Clever Geek Handbook
1 April 2025

Right Relationship

Recommendation

Many books decry human greed, describe the degradation of the environment and end with a few short pages recommending reform. This isn’t that type of book. Instead, from the first page, Canadian environmentalists Peter G. Brown and Geoffrey Garver agitate for a revolution in the way people use natural resources. They present an admirably solid case that the relationship between the Earth and the global economy must change, and soon. Whether their idealistic prescription (global governance institutions?) is realistic, however, remains to be seen. BooksInShort recommends this book to leaders who seek a fresh perspective on sustainability and the economy.

Take-Aways

  • Society must find the “right relationship” between economics and ecology – because, for too long, people have avidly pursued the “wrong relationship.”
  • A right relationship would “preserve the integrity, resilience and beauty of the commonwealth of life.”
  • The economy exists to supply humanity with the basics: food, clothing, shelter and health care.
  • This premise – and promise – has disappeared from today’s economic model. It fails to provide necessities for many people, while allocating more than enough to others.
  • The economy is part of Earth’s larger ecosystem, which has only finite resources.
  • Society’s concept of fairness must extend to other humans and other species.
  • In a right relationship, individuals would consume less than they could afford.
  • National governments have been unable to create the right relationship.
  • Society needs new international governing institutions, such as a Global Reserve to study the biosphere and a Global Court to ensure the rule of law.
  • Once people can meet fundamental needs, wealth doesn’t make them happier.

Summary

Applying Quaker Teachings to Global Sustainability

As civilization takes an ever-greater toll, Earth’s ecosystem is on the verge of collapse. Every one of the planet’s billions of inhabitants cannot feasibly live a rich-world lifestyle, with cars, plane trips and large, air-conditioned homes. But, all those billions can’t live as hunter-gatherers, either. Humanity must strike a balance and find the “right relationship” between economics and ecology – because, for too long, society has avidly pursued the “wrong relationship.”

“The state of the global environment is extremely worrisome and getting worse literally daily.”

Intriguingly, economics and ecology have at their root the Greek word œcos, meaning “home,” but they are not at home with each other. Global warming is a direct result of the conflict between these two areas of study. Now, each individual must question the very idea that rapid economic growth and frenzied money making are inevitable, or that they’re the only way for capitalism and human society to function. Reversing man-made damage is a moral issue. For centuries, people considered greed unsavory, if not sinful. But in recent decades, greed has become an end in itself for many modern cultures. This overarching, unsustainable push to use as many resources as possible is the root cause of global warming and the ailing ecosystem.

“Clearly the time is at hand – indeed, it is overdue – for a grand reconciliation between humans, human systems and the environment.”

To find a road map for dealing with this ethical quandary, look at the way that the Religious Society of Friends, known as Quakers, analyzes moral issues. Quakers are famous for questioning conventional wisdom. In the 1780s, Quakers in England and the U.S. began agitating for the end of slavery. Their perseverance in an unpopular cause helped change history. Today, the Quaker theory of right relationships suggests a goal in the fight to halt global warming. A right relationship “tends to preserve the integrity, resilience and beauty of the commonwealth of life.” A “wrong relationship” does not. Sadly, in their insatiable quest for greater wealth, men and women are perpetuating far too many wrong relationships.

“Building a whole earth economy means moving from endless production and concentration of wealth to providing only as much wealth as is needed for dignified, secure living.”

To work out a balance between humankind’s desire for abundant wealth and its longer-term need for a healthy environment, ask five crucial questions:

“Question 1: What Is the Economy For?”

The economy’s simple purpose is to furnish food, clothing, shelter and health care. This premise has disappeared from today’s economic model, which fails to supply the basics to many while giving more than enough to others. In this way, the economy creates the wrong relationship between human welfare and economic activity. Society has long believed that a fast-growing economy is the best way to offer health care, schools and environmental protections. Yet, despite unprecedented decades of economic growth in the developed world, nations still fall short in establishing health care and education, and in safeguarding the ecosystem. The time has come to change from the old model of unlimited growth to a more sustainable “whole earth economy,” which provides abundance for the many rather than extreme wealth for the few.

“Thinking about how the economy works only in conventional terms like supply and demand, market dynamics, financial incentives and the like misses the big picture.”

Driven by economic expansion and wealth accumulation, the global economy has evolved into its present wrong relationship. Blame free-marketers who preach laissez-faire capitalism or corporations that lobby lawmakers to keep government out of the markets. Despite such wrong-way proponents, societies have set minimum wages, promised pensions and barred child labor. These efforts may defy free-market doctrine, but they infuse respect and fairness into capitalism.

