obstacle today is how much data we have. We’re drowning in data. I always tell my students data is not the problem. We have so much data that we don’t know what to do with it. Most of the startup companies that are working in data analytics are basically becoming specialists in spreadsheet modeling and other types of data modeling so that they can answer questions. And I like to say that every company that has data, which is every company at this point, they’re swimming in answers to questions they haven’t even begun to ask – and that’s a pretty amazing place to be.

Wofford: What is your experience as far as when you work with students? Can you just speak to that broadly about this as a career path or if somebody’s actually already established in a position, how might it benefit them to learn about this?

Haeger: That’s an interesting question and I get this all the time – things like what job titles am I looking for. I have not found a position, an internship or a permanent job, that does not involve data in the business realm as of late. And so that’s interesting because I like to say that this whole thing about data is ubiquitous, like it’s everywhere. There are very few jobs right now that do not relate to having some data literacy, so understanding how to take data and turn it from data to information, which is structuring the data and then analyzing it and turning it to some knowledge is it’s really hard to find a position where you don’t need to know how to do that.

In fact, we’re starting to hear that people are being encouraged to learn a programming language on top of being able to be working with the data.

Wofford: What is that?

Haeger: When you’re working with spreadsheet modeling, you have a lot of control over the data that you receive, however, it depends. Everyone has a choice. I call it a Venn diagram. We’ve gone from where we used to send an email to IT and say, “I need some data, please send it to me” and the business people would get the data from IT.

Wofford: I mean if we talk about data literacy across an organization, for example, there’s certainly a case to be made that everybody should be to literate in some way so we know what we’re talking about. Are visuals where it’s at?

Haeger: We all love pictures, right? I think most of us are visual and even if we’re not visual having the spreadsheet model – and when we say spreadsheet model, it could be a pivot table, table, columns, rows, a chart – when we turn it into a visualization, we’re answering a lot more questions in one image. When we illustrate it this way and if we do a good job with it, it’s much easier for people to answer their own questions and interact with the visual. We’re starting to actually create dashboards now where we’ll create several different pivot tables, pull out some visualizations, put them all on one tab and create slicers where the individual isn’t just looking at three or four images but also being able to hit the slicers and interact with the data. So now you’re answering thousands of questions by interacting with what you see on the dashboard.

Want to hear more? Watch the recorded live eCornell WebSeries event, Why the Ability to Read Data is Just as Important as the Ability to Read, and subscribe to future events.

 

  0  

How Entrepreneurs Think and Behave

“Entrepreneurial thinking is about imagining the end and creating the means.”

That’s the mantra of Neil Tarallo, a senior lecturer at The Hotel School at Cornell University and the director of Cornell’s Entrepreneurship Bootcamp for Veterans with Disabilities. Tarallo, who learned about entrepreneurship at the knees of his father and grandfather, says that the term ‘entrepreneurship’ has become too closely tied with startups when in reality entrepreneurship is not solely about starting a business. It is a way of looking at the world.

As part of eCornell’s Entrepreneurship webinar series, Tarallo spoke with Chris Wofford about the behavior traits of successful entrepreneurs and the foundation for entrepreneurial thinking. What follows is an abridged version of their conversation.

Wofford: Nice to see you again, Neil. The last time you were here we covered the business model canvas, a great tool for entrepreneurs and managers. Today we’re going to be talking about how entrepreneurs think and behave. Why is this something we should look at? What can we hope to learn from today’s talk?

Tarallo: For me, having been an entrepreneur and then moving into an academic environment and teaching the subject, one of the things that became apparent is that entrepreneurship is less about starting businesses and more about how the people who start these businesses think and behave.

Over the past four or five years, there’s been some really great research into how entrepreneurs behave and documentation of the behaviors of expert entrepreneurs. For me as an academic, if we can teach those behaviors and help our students understand those processes, we can put them on a path to be much more successful in their endeavors.

Wofford: The obvious question here: What are those behaviors?

