Sekėjai

Ieškoti šiame dienoraštyje

2024 m. birželio 25 d., antradienis

The Secrets to Making A Good Virtual Impression: Our careers increasingly depend on coming across well on Zoom calls and in emails. But what are the rules for doing that?

 

 

"We all know the rules for creating a good impression. Smile. Make eye contact. Have a firm handshake. Make small talk.

But all those rules go out the window when we go into the virtual world. You can't make eye contact in an email or grasp somebody's hand on a Zoom call. And it is easy to make bad impressions that are tough to correct. For instance, people may think you're rude or indifferent if you keep flicking through tabs or typing during a videoconference.

Still, making a good virtual impression is becoming a crucial part of many jobs, whether it is videoconferences with sales contacts and global teams, or even just sending emails to co-workers a few cubicles away. More and more, our careers depend on how we follow subtle rules and cues of communication in a medium where the rules aren't obvious.

Fortunately, as I discovered in a review of 124 research articles with Hayley Blunden from American University, virtual impressions can be every bit as rich and positive as if you were standing in the same room -- if you avoid critical pitfalls that can make the other person think you don't care about the conversation.

Here are a few strategies that are broadly applicable to anyone, whether you're a new intern or Fortune 500 executive.

Say too much rather than too little

In a work context, silence can do a lot of damage. If you stay quiet during a video meeting or don't send somebody emails for a long time, they might start to make negative assumptions, such as thinking you don't care about the job (or them).

So, it is better to err on the side of saying too much rather than too little. Stanford researchers found that business leaders who undercommunicated were "nearly 10 times as likely" to be criticized in leadership evaluations than those who overcommunicated. The leaders who didn't say as much were seen as less qualified and less empathetic.

It is easy to ensure you don't undercommunicate. On a webcam, you might just rephrase the other person's comments occasionally ("I like where you are going with X. . .") to show you're paying attention. 

With email, it might mean sending follow-up notes or check-ins more frequently than you otherwise might, along the lines of, "I'll review everything and get back to you soon." You will come across as more engaged and make a more favorable impression.

Point out your effort

Erring on the side of overcommunicating helps avoid another pitfall: With notes or video, people can't see how hard you're working. That means they start to assume you're not working hard enough. Managers, for instance, sometimes think remote workers are less productive than those in the office.

You can get around this problem by giving people plenty of updates on what you're doing. Instead of sending a customer or your superior a single weekly note about your progress, send shorter, more-frequent ones. Not only will you make it clear that you're working throughout the day rather than completing all of your tasks right before a deadline, but you will also get more chances to share knowledge and build relationships.

Speed isn't paramount

Showing engagement doesn't mean you need to respond ultraquickly to emails, though. Eight studies of over 4,000 people found that email recipients, on average, overestimate how quickly a message sender expects them to reply. 

It takes a delay of about one day to bring negative reactions, and certain situations require quicker responses (e.g., when there is an impending deadline or urgent issue).

Pick your moments for emojis

Like me, at some point you've probably found yourself in the middle of a text or email exchange about work, pondering whether you should add an emoji. Maybe you are trying to soften a criticism you wrote or show excitement for someone's accomplishment. But will you hit the right note, or look silly?

It depends what you're trying to get across. A series of experiments with participants from over 30 countries showed that including emojis can create an impression that you are less professional, but excluding them can make your communication feel cold. For instance, if you want a new subordinate to feel welcome during your first interaction, smileys and exclamation points will make you seem more approachable (if somewhat less professional).

 If, on the other hand, you want to impress a recruiter during the interview process, then keep your notes emoji-free.

If you're unsure of the right approach, look to the other person in the conversation. If that person's messages are full of smileys, then go for it. If not, don't include them.

Mimic the person you're talking to

Taking cues from your conversation partner can boost your virtual impression in other ways. If your boss has a #1 Mom mug in the frame of her camera, for instance, it might be useful for you to add a couple of family photos to your office that are visible in your video background. If the person you're talking to uses informal language and makes lots of pop-culture references during a conversation, you might want to do the same.

