Today I was inspired by my good friend Corey sending me a text message related to the latest news that Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of facebook, had decided to become a part of “The Giving Pledge.” For those who are not aware of what the giving pledge is I will sum it up briefly for you: it’s a group of extremely wealthy people, formed by Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, in which everyone in the group agrees to give the majority of their wealth to charity by the end of their lives or at their death.

While the concept is noble, I’d like to look at the economics of a hypothetical question: What if each one of those billionaires, most of whom got their money by starting a business, used their money to start or fund other businesses; specifically a mission driven business?

Let’s say that one of these billionaires decided to not donate 15 billion dollars, but to start a privately held pharmaceutical company with the funds. I’m not talking about funding research, I’m talking about starting a for profit company built to compete with the likes of Novartis or Pfizer. By the company being privately held, it doesn’t have to appease shareholders but instead it can keep an altruistic mission, and that could be to reinvest ALL profits into curing cancer not just the vague “cancer research.” At the same time this new company stimulates the economy (and increases the tax base) by hiring an entirely new staff. By introducing a new competitor it helps push the cost of our every day drugs down, thereby reducing the amount the government needs to fund prescription assistance programs (allowing us to pay down the US deficit, or even continue our generous foreign aid program). Putting 15 billion dollars into funding something like this ensures greater than just a 15 billion dollar donation, it ensures employment, it ensures a vision is kept, and in the end it has the ability to have far more of a positive impact on the world through countless years of research, development, AND sales. (Note: I’m aware that this isn’t possible overnight, mainly due to strenuous FDA regulations, but what if?…)

What if instead of a pharmaceutical company, someone set up a $10 billion dollar venture fund with offices around the world for businesses aiming to make a change, with the stipulation that at least $100 million (or some arbitrary number) a year had to be invested in new companies trying to make a positive change? Encouraging investing in companies like TOMs shoes, where for every shoe you buy a pair gets donated to a child in a 3rd world country. Investing in a company like Adaptive Eyewear, the company that is creating glasses for 3rd world countries where the prescription of the lens can be changed by the person wearing it; they are LITERALLY giving sight to people who would otherwise not have it (watch this video on them). What if they took that fund and invested in small businesses throughout Africa? Spurring entrepreneurship and encouraging organic growth within the continent instead of constant reliance on foreign aid that is taken by corrupt politicians.

The bottom line is that the majority of people on the list have succeeded because of capitalism. They have the money they have because of capitalism, and they know the good that capitalism can bring to a country and to the world. They ARE the definitions of capitalists, and they know what it takes to fulfill a vision. They ought to also know that a business, set up with a good mission and vision, with hundreds or thousands of employees working towards the vision can do an immense amount of good for the world, probably more good than donations can…

What if?…

Have any other ideas? Share them below, I’d love to hear them.

No related posts.

As a result we are all extensions of the brand wherever we go. After work when we all go out to happy hour we are walking advertisements and representatives for the brand, and the way that we carry ourselves reflects back on the companies brand; if we slip up, have a few too many, or are rude it reflects back on the brand. We know that this is the case, so we all go above and beyond to act gracious when we get complimented outside of work (very frequently) or attentive and helpful if a customer has a concern. It is clear my employer views us as a physical extension of the brand.

This concept isn’t new, it’s proven, and works, but now is the time for companies to take it a step further.

It seems like everyday I read in the blogosphere about a personal brand and why you need to have a solid online identity which includes, but is definitely not limited to Facebook, Twitter, and Linked In. I always read pretty basic reasonings on why we all need a personal brand, mainly so companies can find you, you can control and own your online image, and so you can market yourself. I agree with all of these things, and I’m not here to offer any new advice on creating a personal brand; for that I recommend going to the master, Dan Schwabel.

What I am here to do is ask a question. Why don’t companies view their employees online personal brands as extensions of the companies brand?

Think about where you represent your company on the internet. Do you have your employer listed on Facebook or Linked In? Do you have a website that contains your resume?

These are primary places where we as individuals represent our employers in todays world. If you have an inappropriate photo on Facebook and your employer is listed, like it or not that photo reflects back on the company and the next time you are in a meeting with someone who has researched you, they might know about that picture of you doing body shots from your last vacation to Mexico. Yes, that is a poor example, but now let’s look at the other side; say you have a strong personal brand, you protect your online image, you blog, you tweet, you are active on Facebook and on great websites like Brazen Careerist; that online presence and your following is a fantastic venue for you to be a steward for the company, instantly adding more value to the company should you choose, or be allowed, to promote your employer.

“That sounds great! Promote us,” your employer might say, but wait…it’s a two way street.

Think of the way large conglomerates advertise their brands. Ziploc, Pledge, and OFF! are all S.C. Johnson Brands. When you look at each of those brands you know they are something different and individual, yet part of something bigger. Every time something good happens to the smaller brand, something good is happening to the bigger brand. If Ziploc has great sales, then that helps S.C. Johnson’s bottom line. On a box of Ziploc there is an S.C. Johnson logo, and on the S.C. Johnson website they feature Ziploc, even at the end of every commercial you hear “S.C. Johnson, a family company.”

