There’s a New Reason to Save Life in the Deep Ocean

"To most of us, the ocean is a no man’s land — a vast, bottomless and uncharted void. Three-quarters of the ocean has never been seen by humans, and only a quarter of its floor has been mapped in detail, which means we have a better understanding of the surface of Mars than we do of the seas on our own planet. It is this lack of exploration and appreciation — particularly of the layer of cold, dark water that begins where light fades, known as the ocean’s twilight zone — that has led us to a very precarious place.

Recently, scientists at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution wrapped up the most comprehensive study of the twilight zone in history, helping to establish that some 11 billion tons of microorganisms, crustaceans, squid, fish and gelatinous animals that live there are helping to draw down a third of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity, likely saving us and our planet from catastrophic climate change.

Just as we are learning to appreciate the extraordinary service of creatures in the twilight zone, companies that manufacture feed for industrial fish farms, fertilizer and omega-3 supplements are preparing to exploit it. Right now nations are considering authorizing commercial fishing fleets to grind life in the twilight zone into fish meal, fertilizer and plant food. Before they move forward with these plans, it would be wise to hit pause so we can understand how that decision will affect our planet.

Mass migration of life in the twilight zone — which can be found in the deepest parts of the ocean, between 650 feet deep and 3,300 feet deep — was first discovered in World War II, when sonar operators on the U.S.S. Jasper recorded an acoustic signature of what looked like the seafloor rising up. After studying the signature further, they realized the layer was alive, and that it rose and fell with the cadence of Earth’s rotation. What they were witnessing was the largest migration of animal life on the planet: trillions of creatures (copepods, bioluminescent lanternfish and basking sharks) swimming to the surface at night to feed, then sinking at dawn to hide in the depths.

The biological foundation of the twilight zone is algae on the ocean’s surface, which uses photosynthesis to break down carbon dioxide, the main gas contributing to climate change, into organic carbon and oxygen forms. This process creates both half of the oxygen and lots of carbon-rich food for twilight zone microorganisms. Animals such as zooplankton and krill feed on the algae, then larger animals feed on them. Apex predators like sharks and whales devour, digest and release the accumulated carbon as waste, after which much of it sinks to the deepest depths and can stay there for hundreds if not thousands of years. “We call it marine snow,” Heidi Sosik, the scientist who led the Woods Hole Ocean Twilight Zone study, told me.

There are a few other ways that carbon can reach the seafloor, sinking algae, dead plankton and bacteria among them. Scientists call this great system the biological carbon pump, and ocean temperatures, currents and climate change itself can influence it. Another takeaway from the institution’s Ocean Twilight Zone project: If you fish out the zone or shut down the pump, you would likely see double the amount of carbon dioxide that humans have already added to the atmosphere, raising global surface temperatures by six to 11 degrees Fahrenheit — a doomsday scenario in which most of the planet becomes uninhabitable for humans and life in the ocean dies off.

With a third of the world’s fish stocks already over-exploited and fish populations in decline, it may be hard to turn fishing fleets away from what they see as a potential windfall. Most twilight zone fish are unpalatable for humans, but their high nutritional content makes them a good choice for fish meal. Aquaculture is the fastest expanding food sector worldwide, accounting for half of all fish harvested for consumption. With current fish meal sources stretched thin, the $240 billion industry is eyeing the protein-rich twilight zone.

For now, countries are still assessing the resources and feasibility of fishing at these depths: Norway issued its first trial fishing permits for this portion of the ocean back in 2016 and European Union scientists are studying whether the creatures can be caught, processed and sold without disturbing the carbon pump or food webs.

At the same time, the private sector is working quickly to overcome obstacles to catching fish in the zone by devising new nets and trawling rigs that can operate a half-mile under the water’s surface. One firm from Norway has already constructed a processing plant onboard a ship to mill twilight zone creatures into liquid.

When commercial fishing operations do eventually make it to the twilight zone, they won’t be subjected to many fishing regulations because much of the zone is part of the so-called high seas, beyond the jurisdiction of a single nation. A new United Nations agreement to preserve marine biodiversity in these areas was signed in June 2023, but most member nations, including the United States, have yet to ratify it — and likely won’t for years. In the meantime, a temporary moratorium on fishing in the zone, enforced by the U.N. or regional fishery management organizations, should be put in place.

One might think that fishing out 11 billion tons of sea life would be impossible, but one would be underestimating the ingenuity and profiteering instincts of humankind. Let’s not forget that whalers killed nearly three million of their prey in 100 years — including 90 percent of all blue whales.

