Experts Matter. Find Yours.

The Great Trillion Dollar Wealth Transfer

Summary: Between now and 2026, over $1 Trillion of wealth will move from Canadian Baby Boomers to younger generations.  Dubbed the “Great Wealth Transfer,” this change is underscored by a cultural shift toward “giving while living,” where seniors are motivated to share their wealth during their lifetimes, driven by factors including personal satisfaction, rising costs for younger generations, and tax efficiency.  These shifts in wealth highlight the importance of open, informed  Intergenerational conversations and the need for trusted financial advice to manage this transfer effectively. However, it risks widening wealth gaps between the haves and have-nots. Better financial literacy, tax planning, and a better understanding of real estate’s role in estate planning and wealth management are essential for ensuring equity and sustainable financial legacies. What it Means • The Largest Transfer of Wealth Is Happening Now: Between now and 2026, over $1 Trillion of wealth will move across multiple generations from Canadian Baby Boomers to their GenX and Millennial heirs. • A Culture Shift is Happening: Older Canadians are now, more than ever, “giving while living.”  They actively want to share their wealth with younger family members while still healthy.  In many families going forward, you won't hear that familiar phrase, "Hey Gram, Stop Spending My Inheritance!" • We aren't fully prepared for this shift: Families need informed, intergenerational conversations among themselves and with trusted financial advisors. They also need to better understand how some of their more significant assets, such as real estate, can provide tax-efficient ways to unlock and share wealth with younger family members. Boomers are sharing their wealth while they still have their health. Many Canadians have joined the growing trend of “giving while living.” This trend is not only changing societal norms but is also spreading like wildfire. The current economic climate, with out-of-reach housing prices coupled with Boomers wanting to witness the impact of their financial gifts, makes for a perfect storm. This storm, valued at 1 trillion dollars, could rebalance the distribution of wealth for many fortunate beneficiaries. Let’s explore what is motivating the Baby Boom generation in Canada to leave a living inheritance to a younger generation: 1. Psychological Reasons: Many seniors want to help their children or grandchildren with significant expenses such as education or home purchases. This provides a gratifying sense of pride. The logic is that they (children or grandchildren) will eventually get their money, so why not give it to them now when they need it the most? 2. Economic Reasons: Some parents or grandparents feel compelled to step in and help financially as they see their adult children and grandkids struggling.  It may be to help fund education or to pay off debt such as a student loan.  The burden of debt often delays other decisions, such as having children, traveling, or saving for a down payment on a first home or a bigger home to accommodate a larger family. And the price of homes today is well beyond the means of the younger generation, even without student debt.  3. Personal Reasons: Older Canadians often find joy in seeing their financial contributions positively impact their loved ones during their lifetime. Sometimes, there are some less conspicuous motivators as well. Improving their children’s financial situation may entice them to have precious grandchildren, or providing financial assistance could allow the gift giver to have a say on how the money is spent—something they would have less control over if they were deceased. 4. Tax Savings: Distributing wealth while alive can reduce the size of an estate and minimize probate fees. And with the popularity of RESP's and TFSA's there are options to gift or contribute to these plans that may offer tax advantages. And some seniors aim to avoid conflicts by distributing assets directly, ensuring clarity and fairness. 5. Cultural Reasons: Traditional notions of inheritance and family values are evolving. Many Baby Boomers see their wealth as a tool to uplift and empower their families while they are alive and are able to counsel their families on preserving and spending the money wisely. This is an opportunity for seniors to create a legacy while alive. Sharing wealth can bring a sense of purpose, gratitude, and connection. For many, it’s an opportunity to strengthen family bonds and pass on values like generosity, financial literacy, and responsibility. Impact • A Wider Wealth Gap: This transfer of wealth could have a significant impact by increasing the income disparities between the haves and have-nots. According to figures from the Canadian Professional Accountants Association, at the end of 2022, the wealthiest families in Canada (the top 20 percent) accounted for two-thirds of the country’s net worth, while the bottom 40 percent accounted for just 2.6 percent. In this latest economic cycle of soaring inflation and growing credit card debt, the net worth of Canada’s least wealthy households is suffering. And while we’ve seen recent increases in capital gains taxes, more changes from the federal government will likely be required to bridge this wealth divide. • The Need for Honest Intergenerational Conversations. Let’s face it: having a transparent conversation with family members about death and money is awkward. But post-pandemic, we’re seeing more seniors looking closely at their financial and estate plans to see what they can do to pass on wealth to deserving and often younger family members. Getting to know the impact of one’s gifts has its practical advantages in addition to the karma generated. Whether it’s to help a family member buy their first home, pay down college debt or start a business, these gestures can be transformative for other family members and very satisfying for seniors. As the saying goes, "you can’t take it with you." • The Need for Trusted Advisors. For many of these younger beneficiaries lucky to receive this generational transfer, having a clear financial plan that extends to informed tax strategies will be vital. The entire community, from financial planners to accountants, lawyers and mortgage brokers, have a lot of work ahead of them, according to the research. A recent Ipsos Reid study suggests Canadians are primarily unprepared to manage their inherited money. The Ipsos poll (conducted on behalf of RBC Insurance) reveals that 61 percent of Canadians don’t feel knowledgeable about (or haven’t even heard of) the probate process or the process to establish the validity of a will, and 57 percent don’t know that specific insurance policies can mitigate estate tax burden. • Improved Financial Literary for All Ages. Conversations about money also need to extend to better discussions about how significant assets such as real estate holdings contribute to wealth. For instance, given a considerable proportion of many family estates are related to real estate and more seniors are looking to “Age in Place” at home, seniors and their adult children must understand various financial strategies, such as equity lending, that can give seniors the financial freedom to age in place while giving them the cashflow to help younger family members while reducing potential tax burdens. Getting to know the impact of one’s gifts has its practical advantages in addition to the karma generated. Whether it’s to help a family member buy their first home, pay down college debt or start a business, these gestures can be transformative for other family members and very satisfying for seniors. As the saying goes, "you can’t take it with you." The Bottom Line One thing is certain. This is an infrequent event, which, over the next few years, will benefit many. Much is on the line for families, the financial industry, and our government. We should expect to see more discussions on tax reform and addressing wealth disparities to ensure social stability and economic growth. And it will require the financial industry to adapt in a number of ways.  For instance, how should we account for these demographic shifts and potentially longer lifespans in our guidelines and how we work with clients? I also hope we see more open and honest discussions about family legacy and financial literacy/education, which play a significant role in preparing the next generation to handle inherited wealth responsibly. As I continue research for my upcoming book, I'm looking closer at demographic trends, gaps in financial literacy, to how our industry needs to work better with Seniors in a way that recognizes these emerging cultural and economic shifts. I'd like to know what you think.  Drop me a line in the comments, or reach out to me directly at our new website - www.retirewithequity.ca Don't Retire...Re-Wire! Sue