Tarallo: I think more than anything else, the behavior can be summed up as a level of comfort in moving forward without really understanding what the final goal will be or even which path you will take.

One of our Hotel School alum put it really well: “Most of the world needs to know every turn and every nuance in the path that they’re taking wherever they go. Entrepreneurs just need to get to the first turn. When they get there, they’ll look around and evaluate their environment and then they’ll make a decision on which way to go based on that information.”

To start a business or to create something new is very dynamic and it requires that we have a lot of information coming from the environment around us and that we can use that information to find the right direction to go.

Whenever I talk about this subject, I always like to define entrepreneurship because it’s really interesting to me that as I talk to people about what entrepreneurship is, there are a lot of different impressions.

While I wouldn’t say that anybody’s really wrong about how they define entrepreneurship, I like to make sure we’re on the same page. So I always start out by asking, “What is entrepreneurship and what does it mean?” Many of the definitions of entrepreneurship that you see involve some reference to starting businesses and honestly I’ve moved very far away from that. For me, entrepreneurship includes starting businesses but it’s not solely about starting businesses. I like to define entrepreneurship as the process of creating value by bringing together a unique package of resources to exploit an opportunity.

If you use this definition, you’ll see that entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial behavior can occur in many different contexts. As we remove the idea of a startup being the focal point of our definite measure of entrepreneurship, we find that it applies to corporate environments, social enterprises and nonprofits.

Wofford: So you’re saying that maybe people have actually exhibited entrepreneurial behavior but they might not think of it that way because the idea of being an entrepreneur is so closely related to having started a business?

Tarallo: That’s right, it’s really not just about starting businesses. The behavior aspect of it really winds up being an alternative way of thinking, and it’s a way that I approach my entire life and especially my work.

I think about entrepreneurship as being a capacity to perceive and act upon opportunities based on the environment around you and the ability to create and build something from practically nothing. That’s what really great entrepreneurs are able to do, and it involves putting things together in a way that other people haven’t thought of yet.

Wofford: We’ve got some questions coming through in the chat box here and I’m just going to throw one out at you and then let you respond: Do you think entrepreneurs are born or can we teach people to be entrepreneurs?

Tarallo: Well, I sure hope so because Cornell pays me to teach people about entrepreneurship! There is some research out there about how some people are born thinking effectually, meaning they think entrepreneurially. If you watch children playing together, you can see this really clearly. When you see little boys sitting down playing and they have a whole bunch of dump trucks but they need a firetruck, they don’t just say, “Oh geez, we don’t have a firetruck so therefore we can’t have a fire.” No way. What they say is, “Okay, you see this dump truck right here? From now on, that’s our firetruck.” And from then on out, any time one of them touches that firetruck, they’re making the siren noises and all that. That’s a form of effectual thinking.

What we’ve learned is that as people move through the education system in the United States, and I would argue in most other countries, they become less and less effectual in their thinking and they become more focused on how to get someplace and what is needed to accomplish something along that defined path. We work on changing that and it is something that I definitely think we can teach.

Wofford: How do you teach people to maintain or reclaim that effectual thinking?

Tarallo: When I came to the Hotel School at Cornell, my responsibility was to help hotels move their entrepreneurship programs forward. One of the first things we did was to separate the skills and tools that we can teach in the classroom – marketing, finance, those kinds of things – from the behavioral component of entrepreneurship.

The only real way to teach the behavioral part of entrepreneurship is to really immerse the students in the behaviors because that’s where you learn. I learned to be an entrepreneur at the knees of my father and my grandfather because they immersed me in that behavior. Teaching practical skills in a classroom is a very simple thing to do, but the behavioral part is a little bit more challenging.

But we do know that we can teach people to be entrepreneurial. Research shows that if you have had even one formal entrepreneurship course, your likelihood of succeeding as an entrepreneur increases exponentially. That’s because you start to become aware and you start to become conscious of these things as you go along.

