• 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.

• There are organizations in which style is definitely valued over substance.
• There are organizations in which substance is definitely valued over style.
• There are organizations in which people wander around in Birkenstocks and call each other “dude.”
• There are organizations in which employees are expected to call superiors “Mister” and “Ms.”
• There are organizations in which employees need to make appointments with superiors before speaking with them.
• There are organizations in which supervisors chew tobacco in the office and during meetings.
• There are organizations that value your having strong family connections more than your work ability.
• There are organizations that are extremely secretive with their employees.
• There are organizations that believe everyone who puts in a solid effort over the course of six or seven years should be promoted.
• There are organizations in which employees work around thirty hours per week, which is considered a good effort.
• There are organizations in which employees are hired and are then almost universally encouraged to leave after five or six years of service.
• There are organizations that have been collapsing for years, but that portray themselves to employees as strong and secure.

I could go on and on. Suffice it to say, however, that your success and happiness in your career may have more to do with your thoughtful and intelligent decision to join an organization that best fits you culturally. People simply want to be around people they like, and when people like each other in the workplace, both sides of the relationship benefit. OBSERVATION:

We all have certainly heard that Albert Einstein flunked out of grade school. Perhaps Einstein was too concerned with the theoretical rather than the practical. Whatever the reason was, Einstein simply did not experience success in the environment he was in at the time because the school and the people in it could not understand or appreciate where he was coming from intellectually. Do the employees in your organization understand where you are coming from? In a business environment, when the employee and the employer see eye to eye, success is far more likely than in situations where they do not.

Employees Often Fail to Give Strong Consideration to Culture When Choosing an Employer.

The problem with the way many employees manage their careers is that when choosing a job, they are motivated primarily by prestige and money, more so than by the cultures of the organizations they are considering. When an employee instead evaluates offers based upon where she believes she fits in the best, that employee is far more likely to find happiness and success in her career. The problem, however, is that most employees simply do not think this way, the reason being that employees are competitive by nature, and “fitting in” is not nearly as easy to quantify as things like money, company cars, and other perks. In almost all respects, it is most difficult to gain the best positions with the largest, most prestigious, and highest-paying employers. Yet, the pressure to join these organizations typically commences while an individual is in school. The problem with this type of thinking is that it can often lead employees to make horrible career decisions. If an employee is always thinking in terms of what he can do to look best to others, he will often neglect what is best for him personally. None of this is to say that there are not numerous advantages to come from being part of a truly significant organization. Nonetheless, this should not be the only consideration on which an employee bases his career choices. OBSERVATION:

Many people, in fact, have subordinated much of their happiness in life in pursuit of money, respect, power, and admiration from their peers. This leads many people to base their entire concept of happiness on things like having the largest house, the most expensive car, and other traditional accoutrements of the American Dream.

Failing to Consider Culture Ends Many Careers Prematurely–Careers That Could Have Otherwise Been Highly Successful.

It is easy to find out an organization’s compensation structure, but this is a simple and superficial distinction to make between organizations. It is not as easy to gauge an organization’s prestige level; however, it is much more difficult to evaluate a organization’s culture and whether that working in that culture will keep you happy over the course of your career. One of the most significant mistakes employees make when evaluating competing offers from organizations is believing that money is the most important factor they should be considering. While money is certainly an important component of any analysis, it is not the most important factor. Making any career decision solely based on money can be a horrible mistake. If you properly assess all variables, including culture, and you choose the right organization, you may have a stable career and life. If you go to an organization just because of monetary considerations, you may wind up so disgruntled that you are eventually not working at all. OBSERVATION:

On a day-to-day basis, in each of our offices, we speak with employees who began their careers with ultraprestigious, high-paying law firms. Many of these attorneys stopped practicing law two to seven years into their careers because they became disillusioned. Most of these lawyers say things like “I would never work in another law firm. I would only work as an in-house attorney.” The résumés of these attorneys are sometimes littered with one firm job after another, where the next and then the next firm were virtually identical in terms of culture to the very first firm that the attorney joined right out of law school. Of course these attorneys are not happy practicing in a law firm. They have only worked for one type of law firm during their entire career. The problem is that these attorneys have worked in a firm culture that was such a bad fit for them that they never got the opportunity to experience practicing law with a group of people they like, respect, and emotionally profit from. Not all law firms are the same. Fitting in with the community of lawyers that make up a particular firm is the key to long-term success and satisfaction in law firm life. Not fitting in is often the key to failure and can even lead to one changing career paths altogether.