To this point, a study found that interviewees who included signals of a political affiliation that was similar to their interviewer -- such as a poster on their wall that read "Proud Democrat/Republican" -- were rated as performing more than 13% better during the interview than someone signaling for the other party. Just be careful, especially these days, in bringing politics into the equation. And in any case, use the "shared interests" strategy only if you know the other person's interests, otherwise you could end up doing more harm than good (e.g., someone who hates sports would likely be less inclined to want to build a stronger connection with you after they see your office background is full of sports memorabilia).

Simply put, we like (and trust) people who are like us, and mimicking other people's conversational styles helps establish an impression of familiarity and trustworthiness. 

In one experiment, researchers looked at a simulated job-contract negotiation over instant messaging. The candidates and recruiters who engaged in language mimicry -- using words and jargon similar to the other person, such as "y'know" in place of "you know" -- got better terms on the deal by more than 30%.

The cc'ing can really hurt

Watch out when using cc and bcc and in your emails -- it can send negative messages you don't intend. For instance, it might seem like a good idea to regularly include your manager on email chains to keep him or her in the loop on projects. But other people on the chain might start to think you don't trust them, and then think less of you.

Studies of U.S., U.K. and Chinese employees showed that regularly cc'ing the boss can slash in half the degree of trust that co-workers feel toward the sender.

Similarly, other research found that email return receipts, which indicate to the sender when an email has been opened, can create negative impressions. To the sender, it seems like a way to reduce ambiguity about whether a message has been received. To the recipient, however, read receipts seem like an invasion of privacy.

When feelings are running high, skip the video

Video is a great choice when you want to communicate authenticity to other people. But it can very easily backfire in emotionally charged situations.

I conducted three studies testing email, phone and video communication for making a positive impression of authenticity in situations like relaying bad news or negotiating or asking for a raise.

 I discovered that modes of communication that convey a lot of detail about your emotions -- like video -- are the most effective but also the riskiest.

Consider those viral layoff videos where the executives end up talking about how difficult the layoffs were for themselves. They are trying to seem sympathetic but usually convey the exact opposite, often coming off as self-centered and uncaring.

Or consider a video call to congratulate an employee on a promotion. One of the person's co-workers feels some ambivalence -- that person also applied for the job, let's say -- and accidentally grimaces. That revealing look may create a worse impression than not congratulating the co-worker at all.

In such cases, it can be better to choose audio: Phone calls or video with webcams off seems higher-effort than email or text but conceals nonverbal reactions.

If you have to use email, though, there are ways to make it seem more emotionally authentic. For instance, provide a reason for choosing a note instead of calling or video-chatting ("I had to email you as soon as I heard, as I'm so excited for you, but I definitely want to talk more later."). For everyday messages that aren't particularly complex or emotional, though, there are generally no downsides to sending off a straightforward note that is all business.

If it feels overwhelming to strategize about all these factors, there is some good news: When interacting with longtime co-workers, the choice of which mode to use and how you communicate matters less. Your communication partners have already formed their impressions of you and will be less likely to misinterpret your virtual communication. So, opting for email is less likely to hurt their perception of you even in emotionally charged interactions.

---

Andrew Brodsky is an assistant professor of management at the University of Texas at Austin and author of the forthcoming book "PING: The Secrets of Successful Virtual Communication." He can be reached at reports@wsj.com." [1]

1. C-Suite Strategies (A Special Report) --- The Secrets to Making A Good Virtual Impression: Our careers increasingly depend on coming across well on Zoom calls and in emails. But what are the rules for doing that? Brodsky, Andrew.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 24 June 2024: R.1.

 

Premjerė: neįtikima prezidento metiniame pranešime nieko negirdėti apie užsienio politiką

 

Šimonytė ir konservai nieko nekalba apie Lietuvos gyvenimą. Tik apie Ukrainos korupcionierių bėdas. Laikas jums visoms į pensiją ar invalidumą dėl proto trūkumo.