“The science that underlies the workings of life systems on the earth creates a powerful logic that, if applied, will pull the economy back from attempting to grow endlessly on a finite planet.”

To inform the quest for a more holistic global economy, look at the practices of Native Americans. In many indigenous cultures, for example, adults would find it unthinkable to strike a child or to kill an animal simply to display its head as a trophy. From hunting buffalo to extinction to damaging the Great Plains with harmful farming practices, European settlers brought many examples of the wrong relationship to the New World. In an ecologically based global economy, humans would harvest only what they need, without being deprived, and use only the resources necessary to sustain life.

“Question 2: How Does the Economy Work?”

If you study economics, you’ll face a bombardment of charts showing market dynamics, like supply and demand. Such measures are fine as far as they go, but they ignore the broader picture. Economists rarely think of biology, chemistry or physics, yet Earth’s scientific realities dictate how long resources such as food and energy will last. Economists focus on easily measured items like incomes and gross domestic products, but they don’t account for the economy’s failures, such as famine or the pollution that a power plant produces. They haven’t figured out how to discount for undesirable economic activity. When someone dies in a car crash, governments count the ambulance and the funeral home fees in gross domestic product (GDP), just like any other routine economic activity.

“The ideal scale is not just a question of size; speed, momentum and intensity also matter. How fast change occurs affects the ability of life’s communities to adapt.”

Perhaps modern economics’ most glaring shortcoming is valuing money above all – while ignoring the globe’s true wealth: life-sustaining air, water and food. Green plants are possibly the most precious item on Earth; by turning sunlight into food, they enable life. Yet, economists don’t value this fundamental ecosystem. Money dominates their thinking. The human economy is part of a larger ecosystem with finite resources. Scientific reality says economies cannot keep growing forever, but most economists ply their trade without regard for nature’s limits. A more practical study of economics would value the ecosphere, not just the wealth created by using its resources.

“The current system implicitly rejects governance options centered on respect for the earth’s ecological limits and a fair distribution of its ecological capacity.”

Economist Kenneth Boulding is an exception. In the 1960s, he compared the globe to a spaceship that’s taken flight. Already packed for the journey, the craft can’t take on any more supplies. Economists who ignore the spacecraft theory end up with a skewed take on pollution and other unwanted byproducts of economic activity. They see pollution’s health effects as “external” problems. But a whole planet view of economics reveals that no impact can be external. In the Earth’s finite closed system, everything is internal.

“Question 3: How Big Is Too Big?”

For decades, the mantra “bigger is better” has propelled the economy: Bigger firms, bigger buildings, bigger homes. In a growth-driven economy, no one has any incentive to cut back on consuming resources. A right relationship would foster a consensus that folks are using up the planet faster than it can replenish itself. But in a wrong relationship, the costs of bad decisions shift to the future. Today’s pollution and global warming will be someone else’s problem later.

“If the economy exists for sustaining life, then any distribution that fails to supply the subsistence needs of any subset of the global population is an unfair, immoral distribution.”

How much damage people wreak depends on the “scale” of the harm – how large, fast and severe it is. Balance requires a new economic metric that, unlike GDP, doesn’t just measure outputs and growth, but also calibrates the ongoing costs of environmental degradation in health, quality of life and ecosphere damage. The economy needs a “thermostat” that would work much like the one in a house. When you turn on the air conditioner, the machine doesn’t just keep making the air colder; it turns off once the temperature reaches a chosen point. By the same token, the economy needs some sort of thermostat to halt the growth machine for a bit when it reaches a certain level. So what should trigger dialing down expansion? Climate change, increased pollution or more species extinctions could be crucial indicators. The thermostat should measure:

  • “Scale and integrity” – Integrity refers to the ecosystem’s health and balance. A degraded system, like the Everglades, is so damaged it can never regain its natural state.
  • “Scale and resilience” – Living systems can bounce back after suffering man-made damage. The Everglades could keep functioning if the human engineering that degraded it were reversed, but it’s not resilient enough to recover its untouched state.
  • “Scale and beauty” – This subjective concept shifts among cultures, but often beauty comes with the right relationship. A poisoned river or leveled forest is not beautiful.
“Phenomena long in the making, such as climate change and mass extinction, are interacting with other looming global trends – in particular, overpopulation – to pose a frightening set of ecological crises.”