Saras Sarasvathy, who has done some really great research at the University of Virginia into how entrepreneurs behave, has identified the two primary ways that people think as causal and effectual. Let’s break those down a little bit. Causal thinking is what we’re all accustomed to and what most of us do throughout the course of our day. In business schools, this might be characterized as a managerial way of thinking. Basically this is thinking about how to achieve a predetermined goal. This is when you say, “Okay, here is the challenge I have in front of me and this is what I am going to do to overcome it.”

The next level of thinking is called strategic thinking. In business schools, we sometimes equate this with creative thinking. This is about generating new means to achieve a predetermined goal.

When it comes to effectual thinking, and this is what Sarasvathy identifies as the way entrepreneurs think, it’s more about moving forward by understanding the means that are around you. Instead of saying, “This is the goal that I have”, what you’re saying as an entrepreneur is, “Here’s the problem I need to solve.” The goal is the solution to that problem but in effectual thinking you are not specific about what that solution might be.

Wofford: To oversimplify it, it’s sort of going with the flow, right? Reacting to what comes along?

Tarallo: Yeah, in a way. Sarasvathy also talks about not thinking about either the means or the end but just understanding the problem that needs to be solved and then kind of letting everything take you in that direction.

Entrepreneurs understand that we can’t control the future, nor do we want to. Because if we let the future unfold on its own, generally speaking it will be driven by our customers and therefore the solution that we create will be the solution that our customers desire. That’s why expert entrepreneurs tend to be more successful than others.

Wofford: Something I’ve heard a lot in the startup world is this idea of the agile methodology. I mean, in the end you’re trying to solve a problem and your solution might look very different than what you initially anticipated.

Tarallo: That’s absolutely true. You know, when anybody comes to me with a business idea and asks me what I think of it, I always tell them that it doesn’t really matter what I think. In fact, it doesn’t really matter what they think about it either. You can only present a product or a service; in the end it is only the customer’s opinion about it that matters.

As I evaluate whether or not someone has the potential to really be a successful entrepreneur, one of the things that I think about is how willing they are to be flexible with the solution that they’re creating. The problem we see with new and inexperienced entrepreneurs is they have this vision of what their company is going to look like and they follow that vision to the exception of all the information that’s around them. That leads to failure.

Wofford: Is this in part because they’ve put too much emotional stake into it?

Tarallo: Exactly. They get very personally attached. You have to be willing to let go. What’s interesting about some of the research into the behavior of expert entrepreneurs is that the only thing that matters to them is solving the problem. The thing that’s really compelling for them is that there’s a problem out there or a gap in the marketplace that needs to be filled. They don’t care they do it, they just care that it gets done.

I’ve created this little mantra: “Entrepreneurial thinking is about imagining the end and creating the means.”

To go back to Sarasvathy, she has something called “the lemonade principle”. This is about the old saying that if the world give you lemons, make lemonade. Entrepreneurs understand that when we have something happen to us, there are usually opportunities to be found. How do we take this worst case scenario and turn it into something that is a true opportunity? How do we move forward with it?

I have another little saying: “The world doesn’t happen to me but the world happens for me.” In other words, when bad things happen there’s generally an opportunity there for me to do something different and new. It’s the old silver lining in the cloud kind of thing.

Another one of Sarasvathy’s principles of entrepreneurial expertise is what’s called “the patchwork quilt”. This is about the fact that entrepreneurship is really messy. It never goes according to plan and things happen that force you to change what you do. So instead of looking at things like a puzzle, where we have very specific pieces that fit into very specific spaces, which is what most causal thinkers would do, for entrepreneurs it’s more like a patchwork quilt. It’s more about finding a piece of fabric and sticking it in, then finding another one and realizing you can fit it in over there if you squeeze it or stretch it out a little bit. No matter how I do it, at the end of the day it’s going to create a big quilt that will keep me warm. But I have no idea what that quilt will look like before I start down that path.