UConn Expert, 10 Years after Sandy Hook, on the Lies that 'Plague the U.S.'

UConn professor and journalist Amanda J. Crawford considers the misinformation that spread like wildfire after tragic school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School to be "the first major conspiracy theory of the modern social media age."  Ten years after 26 young students and school staff were killed in the massacre, the impact of that day in 2012 continues to reverberate in America today. On this solemn anniversary, Crawford writes about the aftermath of Sandy Hook misinformation in a new essay for The Conversation:   Conspiracy theories are powerful forces in the U.S. They have damaged public health amid a global pandemic, shaken faith in the democratic process and helped spark a violent assault on the U.S. Capitol in January 2021. These conspiracy theories are part of a dangerous misinformation crisis that has been building for years in the U.S. While American politics has long had a paranoid streak, and belief in conspiracy theories is nothing new, outlandish conspiracy theories born on social media now regularly achieve mainstream acceptance and are echoed by people in power. Recently, one of the most popular American conspiracy theorists faced consequences in court for his part in spreading viral lies. Right-wing radio host Alex Jones and his company, Infowars, were ordered by juries in Connecticut and Texas to pay nearly $1.5 billion in damages to relatives of victims killed in a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School a decade ago. Jones had falsely claimed that the shooting was a hoax. As a journalism professor at the University of Connecticut, I have studied the misinformation that surrounded the mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, on Dec. 14, 2012 – including Jones’ role in spreading it to his audience of millions. I consider it the first major conspiracy theory of the modern social media age, and I believe we can trace our current predicament to the tragedy’s aftermath. Ten years ago, the Sandy Hook shooting demonstrated how fringe ideas could quickly become mainstream on social media and win support from various establishment figures – even when the conspiracy theory targeted grieving families of young students and school staff killed during the massacre. Those who claimed the tragedy was a hoax showed up in Newtown and harassed people connected to the shooting. This provided an early example of how misinformation spread on social media could cause real-world harm. Amanda J. Crawford is a veteran political reporter, literary journalist, and expert in journalism ethics, misinformation, conspiracy theories, and the First Amendment. Click on her icon now to arrange an interview with her today.