Consider the choice of where to live, and compare the process of making that decision with choosing to join any particular firm or organization. Some people prefer the lifestyle in New York to Los Angeles, or prefer San Francisco to Seattle. Preference for one city or neighborhood is entirely personal and individual. The considerations are whether we feel accepted and appreciated in a community and whether we see people around us who share similar goals and aspirations. Whether that community supports and enhances your lifestyle becomes a driving force in your deciding where to live. And, just as you need to feel that you can thrive in the community in which you live, you should feel that you can thrive in the environment in which you work. You should constantly ask yourself these questions: Is this organization a place where I will feel accepted? Will I be surrounded by people with the same values and goals? Will this organization complement my lifestyle? Boiled down, what is the culture of the organization?

Making a Lateral Move Is Your Best Chance to Find Your Perfect Firm Culture

Many of our candidates, when preparing for an interview, want help identifying those questions that will help them unearth the true culture at a firm. In short form, the question that needs to be answered for each lawyer and every employee is simply, “Will I like it at this firm or organization?” Unfortunately, try as we might, we cannot always answer these questions as well as we would like. The culture of a firm may vary from practice group to practice group, and it is impossible to pin down with any meaningful certainty whether or not a good firm is always a good fit. Often, the only way to learn this is to actually go to the interviews and speak with the attorneys or individuals you may be working with. It’s important to remember that the interview process for a lateral move is much different from when a law student interviews for a summer clerkship. This is a plus. Unlike summer associate openings, which can sometimes number in excess of a hundred, when a law firm conducts a lateral search, many candidates are interviewing for one or possibly two available openings. In these situations, the law firm is not as concerned with competing for any one particular candidate. Conversely, when a firm is in a heightened state of competitiveness, it can sometimes be more difficult for the lawyer interviewing for the job to get a sense of whether the particular law firm is comprised of people with whom the lawyer would want to spend the rest of his or her career. But this is the kind of firm you should be seeking. Keep your best interests at heart, and do everything you possibly can to ensure that you find a good fit. Obviously, your task is to get the job; however, you also need to understand the firm’s culture. At BCG we have identified several ways in which you can evaluate whether a particular firm is right for you. Preparation Is the First Key to Evaluating Culture. You’ve gotten an interview. Before the interview, you should research as much as possible to determine the objective factors: How big is the office? What is the salary? In our opinion, this objective fact gathering is helpful in determining how well the firm or organization is doing financially and how it has grown over time. Diversity. It may also be important for you to look at the firm’s or organization’s commitment to diversity. We don’t know of any organization that doesn’t have an antidiscrimination policy. However, some organizations are more proactive in this area than others. Is it important to you that there are employees of color or of various sexual orientations? Location, location, location. Where is the office located? Of all these factors, we find that this tends to be the least important factor in evaluating culture. A California company known for having employees that wear Birkenstock sandals around the office might have a New York office with that same type of atmosphere. However, even in Hawaii or Miami, there are going to be radical distinctions amongst organizations. These distinctions are important. The city makes little difference in regards to the type of culture that exists within the organization. There are laid-back firms and organizations in Chicago that are down the block from offices where you wouldn’t think of entering without wearing your most formal business attire. The key is identifying and understanding the various cultures of the organizations themselves. Governance. How an organization conducts its day-to-day business is important. Employees have to run the business of their organization, and how they choose to structure the organization can say a lot about its culture. The business model often reveals the core values of the organization. Generally, organizations are governed in one of several ways: The democratic organization allows each employee to become involved in the decision making, regarding anything from new hires to compensation to long-term planning. For many organizations, the democracy may only include supervisors, so it is not necessarily realistic that a junior employee will be making high-level management decisions, or even weighing in with an opinion. However, many democratically run organizations do have some level of junior involvement within the organization’s governance, such as on pro bono committees or with respect to summer associate entertaining and recruiting. This type of culture is entirely inclusive, although sometimes it is the result of too much administration bogging down each individual lawyer’s already heavy workload. The values reflected here are participation and integration, which may come at the cost of expediency and/or consistency. Many organizations govern using a small, centralized committee of decision makers, which results in greater consistency, in terms of vision and management. However, this culture is more exclusive in terms of firm governance, which may turn off the young attorney or employee who wants to be a part of the decision making and planning efforts of an organization. In this system of governance, it’s important to find out how the leaders are chosen and the values they hold dear. At the end of the day, however, what is more important than the method of governance is why a particular organization chooses the business model it does. Asking an organization’s superiors why things are the way they are helps define an organization’s culture and vision for the future. If you hear that the goals of the business match yours, you have likely found a culture in which you will succeed and be happy. Word on the Street. You probably know the reputation of the organization where you’re interviewing. Is it known around town as a sweatshop or a quality-of-life organization? BE CAREFUL! Even if a reputation is mostly on target, you could end up joining a practice area or working with a partner that is decidedly unlike the overall firm or business culture. “Lifestyle” and “quality-of-life” are other ways the business community may refer to a certain organization. These terms have become somewhat hackneyed of late, but still have value in terms of defining a particular organization. A quality-of-life organization is fairly self-explanatory, which is to say that the organization has placed a premium on allowing associates to have lives outside of work. What does that mean? Sometimes it means a slightly lower billable-hour requirement than at other firms. Other times it may mean that the firm’s or organization’s management is more amenable to situations other than typical full-time associate positions, including part-time, telecommuting, flex-time, or non-partnership track. The popularity of this term has caused it to be somewhat diluted. Don’t take these types of labels at face value, and investigate what that term means within a particular firm. Again, be careful. Sometimes attorneys and job seekers interviewing for a position swing too far in terms of evaluating. Spending all of your time in this process wondering, “What can the law firm or business do for me?” will prevent you from showing a potential employer that you are a good match for it. This is a two-way street, so showing a law firm or other organization what you are made of is just as important during an interview as evaluating the organization.