The mystery of the deep is an old trope, but nonetheless true. Despite a persistent lack of funding and resources, marine scientists recently unraveled several of those mysteries. We would do well to listen to what they learned: Wipe out all of the lantern fish in the twilight zone, and we may well see a spike in global surface temperatures from which we can’t recover.

Porter Fox is a writer in upstate New York whose forthcoming book is “Category Five: Superstorms and the Warming Oceans That Feed Them.”" [1]

1. There’s a New Reason to Save Life in the Deep Ocean: Guest Essay. Fox, Porter.  New York Times (Online) New York Times Company. Jul 29, 2024.

 

Ar „superžvaigždės“ darbuotojai to verti? Atsakymas yra taip, bet tik tuo atveju, jei lyderiai supranta, kaip, laikui bėgant, keičiasi jų vertė

 

 "Kiekvienas lyderis nori, kad komandoje būtų superžvaigždė – darbuotojo, galinčio pasiekti dvigubai ar trigubai daugiau nei vidutinio darbuotojo. Šis darbuotojas gali vienas pakeisti verslo likimą.

 

 Tačiau didelių rezultatų pažadas turi savo kainą. Verslo istorija kupina istorijų apie organizacijas, kurios nusilenkia, siekdamos įdarbinti ir išlaikyti geriausius atlikėjus, siūlydamos prabangius atlyginimus ir privilegijas.

 

 Todėl nenuostabu, kad net bosams viliojant superžvaigždes, juos neišvengiamai kankina klausimas: ar superžvaigždė to verta?

 

 Atsakymas yra „taip“, mūsų tyrimai rodo, bet tik tuo atveju, jei vadovai supranta, kad superžvaigždžių įmonei teikiama vertė keičiasi, tobulėjant žvaigždės karjerai.

 

 Anksti žvaigždės sukuria didžiulę vertę jų individualia produkcija. Senstant žvaigždės gali tapti mažiau produktyvios, tačiau dažnai gali kompensuoti tą praradimą, tapdamos puikiais bendradarbiais – moko jaunesnius darbuotojus ir padeda komandoms sėkmingai dirbti.

 

 Taigi, norėdamos kuo geriau išnaudoti žvaigždes, įmonės turi jas tinkamai valdyti, suteikdamos joms galimybių ir paskatų per visą karjerą, kurios tuo konkrečiu momentu išnaudotų jų stipriąsias puses. Jūs neturėtumėte motyvuoti ir apdovanoti išmintingą seną mentorių taip, kaip naujoką, trykštantį energija ir idėjomis.

 

 Anksti žvaigždės daug dėmesio skiria asmeniniams pasiekimams. Jie yra priversti įrodyti savo vertę ir sukurti savo profesinę reputaciją dėl išskirtinių rezultatų. Karjeros plėtros tyrinėtojai tai vadina „įsikūrimo“ faze.

 

 Mūsų tyrimuose buvo nagrinėjama, kaip šis savarankiško darbo siekis atsiliepė faktiniams rezultatams ir atlyginimui. Viename tyrime išmatavome atskirų išradėjų patentų paraiškas įvairiose pramonės šakose – daugiau, nei 1,2 milijono, paraiškų per du dešimtmečius – siekdami išsiaiškinti, kiek jų padavė karjeros pradžioje ir kaip šis skaičius pasikeitė, laikui bėgant. Antrajame tyrime pažvelgėme į vidutinio dydžio finansų įmonę, kad išsiaiškintume, ar žvaigždės – visų tipų įmonėse – buvo permokamos, palyginti su jų bendraamžiais.

 

 Patentų tyrimo metu jaunos žvaigždės per vidutiniškai penkerius metus savo karjeros pradžioje išleido apie 17 patentų, o ne žvaigždės – šešis. Kiti tyrimai parodė, kad daugelyje sričių toks pat efektyvumas lenkia.

 

 Tačiau, žvaigždėms senstant, jų individuali produkcija pradeda mažėti. Mūsų patentavimo duomenimis, žvaigždžių solo darbas pasiekė aukščiausią tašką nuo 20 iki 25 karjeros metų, o vėliau kas 10 metų jų darbas sumažėjo vidutiniškai 35%.

 

 Tuo tarpu mūsų finansų įmonės rezultatai rodo, kaip, laikui bėgant, keičiasi žvaigždžių atlygis. Jaunos firmos žvaigždės, kurios anksti taip pat buvo geriausi solo atlikėjai, dažnai gaudavo per mažą atlyginimą, palyginti su jų santykine verte. Vadovai, vertindami savo veiklą, jaunas žvaigždes įvertino 20–30 % aukščiau, nei nežvaigždes, tačiau žvaigždėms buvo mokama maždaug tiek pat, kiek ir to paties amžiaus nežvaigždėms. Vidutiniškai jaunoms žvaigždėms kasmet buvo mokama beveik 2000 dolerių daugiau.

