Podcasts about Compensation

In this episode, Christine Staten, DVM, MBA, explains how she introduced performance-based compensation at her mixed animal practice. Staten developed a skills-based tier system with transparent pay and a clear path for advancement.To learn more, you can contact Staten through her website: veterinary-mba.comThe Business of Practice podcast is brought to you by CareCredit.This information is shared solely for your convenience. You are urged to consult with your individual advisors with respect to any information presented.Business of Practice Podcast Hosts, Guests, and Links Episode 146:Hosts: Dr. Amy Grice and Carly Sisson (Digital Content Manager) of EquiManagement | Email Carly (csisson@equinenetwork.com) | Connect with Carly on LinkedInGuests: Dr. Christine Staten, DVM, MBAPodcast Website: The Business of Practice

Do bonus programs actually improve performance, or do they simply reward behaviors your team should already be doing?In this episode of the Private Practice Owners Club, Nathan Shields and Adam Robin explore how private practice owners can design bonus and incentive programs that drive productivity without hurting profitability.They discuss why culture must come before compensation, how to determine the right baseline metrics, and why simple incentive structures often outperform complicated formulas. They also share real-world examples of provider bonuses, front desk incentives, alternative compensation models, and profit-sharing strategies. In this episode, you'll learn:Why strong culture matters more than bonus programsThe difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivationThe financial metrics you must know before offering incentivesHow to build simple provider bonus structuresWhy bonuses should reward performance beyond baseline expectationsCreative team-based incentives that don't always involve cashAlternative compensation models that increase earning potentialFront desk bonus ideas that improve productivityCommon mistakes practice owners make with incentive programsHow higher revenue per visit creates better compensation opportunities for your team Whether you're building your first incentive program or improving an existing compensation model, this episode provides practical ideas to motivate your team while protecting your clinic's profitability.Join us at the High-Performance Practice Conference to learn proven strategies for building a more profitable, high-performing private practice.If you enjoyed this episode, subscribe, leave a review, and share it with another private practice owner.Explore more resources from the Private Practice Owners Club:https://linktr.ee/ppoclubWant to talk about how we can help you with your PT business, or have a question you want to ask? Book a call with Nathan - https://calendly.com/ptoclub/discoverycallLove the show? Subscribe, rate, review, and share! https://ptoclub.com/

In this episode, Christine Staten, DVM, MBA, explains how she introduced performance-based compensation at her mixed animal practice. Staten developed a skills-based tier system with transparent pay and a clear path for advancement.To learn more, you can contact Staten through her website: veterinary-mba.comThe Business of Practice podcast is brought to you by CareCredit.This information is shared solely for your convenience. You are urged to consult with your individual advisors with respect to any information presented.Business of Practice Podcast Hosts, Guests, and Links Episode 146:Hosts: Dr. Amy Grice and Carly Sisson (Digital Content Manager) of EquiManagement | Email Carly (csisson@equinenetwork.com) | Connect with Carly on LinkedInGuests: Dr. Christine Staten, DVM, MBAPodcast Website: The Business of Practice

In this episode, Arial Bauman, Director of Physician Compensation at Piedmont, and Kate Taylor, Principal at ECG Management Consultants, discuss how physician compensation governance is evolving from a compliance-focused function into a strategic tool for recruitment, retention, financial sustainability, and organizational growth. 

As we've been reporting, non-disclosure agreements are becoming common practice around large industrial developments in Louisiana, largely driven by Gov. Jeff Landry.On today's episode, we're back again with more NDAs — this time involving a sitting member of Congress. Julia Letlow (R-LA) — who is also the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for U.S. Senate — signed an NDA with Meta. Then, she bought stock in the company building a $50 billion data center in her district in north Louisiana. She then failed to disclose her trades for more than a year. The Gulf States Newsroom's Drew Hawkins has been reporting this story and joins us with more. A program created by Louisiana lawmakers offers compensation to those wrongfully convicted. But Louisiana's top prosecutor, Attorney General Liz Murill, has a history of fighting compensation claims. Currently, she's arguing that Elvis Brooks, a man wrongfully imprisoned for 42 years, should be denied payment because she believes he is still guilty.Richard Webster has been covering this for Verite News and Pro Publica. He joins us with the latest. One of the largest international action sports competitions in the world is hoping to deepen its relationship with Birmingham, Alabama. The Gulf States Newsroom's Joseph King attended an action sports festival in Birmingham earlier this month to explore its growing popularity. —Today's episode of Louisiana Considered was hosted by Karen Henderson. Our managing producer is Alana Schreiber. We receive production and technical support from Garrett Pittman, Adam Vos and our assistant producer, Aubry Procell. You can listen to Louisiana Considered Monday through Friday at noon and 7 p.m. It's available on Spotify, the NPR App and wherever you get your podcasts. Louisiana Considered wants to hear from you! Please fill out our pitch line to let us know what kinds of story ideas you have for our show. And while you're at it, fill out our listener survey! We want to keep bringing you the kinds of conversations you'd like to listen to.Louisiana Considered is made possible with support from our listeners. Thank you!