 


„WikiLeaks“ įkūrėjas J. Assange'as paleistas į laisvę

"Julianas Assange'as pirmadienį buvo paleistas iš kalėjimo ir išvyko iš Jungtinės Karalystės (JK), pranešė jo įkurtas vyriausybių paslaptis viešinantis tinklalapis „WikiLeaks“.

 

Tai įvyko po svarbaus susitarimo su JAV valdžios institucijomis dėl kaltės pripažinimo, kuris užbaigė ilgus metus trukusią teisinę dramą.

 

„Esu dėkinga, kad mano sūnaus kančios pagaliau baigiasi. Tai rodo tylios diplomatijos svarbą ir galią. Daugelis pasinaudojo mano sūnaus situacija, kad prastumtų savo darbotvarkes, todėl esu dėkinga tiems nematytiems, sunkiai dirbantiems žmonėms, kuriems Juliano gerovė buvo svarbiausia“, – išplatiname pranešime nurodė jo motina Christine Assange. Šį pareiškimą paskelbė Australijos visuomeninis transliuotojas ABC.

 

Jungtinės Tautos antradienį pasveikino J. Assange'o paleidimą iš kalėjimo ir pavadino tai „svarbiu žingsniu siekiant galutinai išspręsti šią bylą“.

 

„Sveikiname Juliano Assange'o paleidimą iš sulaikymo Jungtinėje Karalystėje. Kaip jau ne kartą pažymėjome, ši byla iškėlė nemažai susirūpinimo dėl žmogaus teisių. Vis labiau užsitęsiantis Assange'o sulaikymas taip pat sukėlė atskirų susirūpinimą keliančių klausimų. Artimiausiomis dienomis toliau stebėsime įvykius“, – sakė JT teisių biuro atstovė spaudai Liz Throssell, tačiau pridūrė, kad vis dar laukiama galutinio susitarimo dėl kaltinimų patvirtinimo.

 

J. Assange'as pastaruosius penkerius metus praleido JK kalėjime, iš kur JAV siekė jo ekstradicijos. Jungtinės Valstijos norėjo jį patraukti baudžiamojon atsakomybėn už karinių paslapčių atskleidimą.

 

J. Assange'o žmona Stella Assange sakė, kad pagal susitarimą dėl kaltės pripažinimo jos vyras prisipažins kaltu dėl vieno kaltinimo.

 

„Kaltinimas susijęs su Šnipinėjimo įstatymu ir informacijos apie nacionalinę gynybą gavimu bei atskleidimu, – teigė ji. – Šiuo atveju svarbu tai, kad susitarimas buvo susijęs su įkalinimo laiku, kurį patvirtinus jis galės išeiti į laisvę.“

 

„Kai tai įvyks, tai bus tik iš esmės susitarimas tarp Juliano ir Teisingumo departamento, kurį turi pasirašyti teisėjas šiose Šiaurės Marianų teritorijose Ramiajame vandenyne, kur jis ketina vykti“, – pridūrė ji.

 

Manoma, kad J. Assange'ui bus paskirta penkerių metų ir dviejų mėnesių kalėjimo bausmė – būtent tiek laiko jis praleido už grotų Britanijoje – ir po to jis galės grįžti į savo gimtąją Australiją.

 

Palikęs kalėjimą jis įlipo į lėktuvą JK prieš trečiadienį JAV Ramiojo vandenyno Šiaurės Marianų salose numatytą teismo posėdį. J. Assange'as JAV teritorijoje turėtų pasirodyti trečiadienio rytą vietos laiku.

 

Prieš vykdamas ten „WikiLeaks“ įkūrėją skraidinantis lėktuvas nusileido Bankoke pasipildyti degalų.

 

Po septynerių metų, praleistų Ekvadoro ambasadoje Londone, jis nuo 2019 metų balandžio buvo laikomas griežto saugumo Belmaršo kalėjime Londone.

 

Jungtinėse Valstijose 52-ejų J. Assange'ui grėsė teismo procesas dėl įtariamo JAV Šnipinėjimo įstatymo pažeidimo 2010 metais. JAV jis galėjo būti teisiamas dėl kaltinimų atskleidus karinius ir diplomatinius dokumentus.