Conclusions

The key to true job satisfaction is determining which organization’s culture suits you and your career. Finding the right culture will allow you to find a job that won’t feel like work. What is going to make the difference over time is not a $5,000 per year salary differential but whether or not you feel comfortable and appreciated in a particular environment. No matter what the reputation of the organization is, going through the process of discovering who the people are and what they think of you and your skills will be the best indicators of your potential long-term satisfaction and success. THE LESSON Just an ad for the Career Coaching Club.

But once these minor requests were complied with, the men found themselves pushed to submit to related but more substantive requests. A man who just agreed with his Chinese interrogator that the United States is not perfect, might then be asked to indicate some of the ways in which he thought this was the case. Once he had so explained himself, he might be asked to make a list of these “problems with America” and to sign his name to it. Later he might be asked to read his list in a discussion group with other prisoners. “After all, it’s what you really believe isn’t it?” Still later he might be asked to write an essay expanding on his list and discussing these problems in greater detail. The Chinese might then use his name and his essay in an anti-American radio broadcast beamed not only to the entire camp, but to other POW camps in North Korea as well as to American forces in South Korea. Suddenly he would find himself a “collaborator,” having given aid and comfort to the enemy. Aware that he had written an essay without any strong threats or coercion, many times a man would change his image of himself to be consistent with the deed, and with the new “collaborator” label, often resulting in even more extensive acts of collaboration.

A huge secret of getting the results you want from people, organizations, and others is to start small and get them to make larger and larger commitments. For example, when a man asks a woman out, he never says, “Hey, let’s go have sex and then spend the next 60 years of our lives together in a committed relationship.” Instead, he invites her to have coffee, go see a movie, take a walk, and so forth. Everything begins with very small steps, and these small steps lead to greater and greater commitment. When a religious organization comes to your door, the people do not say: “Hey, we would like to invite you to renounce every other religion on the planet, come to our church every Sunday for the rest of your life, and give us as much of your money as you can until you die.” Instead, they offer you a pamphlet and then ask if they can come back to see you at another time after you have had a chance to review the pamphlet. They seek smaller commitments from you at first. They know that the most important thing they can do is get their foot in the door. Once they do that, everything else falls into place much more easily. The Scientologists do not ask people on the street if they are interested in getting therapy for the rest of their lives, in order to get aliens out of their body. No, they know it would be “crazy” to do this. Instead, they ask people to take a personality test, and then they build on this. You need to start small with anything, before you can build on it. Organizations are all smart enough to know that the first step and challenge they face is getting their foot in the door. One of the funniest things I have seen that business schools, college career counseling offices, and other organizations often do with their students is encourage them to ask for “informational interviews” with various alumni of the school, who work in important positions, and in the cities they are seeking to work in. For example, the counselors will coach their students to go out and contact various alumni and tell them they are planning on working in a given industry, in a certain city (the industry could be large and very broad such as banking, retail, law, health care, etc.). The students tell the alumni that they are interested in getting some information about what it is like to work in a given industry in that city and to “learn from someone in the trenches” or something along those lines. Since this is such a small request and seems quite harmless–”I’d love to provide this alumnus of my school some information”–the alumni of the school almost always agree. They figure that since there is some sort of affiliation between them and the student (having attended the same school), and the student is simply seeking some harmless information, there is nothing wrong with speaking to the student at all. The student will invariably show up at the person’s place of business well dressed, with a folder containing a résumé, and with a list of a few prepackaged questions to which the student already knows the answers. The student will then sit down with the employer and commence speaking with him or her. The entire time the employer is speaking, he or she is, on some level, evaluating whether or not the student would make a good hire. The student is not really there to get information 99% of the time, but to “get a foot in the door” and hopefully get a job, or future interview at the least. While the employer has easily agreed to the small request of an informational interview, he or she suddenly starts feeling a small tug to potentially hire the student. The “informational interview” is an incredibly effective tactic, and a brilliant example of the foot-in-the-door phenomenon. We see the foot-in-the-door phenomenon in shopping centers, grocery stores, and all sorts of places every day. The “free sample” in the grocery store is an example of the foot-in-the-door tactic. You are offered a piece of something to eat or drink, and you try it. You then end up buying something you normally would not have bought. Someone sprays some perfume on you while you are strolling through a department store, and you decide to purchase it. It happens all the time. What does the foot-in-the-door mean for your career? It means that you do not always need to ask for the moon when looking for a job. You can start out small and build from there. David Geffen started out working part time at the William Morris Agency. You can start out working in your dream job part time. You can start out as a contract employee. If you want an important job inside the company you can start out doing something that is relatively unimportant. Who cares what it is? Starting out doing something unimportant is a good way to get your foot in the door. This is what internships are in many companies. Numerous companies and other organizations have unpaid internships for students. People come from all over the country to work for one organization or another for free each summer or during the school year. You might ask, why would someone want to work for an organization for free? This is a great question. Working some place for free does not seem to make a lot of sense, until you realize that the person is really just doing everything within their power to get their foot in the door. If you really, really want to work for a particular employer, the most important thing you can do is get your foot in the door. In a bad job market you can really make the foot-in-the-door phenomenon work for you. For example, many people are looking at the prospect of being unemployed for potentially weeks (or longer) in a bad recession. If you are going into a job interview where there is a lot of competition with an employer you really want to work for, a good strategy might be to say something along these lines during the later stages of your interview: “Listen, I have really wanted to work at this company for a long time. Financially, I am okay and do not have any pressing need for money at the moment. I am more concerned about having something to do during the day. I like working. I like the atmosphere here, and I really like this company. I would like to come work here for free for a month so you can see what I am like. Regardless of what happens, I will make the best effort I can during this time; you will have someone doing the job right away, and it will not cost you anything.” This strategy is incredibly effective and it can work wonders. Why? Because you are showing a commitment to the employer. You are showing that you like to work. You are not making the employer feel guilty about not paying you. You are not obligating the person in any way, and you are giving the employer something for nothing. This strategy works and it is like a guided nuclear missile you can use against your competition for the jobs you are most interested in. Try it if you really want the job. If you pull it off right, it will get you a foot in the door, and once you get your foot in the door, this can lead to a full-time job later. You need to get your foot in the door and knowing how to do this will pay huge rewards. The most successful salespeople, job seekers, and others all know that the biggest step they make in their march toward a job or sale is getting the employer, or prospect, to open that door. THE LESSON Getting your foot in the door is an important, necessary first step towards getting the job you want. Once you are “in”, your colleagues will protect you if you work hard and you will have the same opportunity to compete with others. The biggest step you can make in your progress towards your goals is to get your prospective employer to let your foot in the door, even if only a little.