UConn's Amanda J. Crawford on one Sandy Hook family's 'epic fight'

Since December 14, 2012, the families of 18 children and six adults murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School have been forced to live amidst a tidal wave of conspiracy theorists and their constant lies, threats, and harassment. As lawsuits challenging some of the most vocal purveyors of that misinformation are working through the court system, the stories of the hardships faced by some of these families -- endured while they have tried to grieve their unimaginable loss -- have brought new attention to the profound and negative effects that the wildfire spread of misinformation has on the lives of the people most impacted. Amanda J. Crawford, an assistant professor with the UConn Department of Journalism who studies misinformation and conspiracy theories, offers the story of one family in an in-depth and heartbreaking, but critically important, story for the Boston Globe Magazine: Lenny knew online chatter about the shadow government or some such conspiracy was all but inevitable. When a neuroscience graduate student killed 12 and injured dozens of moviegoers with a semiautomatic assault rifle in Aurora in July, five months prior, there had been allegations about government mind control. When Lenny searched his son’s name in early January 2013, he was disgusted at the speculation about the shooting. People called it a false flag. Mistakes in news coverage had become “anomalies” that conspiracy theorists claimed as proof of a coverup. Why did the shooter’s name change? Why did the guns keep changing? Press conferences were analyzed for clues. Vance’s threat to prosecute purveyors of misinformation was taken as an indication they were onto something. But what concerned Lenny most was their callous scrutiny of the victims and their families. Some people claimed a photo of a victim’s little sister with Obama really showed the dead girl still alive. Others speculated the murdered children never existed at all. They called parents and other relatives “crisis actors” paid to perform a tragedy. And yet, they also criticized them for not performing their grief well enough. There were even claims specifically about Veronique. Lenny needed to warn her. “There are some really dark, twisted people out there calling this a hoax,” he told her. Veronique didn’t understand. There was so much news coverage, so many witnesses. “How could that possibly be?” “If you put yourself out there, people will question your story,” Lenny cautioned. Veronique thought he must be exaggerating a few comments from a dark corner of the Web. This can’t possibly gain traction, she thought. No, no, no! Truth matters. If I tell my story, people will be able to see that I am a mother who is grieving. Amanda J. Crawford is a veteran political reporter, literary journalist, and expert in journalism ethics, misinformation, conspiracy theories, and the First Amendment. Click on her icon now to arrange an interview with her today.

Aston University appoints translator in residence to inspire future literary translators

Aston University and Writing West Midlands have appointed Sarah Letza, a professional translator from the region to the role She will be working on community engagement activities at Aston University and with the West Midlands community The project is funded by Arts Council England. Aston University has appointed a translator in residence as part of a project developed by the translators Daniel Hahn and Ros Schwartz, a new one-off literary translation residency for 2022 based in Birmingham. Sarah Letza, a professional translator from the region, has been appointed to the position until March 2023. The project is funded by Arts Council England and will be run in partnership with Aston University and Writing West Midlands. Sarah’s residency will encourage an interest in literary translation and translated literature, and the valuing of languages, among communities in and around Birmingham through workshops, talks and other public engagement and collaborative participation projects. Sarah Letza, translator in residence at Aston University, said: “I hope to draw attention to the opportunities that translation and language learning can lead to and capitalise on the wealth of talent that can be drawn from Midlands schools and universities. “There is the potential to be involved with the many translation research projects already under development at Aston University as well as promoting and supporting languages and translation pathways. “I want to showcase Birmingham as a city that has been built on cultural crossings, intellectual exchange and creativity, all of which are the bedrock of both translation and language learning.” Dr David Orrego-Carmona, a lecturer in English, languages and applied linguistics at Aston University, said: “Birmingham is an incredibly multilingual city and Aston University is particularly well-placed to raise awareness and showcase the value of languages, translation and intercultural exchanges. “We are certain the programme will provide inspiring experiences for our beneficiaries in Birmingham and the region, and we are looking forward to the engaging activities that Sarah is already planning.” For more information about our courses in translation click here.