 

 Tačiau, žvaigždėms senstant ir įgaunant populiarumą, jų organizacijose ir už jų ribų, jų atlyginimai buvo 18–20% didesni, nei jų bendraamžių, palyginti su jų individualia produkcija. Vyresnės žvaigždės buvo permokėtos beveik 10 000 dolerių, o didžiausia permoka buvo maždaug 57 metų amžiaus.

 

 Mes netyrėme kitų pramonės šakų, bet logiška, kad galioja tas pats modelis, nes darbo rinkos paprastai užtrunka šiek tiek laiko, kol žvaigždės apdovanotos didesniu atlyginimu. Reikia laiko, kol atlyginimas pasivys našumą.

 

 Tačiau senstančios žvaigždės permokamos tik tuo atveju, jei susitelkiate į jų solinį darbą. Žvaigždėms senstant, įmonės gauna mažesnę grąžą už atskirus žvaigždžių pasiekimus, o tai verčia daugelį viršininkų manyti, kad jie gauna neapdorotą sandorį. Jų geriausios dienos jau už nugaros. Toks požiūris neatsižvelgia į svarbų faktą: senstant superžvaigždėms jos sukuria kitokią vertę, kuri gali subalansuoti prarastą solo produktyvumą.

 

 Vidutiniai darbuotojai linkę vengti vadovaujančio vaidmens, kai baigia karjerą. Jie laukia išėjimo į pensiją ir nori mažiau tokios atsakomybės. Tačiau žvaigždės labiau įsitraukia į lyderystę. Apklausėme patyrusias žvaigždes ir nustatėme, kad jos turi daug daugiau motyvacijos padėti, palyginti su patyrusiomis nežvaigždėmis, ir turi beveik 50 % daugiau mokinių, nei kiti panašaus amžiaus darbuotojai.

 

 Taip yra todėl, kad, žvaigždėms įgyjant patirties ir ūgio jų srityse, jų prioritetai ir orientacija į darbą iš esmės keičiasi. Žvaigždės karjeros pabaiga gali reikšti pabaigą to, kas anksčiau buvo svarbi asmens tapatybės dalis. Mentorystė gali padėti žvaigždės esmei gyventi pasirinktoje srityje dar ilgai po išėjimo į pensiją, padėti sutvirtinti palikimą ir pasiekti simbolinį nemirtingumą. Patyrusios žvaigždės taip pat jaučiasi priverstos nuleisti liftą atgal ir padėti jaunesniems kolegoms pakilti.

 

 Pasirodo, tos patyrusios žvaigždės yra lygiai taip pat gerai moko, kaip ir dirba individualiame darbe – iš tikrųjų taip gerai, kad gali kompensuoti sumažėjusią individualią produkciją. Mūsų atliktas tyrimas, atliktas finansų įmonėje, atskleidė, kad vadovai nežvaigždės rezultatus įvertino žymiai geriau komandose, kuriose yra vyresnių žvaigždžių, nei komandose, kuriose yra jaunesnių (arba visai nėra). Vyresnės žvaigždės padidino nežvaigždžių našumą vidutiniškai 6,2 %, perteikdamos žinias, tarpininkaudamos ryšiuose ir modeliuodamos laimintį elgesį.

 

 Taigi, ką vadovai turėtų daryti su šia informacija? Paprasčiau tariant, jie turi atpažinti besikeičiančius žvaigždžių įpročius ir talentus ir juos panaudoti.

 

 Žinoma, jaunų žvaigždžių tikslas yra sutelkti dėmesį į įspūdingą solo darbą. Taigi, įmonės turėtų apsaugoti jas nuo blaškančių užduočių ir biurokratijos, galbūt, pasitelkdamos specialią palaikymo komandą arba vadovo padėjėją, kuris pasirūpintų kasdieniu darbu. Lyderiai taip pat turėtų suteikti jaunoms žvaigždėms daug veiksmų laisvės, skirdami joms užduotis, kurios atspindi jų stipriąsias puses ir siekius, kad jos būtų jėgų apkrovime. Ir žvaigždės turėtų gauti išskirtinę prieigą prie vyresniųjų vadovų, kaip mentorių.