—–Original Message—– From: [Suppressed] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 2:51 PM To: [Suppressed] Subject: The Now Infamous [] Charity Auction Debacle… Here is the story of what happened to me this weekend at my firm’s retreat. That’s the last time I ever drink before an auction: Aaron and I decide to leave for the Silverado Ranch by car instead of taking the bus at 2 pm. You have not lived until you’ve ridden through three hours of Bay Area traffic with Aaron at the wheel. By the time we got to Silverado, he was madder than fire. The first reception starts at like 6 pm. There are finger foods, etc., and lots and lots of wine and beer. Not really liking any of the food, I start drinking. Heavily. By the time I know what’s going on, I’m talking to the name partner, Bill Fenwick, in a redneck accent. Of course, he is from Kentucky, so we talked about basketball for an hour. It was great. About 9 pm the charity auction began. There were lots of “Fenwick” type items, like a dinner cooked by the managing partner, etc. One of the items was an entire night chauffeured by the hiring partner, [John]. In my inebriated stupor, I thought that if I won this, then they would have no choice but to give me an offer. The bidding starts at $50. People are bidding here and there, but I get tired of all the slow bidding, so I stand on my chair, and hold up my bidding card–without getting down. So the auctioneer takes this as a cue to just start yelling price increases, without even identifying other bidders. When the price hits about $800, [John] says that he will pay half if a summer associate wins. The bidding automatically doubles (John is a litigator). As the price gets to $2,000, I think I have the thing won. I get the “going once” call, and then this other summer intern, Aparna, goaded on by some partners, decides that she has to beat me. So the bidding hits $2,600, and before I know it, I’m on stage, taking the mike from the auctioneer, and yelling at Aparna to stop bidding. My exact quote, “Aparna, seriously, stop. I have to win, this is the only way I’m getting an offer.” So that just inspires more partners/attorneys/recruiting staff to contribute to Aparna’s pool. When the bidding hits $3,400, I start yelling, on the mike, about how this isn’t fair, because she has partners bankrolling her, but I only have a “few scrubby summers in my corner.” I keep trying to bid only like $5 more than her, but the auctioneer gets all mad at me, and is making me bid in hundred-dollar increments. When her bid hits $3,800, I get back on stage. After some banter, the auctioneer asks me if I want to bid $3,900. I ponder this for a second, and in front of the whole firm and spouses/significant others, with the mike in my face, say, “Fuck it–go ahead.” I won the auction.