Journalism, Libel, and Political Messaging in America - UConn's Expert Weighs in

Former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin didn't cause the deadly 2011 shooting in Tuscon, Arizona, that injured Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, says former journalist and UConn expert Amanda Crawford in a new essay for Nieman Reports. Palin is asking for a new trial after a jury in February rejected her libel lawsuit against the New York Times. Palin sued the newspaper after it published a 2017 editorial that erroneously claimed she was responsible for the shooting. The Times quickly issued a correction.  But Crawford says that, in her opinion, Palin has contributed to increased vitriol in American politics today, and that libel laws protecting freedom of the press need to be guarded: Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee known for her gun-toting right-wing invective, is now asking for a new trial in the case that hinges on an error in a 2017 Times editorial, “America’s Lethal Politics.” The piece, which bemoaned the viciousness of political discourse and pondered links to acts of violence, was published after a man who had supported Sen. Bernie Sanders opened fire at congressional Republicans’ baseball practice, injuring House Majority Whip Steve Scalise. The Times editorial noted that Palin’s political action committee published a campaign map in 2010 that used a graphic resembling the crosshairs of a rifle’s scope to mark targeted districts. It incorrectly drew a link between the map and the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the Democratic incumbent in one of those districts, while she was at a constituent event in a grocery store parking lot in Tucson less than a year later. I was a political reporter in Arizona at the time, and I remember how Giffords herself had warned that the map could incite violence. “We’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list,” she said in a 2010 interview, according to The Washington Post, “but the thing is that the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district, and when people do that, they’ve got to realize there are consequences to that action.” In the wake of the mass shooting in Tucson, some officials and members of the media suggested that political rhetoric, including Palin’s, may be to blame. In fact, no link between the campaign map and the shooting was ever established. As the judge said, the shooter’s own mental illness was to blame. That is where the Times blundered. An editor inserted language that said, “the link to political incitement was clear.” (The Times promptly issued a correction.) This was an egregious mistake and the product of sloppy journalism, but both the judge and the jury agreed that it was not done with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth. That’s the standard that a public figure like Palin must meet because of the precedent set in the Sullivan case and subsequent decisions. Even if Palin is granted a new trial and loses again, she is likely to appeal. Her lawsuit is part of a concerted effort by critics of the “lamestream media,” including former President Donald Trump, to change the libel standard to make it easier for political figures to sue journalists and win judgments for unintentional mistakes. They want to inhibit free debate and make it harder for journalists to hold them accountable. -- Nieman Reports, March 14, 2022 If you are a reporter who is interested in covering this topic, or who would like to discuss the intersection between politics and media, let us help. Amanda Crawford is a veteran political reporter, literary journalist, and expert in journalism ethics, misinformation, conspiracy theories, and the First Amendment. Click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.

The Case for Career Advocates: An Organization Is Not a Meritocracy