What’s something you think people should be compensated for? Also... have you gone on a date that didn’t work out and then gotten a petty Venmo request afterward? We hear from listeners and Lauren makes a funny mistake on-air!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Reflections from host Sarah Olivieri ... Is Your Budget Killing Your Major Gifts Program? Many nonprofit leaders I talk to about major gifts describe some version of the same wall. They know the money is out there. They have heard the statistics about wealth transfer and donor-advised funds. They have sat through the trainings. And still, nothing moves. So they go looking for the missing skill. Better scripts. A new CRM. A workshop on how to ask. Here's what I often find when I see an organization trying to do major gifts but struggling. They're actually operating with systems and processes that work against major gifts. Systems like: annual fundraising strategies a schedule of campaigns an annual budget that rewards short-term gifting, which often comes at the expense of building the proper long-term relationship that leads to true, significant, sustainable funding from major donors Relationships operate on systems as well, but these are not the systems that relationships run on. When the wrong systems are in place, people rarely call out the system. They compensate with effort instead. In fundraising, that effort goes into activity that can be measured this quarter. Events. Appeals. Data entry. All of it visible, all of it defensible, and very little of it building the thing that tends to produce seven-figure gifts. A version of this came up on almost every strategy call I had this spring, which is why I was glad to sit down with Bill Crouch and talk it through. Bill has spent more than forty years inside this work, first as a college president raising private money in the shadow of a state flagship, now advising nonprofits nationally. He has lived this work and he has taught it, which is a rarer combination than it sounds. What the conversation gave me was not a new idea. It was a sharper explanation of why the patient approach holds up and why so few organizations are structured to survive the wait. The Annual Budget Is the Clock Everything Else Runs On Start with the operating budget, because everything downstream inherits its timeline. A relationship with a high capacity donor takes eighteen months. Sometimes three years. Bill spent eighteen months getting the first million dollar commitment for a giving group at his own college. Six weeks after that, he had five more, because the first person made calls to friends. Eighteen months of nothing, then five gifts in six weeks. Now put that curve inside an organization that closes its books every twelve months and asks the development office what it brought in. The gap is rarely a matter of discipline. The organization has committed to a reporting cycle that cannot see the work until it is already finished. So the work does not get funded, does not get protected on anyone's calendar, and does not survive the first cash flow scare in month seven. I write and talk a lot about how the layout of your budget shapes the decisions you make, and this is the most expensive version of that. A twelve-month frame makes long horizon relationship work look like underperformance. Then leaders respond to the number in front of them, which is the only responsible thing to do with the information the system gives them. The Desk Always Wins Bill described development work as needing two different capabilities. The technical side, sitting in the office getting things done. And the relational side, out in the world with people. Two skill sets, often two different humans. In a small shop, one person holds both. Ask that person what they did last week and you will hear about the database, the appeal, the grant report, the reconciliation. Not the coffee that took ninety minutes and produced no measurable outcome. The desk wins because the desk has deadlines. The relationship has none. This is a design flaw with a simple mechanism. Every task in the office has a due date attached to it and a visible consequence for missing it. Relationship building has neither. Give one person both jobs and the work with a deadline tends to consume the work without one, week after week, however much that person believes in the relational side. Which means the fix is structural. Protect the time in a way the person cannot trade away, or separate the roles. Telling someone to prioritize relationships more is asking them to out-discipline their own job description. The Mechanism, Named One line from that conversation has stayed with me: "That forces nonprofits to make short-term decisions that hurt long-term strategies." What I appreciate about this framing is that it locates the problem in the design rather than in the people executing it. The short-term decision is the rational one given the reporting cycle. Change the cycle, or build a revenue floor that takes the pressure off it, and the same team will often behave differently. Not much had to change in anyone's character. The structure stopped charging them for patience. Turnover Is What the Design Produces Forty years ago, the number one problem in nonprofit fundraising was development staff turnover. It is still the number one problem. Bill named four causes, and the timeline inside them is the part worth sitting with. It takes about sixteen months for the wrong hire to realize they do not want this job. It takes the supervisor about sixteen months to accept the same thing. So roughly a year and a half of relationship equity walks out the door, and the next person starts from zero with donors who have now been handed off twice. Run that loop three times and you have a decade of fundraising with no compounding whatsoever. The organization has been paying for major gifts capacity the entire time and never accumulating any. And the third cause Bill listed is the one nonprofits could fix tomorrow. The only way to get a meaningful raise in this field is to leave. We hand out cost of living adjustments and call it compensation strategy. Then we act surprised when the person holding four years of donor history takes a call from a recruiter. The turnover looks to me like an output. The design tends to produce it, and hiring better rarely changes what the design produces. If you want to see the same mechanism from another angle, emotional intelligence functions as retention infrastructure inside these teams, not as a soft add-on. Relationship Building Is a Practice You Can Teach Here is the part that gets skipped. The long horizon only pays off if something real happens inside it, and most organizations treat what happens in the room as a matter of charm. Some people have it. Some people do not. Hire for it and hope. Bill asks every high capacity person he meets about their favorite childhood toy. That is the whole thing. A simple question about a toy, and within a couple of minutes he is hearing what someone actually cares about, in their own words, before any case statement enters the conversation. I have been collecting strategic questions for years, and I recently started a separate collection just for get to know you questions. His goes at the top of that list. I asked my next podcast guest the same thing, and it changed the shape of the whole interview. Which tells you something about the mechanism. A good question is repeatable. It can be written down, taught, practiced, and handed to a nervous program director who has never asked anyone for money. Charm cannot. So when an organization decides that relationship building is a talent rather than a practice, it has quietly made that work impossible to train, impossible to delegate, and impossible to sustain past the tenure of whoever happened to be good at it. Bill also brings brain science into how he approaches this, and that tracks. Relationship building, brain science, and psychology go hand in hand. People give when they feel seen, heard, and valued, and there is a physiological story underneath that, not just a sentimental one. Which means the patient work is doing something specific in those eighteen months. Those months are where the ask becomes possible. Skip them and you are asking a stranger. Titles Are Structure Bill told a story about interviewing a researcher at a large university. She had put the institution in her will. She had been there sixteen years. She had identified and researched a donor who eventually gave a million dollars. No major gift officer had ever walked into her office to thank her. Nobody, in sixteen years. She stayed because her children had a tuition waiver. His response to this pattern is to give every person in the development operation the same title: "Every person in the development shop should have the same title. Director of Major Gifts." This makes sense given the setup. A title describes what the organization believes a role is for. When the researcher's title says researcher and the gift officer's title says major gifts, the org chart has already suggested who is doing the real fundraising and who is doing support work. Most people read that correctly and behave accordingly. I coach clients on titles constantly, usually while helping them build a first development department, and my rule is that people should have whatever title helps them do their job best. Bill's version goes further, and I think he is right about it. It does two things at once. Inside the organization, it tells the researcher and the data entry person that they matter, which is the same thing every donor is trying to find out about themselves. Outside the organization, it gives every one of those people a title they can carry into a room and use to build a real relationship. Give everyone the title that names the actual goal, and you have used structure to say something that a values statement on the wall never manages to say. The Board Question That Is Easy to Sequence Wrong Then there is the board, where two incompatible jobs get stuffed into one body. Bill's framing came from a retired chamber of commerce CEO. Most nonprofit boards are made up of sparrows. Sparrows come to the quarterly meeting, sit through staff reports, argue about whether to spend two hundred dollars on a computer, write a thousand dollar check, and buy a seat at the gala. Most nonprofits could not operate without them. Plenty of boards also want an eagle. Someone who can write a seven-figure check. Eagles tend to hate meetings, do not care about the computer, and rarely sit through reports. Put one on your board and within a year they will often either turn into a sparrow or quit. So Bill builds his clients a separate group. Five or six people, all high capacity, meeting twice a year in each other's homes rather than at your facility, with a single agenda item. Which of our friends can we ask. I give the same advice and I get there differently. I do not want money, power, and decision-making consolidated into the same group of people. Your governing board should be the people who want to do the careful, unglamorous work of oversight, checking that nothing is going off the rails. Not the people with the biggest checkbooks, who are usually the furthest from the weeds and the least accountable for the outcome. So give the givers their own structure where giving is the actual job. Two groups, two purposes, no competition between them. This is also why the board chair and executive director relationship works better when the governance lane is clearly drawn. What a Built System Looks Like Build the plumbing first. Here that means a small number of specific things in place before anyone worries about scripts. The CEO carries a real portfolio, ten people or fewer, and treats it as a standing commitment rather than a fourth quarter push. The relational time is protected structurally, not aspirationally. Compensation is designed so that staying is financially rational. There is a revenue floor that does not depend on this year's major gift closing, which is what makes waiting affordable. And there is a group whose entire purpose is giving and opening doors, separate from the group that governs. Fully built or partially built matters enormously here. A partially built major gifts function has all the cost and none of the compounding. You are paying for the staff, the software, and the events, and you are still starting over every eighteen months. Diversifying and de-risking your revenue base is part of the same picture, which is why revenue design deserves attention before the ask does. What This Makes Possible When leaders see this clearly, the fear around major gifts usually drops several notches. The conversation stops being about whether anyone on the team is brave enough to ask a person for a million dollars and starts being about whether the organization can hold a relationship for three years without flinching. That is a design question, and design questions have answers. What can stop being so heavy is the self-blame. Chances are nobody failed at fundraising here. The organization was built with a twelve-month clock and then asked to do multi-year work, and it did roughly what that setup tends to produce. You are where you are, it is what it is. Once the structure changes, the same people, the same mission, and the same donor list start producing something entirely different, because the effort finally accumulates instead of resetting. Doing Work That Compounds This is not about asking bigger. It is about building an organization that can hold a relationship long enough for the ask to make sense. Nonprofits can raise transformational money.They can pay their fundraisers well enough to keep them.They can stop rebuilding donor relationships from scratch every eighteen months. Not by pushing harder, by building systems that hold. About the Guest Bill Crouch is the CEO of BrightDot Fundraising Advisors and has spent more than 40 years helping nonprofits transform fundraising into meaningful, lasting relationships with donors. A former college president, fundraising expert, author, and Honorary Fellow at Oxford University, Bill is the author of Mattership™: Making Donors Feel They Matter, where he shares practical strategies for building trust and inspiring generosity. Connect with Bill: Website: http://thebrightdot.com/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/brightdot LinkedIn personal: Bill Crouch LinkedIn Be sure to subscribe to Inspired Nonprofit Leadership so that you don't miss a single episode, and while you're at it, won't you take a moment to write a short review and rate our show? It would be greatly appreciated! Let us know the topics or questions you would like to hear about in a future episode. You can do that and follow us on LinkedIn.