This particular e-mail was rapidly circulated among most summer associates in large law firms around the United States after it was written. From a social standpoint, the reason this e-mail was so widely circulated is that it shows the antithesis of fitting in and highlights the importance of doing so. Regardless of where you work, chances are that you will be working close to a relatively small group of people. Because you spend so much time at work, these people are going to become quite aware of your style of work, your personality, and like it or not, a lot of details about your personal life. In all of this, these people want to feel comfortable around you. In addition, they want to feel that they can develop a relationship with you over time. 2. The Importance of Fitting In When Being Hired as a Lateral After you have been working for a few years and want to transition into a new employment environment, the importance of fitting in will arguably be further amplified. Shared experiences take on a different form when someone is trying to move laterally to a company. As a legal recruiter, my job is made easier by knowing the sorts of shared experiences that are likely to get people in the door in different law firms. For example, if someone is in Los Angeles and has worked for the Los Angeles office of a major New York law firm, I know that other New York-based law firms in Los Angeles are more likely to be interested in that attorney than Los Angeles-based law firms of a similar prestige level. The perception is that these attorneys will share a certain “New York outlook.” The same can hold true if one is moving in Palo Alto from one major law firm to another. He or she is more likely to be hired by another major Palo Alto firm than, say, somebody who has been working in another area of California. All of these similarities are based on shared experiences and the perception that these people will fit in. Certain organizations will simply not hire from certain other organizations (even those that are generally considered better than they are) because they believe that people from these companies will not fit in. Most often, these organizations will say things like, “These professionals are all too arrogant,” or something of the sort. When professionals are in the job market, an exceptional recruiter will instinctively know which candidates are likely to get interviews with certain organizations and which ones are not. This calculation is based first on externals such as the school and company the person is coming from; however, it is ultimately based on other important factors in the professional’s background that are often less evident. Recently, I have seen professionals ultimately hired over many other applicants for what I believe were the following reasons:

• I believe one executive was hired for a $200,000-a-year job over more qualified candidates because he, like the CEO that hired him, enjoyed surfing.
• I believe one manager was hired because she attended the same religious group as the hiring manager.
• I believe one executive was hired because she had formerly followed the Grateful Dead, like a director in the company did.
• I believe one professional was hired because of his military background.
• I believe one executive was hired because of her ongoing participation in a controversial protest organization.

I could continue this list indefinitely and give you countless examples. People always say things like, “You have to know someone there to get a job,” and so forth. Indeed, it does help if you know someone. The reason is that you have already proven that you can get along with someone who fits in with that company, which means you too will be more likely to fit in there. I know of dozens of instances at various major organizations throughout the United States where laterally hired employees with, frankly, horrible academic qualifications are working alongside people with first-rate academic qualifications. Why do you think this is? In many cases, these people with horrible academic qualifications may have some unusual and highly valued skill. Still, more often than not, I have discovered that these people knew someone. This is how things work in the world. If you fit in, you are more likely to get a job and succeed in an organization. I can also tell you that there are organizations out there that are somewhat racist and hire people that are likely to fit that mold. My purpose here is not to be judgmental. There are certainly other factors that organizations consider when making hiring decisions, too. Nevertheless, when all is said and done, many hiring decisions are the products of people’s ability to fit in. 3. The Importance of Fitting In as Your Career Progresses In order to survive in a company, you need people higher up in the company to be in your corner. You can get people in your corner by working hard. Nevertheless, there will always be people working hard in large companies. The people who most often get higher-ups in their corner are the ones who are able to establish bonds. These bonds will make people go to bat for the employee. These bonds will also humanize the employee to their employer and make it much more difficult for an employer to fire an employee. Conclusions Most of the conclusions from this article can be derived on your own. You need to understand, however, that fitting in is probably the most neglected topic when it comes to discussions about success. Fitting in can be accomplished on several levels, and often you might not even be able to articulate why you do or do not fit in with a particular group. Fitting in is also something you cannot fake. You can often get a job without fitting in, but you will have a very difficult time keeping it and advancing if you do not fit in. When you were in elementary school, junior high school, high school, and then college, there was probably a group or groups you naturally fit into. Think back about the reasons why you fit in with those groups. Certainly, you have changed over time and will continue to change. The most important aspect of why you have fit in with various groups in the past, though, was based on how comfortable you felt with that particular group of people and how comfortable they felt with you. Your happiness and success in your career depend on the ability to recognize when you fit in and when you do not. THE LESSON The ability to fit into your work environment is among the most important parts of obtaining and retaining a job, even more so than your skill level. Fitting in means nothing more than being comfortable in one’s work environment, and making others similarly comfortable. Employers want to hire people who will embrace their approach to business and the world on physical and moral levels, so you must strive to fit in with their worldview.