I’ve only touched on a few of Sarasvathy’s principles of entrepreneurial expertise, but I encourage everyone to look them up because they are all very interesting.

Wofford: Great. I can see that we are quickly running out of time. Do you want to leave us with some parting words?

Tarallo: I want to stress that entrepreneurship is not something you do, it’s a behavior. I’m really working hard personally to scrub entrepreneurship as a word that I use to describe a career, because it really is a behavior for me. It’s the way that I act, the way that I think.

Wofford: Neil, thank you once again for joining us. I know you are going to be coming back soon for a webinar that looks at innovation. I’m already looking forward to it.

Tarallo: Thanks, Chris. This was fun. See you next time.

Want to hear more? This interview is based on Neil Tarallo’s live eCornell WebSeries event, How Entrepreneurs Think and Behave. Subscribe now gain access to a recording of this event and other Entrepreneurship topics.

  0  

Adding It Up: Hidden Lifetime Costs of Sexual Assault and Misconduct

Victims of sexual assault, violence, and misconduct suffer in multiple ways following the crimes committed against them. Liz Karns, professor from Cornell’s ILR School, has been following the lifetime costs for victims of these sexual crimes. As both a lawyer and an epidemiologist, she is tackling the data from an interesting perspective and sat down with eCornell’s Chris Wofford to discuss the lasting effects for survivors both on campus and in the workplace.

What follows is an abridged version of their conversation.

Wofford: You are an epidemiologist and also a lawyer, so you’re coming at this from two very interesting angles that together make for a really compelling story, so tell me a little bit about when you started looking at this and your experience.

Karns: As an epidemiologist, I started thinking about it just in terms of the types of data we would have, right? But it wasn’t until I went to law school like 13 years after being an epidemiologist that I started applying it to sexual assault, and in that context, I treated, and I continue to treat those cases just as I would any type of medical malpractice case or environmental harm case. They are the exact same set of ways that we assess damage. We need the studies, we need the research, we need the experts, and, it’s been a while coming that we got all of those things together. But at this point, we have so much research, so much information that makes it quite clear that the cost is a lifetime cost, and that currently it is usually the person, the victim, who pays for that – and that’s my interest, is to shift that.

In 2015 we had like a banner year of doing lots of different studies, and these studies were all essentially asking the same, which was ‘Have you been sexually assaulted while in college?’ And, there was some slight difference in terms of the phrasing. This was a study that was done by Kaiser and the Washington Post, and we have 25% of people who were assaulted since starting college, 20% for women, 5% for men. We see pretty similar pattern across all the different places, right? It never varies in a big way. The one that says 27 AAU, this was a study that Cornell was part of. We had 27 different colleges that did the same survey, and it’s important to have this information because it’s consistent across studies. There’s so many people who will say, ‘Oh, but people just make that up or it was dependent on the respondents.’ There’s been a lot of reliability and validity testing on this and this is solid data. The sad thing is that this the exact same data that we had in 1987. The numbers are the same since 1987 – roughly 20% is a consistent thing and it has not changed with anything.

Part of the reason that we add this up is that money matters. Somehow when we start attaching a price tag, people become more accountable, and the different systems that we look at are the legal systems. We’ve got the criminal and the civil system, and the financial obligation that arises out of that. Let’s imagine that a perpetrator is found guilty, and under the criminal system, ordered to pay restitution. That means they have to pay the victim money, and that is a contract now. That cannot be discharged, under a personal bankruptcy, so it is something that will stay with that perpetrator forever until they’ve paid it off.

Wofford: Wow.

Karns: That would change the world.

Wofford: I would imagine.

Karns: This is the standard approach to all injuries. This is exactly what’s used in your car accidents, your slip and falls, medical malpractice, everything else, so it’s interesting that people don’t think of it when it comes to sexual assault. So it’s part of my job, to articulate it, and make people think about that. If we assign dollars, we’ll get societal change. I’m quite sure about this one. The person initially talks to the psychiatrist, and then talks about different situations that this arises in, to figure out how invasive it is in their life. I have had people who could not go to covered parking lots ever again in their lives, and that meant that they would drive 50 miles out of the way to go to a different train station because they didn’t wanna use that one that had the covered parking lot. That meant that she couldn’t take certain jobs, so it’s got this sort of ripple effect.