 

 Tuo pačiu metu vadovai turėtų paruošti jaunas žvaigždes pokyčiams, kurie ateis vėliau jų karjeroje. Tuo tikslu jų atlygis turėtų duoti neatidėliotiną atlygį, pvz., premijas už rezultatus, susietas su konkrečiais pasiekimais, tačiau jie taip pat turėtų gauti ilgalaikį atlygį, pvz., laikui bėgant, suteikiamas nuosavybės dotacijas ir asmenines tobulėjimo galimybes, pvz., vadovų mokymo programas.

 

 Vėliau, kai žvaigždės įgaus norą padėti, viršininkai turėtų jas oficialiai apmokyti ir instruktuoti šiam vaidmeniui. Jie turėtų bendradarbiauti su žvaigždėmis, kad išsiaiškintų, kaip geriausi atlikėjai nori pereiti į lyderio vaidmenį.

 

 Tada viršininkai turėtų skirti žvaigždes kartu su jaunesniais, didelį potencialą turinčiais, darbuotojais ir apdovanoti juos už jų pačių rezultatus ir teigiamą poveikį besimokančiųjų rezultatams ir išlaikymui. Bosai taip pat gali stebėti žvaigždžių rezultatus, naudodami tokius rodiklius, kaip paaukštinimų tarp globojamų asmenų skaičius ir ugdomųjų veiklos įvertinimo pagerėjimas.

 

 Organizacijos taip pat galėtų apdovanoti vyresnes žvaigždes didesnėmis lyderystės galimybėmis. Jie galėtų paskirti patyrusias žvaigždes į patariamąsias tarybas, kurios padėtų formuoti ilgalaikes įmonės strategijas. Žvaigždės taip pat galėtų skirti laiko aistros projektams, turintiems įtakos visam verslui, pavyzdžiui, vidinei startuolių-inkubatoriaus programai, kuri gano perspektyvius jaunų žvaigždžių projektus.

 

 Tuo tarpu įmonės gali prisidėti prie žvaigždžių troškimo turėti palikimą. Pavyzdžiui, jie gali rinkti žvaigždžių žinias, pavyzdžiui, dokumentuoti, kaip jie naudojasi jų profesiniais ryšiais, ir naudoti šią informaciją, kurdami geriausią įmonės praktiką. Organizacijos taip pat gali sukurti alumnų tinklus ir emeritus žvaigždėms, pratęsdamos jų poveikį net ir oficialiai išėjus į pensiją.

 

 Vadovai negali laikytis vieno požiūrio, kai kalbama apie žvaigždes. Suteikdamos, žvaigždėms bręstant, šansą spindėti įvairiais būdais, organizacijos gali optimizuoti šių išskirtinių talentų vertę kiekviename etape. Išmintingiems darbdaviams žvaigždės darbuotojo blizgesys, laikui bėgant, tik ryškėja.

 ---

 Matthew Call yra Teksaso A&M universiteto Mays verslo mokyklos vadybos docentas. Su juo galite susisiekti adresu reports@wsj.com.“ [1]

 

1. C-Suite Strategies (A Special Report) --- Are Superstar Employees Worth It? The answer is yes -- but only if leaders understand how their value changes over time. Call, Matthew.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 29 July 2024: R.1.

Are Superstar Employees Worth It? The answer is yes -- but only if leaders understand how their value changes over time

"Every leader wants a superstar on the team -- the employee who can deliver double or triple the output of an average employee. These workers have the potential to single-handedly change the fortunes of a business.

But the promise of big results comes at a price. Business lore is filled with stories of organizations bending over backward to recruit and retain top performers, offering lavish salaries, perks and privileges.

Little wonder, then, that even as bosses are wooing superstars, there is inevitably a question gnawing at them: Is the superstar worth it?

The answer is yes, our research shows -- but only if leaders understand that the kind of value superstars bring to the company changes as the star's career evolves.

Early on, stars create enormous value through their individual output. As they age, stars may get less productive as individuals but can often make up for that loss by becoming great collaborators -- mentoring younger workers and helping teams succeed.

So, to get the most out of stars, companies must manage them correctly, giving them options and incentives throughout their career that play to their strengths at that particular moment. You shouldn't motivate and reward a wise old mentor the same way you would a newcomer bursting with energy and ideas.

Early on, stars focus intensely on personal achievement. They are driven to prove themselves and build their professional reputations through standout performance. Career-development researchers call this the "establishment" phase.

Our studies looked at how this drive toward independent work played out in actual performance and pay. In one study, we measured patent filings by individual inventors across a variety of industries -- more than 1.2 million filings over two decades -- to see how many they produced early in their careers and how the number changed over time. In the second study, we looked at a midsize financial firm to examine whether stars -- in all types of jobs across the company -- were overpaid compared with their peers.