See human beings as though they were in an underground cave-like dwelling with its entrance, a long one, open to the light across the whole width of the cave.  They are in it from childhood with their legs and necks in bonds so that they are fixed, seeing only in front of them, unable because of the bond to turn their head all the way around …

This passage is well known both for its simplicity and the profoundness of the message that it contains.  This particular passage of The Republic is written as a dialogue between Socrates and his students. Men trapped in a cave sit with their backs to a fire and are not allowed to turn around to see what is behind them.  They are chained in the cave their entire lives and all they can see is a blank wall. The only thing they can see is the shadows of objects that are held up behind them.  When objects are held up to the fire, they project shadows and the men identify these shadows.  But the men can only identify objects by the shadows, and they cannot see the objects themselves.  The shadows are as close as the people ever get to seeing reality. Between the fire and the prisoners there is a walkway that is raised. Along this walkway various animals, plants, puppets and other things are moved.  The prisoners see these shadows.  There are also echoes that come off of the wall from the sounds on the walkway, so the prisoners are not even hearing reality.  Socrates implies that it would be reasonable that the prisoners would see the shadows as real things and the echoes as real things as well.  Hence, the prisoners would see the sounds and sights not just as “reflections” of reality, but as reality itself.  The entire group of men and their society would become dependent upon the shadows on the wall.  Thus, the men would praise the men who were able to guess the next shadow and these would be seen as among the most intelligent prisoners and as people who understood the true nature of the world. Socrates then introduces another idea to the scene and the cave.  For example, what if a prisoner is allowed to stand up and someone showed him the things which cast the shadows.  The prisoner would not be able to recognize the objects because all he understands are shadows. He would believe the shadows on the wall to be more real than what he is actually seeing. Socrates also asks about what would happen if a man were forced to look at the fire.  He would likely turn away and look back at the shadows, because this is what he perceives to be real.    If the man were dragged out of the cave, would the man be angry for this being done to him?   He would be at first pained by the Sun and confused by the objects around him.  However, when he eventually came to understand what the world really is, he would be sorry for the men whose lives were spent in the shadows.  When the man tries to describe the truth to the men in the cave, they resist learning the truth and think their friend is crazy for doing so. In the cave allegory, the men who are in the cave represent most of the world.  They do not see truth and only see representations of objects and things.  They are the majority.  The man who escapes the cave and sees the true nature of things is in the minority. What the cave represents to me is that there are few people out there who really see the true nature of things in the world. Instead, they are interpreting the world through reflections, shadows and echoes.  For example, why did the electrician in the story I told you take out a little advertisement in the Yellow Pages and travel around from house to house giving estimates and doing small jobs throughout his career until advised otherwise by the tycoon?  Probably because this is how he believed the work should be done.  Everyone else did things this way and he saw this and followed the crowd. What does all of this mean to you, your job search and your life?  I would submit to you that if you are like 99% of all people, you are operating by interpreting shadows and sounds.  You are not seeing reality and what opportunities lie before you.  You are not seeing what you are truly capable of, and what you can do.  You do not realize the incredible number of opportunities there are. When you are operating in the shadows you are not seeing the true nature of things.  There are powerful and penetrating insights into the world and the nature of things that are available when you start to think very carefully and closely about things.  These insights are what are separating the people who are going to really get the results they want, from those who will not. I have heard numerous stories about people over the years who achieve incredible success in their careers and lives.  In every case, these were people who stepped out of the shadows to see some new way of doing things.  They opened their mind by challenging an assumption or something along those lines about the way they have done something in the past.  The rewards for stepping out of the shadows are huge.  When you see the truth out there, you can accomplish far more than when you are simply in the shadows. The idea that Plato is attempting to make clear is that people who are trapped in a cave can only see the shadows of objects projected on the wall. THE LESSON You must learn to see the world differently in order to find a job, change your life’s direction, and become the person that you want to be. Take advantage of the opportunities that are in front of you. The people who have achieved incredible success over the years where those who stepped out of their comfort zones and discovered new ways of doing things. The potential rewards for stepping out of your comfort zone are huge.