 

JAV valdžios institucijos norėjo patraukti J. Assange'ą baudžiamojon atsakomybėn už tai, kad jis atskleidė JAV paslaptis apie karus Irake ir Afganistane.

 

J. Assange'o byla tapo rezonansine žiniasklaidos laisvės gynėjams. Jo šalininkai kaltina Vašingtoną bandymais nutildyti pagrįstus pranešimus saugumo klausimais."

 


Kodėl Zelenskio siaubui Bidenas pralaimi rinkimus: bidenomika, taip pat žinoma, kaip šiuolaikinė pinigų teorija

"Kartais idėjos, kurios atrodo akivaizdžiai kvailos, prigyja ir sukelia rimtą sunaikinimą. 2000-ųjų pabaigoje australų ekonomistas Billas Mitchellas sukūrė terminą "Šiuolaikinė pinigų teorija" arba MMT, kad apibūdintų tai, ką galima pavadinti keinsizmu, vartojant steroidus. 

 

Johnas Maynardas Keynesas (1883 m. - 1946 m.) teigė, kad vyriausybė turėtų stimuliuoti ekonomiką, išleisdama ir skolindama trumpalaikio sukrėtimo, pavyzdžiui, ekonomikos krizės ar karo, metu, o tada, kai krizė praeis, grąžinti pagrįstą išlaidų ir skolų lygį.

 

 Pagal MMT krizė niekada nesibaigia. MMT šalininkai teigia, kad kadangi doleris yra pasaulio atsargų valiuta, o iždas gali parduoti obligacijas už mažą palūkanų normą, dėdė Samas gali neribotai išleisti ir skolintis be jokios ekonominės rizikos. Kaip sakė Stony Brook universiteto ekonomistė Stephanie Kelton: „Deficitas gali padėti mums kovoti su begale problemų, kurios kamuoja mūsų ekonomiką – nelygybe, skurdu ir nedarbu, klimato kaita, būstu, sveikatos apsauga ir kt."

 

 Laisvosios rinkos ekonomistai šaipėsi. Istorijoje gausu tautų, kurios bandė išlaidauti ir pasiskolinti savo kelią į klestėjimą: senovės Roma, tarpukario Vokietija, Argentina, pokario Britanija, o pastaruoju metu Bolivija, Meksika, Zimbabvė, Graikija ir Venesuela.

 

 Tačiau kairėje pusėje MMT buvo paaiškinta, kodėl Baracko Obamos beveik 800 mlrd. dolerių stimulas nesuveikė. Jie sakė, kad išlaidų nepakako.

 

 2020 m. Demokratų partija visiškai priėmė MMT. Ponia Kelton dirbo vyriausiąja senatoriaus Bernie Sanders patarėja ekonomikos klausimais, paremdam aantrosios vietos kandidatą į partijos renkamo prezidento kandidatūrą, o vėliau buvo viena iš Bideno kampanijos ataskaitos, kuri buvo jos išlaidų mažinimo planas, bendraautorė. 2021 m. MMT suteikė administracijai ir demokratų įstatymų leidėjams akademinį įspūdį dėl išlaidų lavinos, keturis kartus didesnės, nei B. Obamos paskata 12 metų anksčiau.

 

 Bidenas įtikino Kongresą skirti 4 trilijonus dolerių socialinės gerovės programoms, įmonių gerovės subsidijoms, kairiųjų aplinkosaugos programoms, koledžų ir sveikatos priežiūros subsidijoms ir kt. Įrodydami MMT įtaką, 17 Nobelio ekonomikos premijos laureatų pasirašė 2021 m. pareiškimą, kuriame teigiama, kad visos šios išlaidos „sumažins ilgalaikį infliacijos spaudimą“.

 

 Nesvarbu, kad ekonomika jau atsigavo, kai verslas vėl atsidarė. Bidenas ir MMT minia manė, kad išrado amžinojo judesio mašiną. Vietoj to, jie išlaisvino didžiausią infliaciją per 40 metų.