Four variables affect the ecosphere’s integrity, resilience and beauty. They are:

  1. “Population” – Demographic growth alone doesn’t destroy ecosystems. But combine huge populations with rising consumption and the right relationship is thrown awry.
  2. “Affluence” – Wealthier people burn more power and use more resources.
  3. “Technology” – This is both the cause of and the potential cure for climate change. As people use technological gains to harvest more fossil fuels, additional high-tech progress might help cut the use of such resources. It will take more to slow the damage.
  4. “Ethics” – Selfishness, entitlement and consumption are hallmarks of modern society. The consumer-driven economy, which creates and caters to material desires, encourages such attitudes. In a right relationship, humans would consume less than they could afford, simply because it’s the right thing to do.

“Question 4: What’s Fair?”

For decades, the question of economic fairness has focused mainly on the huge wealth gap between rich and poor countries. While global growth has improved living standards for some (the “rising tide lifts all boats”), it has created a larger issue of fairness: How can people coexist with the planet in a way that is fair to the health of all life forms? Clearly, coal mining that decapitates mountains isn’t fair – neither is destroying forests by harvesting tar sands, nor diverting water from the Athabaska River or the Nile. Society must extend fairness beyond humans to other species. Driving plants and animals to extinction is immoral. Most nations protect endangered species, but – beyond that – society should help them thrive. A healthy biosphere is good for all life.

“A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.” [ – Aldo Leopold, 1940s conservation biologist]

Another troubling moral question surrounds the extreme distribution of wealth. The economic system’s most basic purpose is to sustain life by providing food, shelter and health care. The fact that many people lack survival levels of food, shelter and health care is inherently unfair. Free-market purists cringe at such talk, since it inevitably leads to discussions of redistributing wealth. They argue that – if it makes economic sense – an efficient economy will provide the materials needed to support life. This is disingenuous. Of course, the globe’s resources are not efficiently distributed. The imbalance stems from several arbitrary factors that influence wealth distribution, including the luck of birth, class and governmental structures.

“Question 5: How Should the Economy Be Governed?”

Most people have abdicated active participation in governance, though government is meant to reflect their collective will. National governments have not safeguarded the Earth, so concerned citizens must get involved, make changes and establish global, not national, oversight of scarce resources. This may require new institutions chartered to create the right relationship, such as:

  • “The Global Reserve” would calculate how much of Earth’s resources people can use. It would replace the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to balance the economy and the ecosphere. “Trusteeships of Earth’s Commons” would manage shared resources, like the atmosphere, based on the Reserve’s recommendations.
  • “The Global Federation” would protect human rights, security and the biosphere.
  • “The Global Court” would “prevent abuse of power” and make regulators follow the law.
“People everywhere need to envision having fulfilling lives, and then start living them by walking more lightly on the earth.”

Creating the right relationship requires taking four major steps:

  1. “Grounding and clarification” – The greed-driven society says wealth creates happiness. In truth, once men and women’s basic needs are met, wealth doesn’t make them happier. Instead, contentment stems from good health and close relationships with other people and with nature. Once people know this, they can change how they act and how they treat the planet.
  2. “Design” – Society must devise ways to respond to this crisis by developing the “institutional changes and processes necessary to...preserve the integrity, resilience and beauty of the commonwealth of life.”
  3. “Bearing witness” – Changing your own life is a good start toward fostering “a guidance system built on right relationship.” If you set an example and speak out, you can help create a “mass epiphany” that will change the way everyone lives.
  4. “Nonviolent change” – The Quaker approach to a nonviolent social movement has achieved many victories, including the end of slavery. This model can prove fruitful, again, in arresting climate change and the degradation of the planet.

About the Authors

Peter G. Brown, Ph.D., is a professor at McGill University’s School of Environment, and author of Restoring the Public Trust and Ethics, Economics, and International Relations (published in North America as The Commonwealth of Life). Geoffrey Garver is an environmental consultant in Montreal and a trustee of the Quaker Institute for the Future.

Read summary...
Right Relationship

Book Right Relationship

Building a Whole Earth Economy

Berrett-Koehler,
 


1 April 2025

Work and Family - Allies or Enemies?

Recommendation

Stewart D. Friedman and Jeffrey H. Greenhaus conducted extensive research with 861 alumni of the business schools at Drexel University and the University of Pennsylvania, both in Philadelphia. Their research yielded revealing results about the struggle of professionals to manage work and family commitments. However, Friedman and Greenhaus present these results in such overwhelming statistical detail that the average reader is in danger of being swamped. This is especially the case when the data proves principals that most people already grasp through common sense and experience. That said, BooksInShort recognizes that the authors have done working Joes and Janes a great service by aggregating numbers to back up the notion that it’s getting tougher to balance family and career. As such, this is an important book for anyone in a position to set workplace policy.

