• get promoted
• get a better job
• or find themselves in a better life

as a result of doing more than was expected of them.  The harder you work—and the more you do than is expected–the more you will attract the attention of your superiors and the sooner you will find yourself in a better life. In the case of my job as a garbage man, my hard work attracted the attention of my superiors at first in the wrong way—but then it paid off. In my job as a garbage man I was surrounded by men whose entire careers had been based on not doing more than was expected of them.  In contrast, I was of the belief that I should always do more than was expected of me.  This belief is something that I owe every success I have ever had to. In academics, this means studying more than is expected of you. In the work world, this means doing more than is expected of you in many, many ways.  When I was in college, if a teacher told us we had to write a paper of a “minimum” of five pages—I would write a thirty- or forty-page paper. “Why are you writing such a long paper,” my classmates would always ask me. “Because I want to get an A,” I would tell them.  And when I wrote such long papers and put so much effort into them, I always got As (often the only A in the class) when everyone else turned in their five-page (or maybe six-page) papers and got Bs and Cs. I even saw many people play with their margins to get to over five pages. The practice of law (which I did for some time) is like this to.  I remember one of my first insights into really great lawyering came when I was clerking for a judge.  I started to notice that the best lawyers from the best firms did very small, imperceptible things that other attorneys would not. For example, if they were sending you a bunch of pages paper clipped together they might put a sticky note between the paper and the paper clip so the pages were not marked with the paperclip indentation. This is, of course, excessively anal but it is an example of the smallest of details that the best attorneys do not miss. Their work is proofread meticulously. They are on top of just about every single thing they are doing to an extraordinary degree, and no detail is too small. In contrast, the work of average attorneys would be proofed far less carefully and contain far more errors, typos, and other sorts of things.  Forget about a sticky note so there is no paper clip indentation… Whether it is working as a lawyer or as a garbage man, there is always a way to do much more than is expected of you in every profession. There is no job where you cannot do more than is expected of you. You may not immediately see the results, but over time you will.  No supervisor misses their hardest and best workers.  You will soon find yourself promoted, given raises, given bonuses, and more. You will be offered a supervisors job eventually. Or you will be hired away by an astute competitor who sees how much you are giving and knows they can channel your energy. “If I give more than is expected of me, won’t I be used and taken advantage of?” you may ask. There is a remote chance of this occurring. But human nature is to give back in response to receiving. This is how it works 99% of the time. It is just a law of the world. I have seen so many attorneys get better jobs by giving more than is expected of them.  Other lawyers notice and hire them away. They rise up the ranks of firms. They attract clients who also see their devotion. They get to the top fast. It is like this in every profession. There is no other thing that has given me more in life than performing more than is expected of me.  Let your competitors in your job slack off and put in half-assed efforts.  A few years from now you will be living the dream while they are stuck or moving backward. If you are not doing your absolute best and withholding your best work, you are only prolonging your present situation and are dooming yourself to a life of mediocrity (for your abilities) or, at worst, failure. Resist the urge to do only what is expected of you.  Give all you can to everything you do and you will succeed. THE LESSON In every job, there is always much more to do than what is actually expected of you; by dong more than expected, you will attract the attention and respect of your superiors and find your life improving. When you withhold your best work, however, you only prolong your current situation and confine yourself to mediocrity. Put everything you can into all of your work, resist the urge to only put in the expected effort, and you will find your life and career approving accordingly.

Conversely, some of the greatest powers you personally have in your own career and in business are relationships. Relationships are a powerful force that you can use to your advantage in your career. Inefficient and top-heavy organizations are everywhere, and they become this way mostly due to the power of relationships between the people working there. People often get hired and stay employed–due almost entirely to their ability to connect with their employer–and develop strong relationships at the workplace. I would go so far as to say that probably 20% to 30% of the people inside of most organizations are not actually needed at all. These people are kept employed and are allowed to collect salaries, benefits, and so forth because of the power of the relationships they have developed inside the organization. Others like having these people around and will protect them. This is a good, safe position in which to find yourself.

I used to defend companies when they were sued for employment discrimination, wrongful termination, and so forth. I defended more of these cases than I can even remember; they are a dime a dozen. Generally, when people lose their jobs, it is because they did not have solid relationships within the company, people did not like them, and so forth.

Furthermore, people often lose jobs because they are not protected by others inside of an organization. One of my parents worked for years inside of a major American company, not doing much of anything, because my parent was protected by someone high up. It was due to this relationship that this parent was able to keep their job for so long. There is a constant tension between efficiency and inefficiency inside of organizations, and often relationships can win out over purely rational business-based decisions.

As any business grows, a protectionist sentiment develops, as employees protect each other and do their best to honor various relationships. It is for this reason that most companies generally cease to be competitive within the market or go out of business altogether. In reality, draconian cutbacks, harsh management, and cold and calculating number crunchers are the ones who ultimately save companies and organizations. At the same time, these sorts of people are also typically the greatest enemy of relationships in organizations.

I have been deeply involved in the legal profession for most of my career. Back in the early 1980s, most law firms in the United States and throughout the world dealt with what was called the lockstep compensation system. In effect, this was a system of compensation wherein people were compensated more money for each year they worked at their law firms, regardless of their productivity, the amount of business they generated, or other criteria. The idea was that the older attorneys had paid their dues within the law firm by being there for the longest amount of time. Other law firms simply had compensation systems that were less formal, and might be decided through committees, for example. In this case, it was possible for the firm to determine individuals’ salaries based on the quality of their relationships with superiors.

Starting in the 1980s, consulting firms began to come into law offices, and they started to mix it up. The consultants showed the law firms that they could increase their profitability by rewarding the highest producers based on their individual productivity, instead of paying everyone based on informal compensation systems. The consultants set up point systems and other measurements of productivity within the law firms. Before long, a sea change occurred inside of the legal profession, and numerous attorneys ended up losing their jobs or taking massive hits in their compensation. The relationships inside of the organizations became drastically de-emphasized and, instead, the decisive factor became numbers and other quantifiable items. This change is still occurring in law firms, and it has been devastating to numerous attorneys, specifically to those whose lives and careers have revolved around their ability to create relationships within their organizations. Law firms, however, have had to undergo this restructuring in order to survive.

I have the most hands-off management style you can ever imagine. Throughout the years, I have employed numerous managers whom I have given near complete discretion to make all sorts of hiring decisions without my involvement. In watching how these people have hired new employees, I have learned that people hire the kinds of people they like, relate to, and want to spend time with outside of work. I have seen this in most companies, firms, and other organizations I have observed throughout the years.

Several years ago, I hired a human resources director who had experience in working for a large multinational organization in a hiring capacity. On one of his first days of work, the two of us had lunch and spent some time together. While I am not sure how it came out, the man told me that he really liked thin women with giant breasts. I did not think much about it at the time; however, I did find it somewhat humorous, considering this fellow was an older man with a real professorial sort of demeanor. I filed this information away in the back of my head and forgot all about it.

