【推荐1】I once met a young woman who had dreams of swimming for the U.S Olympic team. She had to get up every morning at 4 a.m. to swim for 3 hours before going to school. She did not party with her friends on Saturday night. She had to study and keep her grades up, just like everyone else.

When I asked her what compelled her with such super-human ambition and sacrifice (牺牲). She simply said, “I do it for myself and the people I love. It’s love that gets me over the hurdles and sacrifices.”

A reason or a purpose is a combination of “wants” and “don’t wants”. When people ask me what my reason for wanting to be rich is, it is a combination of deep emotional “wants” and “don’t wants”.

I will list a few. First the “don’t wants”, for they create the “wants”. I don’t want to work all my life. I don’t want what my parents aspired for, which was job security and a big house. I don’t like being an employee. I hated it that my dad always missed my football games because he was so busy working on his career. I hated it when my dad worked hard all his life and the government took most of what he worked for at his death.

Now the “wants”. I want to be free to travel the world and live in the lifestyle I love. I want to be young when I do this. I want control over my time and my life. I want money to work for me.

Those are my deep-seated, emotional reasons. What are yours? If they are not strong enough, the reality of the road ahead may be greater than your reasons. I have lost money and been set back many times, but it was the deep emotional reasons that kept me standing up and going forward. I wanted to be free by age 40, but it took me until I was 47 with many learning experiences along the way.

I wish I could say it was easy. It wasn’t, but it wasn’t hard either. But without a strong reason or purpose anything in life is hard.

【推荐2】What does it mean to live a good life? This question has been debated by may philosophers(哲学家). In the field of psychology (心理学), two main ideas of the good life are influential: A happy life, full of stability, enjoyment and positive emotions, and a meaningful life, full of purpose, virtue and devotion. But what if these aren’t the only choices?

In recent years, the psychologically rich life has been receiving greater research attention. It is full of strong emotions, both positive and negative, and new and interesting experiences. They are, however, seldom boring or dull.

In a new study, Shigehiro Oishi and his colleagues found that many people’s self described ideal lives include psychological richness. When to chose a life, however, the majority chose a happy life and a meaningful life. Even so, some people still favored the psychologically rich life.

These findings suggest that while most people do struggle to be happy and have meaning and purpose in their lives, a sizable number of people are content only living a psychologically rich life. Indeed, other new research suggests that for a lot of people, the intensity (强度) of the experience matters more than only how “positive” or “negative” it was. As Oishi and his colleagues conclude, “we believe that taking the psychologically rich life seriously will deepen, broaden and enrich our understanding of well-being.”

At the end of the day, there is no one acceptable path to the good life. You have to find a path that works best for you. As Nietzsche put it: “No one can build you the bridge on which you, and only you, must cross the river of life. There may be countless bridges but there is one path in the world that none can walk but you. Where does it lead? Don’t ask, walk!”

【推荐1】During the pandemic, millions of people replaced their large open-plan offices with their living rooms. Now, some companies say their employees need never come back in.

Brynn Harrington, Vice President of Facebook, said, “Facebook believes that remote work is the future. We want to be able to give our employees choice to live and build lives in places that they love, and we want to increase our ability to hire from places around the world, not just places where we currently have offices.”

Not everyone approves of working from home. Some people are eager to get back into the office. Facebook estimates that more than half of its staff could work remotely in the coming years, but it insists the move is not about saving costs. And it says it’s committed to keeping its offices open.

Other tech giants such as Microsoft and Twitter have also indicated staff could stay remote — even after lockdowns ease. On Wall Street, they seem less enthusiastic about the idea. The boss of Goldman Sachs rejected working from home as a new normal — labelling it an “aberration” instead. There are also fears that it could create more inequality.

For many companies, the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle — with workers dividing their time between office and home.

Tushar Agarwal from Hubble said, “The office does have a future. We believe the future is hybrid (混合). We believe the future is flexible. The demand for flexible workspace has just gone through the roof. Just in the month of March, we’re back to about sixty to seventy percent of pre-Covid levels, and actually huge amounts of companies that are demanding flexible space used to be in traditional rent space, so now people want more and more flexibility than ever before.”

One thing’s clear — the world of work will look very different to how it did before this crisis.

【推荐2】The more women and minorities make their way into the ranks of management, the more they seem to want to talk about things formerly judged to be best left unsaid. The newcomers also tend to see office matters with a fresh eye, in the process sometimes coming up with critical analyses of the forces that shape everyone’s experience in the organization.

Consider the novel views of Harvey Coleman of Atlanta on the subject of getting ahead. Coleman is black. He spent 11years with IBM, half of them working in management development, and now serves as a consultant to the likes of AT&T, Coca-Cola, Prudential, and Merch. Coleman says that based on what he’s seen at big companies, he weighs the different elements that make for long-term career success as follows: performance counts a mere 10%; image, 30%; and exposure, a full 60%. Coleman concludes that excellent job performance is so common these days that while doing your work well may win you pay increases, it won’t secure you the big promotion. He finds that advancement more often depends on how many people know you and your work, and how high up they are.

Ridiculous beliefs? Not to many people, especially many women and members of minority races who, like Coleman, feel that the scales have dropped from their eyes. “Women and blacks in organizations work under false beliefs,” says Kaleel Jamison, a New York-based management consultant who helps corporations deal with these issues. “They think that if you work hard, you’ll get ahead—that someone in authority will reach down and give you a promotion.” She adds, “Most women and blacks are so frightened that people will think they’ve gotten ahead because of their sex or color that they play down(淡化)their visibility.” Her advice to those folks: learn the ways that white males have traditionally used to find their way into the spotlight.

【推荐2】Plato believed that men are divided into three classes: gold, silver and bronze. Vilfredo Pareto, an Italian economist, argued that “ the vital few” contributed to most progress. Such viewpoints are taboo (禁忌) today in public life. Politicians avoid talking of a “leadership class” or “the vital few”. School recruitment turns away from picking winners. Universities welcome the masses: more people now teach at British universities than attended them in the1950s.

In the private sector things could hardly be more different. The world’s best companies struggle tirelessly to find and keep the vital few. They offer them fat pay packets, extra training, powerful instruction and more challenging assignments. Private-equity (私人股权) firms rely heavily on a few stars. Firms in emerging markets are desperate to find high-flyers who can cope with rapid growth and fast-changing environments.

Few people know more about how companies manage talent than Bill Conaty and RamCharan. Mr. Conaty led the human-resources department at General Electric (GE) for 14years. Mr. Charan has spent the past few decades presenting proposals to some celebrated entrepreneurs (企业家). Their recent book, The Talent Masters, provides. a nice mix of portraits of well-known talent factories, such as GE and Procter & Gamble (P&G).

Successful companies make sure that senior managers are involved with “ talent development”. Jack Welch and A. G. Lafley, former bosses of GE and P&G, claimed that they spent 40% of their time on personnel. Andy Grove, who ra n Intel, a chipmaker, obliged all the senior people, including himself, to spend at least a week a year instructing high-flyers . Nitin Paranjpe, the boss of Hindustan Unilever, recruits people from campuses and regularly visits high-flyers in their offices.

Elitism (精英主义) has its drawbacks. In their rush to classify people, companies can miss potential stars. Those who are singled out for special treatment can become too full of themselves.