Take-Aways

  • People’s two dominant roles - work and family life - can be allies or enemies.
  • The two roles are allies when you achieve a good balance between them.
  • The two roles become enemies when you lack balance.
  • Women experience more problems choosing between career and family.
  • Motherhood tends to limit women’s career advancement, because they spend more time parenting than men.
  • Fatherhood tends to advance men’s career achievements because it is associated with more authority in the workplace.
  • For men, a big tradeoff in career success is less time at home.
  • Children suffer when parents are not psychologically available due to work.
  • Dual-career families are becoming the norm, and employers need to adapt to this by permitting greater flexibility.
  • Society needs to encourage "gender equity" in the home and office.

Summary

Work and Family: Changing Dynamics

The two dominant roles most employed women and men fill - work and family life - can help or hurt each other as allies or enemies. They can be allies if you learn to balance them, while they may be enemies if you invest too much time in one to the detriment of the other.

“Motherhood turns out to be a career liability as things exist today. For men, however, fatherhood is a career asset.”

Today, people from dual-career families are working more hours, which makes it particularly hard to care for children. The psychological effects of work commitments on the home and of home commitments on work can be even harder to handle than the time commitment a job requires. This conflict affects men and women differently. Women find it more difficult to choose between having a satisfying career or marriage and children. Trying to keep a balance often limits their career advancement opportunities. By contrast, men may find it more difficult to participate in family life when they place a priority on career advancement.

Balance: Six Major Themes

Research with 861 alumni of business schools at Philadelphia’s University of Pennsylvania and Drexel University, produced the following six themes:

  1. Having it all is possible but tough for working mothers - You can have both a fulfilling career and satisfying family life, but you need balanced involvement in both spheres. This can be especially difficult for working mothers, since traditional values still influence the division of labor in most homes. As a result, working mothers are most at risk of suffering career penalties and stress over balancing their dual roles. They generally feel less satisfied than men with both their careers and personal growth, while men are better able to invest time and energy in both areas. Working mothers earn less than women without children, in part because they work fewer hours. They also feel less career satisfaction. Women feel more forced than men to make tradeoffs to maintain a good family life, so they spend more time on home and child activities and adjust their work schedules to do so. So, today, motherhood is a career liability. By contrast, fatherhood is a career asset, in that fathers have more authority at work, which helps them achieve more and feel more satisfied.
  2. Work and family can be allies - Work and family life can be mutually enriching. Careers can provide emotional gratification and satisfaction, such as increased self-esteem. Men feel better about their families when they have more job success, while women can gain useful family management information and support from their social networks at work. Spouses who support each other at home contribute to this work-family alliance, as do family-friendly employers. Employer support, such as childcare, can be especially helpful for women. Employees in supportive companies spend less time at work, but their job performance does not differ and they are more loyal and committed to their organizations.
  3. Time is not the major problem - Although balancing work and family participation is a logistical time bind, the real problem is "psychological interference." This interference reduces your family satisfaction and sense of personal growth. It interferes with parenting when kids sense that you are distracted, even though you are physically present.
  4. Authority on the job is essential for work-family integration - Experiencing authority on the job affects your career and your off-the-job satisfaction. Employers can help by giving employees more autonomy beyond just flex-time and telecommuting, such as by allowing employees to determine ways to do their jobs that best fit their lives off the job.
  5. Women may be better adapted for the jobs of the future - In the future, people will increasingly need to be skilled at juggling their career, family and other commitments - a skill where women seem to do better than men. Thus, employers should do more to invest in women as future leaders and to help men develop juggling skills.
  6. Kids are the unseen stakeholders at work - Although they are often forgotten in the work equation, kids are very much affected by their parents’ work experience. When parents are overly focused on their careers, kids have more problems in school and more behavior problems, because their parents are not psychologically present for them.

Relationships: Work and Family

Your resources, involvement and emotional gratification both affect the way you carry out your work and family roles, and result from the choices you make in these areas.

  1. Resources - The supports or aids that help you deal with your situation include both tangible resources such as time or money and less tangible resources such as information, acceptance and self-esteem. Resources you gain in one role enable you to be more competent, better available to people and more satisfied in your other role. So, resources you gain at work can increase your ability to balance and integrate work and family.
  2. Involvement - How deeply you are involved in one or both roles affects the way you apply the resources in one domain to the other domain, but only as long as your involvement in both areas is balanced. If you are too intensely involved in one role, then you will be more likely to experience conflict. Balance can make the two areas into allies.
  3. Emotional gratification - You experience positive emotions when you perform effectively. Generally, when you have positive feelings about one role, you can transfer them to your other role. On the other hand, negative emotions from one sphere will undermine your ability to experience satisfaction and success in both spheres.