“This blog post is the first in a three-part series that summarizes the key messages I deliver to my students, in the hopes that it can catalyze and support the career success of a broader group of ambitious employees who aspire to make it to the C-Suite,” writes Renee Dye 94PhD, associate professor in the practice of Organization & Management. “Most of my lessons are derived from my own unlikely personal journey from literary scholar to top-tier management consultant to C-suite executive for a publicly traded company, but they are also heavily informed by leading researchers like Sylvia Anne Hewlett. In the final blog, I discuss the impact of remote work on career success.” One of the paradoxes of the Gen-Zs and Generation Alphas is their intuitive understanding of the phenomenon of social media…at the same time they maintain an almost ideological conviction that the workplace – apart from systemic biases – is otherwise a meritocracy, where talent is perfectly and objectively evaluated – and the best and most deserving rise to the top. Surely a cursory exploration of Instagram and TikTok would convince even the most skeptical of the fundamentally idiosyncratic nature of success in a networked world? The Real World is likewise characterized by outcomes in which success is imperfectly correlated with capability level. Someone whose capability level is less than yours may lap you in the race to the top of the organization. That may seem unfair, but that’s because you’re making the mistake of assuming that career success is predicated purely on capability. A survey of MBA graduates from my school a few years ago produced a startling insight: of all the skills that we provided to our students during their MBA tenures, our students felt most unprepared to navigate “organizational politics” in their careers. The reason that I found this fact so astonishing is that today’s students, who are Digital Natives and in part Social Media Natives, are the most connected and self-promoting generation the world has ever seen. Yet today I find that my students continue to exhibit little practical understanding of how career success is forged…so much so that I now devote an entire class session in my core Strategy class to demonstrating the importance of relationship management and advocacy cultivation. Capability is not unimportant; far from it. As I tell my students, though, capability is table stakes these days as the level of education and skill sets continues to advance among individuals. If you’re not smart and capable you’re not getting in the door. But once you’re in, your career path and ultimate career success will be more determined by (1) your level of aspiration and unflagging commitment to achieving your goals; (2) your performance outcomes in your individual roles; (3) your work ethic and conscientiousness; and (4) the relationships you have with other people within your organization. And the relationships that matter the most are the individuals with influence and power over your future career opportunities. Let me put it starkly: without career advocates (notice the plural), it will be much, much harder to make it to the senior management ranks. Full stop. Some facts to bear this assertion out: • People with advocates are 23% more likely to move up in the careers • Women with advocates are 22% more likely to ask for a stretch assignment to build their reputations as leaders Ultimately, having an advocate confers a career benefit of 22-30%, depending on who’s doing the asking and what they’re asking for. That’s increasing your odds of making it to the C-Suite by nearly a third! If anecdotal evidence is more your thing, here are a couple of quotations for you: • A lot of decisions are made when you are not in the room, so you need someone to advocate for you, bring up the important reasons you should advance” (Catalyst Survey, as quoted in Elizabeth McDaid, “Mentor vs. Sponsor,” September 3, 2019) • When you get to the level in your career when decisions are not just being made by an individual manager, feedback from other leaders becomes crucial. Rosalind Hudnell, Chief Diversity Officer, Intel. As quoted in Hewlett, Sylvia Ann, Melinda Marshall, and Laura Sherbin. “The Relationship You Need to Get Right,” HBR 2011) • “I was great at building businesses and had tons of cheerleaders, but I had that typical Asian keep-your-head-down-and-you’ll-get-taken-care-of mindset.” My boss had to take me aside and tell me that if I didn’t actively cultivate her as my sponsor, I would never progress beyond senior associate” (quoted in Hewlett, Sylvia Ann, Melinda Marshall, and Laura Sherbin. “The Relationship You Need to Get Right,” HBR 2011) To reiterate: an organization is not purely a meritocracy where talent and hard work speak for themselves; and it’s much, much harder to advance within an organization without effective advocates. Renee Dye is an Professor in the Practice of Organization & Management at Goizueta Business School. For more insight and to continue reading this article and series, please visit Dye’s blog. To arrange an interview – simply click on Dye’s icon now to book a time today.