 

 Vidutinis darbuotojų savaitinis darbo užmokestis nuo 2021 m. sausio mėn. iki 2024 m. gegužės mėn. padidėjo 15 %. Tačiau realiai tai buvo nuostolis, nes kainos pakilo 19 %. Net ir turint trilijonus dalomosios medžiagos, dirbančių amerikiečių vidutinės realios metinės pajamos sumažėjo daugiau, nei 2 300 dolerių šiandienos doleriais. 

 

Mūsų žiniomis, nė vienas iš tų Nobelio ekonomistų nepateikė atsiėmimo.

 ---

 P. Lafferis yra Laffer & Associates prezidentas. P. Moore'as yra Paveldo fondo vyresnysis bendradarbis. Jie yra Komiteto, skirto klestėti, įkūrėjai.“ [1]

 

Vargšas Ukrainos ponas Zelenskis, gyvenantis pono Bideno dolerių dušo dėka. Ponas Trumpas žada baigti šį dušą.

 

1. Bidenomics, Also Known as MMT. Laffer, Arthur; Moore, Stephen.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 24 June 2024: A.15.

Why Biden is Losing the Election to the Horror of Zelensky: Bidenomics, Also Known as Modern Monetary Theory


"Sometimes ideas that seem obviously silly catch on and cause serious destruction. In the late 2000s Australian economist Bill Mitchell coined the term "Modern Monetary Theory," or MMT, to describe what one might call Keynesianism on steroids. John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946) argued that government should stimulate the economy by spending and borrowing during a short-term shock like an economic crisis or a war, then pull back to a reasonable level of spending and debt once the crisis has passed.

Under MMT, the crisis never ends. Proponents posit that because the dollar is the world reserve currency and the Treasury can sell bonds at low interest rates, Uncle Sam can spend and borrow limitlessly with no economic risk. As Stephanie Kelton, an economist at Stony Brook University, put it: "Deficits can help us fight a myriad of problems that plague our economy -- inequality, poverty and unemployment, climate change, housing, health care, and more."

Free-market economists scoffed. History is littered with nations that tried to spend and borrow their way to prosperity: ancient Rome, interwar Germany, Argentina, postwar Britain, and more recently Bolivia, Mexico, Zimbabwe, Greece and Venezuela.

But on the left, MMT caught on as an explanation for why Barack Obama's nearly $800 billion stimulus plan in 2009 failed to yield anything like the promised 4% annual growth. They said the spending wasn't enough.

In 2020 the Democratic Party fully embraced MMT. Ms. Kelton served as a top economic adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders, runner-up for the party's nomination, and later co-authored a report for the Biden campaign that served as a blueprint for its spending blowout. In 2021 MMT gave the administration and Democratic lawmakers an academic imprimatur for the avalanche of spending, four times as large as Mr. Obama's stimulus 12 years earlier.

Mr. Biden persuaded Congress to shovel $4 trillion into social-welfare programs, corporate-welfare grants, leftist environmental programs, college and healthcare subsidies and more. In a testament to MMT's sway, 17 Nobel economics laureates signed a 2021 statement asserting that all this spending "will ease longer-term inflationary pressures."

Never mind that the economy was already bouncing back as businesses reopened. Mr. Biden and the MMT crowd thought they had invented a perpetual-motion machine. Instead, they unleashed the worst inflation in 40 years.

Average weekly earnings of employees rose 15% between January 2021 and May 2024. But that was a loss in real terms, since prices were up 19%. Even with trillions in handouts, working Americans have seen their average real annual income decline by more than $2,300 in today's dollars.

To our knowledge, not one of those Nobel economists has issued a retraction.

---

Mr. Laffer is the president of Laffer & Associates. Mr. Moore is a visiting senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation. They are co-founders of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity." [1]

 Poor Mr. Zelensky of Ukraine, living thanks to the shower of dollars from Mr. Biden. Mr. Trump promises to end the shower.

1. Bidenomics, Also Known as MMT. Laffer, Arthur; Moore, Stephen.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 24 June 2024: A.15.