Changing Roles: Work and Family

Even though a growing number of women have entered the workforce, the work-family split has more impact on women than men. In the United States, many traditional views of male/female differences remain. Changes in the workplace include:

  • About 50% of the American workforce is female.
  • 63% of married women with children younger than six are working.
  • 40% of workers are in dual-earner couples.
  • 23% of employees are single parents.
“While a parent might be physically present, kids rarely miss picking up on the psychological absence of a mom or dad who’s with them but whose mind is elsewhere.”

Increasingly, many employees, especially women, face the pressure to have a satisfying life off the job while satisfying their career demands. Although egalitarian arrangements where men and women share home responsibility are trendy, mothers in general are more responsible for worrying about what gets done at home and by whom.

“For men, greater success on the job generally leads to a better feeling about family.”

Women are more concerned with having stimulating tasks and with the career goal of professional development while men are more concerned with securing a solid financial base. Men pay a price for their greater career commitment, in that they have less opportunity to participate in their children’s development or to gain satisfaction from family life. Men who are more involved with their families feel their lives are more meaningful and they experience less stress, which contributes to their better health.

The Need for Flexibility

Research suggests that the following workplace changes are necessary to promote more flexibility so people can better balance their work and family roles:

  • Employers should value what employees contribute to work as a result of satisfactorily fulfilling their other roles. They should support the "whole person," though it remains necessary to keep appropriate boundaries between family and work.
  • Companies should restructure work to promote greater flexibility on a day-to-day and long-term basis, including helping parents be more available for their kids.
  • Everyone should recognize that dual-earner families are becoming the norm and should adapt to the needs of different parents at different times.
  • Society needs a new definition of gender roles to permit mothers and fathers to take on the roles each have held traditionally. This enables gender equity at home and work.
  • Society should recognize that career interests might change over time, as influenced by different life stages.

Conclusions

Beyond these recommendations, this research led to the following specific conclusions:

  • It is difficult to be highly involved in both career and family simultaneously, but it is possible to be highly involved in both.
  • Women experience more constraints than men and have to make more trade-offs.
  • People have diverse priorities in different areas of their lives. Career-focused people value status, challenge and money, while family-focused people value relationships, and some are more interested in personal growth and development.
  • Work-related experiences are especially powerful in determining career success and are much more important to career success than family factors are. For example, the most successful individuals work long hours, are psychologically involved in work and have a great deal of authority on the job.
  • Men experience a "family bonus," while women face a "family penalty," in that married men and fathers have career advantages because they have more job authority. By contrast, children have a detrimental affect on women’s income and career satisfaction.
  • More important than the actual time spent in balancing different roles is the psychological experience people have in balancing different life roles. Mastering the mental challenge contributes to achieving this balance.
  • Individuals who receive a great deal of personal support from their families generally experience relatively little work-family conflict, although if such conflict develops, the support doesn’t make much difference. Such support includes providing empathy, praise, information and advice, and it contributes to increased satisfaction with personal development, family life and career achievement.
  • Family-friendly companies can have a significant impact on improving the lives and careers of their professional employees. Even though people in such firms work fewer hours, their job performance is equal to those in unsupportive organizations, since they are working more efficiently.
“Forty percent of all workers are part of a dual-earner couple. There is less pressure on men to be the sole breadwinners.”

Work and family can be close allies, when the resources derived from one role are effectively applied in the other, and positive emotions in one area enrich the other. Conversely, they can be enemies, when work and family fail to provide resources or deplete them, or when individuals are too involved in one realm to the detriment of the other.

“All sorts of career factors and experiences - authority at work, commitment to our employer and bright future prospects, to name a few - are assets that can help create allies of work and the family.”

The research results promote a sense that people can live happier and more balanced lives in which each part of life benefits from the other. But to achieve this, employees need flexibility, information, acceptance and self-esteem, along with the support of employers, families and society.

About the Authors

Stewart D. Friedman  is a professor of management at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, where he directs the Wharton Work/Life Integration Project. He has advised Al Gore on work and family issues. Jeffrey H. Greenhaus  is a professor of management, commerce and engineering at Drexel University. He has authored or co-authored three books.

Read summary...
Work and Family - Allies or Enemies?

Book Work and Family - Allies or Enemies?