I met with this man by phone and in person once a week, and during these meetings, I told him about various people that the company needed to hire. The company was growing very quickly at the time and this person was generally hiring several people per week. Each evening he would take home tons of résumés, review them, and hire people the next day. Because our company was spread over three buildings in Pasadena, I did not meet, nor did I see, all of the people the guy was hiring. In addition, I was traveling a great deal, so I was not in the office as much as I would have liked to be.

At some point, I was in the office and I took a look around. I immediately realized that the man had hired nothing but thin women with large breasts. In addition, the more I watched this story unfold, the more I noticed that the women he had hired all seemed to fawn all over him, understanding that he liked feeling validated constantly by women.

Was this a bad thing? I am not sure. What I do know is that, from what I understood, all of the women were pretty good at their jobs–at least to begin with. As time went on, however, it turned out that a few of the women were not performing very well. One, for example, had spent the majority of her time cutting and pasting outfit combination ideas into a Word document, instead of working. When her horrible work ethic was brought to my attention, the human resources director said:

“She is the most valuable person in this company,” and he did everything he could to defend her, although she was clearly not necessary to the company’s functioning. The human resources director fought with everything he had to keep this woman around, due to a perceived connection that he shared with her. This is just a minor example of the power of relationships in business.

I remember another employee who had a real leaning toward a certain type of employee. The person that he seemed most interested in hiring and protecting was always of the same race, sex, physical build, and other characteristics. When people that this person hired did not do well on the job, they too were defended blindly and with a great deal of gusto, despite being poor performers.

I have also seen people kept on who literally had no work to do, because they were considered valuable to the company. In the past our company has had entire departments staffed when one person could have probably handled the work. A manager often grows protective of his employees, because of how the relationships with them develop over time: “We could never do without these people!” they may say. However, this usually could not be further from the truth.

Getting a job, advancing in your career, getting business, making the sale, and more–it is all about relationships. The better relationships that we form, the better off we are. When you are being interviewed for a job, your success often has more to do with the connection and quality of relationships you have with others than anything else. People want to work alongside those with whom they feel they have a connection–not necessarily with those who they perceive will do the best job.

One of the most interesting things about job interviews is that many times there is a favorite for a certain job–before everyone has had a chance to interview. That favorite could be someone who is a friend of the person making the hiring decision. Or it could be someone who made a great impression on the interviewer before you got to the interview. If you are interviewing after that person has interviewed, it means you have come into the interview at a distinct disadvantage, because the interviewer may have a sense of loyalty to the person he or she has already interviewed and favored; in this case, the interviewer does not want to like you too much. What ends up happening in these sorts of interviews is that a great deal of “professional formalities” generally occur, and you will notice that you are unable to make any sort of meaningful connection with your interviewer. This clamming up on the part of the interviewer is generally a very bad sign. In order to get a job, get business, and reach your potential in anything, it is extremely important that you make a personal connection.

If you cannot connect with the people you want to hire you, or the people you want to do business with, then you are not going to have an easy time getting work. You need to break down the walls of professionalism between you and others and make sure that the person relates to you, likes you, and feels a connection to you. There is nothing more important than this.

A danger in business, in your career, and in your job search is professionalism. Many people have a profound belief that they must be extremely professional in the business world–with employers and with others–at all times. While I am in no way against proper decorum, there is a real danger in acting too professional. This is because always being hyper-professional will keep others from feeling connected to you. If you cannot relate to people and build strong personal relationships with them, you are generally not going to do well. Relationships can be built in many ways, but they exert so much influence over our day-to-day careers and lives that without any sort of connection, we are often quite lost.

I absolutely hate it when people in business try to act extra “professional.” I dislike being “professional” in business a great deal as well. Professionalism can act as a wall that potentially prevents you from getting that job, promotion, or business. If you actually have a real shot at getting the job or position, you will know it because your interviewer will most often let down his or her guard, confide in you, and make the connection. However, if the person you are dealing with actually does not want anything to do with you, he or she will not be willing to reveal much to you and will try to keep his or her distance. The lack of personal connection will most probably either get you into trouble now (i.e., you will not get hired) or later (i.e., you will be let go in the future).

An employer’s lack of genuine interest in you makes it incredibly difficult for you to get the job, to get ahead, and to accomplish what you are seeking to accomplish. You need to be able to relate to people and connect with them at work, in interviews, and elsewhere. The more connected you are, the better you will do.

THE LESSON

The influence of relationships can inhibit business growth and lead to disaster. At the same time, however, relationships constitute your greatest assets in your career. All aspects of your job search and your career depend on the relationships you cultivate, so you must strive to form the best relationships possible. You must engender affinity and genuine connections with those around you to achieve success.

• They would have questions about the proper sorts of candidates to send to law firms.
• They would have technical questions about different law firms.
• They would want to know various company procedures and so forth.

I would happily share and teach all of this information; however, in the weeks and months that I would train each new recruiter, I really was never all that concerned with fundamentals. For example, I knew that the recruiters would learn about various law firms in due course. I knew that I could teach them how to present candidates to law firms most effectively. What I was most concerned with was something far deeper and more significant.  There was one thing that I knew would either make or break these recruiters and determine whether or not they succeeded. By the time each recruiter was done being trained, I knew and could tell many, many things. I knew if they would succeed at the job. I knew if they would last at the job. What I knew, all came down to one thing: Whether or not the person believed the job was about them—or was about others. The more the recruiter truly believed the job was about others, the better they did. “None of this is about you,” I would always tell people.  “It is 100% about others and has nothing to do with you.” Less than 30% of all the recruiters I’ve hired, worked on, and trained ever “got” this.  A few people understood this naturally (most do not). My training would generally hit the new recruiters with this message from multiple directions and in unexpected ways. I might have them read self-improvement books where this was an underlying (but not direct) message. Generally, sometime during the final week or so of the training, I would try to deliver them this message in a serious way. I might bring it up in the evening while we were sitting by a fire and there were no interruptions. I felt the message needed to be taken in, pondered, and slept on. The reason for this was that I felt the message was incredibly important and something that needed to be absorbed and fully understood. In fact, I felt the message was the most important career lesson the person would ever receive. When recruiters “got” this message, their career and life changed. They would very quickly start doing exceptionally well and making all sorts of placements. They would be referred to others. Their entire career would just get fired up in a real hurry.  People who understood and practiced this mantra almost universally did very well. The power of this message was so strong that two recruiters working together in the same office might have results that were 180 degrees different. One recruiter might have fifteen people interviewing at one time and be making placements at a rapid clip.  Another recruiter might be lucky to have anything going on at all—despite having access to the same resources as the other recruiter. It is all about the other person and never about you. What does it mean when I say people believe the job is about them? It means people are focused on their needs and wants.  They focus on things like

• How much money they make
• Working too hard
• Giving too much of themselves
• Whether others in a similar job are making more money than them
• How others in their company are doing compared to them
• How much free time they have
• Hobbies and pursuits outside of work
• How they are perceived by others
• Not being taken advantage of
• The prestige of other people they are working with
• The quality of their benefits

People who are focused on themselves spend a lot of time worrying and thinking about stuff like this. In fact, they generally spend just as much time thinking about these sorts of things as they spend thinking about their jobs and the people they are serving.  When someone is focused on things that have nothing to do with serving the people they are working for, they get predictable results. When a job is not about you, everything changes.  If a job is not about you:

• You take time to prepare an exceptional work product.
• You see things from another person’s point of view constantly.
• You think about the other person’s needs while you are working and not your own.
• You take the time to meet people and form alliances.
• You communicate with people in a way that they can tell you care about them.
• You write articles, give speeches, and do all sorts of things that people focused on themselves do not.