In the mid-1990s, then-General Motors Corp. Chairman John G. Smale decided to bring the world’s biggest automaker a dose of the ‘give-the-people-what-they-want’ethic that’d animated Smale’s old company, Procter & Gamble Co. And what the people wanted was sexy, edgy and a bit off-key – in short, a head-turner. General Motors’ culture took over from there. Design would be by committee, the focus groups extensive. And production would have to stick to a tight budget, with all that sex appeal packed onto an existing minivan platform. The result rolled off the assembly line in 2000: the Pontiac Aztek, considered by many to be one of the ugliest cars produced in decades and a flop from Day One. The Aztek represented all that is wrong with GM’s design process, that official said. The concept car actually did something few GM designs do: arrive before a trend — this time, the crossover SUV that combined the attributes of a truck and a passenger car. And GM had high hopes to sell 50,000 to 70,000 Azteks a year, putting Pontiac on the cutting edge. Then came production, the executive said. The penny-pinchers demanded costs be kept low by putting the concept car on an existing minivan platform. That destroyed the original proportions and produced the vehicle’s bizarre, pushed-up back end. But the designers kept telling themselves it was good enough. “By the time it was done, it came out as this horrible, least-common-denominator vehicle where everyone said, ‘How could you put that on the road?’” the official said. Sales never reached the 30,000 level needed to make money on the Aztek, so it abruptly went out of production. The tongue-in-cheek hosts of National Public Radio’s “Car Talk” named it the ugliest car of 2005. “It looks the way Montezuma’s revenge feels,” one listener quipped. http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000321.html

In an oval office interview in January of 2006, President George Bush said he believed General Motors and Ford needed to produce “a product that’s relevant.” The idea of producing a relevant product is one of the most important things any manufacturer can do. Being a relevant product is also something essential for your success, as well. In a bad economic climate, one of the strangest things people do is try and continue being a ‘product’ that is no longer needed. This is nonsensical. You need to be relevant and understand what the skill is you are offering. The worst thing you can do is not be relevant to the market you are serving. It’s easy to be relevant when you understand what you are doing and what purpose you serve. Being relevant is about much more than just getting a job, however. Being relevant also relates to serving your employer with the skills they need. You need to understand your market and what your customers want. One of the biggest failures in my career was due to not understanding my market. When I got out of law school, I worked for a federal judge who had recently been appointed to the bench. My interest in this job was being brilliant and showing how smart I was, what a good writer I was, and how much detail I could put into opinions and more. I did a very good job with the harder intellectual aspects of the work. The judge I worked for admired my intellectual abilities, but his biggest concern was for me to produce work that was completely error free. Because I was so interested in the intellectual aspects of the work, I did not always give him what he wanted in terms of error free work. This was upsetting to him. Because of my concern with the “meat” of what I was doing, and not the details, I ended up leaving this position after one year, when I’d been hired for two. Had I not left, I am pretty confident I would have lost my job. I was not giving my employer what he wanted and, instead, was making up my own rules. The next legal job I held, I was sought out for my intellectual insight into legal issues. You need to know your audience. When you think about your career, how often have you made up your own rules? You need to understand your audience. You need to know you are in the business of selling a product to people, and you need to give them what they want. You are a product, and your job is to give your audience exactly what it wants. This is the way to get, and keep a job.

• ‘‘If I just get into the interview I will get the job.’’
• ‘‘If the firm meets me and I have at least 30 minutes with the person in charge of hiring, I will get the job.’’
• ‘‘All you need to do is get me in the door and everything will take care of itself.’’

None of this has to do with the looks of the attorney or with their specific ability to sell themselves through words. The attorneys who say this are usually ‘‘right’’ 99% of the time and do get the jobs. I could have a job where I have sent 15 people in for interviews and the person who says this and also interviews with the employer is almost invariably the one who gets hired. It does not matter what this person’s qualifications are most of the time. It is an ‘‘intangible’’ energy the person has about them that enables them to walk into jobs and get them. The reason this is odd, nonsensical and problematical is that the product that attorneys produce and the ability to produce this product is completely technical in nature. The ability to produce good quality work, to think through problems and to navigate this landscape is something that the best attorneys know how to do and it is incredibly important. Moreover, the difference between average and extraordinary attorneys in terms of how they use their minds and solve problems is incredibly profound. The differences that good attorneys are able to produce with their technical skills, compared to those of average attorneys, are incredible. None of this is really asked about or measured when law firms are hiring attorneys, however. The law firms are looking for something else. They may call it ‘‘fit’’ or ‘‘culture’’ but is usually comes down to the ‘‘feeling’’ the person gives the law firm, or their ‘‘energy’’. I would like to contrast this for a moment in terms of how a law firm would purchase something as simple as a copier. The law firm would evaluate the copier in terms of things such as:

• How many pages it prints per minute.
• How many pages it can print on each toner cartridge.
• How much paper it can hold.
• Whether or not it is a trusted brand name.
• How much it costs to print per page and what sorts of other features it has.

In fact, the law firm would ask tons of technical questions about the copier before making a decision about whether or not it is going to purchase or lease it. It might endure scores of sales presentations from competing copier companies demonstrating different copiers, and then it might also travel to the office of the copier manufacturer to watch various live displays and demonstrations of what the copier is capable of. If there are reviews of the copier out there, the law firm will likely read reviews of the copier as well. In summary, the law firm will learn the technical pluses and ups and downs of the copier. We do the same thing when we are purchasing any material sort of good:

• If we are purchasing a car we test drive the car.
• If we are purchasing a television we watch the television in the store to see how it performs before purchasing it.
• If we are purchasing a home we walk through the home and inspect every nook and cranny.
• If we are purchasing a mattress we lie down on the mattress and see how it supports us.
• We read reviews online about the various products we are purchasing.