What Happens When Business Professionals Confront Life Choices

Oxford UP,
 


1 April 2025

Rich Like Them

Recommendation

Journalist Ryan D’Agostino wore out his walking shoes compiling this breezy, unconventional look at how a random set of rich people became wealthy. He gathered his information by ringing 500 doorbells in some of the 100 wealthiest neighborhoods in the United States, and found 50 people who not only opened their doors, but also were willing to answer his questions about how they earned their money. D’Agostino asked what advice they would offer others who want to end up in similar neighborhoods. What he learned isn’t particularly original, and it isn’t a blueprint to certain wealth, but his approach is unusual enough to make his findings personable and valuable. Given that the book doesn’t offer traditional tips for making money, it won’t serve financial planners or money managers. Yet it successfully merges rich people’s stories, ideas and suggestions in an easy, enjoyable read. Yes, it’s pep-rally material for budding entrepreneurs or high rollers, but it’s good pep-rally material. BooksInShort suggests this book to business students, young businesspeople, entrepreneurs, managers and worker bees hoping to get ahead. Way ahead.

Take-Aways

  • By knocking on doors in rich neighborhoods, reporter Ryan D’Agostino garnered bountiful advice on how to get rich.
  • His premise was “people who live in large, expensive houses must know something about making money.”
  • The rich people he met fit five categories: innovative “visionaries,” diligent “lucky” people, industrious “worker bees,” networking “connectors” and “renegade” risk takers.
  • Those he met were almost universally humble and hard working.
  • Rich people advise being observant and alert for new ideas. They say to gather information and connect with as many folks as possible.
  • They don’t believe in luck; they believe in hard work, practice, preparedness, passion and obsession.
  • Taking wild gambles with little forethought rarely pays off well.
  • Calculated, researched, thought-out “smart risks” most often reap rewards.
  • Don’t ever think you know everything. Don’t ever stop working. Enjoy what you earn.
  • No one has a guaranteed formula for making money – but you already know that.

Summary

Meet the Wealthy; Pick Their Brains

Investment strategies and savings plans serve a recognized role in becoming rich, but that’s not the only path, according to people who earn enough to live in grand houses in expensive neighborhoods, as delineated by postal codes. Going door-to-door didn’t produce textbook data about selecting mutual funds or arranging business financing, but it did deliver vivid stories from people who built wealth and were willing to discuss how they handled important decisions, recovered from mistakes, structured their daily lives, and decided what to save and what to spend.

“Most of the people who spoke to me seemed to have charged through life, operating on the theory that infinite possibility exists in the unknown. That’s why they bothered to talk to me at all.”

Knocking on 500 doors in some of the U.S.’s 100 wealthiest ZIP codes did, in fact, yield very personalized information. Of the people who opened those doors, 50 or so were willing to talk about how they became wealthy. They shared insights and wisdom that might be instructive for anyone who hopes to get rich. Their lives and stories vary, of course, but one big similarity is that most participants worked hard to earn their fortunes. Almost all of them fell into five categories: 1) “The Visionary,” who came up with a new and fabulous idea; 2) “The ‘Lucky’ One,” who toiled for years before hitting it big; 3) “The Worker Bee,” who worked longer and harder than anyone else; 4) “The Connector,” who listened to every pitch because “you never know” what might come of it; and 5) “The Renegade,” the risk taker who forged an independent path.

Always Be Alert to the Possibilities

Imagining an innovative, new idea doesn’t come easily, but the ability to think creatively isn’t an arbitrary gift; it’s a skill. Coming up with a revolutionary idea, invention or business plan requires education, practice and attention. Some people might be better at this skill than others, but everyone can do it. Those who succeed at it always have their ultimate goal in mind, whether they’re working, relaxing or walking their dogs. The goal filters their reactions to everything they see, read and do, as well as how they perceive the people they meet and the conversations they share. They consider how every piece of information they encounter each day might fit into their goal. To do the same, keep pen and paper handy for gathering your impressions as they happen.

“There are many kinds of risks. Little risks, reckless risks, all-or-nothing risks, safe risks. All the risk takers I met...took smart risks.”

Notice openings the way Arthur Tauck did. He realized that Western Canada’s ski lodges and helicopters went unused all summer. He combined that insight with other innovations in retiree vacation packages to turn his small tourism agency into one of the world’s top luxury and adventure travel businesses. Ask yourself questions that might produce such results. Think about things you see and people you know, what they do, like and need. Listen for opportunities; they’re often avenues to good ideas. Consider Mark Banta of Austin, Texas, who realized that doctors needed a businessman’s help in opening offices outside hospitals. Once he saw the need, he created and provided the service.

“Whatever your goal, only by keeping it at the forefront of your mind all the time will you develop the ability to connect dots that other people don’t.”