The world provides rewards (money, status, and so forth) in direct proportion to the value you provide. You will simply provide more value to others when you are focused on giving and concerned about the welfare of those you are working for. There are essentially three types of people and businesses out there: Those that over deliver, those that deliver what is expected, and those that under deliver. People who over deliver generally believe the job is about others.  People who under deliver generally believe the job is just about them. In your current and past jobs, you certainly have been promoted, let go, or remained stagnant based on whether you over or under delivered.  In terms of the businesses you frequent and like, the odds are very good that you are most comfortable with those which over deliver. Your personal success, like the success of most businesses, comes down to whether you over or under deliver. In my job, I speak with people who are unemployed and have lost jobs all the time.  I also speak with people who are incredibly successful all the time.

• The one constant I have noticed when speaking with the most successful people is that they make “over delivery” incredibly important in their work.
• In terms of speaking with the most unsuccessful people, they make under delivery the most important thing in their careers.

The laws associated with making money, getting ahead, and being successful – all really do come down to over and under delivery.  Most people who believe that a job is about others, over deliver.  Most people who believe the job is about themselves, under deliver. Do more than expected, work harder,  give more, and you will simply do better in life. There’s really no question about it. In your career, one of the most important things you can do is to get a reputation for over delivering as opposed to under delivering. Everything in your career and life—and how you will be known–generally comes down to whether you over deliver. You need to be focused on what other people want and need. Being focused on the needs of others and not yourself is crucial in any pursuit. I love reading biographies of incredibly successful people. I like doing this because studying the lives of successful people teaches me lessons that I can teach others about their own careers. Most biographies start out in the person’s childhood and then go from there. One of the most interesting parts of these biographies is reading about the work ethic of the people. The great successes are always are people who over deliver and are concerned about others.  They can see what other people want and could use and make this a priority. I also love reading stories about successful companies.  Successful companies also get the reputation for being focused on others and anticipating others’ wants and needs. To truly reach your potential, you need to over deliver–be focused on others and not yourself. THE LESSON You are rewarded in direct proportion to the value that you deliver, meaning that you have to deliver in order to reach your full potential. You will provide more value to others when you are focused on giving. People who under-deliver view their jobs as being primarily about them, while those who over-deliver see their jobs as being about others. Strive to develop a reputation for delivering rather than under-delivering.

• One man had originally been a financial trader with a bunch of Ivy League degrees. He made his fortune by selling some trading system he had developed for $10 million or so.

• The other man had been an attorney with an impressive pedigree as well. One day, he won a huge settlement and made around $5 million.

Both men were in their 40s, and after these major career victories, each of them quit their jobs and bought gas stations on the New Jersey turnpike. These men did not know each other and were of no relation, yet they both ended up migrating into the same profession. How does one transform from being a person with incredible qualifications to a person who simply owns a gas station on the New Jersey turnpike? From what I understood, these guys were incredibly happy after leaving their careers and taking on new positions as gas station operators. Running a gas station that sees a lot of business can be very profitable. Most gas station operators make around 10 cents a gallon in profit from every gallon of gas that they sell. In addition, they make a lot of money on the concessions that they sell inside the shop. Also, a lot of customers pay with cash, and the gas station owners often do not declare and pay taxes on their cash sales. Owning a gas station is much different from being a Wall Street lawyer or trader. You report to work in jeans, not a suit. You often work with people who are not highly educated. Selling refreshments and gas is something, it would seem, that almost anyone could do. Why, then, did these men both plan such a drastic change in profession? Here are some likely possibilities:

• They wanted to be happy.
• They enjoyed working in the gas station.
• They could earn decent money in the gas station business and could maintain a high quality of life.
• They wanted to be independent, and having their own businesses allowed them this independence.
• They realized that much of what is going on and is expected of people in the working world is just complete nonsense.