We do all of these things and more to best understand the technical capabilities and limitations of the products we are purchasing. When you are marketing yourself and seeking a job, or working in a job, there are essentially two things you are marketing. You are marketing your technical skill, but more importantly you are marketing an intangible sort of energy and promise of this you will bring to the job. The entire economic system and our jobs is based upon the transference of energy:

• (1) the sale of a current transference of energy and the promise of an economic benefit to our employers from this, or
• (2) a future transference of energy and a (a) current or (b) future economic promised benefit from this.

Energy can be translated into either goods or services. However, in all cases, every single time that we purchase something we are purchasing a transference of energy. We spend more depending upon the quality of this energy transference, the amount of energy transference, the presumed effectiveness of this energy transference and in many cases the potential promise of this transference of energy to change a future result. Our entire economic system has always been and is about the transference of energy. Simple Energy Transference:

• Purchase a bowl of soup. The bowl of soup has energy. (Purchase of future energy and past energy needed to create it.)
• Purchase a knickknack at the store. The knickknack has energy that was expended to create it. (Purchase of past energy.)
• Purchase a hair cut. (Purchase of energy required to cut hair.)
• Purchase of the services of a floor sweeper. (Purchase of current energy to create instant results.)
• Purchase of gasoline to power car. (Purchase of past energy in the fuel and promise of future energy to burn fuel.)

Regular Energy Transference

• Purchase a machine, like a copier. (Purchase of past energy to make machine and promise of future energy potential.)
• Purchase a car. (Purchase of past energy to create car and promise of future energy potential.)
• Purchase of a ticket to a movie. (Purchase of past energy.)
• Purchase a used car. (Purchase of past energy to create car and reduced potential of future energy potential due to the use of the car.)
• Purchase a fiction book in the store. (Purchase of past energy required to write book.)

Complex Energy Transference

• Purchase of the services of a psychic to change future. (Purchase of current energy for service and hope of unknown future energy transference.)
• Purchase of the services of an attorney. (Purchase of current energy, exerted over time, with hope of unknown future energy transference by changing results.)
• Purchase of the services of a CEO.(Purchase of current energy, exerted over time, with hope of unknown future energy transference by changing results.)
• Purchase of the services of a professional coach. (Purchase of current energy, exerted over time, with hope of unknown future energy transference by changing results.)
• Purchase of the services of a salesperson. (Purchase of current energy to provide an unknown future energy transference by changing the result.)

The more complex our purchase of energy becomes, the more we are making a purchase based upon the presumption of a future benefit from this energy transference. This is an extremely powerful concept to understand. The idea of the transference of energy and the impact of energy on the world and our lives and careers is something that can impact everything that happens to us. When we are spending money and purchasing things or services we are essentially purchasing one of two things: An instant transference of energy, or the hope of a future transference of energy. Understanding your role in the energy transference chain is extremely important. The more promise of future energy you hold, the more employable you are. Scores of hiring decisions are made on ‘‘hunches’’ that a particular employee may provide a result in the future. We get these hunches based on ideas and feelings we get about people. In addition to the idea of ‘‘hunches’’, there are also much more direct and concrete indicators of the promise of energy that people hold and how hiring decisions are made. Like it or not, hiring decisions are also made based on more direct promises of energy transference. What I am about to say is offensive but it is stuff I have heard before so I am going to share it with you because, like it or not, this is how many employers think about you and your energy:

• The young are typically hired over the old in most companies (younger people have more promise of current energy and future energy).
• The thin are typically hired over the fat (if you are overweight this might hold you back in terms of your energy and ability to carry out certain tasks).
• Higher class people are typically hired over lower class people (there is a presumption that they have ‘‘better’’ energy to provide).
• The better educated are typically hired over the less educated (the investment in education provides a certain type of energy that is likely to benefit the employer).
• The social are typically hired over the unsocial (the energy to be social presumes the person will have the ability to interact with their environment).
• The healthy are typically hired over the unhealthy (the promise of future energy is embodied in the healthy).
• The attractive are typically hired over the unattractive (attractiveness is a form of energy).

It is important to understand that, like it or not, thousands of small judgments are made about the energy we are holding within us. You need to be conscious of the energy you project and do everything within your power to cultivate positive energy and a positive aura that makes people want to work with you and hire you. Having the right aura and energy can make a gigantic difference in whether you ultimately succeed or fail. The most successful people have mastered the art of projecting positive energy. When you spend money on services and material goods, you are also purchasing energy. The purchase and exchange of energy is something that underlies all commerce. You need to cultivate, project and display positive energy. The better your energy, the more employable you will be and the farther you will go.