Much like the conglomerates there is a mutually beneficial relationship online between an employee with a strong personal brand and their employer’s brand. If I put up on an “About Me” page laying out where I work and what I do in my day job with a logo and a link to the company, I can instantly help give credibility to my employer if you’ve never heard of them, and you might be more inclined to go visit the company. On the other side of the coin, if my employer has a link to me on a company page, it can instantly help give credibility to me as someone who is employed by a great company.

Zappos has a great start at just this, twitter.zappos.com provides realtime streaming of their employees on twitter, but I think it should go a step further. Why not promote employees with good personal brands? Photo, website link, and twitter feed, all on the companies website. Make employees comfortable being online ambassadors for the company by encouraging it and giving them the ability to reach out on the companies behalf even if it’s not their job. It’s even in the companies interest to help employees develop a personal brand online.

The best way to increase brand awareness online is being represented, and if you have a good relationship, what better people to represent you and give you presence than your employee or employer?

No related posts.

As the Treasury Manager of the company, and the writer of this blog, I try my hardest not to get caught up in it, though I admit it’s hard. As a personal finance writer, I preach to be conservative with your money: save, invest prudently, and keep an emergency fund; and as a financial professional in charge of all of a companies cash I act the same way, because if there is one thing I know, it’s that the party always ends.

Adorning the walls of my office I have hung constant reminders of this: vintage advertisements for Chrysler and Chevrolet. Every time I look up and see the ad for “The New 1967 Chevrolet Pickup” or the “Silver Anniversary Edition Chrysler New Yorker,” I think about what their management would have said at that time had someone approached them to announce that their company would go bankrupt. As much as I’d like to think they’d sit down and ask “how? when?” I have a feeling that they would have laughed it off. After all it was the heyday of the automobile!

Think about approaching an internet startup in 2000 (really, any startup will do), with the same information. Money was being handed out left and right, it was a huge party!, but the vast majority of them got caught up in the party and never looked at the bottom line. For a prime example, watch the movie e-dreams which follows the rise and fall of kozmo.com.

What about telling Bear Stearns in 2005? Worldcom or Enron in 2000? Blockbuster in 1999? All of these companies were at the peaks of their “Party” stage in these times, only to go drastically downhill a few short years later.

With all this said, I’m not against the “party,” in fact I love the party stage it’s fun and very exciting, but like any party, you have to party like the party will end, or else you wake up in the bushes wondering where your clothes went.

In personal finance partying like the party will end means saving, planning for retirement, and keeping an emergency fund, all while still enjoying your money. In the business world, that means always keeping an eye on costs (I just saved the company $15k by changing vendors for deposit tickets), managing the funds prudently (and safely), always striving for efficiency, and growing the business at a manageable pace.

If you stick with this advice, the party will last longer, and you’ll be prepared if it abruptly ends.

No related posts.

Gandhi once said “you must be the change you wish to see in the world,” and to effectively work with us you need to understand that we don’t expect businesses to change for us.  We expect businesses to change for everyone because of our questioning of the long standing staples in business culture.

For instance, the current structure of 9-5 American business dates back to the manufacturing era where the job was repetitive work on an assembly line, and showing up was actually work.  The world has changed and corporate structures haven’t adapted to reflect this. 

Gen-Y embodies the concept of “work smarter, not harder,” and we thrive on efficiency and automation.  We know how to use computers and the internet to accomplish our work in a fraction of the time, but we are still willing to put in more time when it’s necessary.  So when we get all of our work done, why shouldn’t we be able to leave, why should we sit around waiting?  Or worse, pretending to be busy?  Why is facetime still the standard when productivity should be king?

This is one of many questions that thousands of corporations need to answer in order to effectively recruit and retain Gen-Y.

Best Buy has already answered this question.  In 2006, Best Buy implemented what they call a Results Oriented Work Environment (ROWE).  ROWE means that employees are evaluated on their results, not on how much or how “hard” they work.  Employees are encouraged to work wherever they want, whenever they want, as long as their work gets done.  It may sound absurd, but as a result of ROWE, Best Buy has increased productivity by at least 35%, and employee satisfaction is through the roof!  Now Best Buy is widely known as a “Gen-Y friendly employer,” but more than just Gen-Y flocks to work there.

This is a prime example of the change that Gen-Y works for, and it positively impacts everyone!  From the family man to the single mother, to the thousands of people who work a job to support their true passions.

Changes like ROWE are becoming more widespread, and if the corporate world does not jump on board with forward thinking like this, you will see Gen-Y turnover skyrocket because of another true trait about us; as we see the greener grass, we won’t hesitate to hop the fence.

No related posts.