The idea has always fascinated me: If you could rise up through the ranks in your company and become incredibly successful, hypothetically making enough money to retire–would your very next move be to purchase a gas station? Most people would probably not do this. Instead, they would choose to keep on doing exactly what they had been doing before. It takes a lot of courage to walk away from a prestigious job to do something viewed as much less prestigious. One of the most interesting things that I have seen in all my years in the recruiting industry, and as someone who has personally hired hundreds of people, is that many people out there seem to have been brainwashed into doing certain types of jobs and living certain types of lives. Most often, these people want to have the jobs that are considered the most prestigious, which pay the most, and are perceived as offering the most security. At the same time, the people who end up following all the rules to obtain careers and lives like this are often the most unhappy. If you have a job or are pursuing a certain career primarily because you think you should, or because others think you should, you are making a huge mistake. You need to understand that if you keep doing this, you are never going to be truly happy. You need to be living the life and having the career that makes you happy. The voices that you hear inside yourself, which tell you to pursue a certain profession or be a certain thing, are often not your own voice. They are the voices of your parents; they are the voices of your peers in school; they are the voices of the people you associate with at work. Around a year or so ago, I hired an investment bank to raise capital for one of the businesses I run. Despite the fact that the bankers have not yet raised the amount of money I am seeking, it has been an enjoyable year working with them so far and I have learned a lot. In addition, these people have raised awareness of our business in the market, simply by talking to certain key people in the industry. They have done a good job, and I have certainly learned a lot by watching how they operate. I have noticed that the venture capital firms I am dealing with have been laying off lots of people. So have the investment banks. Since I chose to raise money at an inopportune time, the offers I have received so far have not been all that good. One deal that I was hoping would go through ultimately fell apart because the investors could not come up with the money. Nonetheless, I feel good about having at least gained some attention in this market. Meetings with venture capital firms are fun and educational because the firms are typically run by pretty strong businessmen who know how to make deals happen. I have enjoyed speaking with these people because they have made me question many of the assumptions I have had about the businesses I operate. A couple of months ago I received a voicemail from someone at one of the venture capital firms, asking me to call him back. I was enthusiastic and assumed that he had called to make me an offer. Perhaps our company expansion would quickly come to pass. “I have been very impressed with your business,” he told me. “As a matter of fact, I cannot stop thinking about it. I do not think our firm is going to be able to get you the money you are seeking, but I would really like the opportunity to work with you,” he said. Given his enthusiasm, I asked the man to send over his résumé–and it was very impressive. In fact, it had all the right schools and all the right previous jobs leading up to the present one. Since he seemed so enthusiastic about working with me and my company, I invited him to come and meet with me in person. “Are you actively looking for a job?” I asked him. “No. In fact, if this is what you think, then I am not even sure it makes sense for me to come down and interview with you. I am just very impressed with the business and feel like it is a natural fit for me.” After having a few meetings with this fellow, I started to get the sense that he was probably looking everywhere he could for a job, and that he had probably been laid off. In addition, I got a distinct sense that he actually had no interest in me, or the business in particular, and was really more concerned with making sure he stayed on a certain track, wherein he would be making a certain amount of money per year and in a job that had a certain level of prestige. While it was unspoken, I also understood that he was extremely unhappy in his current job and did not feel comfortable doing it. Finally, this man voiced to me that his real interest and desire was to start his own business. This was clearly what he was most interested in doing with his life, no matter where he worked along the way, acquiring all the necessary skills. There is nothing wrong with any of this, of course, but it was not what he had represented in his initial conversations with me. Notwithstanding all this, I liked the guy. At the same time, I also realized that he was confused and did not really know what he wanted to do with his career and in his life. Many people, like this individual, end up getting “shook up” at some point and do not necessarily know what to do. This is often more problematical for people who have the best backgrounds, because they believe and have been taught that they need to be and operate on a certain path. While this guy was probably making at least $200,000 a year in his previous position, I decided to take a chance and I made him an offer to be a consultant for six months at $10,000 a month. During his time as a consultant, I told him, he could basically work on whatever projects he wanted to, as long as it helped our company. I told him to try to create projects and tasks for himself that he would enjoy. After the six months, if he worked out and was enjoying the job, I would be prepared to make him a more permanent offer. I made the offer on these terms because I knew that whatever job the man ended up taking (whether with me or someone else) it would be experimental and might not be something that would last for very long. As a side note, there is an obvious danger in hiring someone who wants nothing more than to have his own business. Namely, if you are training him in your business, he could possibly become a competitor. Several years ago, I had two legal recruiters working for me who I knew wanted to start their own businesses. Since I did not want to compete with them in the United States, I started telling them every time I spoke with them that Asia was the best place to be a recruiter, and this would be a great business to get into over there. Incredibly, when they eventually started their own recruiting businesses, they were both dedicated to recruiting in Asia. It was among the most humorous things I have ever seen, and these two recruiters are now currently handling almost all placements in Asia (10,000+ miles away from where our company concentrates its efforts). I figured this man might have had a lot to teach me and vice versa, and that this would be the best way to proceed with him until he figured out what he was going to do. I was pretty confident he would not take the offer and I was right. A few days after receiving the offer, he called me and declined. The reason was that I was not offering enough money, or any stock options, or other types of perks–things that he typically would have expected. “It sounds to me like you are at a real crossroads in your career. You are going to need to decide if you want to be a bureaucrat or an entrepreneur,” I told him. He knows that he has a choice to be one thing or another. He knows that he is at a crossroads. But my guess is that he will stick with doing exactly what he was doing before and will spend his entire life and career in a role that is not satisfying to him. Life is too short to be doing things you do not want to do. You should be doing what you want to do, whatever is in your heart. Maybe this means owning a gas station–maybe it does not. It can be anything that you enjoy. If you do not yet know what it is that you enjoy doing, you had better get out there and find it. As Marsha Sinetar says, “Do what you love; the money will follow.” THE LESSON It is important to have a career that makes you happy, rather than pursuing a career simply because you or others think that you should. Life too short not to be doing the things that you really want to do with your life. If you do not yet know the kind of work that makes you genuinely happy, you need to go and find it.

• They worry about their appearance.
• They worry about how they will describe past jobs and moves.
• They worry about their experience.
• They may worry about their education.

All of these are valid worries (and may be important to the employer) but none of them are as important as the emotional motivation behind the employer’s hiring you. Emotion is often irrational, and employers often hire people for irrational reasons. In fact, our entire economy runs on irrationality. This may seem like a bold statement, but look at it this way: In virtually every news story I have read about when unemployment is high, something is always mentioned about how companies and other organizations are “doing more with fewer people.” Many of the stories mention things like companies doing just as much business (yet being more profitable) with 25% of the workforce. More recently, news stories have mentioned ”record corporate profits” because companies have staffed down and are doing the same amount of work with fewer employees in response to recessionary conditions. This indicates to me that something else is going on when employers are in hiring mode. A rational and unemotional organization would only hire as many people as it needs to do the work. It would not hire more people than it needs to do the work—and it certainly would not hire four times as many people as it needs to do the work. There is, of course, the need for extra employees in case someone leaves. There is the need to make sure people are not overworked. But there is absolutely no reason for any company to have four times as many employees as it needs to do the work. (Forget about four times as many employees … there is no reason to have 25% more employees than is needed to do the work.) Overstaffing is a complete waste of any organization’s money and resources. If this is the case, what is going on?

• In good economic climates, companies may be enthusiastic about the future and therefore want to hire more people—this is emotional.
• In good economic climates, more work that might not even be necessary is allowed to be done—this is emotional.
• In good economic climates, companies may want to see their offices and factories full of people—this is emotional.
• In good economic climates, friends and relatives of people are hired more readily—this is emotional.
• In good economic climates, people who are not productive are kept around—this is emotional.

Hiring becomes more of an emotional function for many employers than a rational and business-oriented function. For a few years, in my own company, we had a man who was consistently working massive amounts of overtime. It got to be so that his overtime was so excessive, I spoke with his supervisor and told him that overtime had to stop. Then I spoke with his supervisor again. Then I spoke with him again. Then I spoke with him again. This went on for more than a year. Finally, I told the supervisor that if the overtime did not stop, I would fire the guy working overtime. To my astonishment, the supervisor said: ”Boss, he has three kids to feed and a house. You need to let him work overtime.” The supervisor was telling me, essentially, that his emotional connection to the employee overrode the company’s more pragmatic and business-oriented reasons (saving costs) for limiting his hours. I could list countless examples of these sorts of emotional connections and how they come into play in the workplace. There are so many emotional connections that virtually every company is far more inefficient than it should be. If you are smart, you should realize that these emotional connections and emotional alliances are almost as important as your professional performance at work. These emotional connections are important in your getting and keeping a job and just about everything you do in your professional life. Make the most of your emotional connection and realize that emotion is the dominant force in most professional settings.

• First, there are those who are out there doing this or that and making things happen. These people typically put in years to perfect their craft, whether they are lawyers, actors, sports stars, businesspeople–or whatever. These people are actually doing something with their careers and lives. Their sense of self-importance and achievement comes from what they do. They are committed to getting things accomplished.
• Second, there are those who sit around writing about, talking about, and gossiping about those who are doing things in the world. Those who cannot do things or make things happen in the world are generally the ones who are best at writing, talking, and gossiping about those who are making things happen in the world. Writing, gossiping, reviewing, and passing judgment on people who are actually doing things is often a cheap shortcut to a sensation of power for those who lack the discipline necessary to do and create something that has worth. In reviewing, criticizing, gossiping, and so forth about others, the person can experience a fleeting feeling of importance.