Bohan Lou is a partner at Chemistry Ventures, based in SF.https://x.com/loubohanBohan's report on the venture ecosystem in China:https://www.linkedin.com/posts/bohanlou_i-spent-last-month-in-china-meeting-most-ugcPost-7487909585689698304-qepw/Chapter Markers:(01:42) - Venture Capital in China; Bohan's Shanghai Roots (11:15) - Chemistry Fund and China Investing (20:04) - China Trip and Venture Reality Check (32:18) - Pressure Cooker: Founder Exits and Financial Liability (33:50) - Variation in Founder-Friendly investment environment (46:52) - AI Models and Open Source (58:56) - Big Picture and Wrap Up –Steve Hsu is Professor of Theoretical Physics and of Computational Mathematics, Science, and Engineering at Michigan State University. Previously, he was Senior Vice President for Research and Innovation at MSU and Director of the Institute of Theoretical Science at the University of Oregon. Hsu is a startup founder (SuperFocus.ai, SafeWeb, Genomic Prediction, Othram) and advisor to venture capital and other investment firms. He was educated at Caltech and Berkeley, was a Harvard Junior Fellow, and has held faculty positions at Yale, the University of Oregon, and MSU. Please send any questions or suggestions to manifold1podcast@gmail.com or Steve on X @hsu_steve. Announcing this for some friends at Mechanize - a startup that builds environments for training and evaluating frontier LLMs. Its customers include the top AI labs, and it has contributed to the breakthrough in coding capabilities of frontier models. Mechanize is hiring! https://mechanize.work/b/hsu Compensation is extremely competitive. For technical roles, $300-500k. They are also seeking smart generalists. For example: Research Engineer, Alignment: Build evals that test for misaligned model behaviors  $500K salary Puzzle Maker: Design interesting and original puzzles that LLMs can't yet solve  $300K salary Mechanize understands that my readership is highly selected. There is a VERY GOOD CHANCE you will be interviewed if you apply via the link above.