Baylor Expert: 9/11 Reshaped Every Aspect of American Life – Not Necessarily for the Better

English professor, culture expert says terror attacks damaged America, but it’s not too late to recover sense of purpose and generosity The Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon continue – 20 years later – to have profound effects on everything from America’s political, religious and cultural polarization to American entertainment choices, said Baylor University faith and culture expert Greg Garrett, Ph.D., professor of English. “It shouldn’t surprise anyone that an event that shook our sense of security and our identity would be reflected in every aspect of American life,” Garrett said. “But what does surprise and alarm me is the degree to which 9/11 continues to shape our attitudes about race, religion, immigration and the Other, whether that Other is in Afghanistan or just across town. The United States initiated a perpetual war against terror in response to the 9/11 attacks, and the fear that took root in the American psyche has proven difficult to shake.” Garrett, author of more than two dozen books, is internationally recognized as an expert on faith, culture, race and story, and he argues that the reaction to 9/11 can be measured just as much through literature and culture as through accounts of executive orders and covert military operations. Country music, procedurals and reality TV after 9/11 “Initially, Americans supported the War on Terror across political, religious and cultural lines,” Garrett said. “Country musicians like Toby Keith leaned into militant songs about American greatness and righteous revenge. The top-selling act the Chicks (then the Dixie Chicks) was drummed out of country music for their public stand against going to war. The TV show 24 reflected the growing darkness of America’s extra-legal approach to that war—the willingness to use torture, rendition and the opening of a dark site in Guantanamo Bay to house suspected terrorists—and it actually shaped opinion and policy as it grew in popularity and influence.” Two other types of television shows became extremely popular as a result of 9/11, Garrett said. Procedurals (shows such as CSI, Law and Order and House, M.D.) gained a new popularity because they offered viewers something the ongoing War on Terror never could or will: closure. “A serious problem was introduced in every episode, grappled with and solved by the end of an hour,” he said. Another type of show that leapt in popularity in the months and years following the attacks – reality shows – offered “train-wreck escapism,” Garrett said. “The contestants on Survivor and The Bachelor, and the wayward souls on Jersey Shore and Keeping Up with the Kardashians, presented exaggerated versions of our present moment that allowed viewers to forget about the dark actuality of the times,” he said. Springsteen, Harry Potter and critiquing ‘moral failures of the War on Terror’ Not all popular culture offered reinforcement or escapism, Garrett said, adding that some of the most powerful pop culture from 2001 onward critiqued the “moral failures of the War on Terror and critiqued the American people for so readily accepting them.” “Punk rock, always a prime medium for protest, was one of the earliest forms of dissent,” Garrett said. Green Day’s 2004 album American Idiot reached the top of the charts in the United States and 18 other countries, ultimately selling 16 million albums. But mainstream acts like Bruce Springsteen also asked complicating questions about the attacks and their aftermath. “After primarily offering empathy and comfort in The Rising (2002), Springsteen realized that America had betrayed many of its most important ideals, as revealed by songs like ‘Your Own Worst Enemy’ on the No. 1 2007 album Magic,” Garrett said. “Later novels in J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series, the most popular fictional narrative of all time, introduce questions of torture and terror, and powerful TV dramas like Battlestar Galactica and the British import Doctor Who also criticize the choices made by the American government and its allies.” Zombies and the Apocalypse Perhaps the most significant byproduct of 9/11 in our culture is the resurgence in apocalyptic stories such as 28 Days Later, Sean of the Dead, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, World War Z and The Road, Garrett said. Stories about the Zombie Apocalypse – whether in games, books, comics, TV or movies – asked serious questions about what it means to be human, and about what moral compromises a person might be willing to take to stay alive, Garrett explained. They also reflected the new 24/7 sense of encroaching menace that “seeped into our culture and lit up our phones at all hours of the day and night.” “You could fight all day every day against this menace, these creatures who look like humans but seek your destruction. And then the next morning, you still have to rise and confront it again,” Garrett said. ‘Not too late’ “People 20 years ago said that 9/11 changed everything, and so it did.” Garrett said. “But 20 years later it is not too late to recognize that the fears those attacks brought to the surface don’t have to be the way we continue to live. In my faith tradition, Jesus constantly admonishes his followers not to be so afraid. We make bad and selfish decisions out of fear. We abridge hospitality, compassion and liberty when we believe we are endangered. That’s not the America I grew up in, and it’s not the America in which I hope to die. That America, the light of the world, the city on a hill, Lady Liberty lifting her torch to welcome all, is the America that our founders dreamed, and that we can dream once again.” ABOUT GREG GARRETT, PH.D Greg Garrett, Ph.D., is a professor of English at Baylor University and Theologian-in-Residence at the American Cathedral of the Holy Trinity in Paris. An award-winning professor, Garrett has written about 9/11 and its aftermath in a number of books, including One Fine Potion: The Literary Magic of Harry Potter (Baylor University Press), Living with the Living Dead: The Wisdom of the Zombie Apocalypse, and A Long, Long Way: Hollywood’s Unfinished Journey from Racism to Reconciliation (both Oxford University Press). ABOUT BAYLOR UNIVERSITY Baylor University is a private Christian University and a nationally ranked research institution. The University provides a vibrant campus community for more than 19,000 students by blending interdisciplinary research with an international reputation for educational excellence and a faculty commitment to teaching and scholarship. Chartered in 1845 by the Republic of Texas through the efforts of Baptist pioneers, Baylor is the oldest continually operating University in Texas. Located in Waco, Baylor welcomes students from all 50 states and more than 90 countries to study a broad range of degrees among its 12 nationally recognized academic divisions. ABOUT THE COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCES AT BAYLOR UNIVERSITY The College of Arts & Sciences is Baylor University’s largest academic division, consisting of 25 academic departments and eight academic centers and institutes. The more than 5,000 courses taught in the College span topics from art and theatre to religion, philosophy, sociology and the natural sciences. Faculty conduct research around the world, and research on the undergraduate and graduate level is prevalent throughout all disciplines. Visit baylor.edu/artsandsciences.