When I was eleven years old, in February of 1981, the only television in our Detroit home was in my bedroom, and one time in the wee hours of the morning my mother and my four-year-old sister came into my room and watched Prince Charles and Diana get married. I have vague recollections of images from this wedding coming through as I tossed back and forth, incredulous that my mother and sister were disturbing my slumber all over some wedding spectacle. They both were so incredibly enthusiastic about the marriage. It seems funny to me that a single mother and her daughter would be watching this in the suburbs of Detroit, thousands of miles away from where the wedding was taking place. The marriage ultimately did not affect them in the least. Nonetheless, there they were, a little girl and her mother, glued to the television and watching a prince get married. As the years progressed, I would see one magazine after another arrive at our home with Diana on the cover and one rumor or another about her marriage. I would turn on the television and each day there was some gossip show that had a segment about the marriage. From the moment that marriage occurred, it seemed not a week went by wherein I did not hear some noise in the background about what Diana was doing. It was incredible to me that people could be so interested in one person. It was ironic, it seems, that Diana was eventually killed while she was in a car racing away from photographers. The public’s obsession with Diana is something that ultimately may have contributed to her death. Even today I see magazines in my house with her picture on them now and again, or I turn on the television and from time to time see a story about her. The public continues to be interested in Diana. Most of the world figures are never going to be like Princess Diana. Most of the public at large is never going to be an important politician, actor or actress, businessperson, and so forth; instead, what we often do is sit around and gossip, review and pass judgment on the people who are actually out there doing things in the world. The most popular magazines out there are magazines like the National Enquirer and Us Weekly: these are magazines that are continually gossiping, maligning, and generally discussing the lives, careers, successes, and failures of others. Why the intense interest in what others are doing? Why are people so fascinated with what others are doing and achieving in their lives? In my career I have seen the exact same thing: There are people out there who are doing and achieving things and, on the sidelines, there are those who spend the majority of their time as commentators on the people who are involved in doing things. This is a pattern that exists in every firm, company, and organization I have ever been involved with. It also is something that I have heard people talk about and have witnessed as a consistent pattern in any organization as well as the candidates I have worked with as a recruiter. Since I am also an attorney I will share with you some more of my insights into this. Several years ago the most popular legal site on the Internet was a site called Greedy Associates. This website was basically dedicated to associates inside of law firms who would gossip about people at their own law firms, and would disclose (sometimes maliciously) the financial states of affairs of various firms. Over the past ten years, the websites that have replaced Greedy Associates have all grown popular essentially by spreading rumors and bad news throughout law firms. Lawyers for the most part are not interested in flocking to websites for lots of positive information. Instead, their interest lies predominantly in going to websites where they can read about bad things that are happening to various employers. I started one of these websites myself, JD Journal, and was surprised by how much traffic the site got and by how interested lawyers are in this sort of news. I hate to say this but it is true: The great majority of people out there are incredibly interested in what others are doing–even more than their own lives. It is much easier to criticize and gossip about others than it is to achieve anything of significance in our own lives. To achieve something of significance requires an incredible investment of time and energy; it requires dedication; it requires risk; it requires believing in ourselves and overcoming obstacles. Conversely, gossiping or maligning others can usually be done very quickly by simply logging onto a gossip site or blog, sending an e-mail, or making a phone call. I want to also note a fact that is pretty subtle, but is an important one: The people who are most interested in gossip and so forth are most often the people who lack the dedication necessary to achieve anything of significance.

• Inside companies and organizations these people are the ones who feel alienated because when they do not do an assignment correctly they are told so.
• They are generally the ones who leave earliest, come to work the latest, and get the least done while they are at work.
• They are also the ones who are most likely to not get promoted because they do not put in a good effort.
• They are the ones who are disloyal and who easily find fault within their organization, and with the people working inside their organization, and with the products or services of their organization.

Lacking the dedication to do good work, the faculties to fit in with their coworkers and so forth, these people instead decide to turn their efforts toward gossip and criticism. When an employer is looking to hire new employees, one of the worst mistakes the employer can make is to bring in people like this. Just a few bad apples like this can easily destroy the whole bunch. In fact, it is precisely this fact and this attitude that can lead to the destruction of entire companies, governments, and so forth. Good organizations are experts in removing bad apples--and keeping the good ones around. For the past several years I have been involved in the property business, and I rent out office buildings, store fronts, executive suits, beach houses, and also premium beachfront real estate. My favorite business is the one involving premium beachfront real estate. The reason I enjoy this is that the clients I deal with tend to be big names in politics, show business, and so forth. It is not uncommon for a premium property I am renting out to an international celebrity to be surrounded by hundreds of paparazzi, and to have helicopters buzzing overhead all day while a certain famous person is there. Most celebrities do not want this attention and manage to slink into the property unobserved while they are on their vacations. However, there are some who prize this attention and find ways to alert the press when they are there. I have always been very good about being extremely discrete when a celebrity is staying in one of my premium properties. I never talk about it; I never tell anyone who is there, and I simply allow the celebrity to do his or her thing. However, a few months ago one extremely famous celebrity was staying in this premium beach house and had extreme demands for attention. This person had just finished filming a movie and the studio was putting him up for a one-week vacation. The actor wanted extreme privacy, and the reason was that he and his actor friends wanted to spend the entire vacation in the nude. Now, I do not know why someone would want to walk around nude for an entire vacation with a bunch of other men–but this was what was on the itinerary. The maid was astonished by this, but she simply did her job and reported the nudity to me later. As this man and his friends walked around the house nude every day, I went about my business seeing him on the covers of magazines, on television, and on billboards as I went about my day-to-day business. On the final day this nude actor and his friends were scheduled to presumably put their clothes on and get on a private jet to go back to whence they came, but the actor declared that he was staying another day and, on top of this, he refused to pay for it because “the maid had worked too much and the gardener had come” while he was staying there. This luxury property requires a lot of gardening, and after the gardener had come for an hour or so one day, all hell broke loose, and we had to get him out of there. The problem with this guy staying an extra day was that on his “extra day,” a bride from England was scheduled to come to the house with various armies of wedding planners, lighting designers, and so forth to set up for a large wedding scheduled to occur there. The actor flat-out refused to leave and got on the phone and told us that there would be “bizarre behavior” if the bride tried to enter the property while he was there. He was referring, we assumed, to the fact that he might be walking around in the nude. I was a little taken back by this, and the entire episode seemed just a little too much to believe. I had a serious problem on my hands because I knew that if the bride were unable to get into the house I could be subject to multiple lawsuits from her and countless wedding vendors. I finally decided I needed to take drastic action. I called one of the actor’s many assistants, who was also on the property: “If he is not out in an hour, I will call the police and every gossip reporter I can find and have him removed from the house.” I never would have actually done these things; however, after I made the threat, within fifteen minutes the man left. He knew that the press would have had an absolute field day with this episode if it had gotten out. I ended up letting the man stay an extra night as a courtesy, and the bride was able to get in with all her people at the appointed time. In the end everything worked out just fine. The reason everything worked out was that the actor was terrified of the press and how things would look to the public. He knew it would be a public relations and overall massive disaster, and people would talk about this the world over. I was able to quickly and painlessly solve the issue just using the power of gossip. It is something I am not proud of, but with my back against the wall I used it to great effect. I realized that my threat to use and create gossip came from a place of weakness. It was the best I could do and, while effective, it was admittedly pretty pathetic. The most powerful and influential people in the world are people like the actor I threatened to eject from the rental house, like Princess Diana, powerful businesspeople, and others. These are the people who make things happen and who are actually out there doing things that captivate the public attention. The people who live lives of significance are not the people who talk about and watch those who are making things happen; they are the ones who are accomplishing things. People who feel the need to gossip and malign others are usually coming from a place of weakness. There is nothing strong about gossiping and talking negatively about others. When you are coming from a place of strength this type of behavior is just something you do not need to engage in. The strongest people out there avoid gossip and avoid maligning others because it detracts from their ability to move forward. You should be focused on doing and not talking about those who are doing. THE LESSON Focus on what you are doing, not what others around you are doing. There are people to take action towards their goals, and then there people who sit on the sidelines and comment on the first group of people. People who are mostly interested in gossip and watching others usually lack the confidence and determination to take action themselves. The most successful people go account and accomplish things rather than sit back and watch others make things happen.