Following our eye-opening episode on Australian optometrists unionizing in response to growing corporate pressure, The 20/20 Podcast turns to the United Kingdom—and the warning signs are just as important. Dr. Harbir Sian sits down with Dr. Keyur Patel, an experienced UK optometrist who has worked across corporate, hospital and independent practice settings and also trained in the United States. Together, they examine how decades of undervaluing clinical services, increasing corporatization and a growing dependence on retail revenue have reshaped optometry in the UK. Keyur also shares his own experience of being dismissed from a refractive surgery company despite no concerns about his clinical ability—because he was not converting enough patients to laser surgery.The conversation then moves to one of the most consequential issues facing the profession: workforce oversupply. With more optometry schools opening and more graduates entering already saturated markets, compensation can be driven lower while individual optometrists lose negotiating power. Keyur and Harbir discuss reports of locum positions paying as little as £25 per hour and the uncomfortable economics behind it: when there are more optometrists competing for fewer desirable jobs, employers gain leverage, salaries decline, and clinicians may feel increasingly pressured to accept working conditions or business models they otherwise would not. Combined with low reimbursement for eye examinations and diagnostic services, that environment can push practices further toward KPIs, spectacle sales and other commercial metrics simply to remain profitable.For optometrists in Canada and the United States, the UK and Australia may offer a glimpse of what can happen when these changes are allowed to compound over decades. More schools, more graduates, lower professional compensation, weaker negotiating power, increasing corporate influence and the gradual erosion of clinical autonomy do not happen overnight—but they can fundamentally change a profession. At the same time, Keyur offers a powerful counterexample: his independent practice walked away from the low-fee NHS sight-test model and built a practice where patients willingly pay more because they value the quality of care, relationships and experience they receive. The message is clear: if optometrists do not actively protect the value of their clinical services and the independence of the profession, others will define that value for them.Love the show? Subscribe, rate, review & share! http://www.aboutmyeyes.com/podcast/