The Case for Career Advocates: An Organization Is Not a Meritocracy

This blog post is the first in a three-part series by Renee Dye 94PhD, associate professor in the practice of Organization & Management that summarizes the key messages she delivers to students in the hopes that it can catalyze and support the career success of a broader group of ambitious employees who aspire to make it to the C-Suite One of the paradoxes of the GenZs and Generation Alphas is their intuitive understanding of the phenomenon of social media…at the same time they maintain an almost ideological conviction that the workplace – apart from systemic biases – is otherwise a meritocracy, where talent is perfectly and objectively evaluated – and the best and most deserving rise to the top. Surely a cursory exploration of Instagram and TikTok would convince even the most skeptical of the fundamentally idiosyncratic nature of success in a networked world? The Real World is likewise characterized by outcomes in which success is imperfectly correlated with capability level. Someone whose capability level is less than yours may lap you in the race to the top of the organization. That may seem unfair, but that’s because you’re making the mistake of assuming that career success is predicated purely on capability. A survey of MBA graduates from Emory University's Goizueta Business School a few years ago produced a startling insight: of all the skills that we provided to our students during their MBA tenures, our students felt most unprepared to navigate “organizational politics” in their careers. The reason that I found this fact so astonishing is that today’s students, who are Digital Natives and in part Social Media Natives, are the most connected and self-promoting generation the world has ever seen. Yet today I find that my students continue to exhibit little practical understanding of how career success is forged…so much so that I now devote an entire class session in my core Strategy class to demonstrating the importance of relationship management and advocacy cultivation. Capability is not unimportant; far from it. As I tell my students, though, capability is table stakes these days as the level of education and skill sets continues to advance among individuals. If you’re not smart and capable you’re not getting in the door. But once you’re in, your career path and ultimate career success will be more determined by (1) your level of aspiration and unflagging commitment to achieving your goals; (2) your performance outcomes in your individual roles; (3) your work ethic and conscientiousness; and (4) the relationships you have with other people within your organization. And the relationships that matter the most are the individuals with influence and power over your future career opportunities. Let me put it starkly: without career advocates (notice the plural), it will be much, much harder to make it to the senior management ranks. Full stop. Some facts to bear this assertion out: • People with advocates are 23% more likely to move up in the careers • Women with advocates are 22% more likely to ask for a stretch assignment to build their reputations as leaders Ultimately, having an advocate confers a career benefit of 22-30%, depending on who’s doing the asking and what they’re asking for. That’s increasing your odds of making it to the C-Suite by nearly a third! If anecdotal evidence is more your thing, here are a couple of quotations for you: • A lot of decisions are made when you are not in the room, so you need someone to advocate for you, bring up the important reasons you should advance” (Catalyst Survey, as quoted in Elizabeth McDaid, “Mentor vs. Sponsor,” September 3, 2019) • When you get to the level in your career when decisions are not just being made by an individual manager, feedback from other leaders becomes crucial. Rosalind Hudnell, Chief Diversity Officer, Intel. As quoted in Hewlett, Sylvia Ann, Melinda Marshall, and Laura Sherbin. “The Relationship You Need to Get Right,” HBR 2011) • “I was great at building businesses and had tons of cheerleaders, but I had that typical Asian keep-your-head-down-and-you’ll-get-taken-care-of mindset.” My boss had to take me aside and tell me that if I didn’t actively cultivate her as my sponsor, I would never progress beyond senior associate” (quoted in Hewlett, Sylvia Ann, Melinda Marshall, and Laura Sherbin. “The Relationship You Need to Get Right,” HBR 2011) To reiterate: an organization is not purely a meritocracy where talent and hard work speak for themselves; and it’s much, much harder to advance within an organization without effective advocates. "This blog post is the first in a three-part series that summarizes the key messages I deliver to my students, in the hopes that it can catalyze and support the career success of a broader group of ambitious employees who aspire to make it to the C-Suite,” writes Renee Dye 94PhD, associate professor in the practice of Organization & Management. “Most of my lessons are derived from my own unlikely personal journey from literary scholar to top-tier management consultant to C-suite executive for a publicly traded company, but they are also heavily informed by leading researchers like Sylvia Anne Hewlett. In the final blog, I discuss the impact of remote work on career success.” For more insight and to continue reading this article and series, please visit Dye’s blog. To arrange an interview – simply click on Dye’s icon now to book a time today.

UC Irvine experts available to discuss wide range of China-U.S. relations, from politics to education, food to movies