Like former actor Harvey Jason, invest a little time in the strangers you meet every day. You never know what might come of those relationships, which amount to “social capital.” Jason combined his Hollywood connections with his love of reading to create Mystery Pier Books, which specializes in first editions and in books that have become movies. Given his constant contact with new people, his Sunset Boulevard location and his network in Tinseltown, word spread quickly to actors, directors and the people who stage big productions, such as the Emmy and Oscar award shows. Soon Jason was selling first editions to major clients, including Robin Williams and Steven Spielberg. His shop once showcased a $40,000 set of Harry Potter novels signed by author J. K. Rowling. Jason’s Hollywood career and his warm, optimistic personality fueled his success.

“Try writing a little note, like ‘the world will never run out of good ideas. What’s mine?’ and taping it to the bathroom mirror.”

Invest in good ideas and projects, but don’t risk everything you have. Put your profits in the bank and keep working. That’s advice from Roxy Stutzman of Las Vegas, whose husband worked in casinos and then real estate. Roxy, who advised her husband through the years, points out two basics of any success: the imagination to recognize a good possibility and the wisdom to save money in case it fails. Then, if you make connections and have the ideas, act on them.

Getting Lucky Takes Hard Work

New York Yankees baseball star Derek Jeter might appear to make lucky catches, but he trains and practices daily. Working hard produces opportunities that might look like luck if you don’t know about the years of diligent effort that came first. Consider Bob Grosnoff of Scottsdale, Arizona. A stockbroker in the 1969 down market, he came up with a good but unglamorous idea for lining up future clients who might turn to him when the market improved. He sold short-term government bonds – for very low commissions – to moneyed clients who had been buying lower-return certificates of deposit. Co-workers teased him about spending so much time to make so little money. That stopped once the market improved. Those wealthy clients thought of Grosnoff when they began to buy stocks again. They called him with their orders. And, then, his commissions weren’t so puny. The office jokes ceased when the owner of a coal mine phoned from his private plane with a large stock order.

“Squeezing a great idea out of your brain begins with getting a good angle on the moments that make up your life.”

An anonymous former CEO of several large companies now has a waterfront home worth at least $9 million in Westport, Connecticut. His advice: Have patience, save money and don’t cash out too soon. He paid $450,000 for the house in 1979. “It’s the miracle of compounding,” the man says. And don’t forget the value of happiness. He still owns the house because it’s a great investment, but also because he sees it as “a magical place.”

“All around us...are opportunities to make associations that others can’t see.”

Think twice or three times before spending your money. Mimi Johnson, also of Westport, remembers her father’s famous spending rule: “You’ve got to earn two or three dollars for every dollar you spend.” The single mom and interior decorator was born in this upscale neighborhood, but she doesn’t take it for granted, especially since her divorce. She says she never knows when she might need her money, so she guards it cautiously.

“There is great virtue in being young and clueless about the future, because you have no reference point [about] how much you can afford to slack off...so you don’t slack off at all.”

Stay focused and persevere, even through serious adversity. Consider Scott Zdanis, whose company processes credit-card transactions. Early on, his largest client backed out of a major deal, potentially sinking the young firm. Zdanis sued and won, but the client didn’t have the money to pay. Zdanis didn’t consider folding. He maintained his passionate devotion to his idea and his firm, first by adjusting to survive without the cancelled order. Then he hired “fantastic” lawyers to write solid contracts to protect him in the future. Zdanis, who turned his loss into a valuable lesson, says he’s a better businessman than he would have been without this experience.

“Humility makes it OK to roll up your sleeves, stay late when no one else does and make your own coffee...Humility makes you work harder.”

Business habits make a difference. Remember your purpose and your plan. Don’t change your intent or abandon your mission without good reason. Know your field, pay people when you owe them, and run your business ethically and honestly.

Passion Isn’t Enough; Get Obsessed

People often talk about the need to feel zealous about their work. But simple love for what you do probably won’t propel you to wealth. Combine it with obsession, however, and you might have the recipe. That laser focus on the object of your passion drives you to work hard and pursue your goal on all levels. Such enthusiasm is a good start, because it makes obsession easier. Art Dwyer of Sandy Springs, Georgia, just outside Atlanta, speaks of finding this kind of drive so you can broaden and enrich your life. After all, who wants to work hard at a job they hate, or even dislike, just so they can buy things? Dwyer, who is a media planner, recommends joining a business where you can rise to the top. He took the gutsy step of leaving a comfortable job at a top company to start his own firm, work creatively, employ people he likes and tailor his work to his interests. Dwyer offers two tips for financial success: Become the best in your field or promote yourself so much that everyone thinks you’re the best. Often, the two happen together.