Wofford: Yes, exactly. So what I’m getting at, or where I was going with that was, linking this particular diagnosis to these behaviors, and I wonder often how that plays out legally.

Karns: Yeah, well, I mean it’s absolutely part of the case because you’ve got, first the initial injury, which is the assault itself, and that doesn’t have a huge amount of value, obviously, like in terms of money, but the ways that it impairs one’s life after that are what get documented. That is the job of the lawyer to go through and describe the day and the life – you bring in different experts to say, this person will have a very predictable set of problems when they have their own children, so that’s a cost that you should be thinking about.

So the expert is who ties this person’s diagnosis and situation and then projects it forward, and when I’ve worked on medical malpractice cases where we had something happening to an infant, we would do the same thing. We’d say this is what their life looks like in the future.

Wofford: Yeah. Okay, behavioral health, again, this is not a big surprise, that they are more likely to be using alcohol or hard drugs, and they’re aware that they need to cut down, so they are aware that they’re using it as a substitute for treatment, if you will. And then this is the one that the insurance company knows is that they continually use more healthcare than non-victims, so whenever somebody discusses, gosh, maybe we should decide this is a preexisting condition, you can see why the insurance company is interested in that ’cause these are very costly, they have higher costs, 20% higher.

Karns: So, when people start acknowledging that the assault occurred, and that’s a process in itself, and realizing that they need counseling, it’s not unusual to have a diagnosis come up from that. They don’t have to go and seek a diagnosis to say, ‘mmm, boom, I have it.’ It’s going to evolve, and you have this statute of limitations, so you have so many years afterwards, that depends on your state, to file this case, and so, you don’t have to seek it right away. If you’re gonna build a case, and you’re talking to your lawyer, right, a lawyer, then they will very much ask you, ‘Are you in counseling? Do you have a diagnosis?’ Most of us have health insurance that would cover some aspect of that so there’s some record of that as well.

Wofford: So you’re recommending that the damages are then directed to the perpetrator, legally. What is the state of the law, what’s happening out there, as far as cases like this? Is this line of thinking adapted?

Karns: Yeah.

Wofford: Okay, so this is nothing new.

Karns: This is not, nothing I’m doing is new. All I’m doing is calling attention to it in a different way, and the way that I check myself, if you will, is that I look at what are called default cases – these are cases where the perpetrator, who then became a defendant in civil court, never showed up and the plaintiff, the person who experienced the assault, has the right to make the argument of, ‘What are the costs?’ And then the judge assesses those costs and decides whether or not they’re warranted.

This is all about true economic loss.

But, compensation funds will actually pay for things like therapy, so you could get that immediate counseling that you need, it’s just onerous to get there. Second one is – I mentioned this before – criminal restitution. This is part of any court process, that the criminal court can order the perpetrator to pay the victim. And then finally, civil damages, and this is the one I think most of us are familiar with, where we undertake legal action. The plaintiff, the person who is the victim, brings the case against that defendant, and everything I’ve talked to today goes into that damages number, and then that number gets used all the way through the civil court process, so demand letter, complaint, arguments.

So shifting the burden is what we need to do. That is absolutely what we’ll have to do. So things we can change. One, sexual assault happens in schools quite a lot, and we need to address the fact that it interrupts their education, and we need to think about a student loan deferral on this. It’s absolutely mandatory. The legal ones, holding the perpetrators responsible. And then finally, support, engaging survivors in discussions about the economic impact.

Want to hear more? Watch an excerpt of the live eCornell WebSeries event, Adding It Up: Hidden Lifetime Costs of Sexual Assault and Misconduct, and subscribe to future events.