Emily Baum: Chilling academic exchanges between China and the U.S. Emily Baum is an associate professor of modern Chinese history and director of the Long U.S.-China Institute, which aims to bridge the gaps between academia, journalism and the public sector. Baum says the pandemic will likely affect study abroad for years to come, in both directions, with negative impacts on both sides. There was already a significant disparity with roughly 370,000 Chinese students studying in the U.S. and only 11,000 Americans studying in China annually. “A drop in Chinese enrollments will have major consequences for the future of higher education in the U.S., where many schools rely on the full tuition paid by international students to stay afloat,” Baum says. But equally worrisome: “The educational decoupling that had already begun before COVID-19 — and will be greatly exacerbated by it — means that there will be far fewer opportunities for each country’s students to gain firsthand knowledge of, and mutual understanding about, the other.” Reach Baum at: emily.baum@uci.edu Wang Feng: China has passed its peak Wang Feng is a professor of sociology and an adjunct professor at Fudan University in Shanghai, China. He is an expert on global social and demographic changes and social inequality. He has served on expert panels for the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, as well as he served as a senior fellow and director at the Brookings Institution Brookings-Tsinghua Center for Public Policy. Wang sees the ascendance of China in the last 40 years as the result of a unique confluence of circumstances: a dynamic leader in Deng Xiaoping, plus a significant rural population that moved to cities and provided a huge labor force. In the last 20 years, China has produced 600 billionaires — and gaping wealth disparities. “When China was poor, people thought it would be poor forever. Now that China is rich, people think it will be rich forever. But China has passed its peak,” he says. “The headwinds of an aging population, the legacy of the one-child policy, and tremendous social inequality will present enormous internal challenges in the years ahead.” Reach Wang at fwang@uci.edu. Jeffrey Wasserstrom: China’s box office changes Hollywood portrayals Jeffrey Wasserstrom is a Chancellor’s professor of history. A specialist in modern Chinese history, he has testified before a Congressional-Executive commission on China, conducted a State Department briefing on contemporary Chinese politics, and worked with the Hong Kong International Literary Festival. His articles have been published by TIME, The Nation, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, The New York Times and others. Wasserstrom notes that Hollywood films and TV often negatively present whichever East Asian country is most feared at the time. However, the power of China’s box office is changing that. “Due to concern with the massive market for movies in the People’s Republic of China, you do not often see negative portrayals of that country on American screens,” says Wasserstrom. “A telling example of our living in a new era is that when filmmakers were setting out to make a new version of ‘Red Dawn,’ a film that originally portrayed a Russian invasion of the U.S., the plan was to have Chinese soldiers serve as the enemies. Concern about PRC box office receipts led to a change in nationality — the enemies became North Korean soldiers.” Reach Wasserstrom at: jwassers@uci.edu. Yong Chen: Chinese food in the U.S. and China Yong Chen is the author of several books including "Chop Suey, USA: The Story of Chinese Food in America" (Columbia University Press, 2014). He also co-curated “‘Have You Eaten Yet?’: The Chinese Restaurant in America” in Atwater Kent Museum, Philadelphia (2006), and the Museum of Chinese in the Americas, New York City (2004–05). He is professor of history. He points out that the COVID-19 pandemic hastened changes to culinary habits that were already underway in China, including less consumption of wild animals, greater demand for fast food, and a shift away from communal or “family style” meals. Meanwhile, in the U.S., Chinese restaurants have been hit hard by anti-Asian sentiments, while also showing signs of resilience thanks to the popularity of Chinese takeout. “If the seriously strained relationship between China and the US continues to deteriorate, it is possible that more people in America will lose their appetite for Chinese food, to say the least,” Chen says. Reach Chen at: y3chen@uci.edu.

Could Smarter Guns Be the Key To Stopping Mass Shootings and Other Violence?

“Gun violence in this country is an epidemic, and it’s an international embarrassment,” President Biden recently said. At least 45 mass shootings have occurred in America in the last month, according to reports. In the same time period, news of police officers killing unarmed Black men and boys, including 20-year-old Daunte Wright in Minneapolis and 13-year-old Adam Toledo in Chicago, sparked waves of protest around the country. These all-too-common tragedies could be significantly reduced — and even eliminated — without any of the partisan rancor and gridlock typically associated with gun-related debates, says Selmer Bringsjord, an expert in artificial intelligence and reasoning and a professor of cognitive science at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. “There is a solution,” Bringsjord, the director of the Rensselaer AI and Reasoning Laboratory, wrote in the Times Union. “A technological alternative to the fruitless shouting match between politicians: namely, AI — of the ethical sort. Guns that are at once intelligent and ethically correct can put an end to the mass-shooting carnage.” Rather than an endless debate over whether the public should have more guns or less, Bringsjord’s novel – and, he says, plausible – proposal is to shift to “smart and virtuous guns, and intelligent restraining devices that operate in accord with ethics, and the law.” Along with his coauthors, Bringsjord detailed his ideas in a recent paper, “AI Can Stop Mass Shootings, and More.” Anticipating some counterarguments, the authors urge readers “to at least contemplate whether we are right, and whether, if we are, such AI is worth seeking.” Bringsjord and his collaborators have created simulations showing how, in only 2.3 seconds, ethical AI technology can perceive a human’s intent and environment and then, if necessary, prevent their gun from firing. Importantly, he notes, the same technology that could prevent a criminal from opening fire in a public area could also prevent a police officer from shooting a person who posed no threat. “Ultimately research along this line should enable humans, in particular some human police, to simply be replaced by machines that, as a matter of ironclad logic, cannot do wrong,” Bringsjord said in a recent public radio segment. The AI capabilities discussed by Bringsjord are the product of prior work over seven years of funding from the Office of Naval Research devoted to developing moral competence in robots. Bringsjord has spoken about robots and logic at TEDxLimassol. He is the author of What Robots Can and Can’t Be and Superminds: People Harness Hypercomputation. He is also the co-author of Artificial Intelligence and Literary Creativity: Inside the Mind of Brutus, a Storytelling Machine. Bringsjord is available to speak about his recent proposals around AI-enabled guns, as well as other aspects of AI, human and machine reasoning, and formal logic.