• On one hand, the culture of Athens left a legacy of art, drama, architecture, philosophy, the enjoyment of wealth and opulence, the idea of a governmental democracy and a strong navy.
• On the other hand, the government of Sparta left a legacy of asceticism, military supremacy on land and oligarchy (rule by a few).

These two societies fought repeatedly between the years of 500 BC and 350 BC. Their clash was a fight between two civilizations in the fullest sense. Each believed that their society and their way of doing things was the correct way. They fought in different ways and they ran their societies in different ways. Most of what we know about the Spartans comes from the writings of the Athenians, because the Athenians were the ones who spent their time writing and thinking. And since the Athenians did not like the Spartans, the writing is somewhat biased. I believe, and have always believed, that being a successful job seeker requires you to be more of a Spartan than an Athenian. In fact, I would propose to you today that a great deal of what is wrong with our current economy is due to many of us approaching our careers and our jobs more like an Athenian would than a Spartan would. I have been witnessing what appears to be a decline in a solid work ethic, job finding skills and the ability to do good work in the United States since I have been a young child. It seems to me that this decline is just getting worse and worse. Most people use all their sick days each year, even if they are not sick. Many people who are not working spend years unemployed and refuse to take a job unless it pays as much as their last one. In the automobile industry, unions have contributed to a slow death among American automobile companies by demanding more and more benefits and less and less work. Our government is bailing out companies and banks when they cannot make a profit. Our leaders are intellectuals with no experience running armies or groups. Worst of all, there is something developing in this country where we reward people for making mistakes. For example, between 2000 and 2005 hundreds of thousands of Americans made an incredible amount of money buying and selling houses. Now that the economy has started to slow down and they are no longer making money, we are stepping in to fix all of this. It is like a child running back to their parent for help. Our health care costs are incredibly high compared to other cultures. The people of our country are very unhealthy and do not watch their diets. Our highest paid workers in the law and other disciplines form communities online where they spend more time complaining about what they are making than appreciating what they have. Our jobs in this country have begun migrating to places where people can do them more cheaply and are hungrier for work. With manufacturing, it happened already with jobs migrating to China. In the information technology sector our jobs are going to places like India. Our country is getting fat, lazy and developing a massive sense of entitlement. We are turning into intellectuals, as opposed to soldiers. Our children spend time playing video games and not learning. Our national test scores are going down on an almost annual basis. We are innovators in many sectors, but something is changing. We have a sense of entitlement about what we deserve and yet we are not delivering. Much of the success we have experienced in the recent past has been the result of financial chicanery and financial manipulation. The cultural icons of our youth are other kids who have never worked. Some of our most popular shows at this point in time are of people who are not even required to memorize lines. Instead, a camera follows around young adults on shows such as The Hills, as they go on dates and socialize. Our country spends more than it saves. Our government has a deficit and most households do as well. There is something going on in this country that is more “Athens” than it is “Sparta,” and it is dragging us down. I know there is not a lot you can do about what is going on–and I know you may not agree with me as well. However, what you can do personally is be more “Sparta” than “Athens,” and being more “Sparta” than “Athens” is something that can help you reap incredible rewards in your career. As I will discuss below, being more “Sparta” than “Athens” will enable you to: (1) get a job more quickly, (2) be more effective in your existing job and (3) survive in all economic conditions. In ancient Greece, Sparta had the most feared military force there was. The Spartan soldier was, and still is, legendary. A Spartan soldier’s training began at birth and the Spartan soldiers never lost a battle in the conflicts that waged between the small city-states of ancient Greece. When a baby was very young, it was tested for weakness and deformity. Babies were bathed in wine shortly after being born by their mother. The babies that survived the bathing were brought by their fathers before a governing body of Sparta (a council of elders known as the Geousia). Babies that seemed as if they would be unlikely to become strong soldiers, or who were considered “puny”, were thrown in a gorge to die. (If a baby made it past this stage and died in another manner later on, they were not even allowed a headstone. The only Spartans who were allowed headstones were those of Soldiers who died in battle where Sparta was victorious, and women who died in childbirth or a divine office.) For those who were allowed to live, the training of the Spartan solider was nonstop and savage. Spartan boys began formal military training at the age of seven in what was called the Agoge system. The boys lived communally, and were given grueling physical training and learned to work with weapons at a young age. Men could not not live with their families until they left active military service at the age of the thirty (Spartan men remained in the reserves until the age of sixty). Plutarch, a Greek historian and essayist, wrote that for many Spartan soldiers going to battle was a welcome relief from the grueling training: “For the Spartans, actual war was a holiday compared to their tough training.” What is so significant to me about this early aspect of Spartan training, is the incredible focus that the young were forced to develop at a young age. Their lives were all about their jobs and they were toughened and taught to be “warriors”. Instead of being coddled by schools, they were toughened by schools. They were pushed both physically and mentally in these schools. The emphasis in the schools was not on being academic. For example, while Spartan boys studied reading, music and and writing, the boys were punished if they failed to answer questions laconically (i.e., briefly). The idea for Spartans was that they were to be warriors who were educated but did not sit around debating the nature of good and evil, for example. The idea of intellectualism and debate was not something that was part of Spartan society. A Spartan was trained as a soldier whose job it was to get something done. While I am not sure I personally would be all that comfortable with the Spartan educational system, what makes it so interesting to me is that it emphasized utility and action over the converse. The idea that was being taught was that focus is what is important. By being focused, you are much more likely to reach your point than by talking around the truth. The Spartans’ educational system was geared towards this focus. In modern society, our academics will traditionally sit around debating this or that. Our best students are often those skilled in the art of giving long-winded answers. Lawyers spend a great deal of time debating this or that, and this makes up a giant portion of what goes on in our culture. Students in school are coddled and given the sorts of learning environments that “nurture” them. While I am not going to debate this in great detail, I would go so far as to argue that the nurturing of our modern educational systems gives people in the United States a certain sense of entitlement about what society owes them, instead of what they owe society. This coddling ends up instilling a sense of entitlement that may go on in peoples’ lives forever, and continually put them in the role of being takers rather that doers. This is not something that would have happened in Sparta. In Sparta, failure was also something that was not allowed. According to Thucydides, when Spartan men were going off to war their mothers, wives, or a woman of significance in their lives would present them with their shield and the statement “With this, or upon this.” This meant that the solider could only return to Sparta having won the battle, with their shield in hand (“with this”) or dead (“upon this”). Spartans who returned to Sparta without their shield were presumed to have thrown it at their enemies and then fled–something that was punishable by death or banishment from Sparta. The entire Spartan culture was one that enforced incredible discipline upon its soldiers. For example, one Spartan legend discussed a man who ran away from battle and back to his mother. Instead of comforting him, the mother chased him around the streets hitting him with sticks. In our current society, failure is allowed. While there is nothing wrong with failure, it should never be an attractive option. Celebrities and well known figures repeatedly go into rehab for drugs and alcohol. We quit jobs if we do not feel we are being treated as well as we could be. We coddle people for failing and give them “easier” tasks to do if one task seems too difficult for them. Our government steps in if people make horrible economic choices and does not allow them to fail. We pay people unemployment who get fired from their jobs. We bail out companies with government money that are making bad products that no one wants to buy. When a Spartan went off to battle they had no choice but to succeed. There would be no warm homecoming for them if they failed. Consequently, the Spartans did not fail and always won their battles among the city states of ancient Greece. According to one commentator:

The life of a Spartan male was a life of discipline, self-denial, and simplicity. The Spartans viewed themselves as the true inheritors of the Greek tradition. They did not surround themselves with luxuries, expensive foods, or opportunities for leisure. And this, I think, is the key to understanding the Spartans. While the Athenians and many others thought the Spartans were insane, the life of the Spartans seemed to hark back to a more basic way of life. Discipline, simplicity, and self-denial always remained ideals in the Greek and Roman worlds; civilization was often seen as bringing disorder, enervation, weakness, and a decline in moral values. The Spartan, however, could point to Spartan society and argue that moral values and human courage and strength was as great as it was before civilization. Spartan society, then, exercised a profound pull on the surrounding city-states who admired the simplicity, discipline, and order of Spartan life.

Sparta’s emphasis on military supremacy and a simple lifestyle was the major emphasis behind Plato’s book, The Republic, which was one of the first attempts to formulate an ideal community. Was Sparta ideal? In many ways I believe it was. In our current society everything is just far too complicated. Our emphasis on leisure and eating has made us a nation that is predominantly overweight. Our ability to manufacture goods the world wants to buy continues to decrease. As a group, we do not have discipline. Our military is not valued and held in esteem by many of our highest leaders. We surround ourselves with luxuries and more emphasis seems to be put on this for many of us than on the value of our work. In contrast to Sparta, Athens was a very different society and far less rigid and militaristic. In Sparta, the emphasis of the society was on the military and in Athens the largest emphasis was upon culture. Some very important accomplishments were made by Athenians in science, art, philosophy and other disciplines. For example, the philosophers Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and the playwrights of Euripides, Aristophanes, Aeschculus all lived during Athens’ golden age in the fifth century BC. Athenians believed that they were culturally superior to the Spartans. They enjoyed luxuries and foods from all over their empire. The homes of wealthy Athenians were very nice and had inner courtyards. A good description of Athens also comes from Pericles famous funeral oration:

Further, we provide many ways to refresh the mind from the burdens of business. We hold contests and offer sacrifices all the year round, and the elegance of our private establishments forms a daily source of pleasure and helps to drive away sorrow. The magnitude of our city draws the produce of the world into our harbor, so that to the Athenian the fruits of other countries are as familiar a luxury as those of his own.

In contrast, Spartan men were taught to get along with almost nothing. Spartan citizens were not permitted to own gold or other luxuries. These differences between the Spartans and Athenians remind me of a conflict I see today all around me. There are people who talk a lot about what they are going to do and read a lot about what others are doing and have done, and there are people out there doing things and actually getting work done. Which are you? I would encourage you to be on the side of action, self denial and create effective contribution, rather than on the side of those who simply talk and do very little. One of the greatest conflicts I have personally witnessed in working with thousands of job seekers over the years has been a similar conflict–there are job seekers who are Spartans and there are job seekers who are Athenians. The Spartans are always the more successful in the long run. When I was around 18 years old my parents stopped giving me money completely. I did not have a traditional home to come home to where parents cooked and looked after me, either. Without any money coming in and expenses that included car maintenance, gas for my car, clothes, books for school and other essentials I was put in a position where I had to work. While I resented my parents for their personal situation which put me in this role at the time, it was something that I ultimately came to appreciate as I got into my 30s because I realized how much more scrappy it made me compared to others. In ancient Sparta, the boys were intentionally underfed so they would always be hungry and so they would develop the skill of being able to steal food. Here, without any money coming in, I needed to toughen myself and learn skills that other kids my age were not learning at the time. I sold knives on the street. I worked as a pizza delivery boy. I worked in the school bookstore. I started a business doing asphalt work. I worked on cars in my spare time. I did not have the same luxuries and other accouterments as other kids had. I also knew that I did not have any “backstop” if I failed. If I did not have any money then I would simply not be able to function. I needed to look out for myself. This was something that personally toughened me up. It made me quite self reliant and it put me in a position where I learned over time how to make use of existing resources, find the best deals for things and make the most of what I was given. This is an incredibly valuable skill to have, and as a “Spartan” I toughened myself up quite a bit. What this means for you and your job search is that you need to put yourself in the position of a Spartan. If a Spartan were looking for a job today they would show up to an interview ready for work. They would not debate the idea of retreat or running home if they did not get the job. They would not debate the idea of quitting the job if they were unhappy with the work conditions or they did not like their boss–they would make it work. They would only accept victory. Moreover, a Spartan would go to work ready to work and would work very hard. A lot of people enjoy sitting around and talking about things. They are undisciplined when it comes to their job search and quite lazy. Many may purchase a book or two here and there, and not do anything with it. Others may lament the state of the market and cite accounts in newspapers and other sources that there are simply not enough opportunities. They will sit around and try to see what benefits they are entitled to. They will take all of their vacation and sick days. Instead of working on their existing weaknesses and acknowledging them, they may move between jobs to find employers who will not bring to light their weaknesses. None of this does them any good in the long run. I think a lot of what is wrong with this country today is that we are too Athenian and not Spartan enough. I would encourage you, in your job search and career, to be more Spartan than Athenian. THE LESSON While Athens prioritized culture and intellectualism, the people of Sparta devoted themselves to simplicity and discipline. You need to approach your job search as a Spartan, not an Athenian; don’t retreat from the negative aspects of your life and current job, but rather make them work for you and remain focused on your success.

• The salesperson who is making $100,000 a year is using the facilities of the business such as phones, buildings, showrooms, photocopiers, conferences, demonstration models, databases, and so forth, which the business must pay for.
• The business needs to pay managers to manage the salesperson, people to answer the phones, and more.
• The business needs to pay someone to do accounting and payroll and needs to pay others to offer support services for the salesperson.
• The business needs to advertise, make contributions to health insurance, and do other tasks that every business is involved in.