“Patience is a hugely underrated ingredient in the building of wealth.”

The next tip is to do your best, as Roy Layton always did, according to his widow, Helen. Roy, who was a Delta Airlines pilot for 30 years, discovered his passion and never wavered in his quest to perform it to the ultimate of his ability. Obsess about your job, whatever it might be. For Charles Marsala of Atherton, California, that meant striving to reach the top at his less-than-thrilling job selling industrial furniture. When his company won a U.S. military contract, things got interesting – and lucrative. After a few years, he left the firm and bought other businesses, without giving up his obsessive attention to performance.

“Lucky people are patient, or maybe it’s the other way around: patient people get lucky.”

Obsess about your business, but don’t do it for the money. Enjoy making the deal, negotiating and doing the work itself – and the money will come. “All the people I know who have a lot of money are all still working,” says Dave Dollinger, a real estate mogul in California’s Silicon Valley. Envisioning the life he wanted, instead of just focusing on a career, worked for Harland Young, who enlisted in the U.S. Army Air Corps to pay for his obsession: getting an art school education. That led to his flourishing career as an artist. Immerse yourself in whatever you do and do it as well as you can. Ophthalmologist Andy Schachat of Shaker Heights, Ohio, advanced in his field and is now an international expert in retinal disorders. He says his accomplishments come from enjoying what he does. He loves his medical practice and considers it fun, so he works harder and accomplishes more than most people.

Gambles Are Really Nothing More Than Calculated, Planned Risks

Take a lesson from venture capitalist Heidi Roizen, who eliminates as much doubt as possible before investing. She learns all she can about the field or product, studies the possible outcomes and then makes a decision. She doesn’t blindly invest and get lucky. Jeff Weisfeld, a produce broker in Beverly Hills, works hard at his day job, but lives among the rich as part of his “hobby,” buying real estate. “I just saved all my money,” he says. Before he buys homes, he conducts through research. He pays a lot of cash up front, minimizing his risk by avoiding big mortgages.

“If you find something you love...in a field where there’s money to be made, you will make it. But...the money can’t be why you go into that field in the first place.” (Art Dwyer)

Leaving the corporate world often pays off, but analyze all your risks first, including your home and business risks. Just ask Ron Irvine of Lake Forest, Illinois. The young African-American already had two young children when he gave up a solid corporate job to start his own pharmaceutical consulting firm. When he weighed the risk, he found it bearable because he thought ahead. First, he figured out that the government would be hiring more minority-owned businesses in the upcoming years. He knew how to carry out – and sell – the work, and he already had clients in the wings. Four years later, his company made $2.3 million in revenue.

“You never know. That...is one of the most important phrases for anyone wondering whether it’s time to set out...to take a chance, to switch careers, to pursue a dream.”

Failing can teach you a great deal, but if you hate what you do, don’t wait around to learn the lesson. Find a new career. Having tremendous faith in yourself will diminish your risk. Just saying no, staying put and turning down possibilities also can be risky, so don’t let fear keep you frozen in place. Whatever your risks are, make them “smart risks,” based on solid know-how.

Modesty Helps You Make It

Each of these rich people had a surprisingly humble approach to business and life. While they appreciated their talents, promoted their skills and enjoyed their wealth, they didn’t let money or success go to their heads. These folks continued to work hard and ask questions, while remembering that no one knows everything and not every venture turns to cash. Many of them still seem a little surprised by their surroundings: Palm Beach, Hollywood, Silicon Valley or Westport, Connecticut. That humility explains why they’re still working hard. They aren’t so comfortable or so naïve that they think their good fortune will last forever.

“We were an overnight success; it just took twelve years.” (Pete Francis)

These people keep excess pride at bay. As produce distributor Ted Kaplan of Los Angeles says, “I move $80 million a year in produce, but you’re only as good as your last load.” Even if all their current work is philanthropic, they still work hard. Successful men and women also seem to know their strengths, weaknesses and limits. They don’t forget that they are not invincible. They try to improve themselves. They know that focusing on the next project probably will bring in more money than congratulating themselves on a job well done. As you know and as they will tell you, “There is no secret, fail-safe recipe for success.”

About the Author

Ryan D’Agostino is an editor at Esquire and a former senior editor at Money. His work has been published in The New Yorker and other major publications.

Read summary...
Rich Like Them

Book Rich Like Them

My Door-to-Door Search for the Secrets of Wealth in America's Richest Neighborhoods

Little, Brown US,
 



All Articles
Load More