In the patent study, young stars produced about 17 patents during an average five-year period early in their careers, compared with six for nonstars. Other research has found the same kind of outpacing performance across a number of fields.

As stars age, though, their individual output starts to decline. In our patenting data, stars' solo output peaked at 20 to 25 years into their career, with an average 35% drop in output every 10 years thereafter.

Our results at the financial firm, meanwhile, show how stars' compensation changes over time. Young stars at the firm -- who were also top solo performers early on -- were often underpaid versus their relative worth. Managers rated young stars 20% to 30% higher than nonstars in performance evaluations, but the stars were paid about the same as nonstars of the same age. On average, young stars were underpaid by almost $2,000 annually.

But as stars got older and gained cachet inside and outside their organizations, they commanded salaries 18% to 20% higher than their peers, relative to their individual output. Older stars were overpaid by almost $10,000, with peak overpayment around age 57.

We didn't study other industries, but it makes sense that the same pattern would hold, given that labor markets generally take some time to reward stars with higher wages. It takes time for pay to catch up with performance.

But aging stars are overpaid only if you focus on their solo work. As stars get older, companies are getting lower returns on the individual achievements that stars make, and this leads many bosses to think they are getting a raw deal. Their best days are behind them. That attitude doesn't take into account an important fact: As superstars age, they produce a different kind of value that can balance out their lost solo productivity.

Average employees tend to avoid leadership roles as they wind down their careers. They are looking forward to retirement and want less of that kind of responsibility. Stars, however, get more engaged in leadership. We surveyed seasoned stars and found that they have significantly more motivation to mentor compared with seasoned nonstars and have almost 50% more mentees than other employees of similar ages.

That is because, as stars gain experience and stature in their fields, their priorities and work orientation undergo a profound shift. The end of a star's career could represent the end of what had been a salient part of the person's identity. Mentoring can help the essence of the star live on in a chosen field long after retirement, helping cement a legacy and achieve symbolic immortality. Experienced stars also feel compelled to send the elevator back down and help junior colleagues rise.

It turns out those seasoned stars are just as good at mentoring as they are at individual work -- so good, in fact, that they can make up for their diminished individual output. Our study in the financial firm found that managers rated the performance of nonstars significantly higher on teams with older stars than teams with younger (or no) stars. Older stars increased nonstars' performance by 6.2% on average, transferring expertise, brokering connections and modeling winning behaviors.

So, what should managers do with this information? Put simply, they must recognize the evolving habits and talents of stars and leverage them.

The goal with young stars, of course, is to keep them focused on high-impact solo work. So companies should shield them from distracting tasks and red tape, perhaps with a dedicated support team or executive assistant to take care of the everyday work. Leaders should also give young stars a lot of leeway, giving them assignments that play to their strengths and aspirations, keeping them invigorated. And stars should get exclusive access to senior leadership as mentors.

At the same time, managers should prepare the young stars for the changes that will come later in their career. To that end, their compensation should deliver immediate rewards -- such as performance bonuses tied to specific achievements -- but they should also enjoy long-term rewards, such as equity grants vesting over time and personalized development opportunities like executive-education programs.

Later on, as stars get the urge to mentor, bosses should give them formal training and coaching for that role. They should collaborate with stars to figure out how the top performers want to transition to a leadership role.

Then, bosses should put stars alongside younger, high-potential employees, and reward them for both their own output and their positive impact on mentees' performance and retention. Bosses might also track stars' performance with metrics like the number of promotions among mentees and improvement in mentees' performance rating.

Organizations could reward older stars with bigger leadership opportunities, as well. They could appoint seasoned stars to advisory councils to help shape the company's long-term strategies. Stars could also get to spend time on passion projects that have impact on the whole business, like an internal startup-incubator program that shepherds promising projects from young stars.

Meanwhile, companies can play into stars' desire for a legacy. They might collect stars' knowledge, for instance, such as documenting how they leverage their professional connections, and using that information to create best practices for the company. Organizations might also create alumni networks and emeritus roles, for stars, extending their impact even after formal retirement.

Managers can't take a one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to stars. By empowering stars to shine in different ways as they mature, organizations can optimize value from these exceptional talents at every stage. For savvy employers, the star employee's luster only brightens with time.

---

Matthew Call is an associate professor of management at the Mays School of Business at Texas A&M University. He can be reached at reports@wsj.com." [1]

1. C-Suite Strategies (A Special Report) --- Are Superstar Employees Worth It? The answer is yes -- but only if leaders understand how their value changes over time. Call, Matthew.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 29 July 2024: R.1.