This is why any job that you do for an organization requires that you make a far greater contribution than the value of the money that you are paid. You must contribute more than you take for the organization to survive and thrive. Being able to do this will greatly aid in your job security. Furthermore, to increase your odds of long-term employment, it is also vital that you become part of a group or company wherein all employees are expected to contribute more than they take from the group. I have run some very successful companies in my career and every time a company starts to become successful, job seekers start appearing out of the woodwork. There are numerous people out there who sniff out successful companies, who show up like leaches and try to make as much money as they can, as fast as they can. These people are usually brilliant interviewers and incredibly impressive people. The danger these people pose to growing companies, though, is that they will often take far more than they contribute. This is an extremely hazardous sort of hire for any organization. I interviewed a guy recently who is currently unemployed, but in his previous job, he made $500,000 a year. I was interviewing him for a job paying $100,000 a year. He had a very good record, with an excellent legal and sales background. Every single company that this guy had ever worked for over the past decade had gone out of business. He may have made a lot of money in each of his previous jobs, but for one reason or another, none of the companies were able to stay afloat. I am almost certain the reason all of these companies ended up going out of business was that, while they may have been successful at one point, they ended up getting choked by a massive payroll, which included many people who were not adding sufficient value to the operations of the company. As I spoke with this man, I could see he probably would want various secretaries helping him out. He would be taking long lunches and going on unnecessary meetings. As more and more money goes toward salaries, benefits, and so forth, a company stops investing in its product; a culture of waste and inefficiency sets in, and the company or organization soon thereafter dies. In the case of a smaller company, this can happen quickly. In the case of a larger company, the process could take decades. Think of the massive bureaucracy that exists in many organizations and how unnecessary much of this is. A man like the guy who used to make $500,000 a year spends his time looking for an employer who is willing to compensate him more than he is worth. This sort of strategy can work for a time, but it is not a path toward security. It probably does not work in a bad economy either. If you are seeking to really excel in the world and in your career, you need to be always perceived and known as a person who contributes far more than you take. One of the most interesting things I have seen about the most successful people in any organization is that they make sure they are contributing more value, contribute as much as they possibly can, and leave it at that. People who fail inside of organizations are often doing everything they can to measure and quantify how much value they are adding, and then they demand a raise at every turn. Of course, they will not come to management with a request for a raise when their productivity is down, but they do so when it is up. This is a dangerous strategy if you want to be viable for your organization in the long run. People who act this way show that they are out for themselves, not the group. If you want to be considered a productive member of a group, the smartest thing you can do is to keep your head down and contribute everything you have. The cream always rises to the top and, with the right amount of effort, so will you. Your coworkers will respect you for your efforts; your supervisors will respect you; their supervisors will respect you; the market will respect you. You can talk your way into a high-paying job, but you will never stay there long unless you are contributing far more than you are taking. Whenever you encounter a situation in which there are several unproductive members in a group, many problems can occur. If you are part of a company where you see a lot of unproductive people, and if this continues for some time, my recommendation to you is to find another job. An organization cannot and will not survive if it has many unproductive members working in it. How could it? If, however, there are some extremely productive members and others who are not, this means that the productive members are supporting the unproductive ones. If you are a producer surrounded by nonproductive people, you should know that you are supporting those nonproductive people, and an organization that tolerates this over the long term is not a strong one. The non-producers will drag down your income and potential to advance in your job. Similarly, people who bad-mouth an organization that you are part of will absorb the potential you have in your job. You need to make sure that the people inside your organization are supporting it and not causing it problems. This type of behavior hurts your performance and makes the products of your effort less effective. One summer several years ago my asphalt business grew to be very large. I generally had more than one crew doing asphalt work in various locations around Detroit in any given day, and each crew consisted of many people. At the time, I thought it was a good thing to have so many people working for me. I was basically hiring as many people as I could to help me get jobs done, because there was so much work coming in. But this is a fallacy. Some things people have always asked me about every company I have ever run are questions like: “How many people do you have working for you?” or “What is the company’s revenue?” People seem to believe that the number of people working in a company, or the size of its overall revenues, are indicative of its success. Back in my days in the asphalt business, when I had multiple crews operating and more people than I knew working most days, I thought that bigger was better as well. There are problems with a big crew, though, that are not present with a small crew:

• With a larger crew there are more people to watch, to make sure the work is going on properly.
• With a larger crew you need to make sure that everyone is consistently being productive and adding to the final product.
• With a larger crew there are more people to disagree and slow the final product down.
• With a larger crew there are more people who can get injured.
• With a larger crew each project costs more money because there are more people doing it.
• With a larger crew, if a piece of important equipment breaks, you have 20 people standing around doing nothing and getting paid, instead of just one person.
• With a larger crew it takes more time to get everyone on the job after a lunch break.
• With a larger crew the workers typically socialize and goof off more than with a smaller crew.

My largest summer in the asphalt business in Michigan in terms of the number of people I had working for me was (by far) my least successful summer. The reason was due to all of the variables I just listed above. With so many variables, there were just too many things that could (and often did) go wrong, and all of these things going wrong made the entire business much less profitable. In subsequent summers, I avoided having so many people working for the business. There was a certain degree of pride in having a large workforce; however, I was smart enough to realize that having more people was actually slowing everything down and making the jobs too expensive for the company. The fewer people I had on the job, the better work we did and the more money the asphalt company was able to make. The more revenue a company brings in, the more problems it often has as well:

• With higher revenues, a company will often hire more people to do the same amount of work.
• With higher revenues, a company will often pay people more than they are worth.
• With higher revenues, more people will create problems for the company through lawsuits and so forth.
• With higher revenues, a company will try and provide more benefits for its employees.
• With higher revenues, a company will have a higher cost structure.
• With higher revenues, a company will generally try to maintain its revenues and productivity, rather than innovate and grow.
• With higher revenues, a company will pay less attention to various expenses and is likely to become wasteful.

None of this is to say that high revenues are a bad thing: Of course they are not. However, at the same time, the more revenue a company earns, the more problems come into play. When expenses, employee performances, and so forth are not watched very carefully, a recipe for disaster very quickly is created because there is likely to be excess waste in the system; that is, there are likely to be lots of people who are not carrying their weight and adding high value. The more people there are who are not adding high value, the more an organization or business is likely to be in trouble. When value (money) is paid to people who are not producing and adding high value, a company or organization is set up for severe problems. When groups or organizations demand benefits, increased wages, and so forth from an employer, without creating higher value, they are setting themselves up for a whole host of problems, and possibly the employer’s demise. When every individual in an organization efficiently produces quality goods and services, the organization is likely to thrive. Success in your career demands that you contribute more than you take and that the people you are working with do the same. THE LESSON One of the most important things you can do in your career is generate value for your employer far in excess of what you receive back. You can talk your way into a high-paying job, but you will not remain there unless you provide more than you take. Organizations thrive when all of their members produce goods and services efficiently. Your career depends on providing more than you take, and surrounding yourself with people who do the same.