The HHS Office of Inspector General is seeking public input on how fraud-and-abuse laws affect payments to clinical-trial participants. The effort could help determine whether existing rules strike the right balance between protecting patients and supporting medical research. Joining me now is Spencer Turnbull, Chief of the Industry Guidance Branch at HHS-OIG.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Trump calls on Iran to pay compensation for the deaths and injuries of Americans in conflicts allegedly linked to Tehran, The Washington Post reports that Trump was snuck out of Turkey in a catering container, Russia frees an ailing U.S. Marine after four years in detention, Syria sentences al-Assad to death in absentia, Republican senators release a batch of Fauci's COVID-19 text messages, Turkey approves a conditional pardon bill for thousands of PKK members, Lebanon Indicts ex-central bank chief for Salameh for alleged embezzlement, the U.S. Justice Department sends polling monitors to in Minnesota's primaries, a U.S. court rejects social media companies' bids to block thousands of youth addiction suits, and the U.K. says it's close to eliminating Hepatitis C. Sources: Verity.News

Trump To Iran Compensation- YOU Owe US Compensation! by Ron Paul Liberty Report

An earthquake rocked western Colombia, killing at least 111 people and trapping many more beneath rubble. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Michael Roch is the founder and principal advisor of MHPR Advisors, where he advises managing partners, boards, and remuneration committees on partner compensation and governance. For more than 25 years, he has worked with law firm leaders across Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, Europe, and the United States, as well as with accounting, consulting, and other professional partnerships. Originally trained as both an accountant and a lawyer, Michael brings a cross-disciplinary perspective to questions involving compensation, governance, finance, and tax. He is the co-author of The Partner Remuneration Handbook and co-leads a long-running global survey tracking how partners are paid across markets. Based in Zurich, Michael serves clients worldwide. WHAT'S COVERED IN THIS EPISODE ABOUT PARTNER COMPENSATION AND LAW FIRM STRATEGY Law firm leaders often believe their compensation system reflects what they are trying to build. Yet the way partners are paid may still reward them for holding tightly to client relationships, prioritizing their own originations, and resisting the collaboration the partnership says it values. As the business grows across offices and practice areas, those old approaches can become increasingly disconnected from where the firm is going. Michael Roch explains that this often happens because partnerships fail to update compensation systems developed when they were much smaller. Changing the system requires leaders to be clear about what the business is trying to achieve and willing to let go of old paradigms that no longer support that direction. It also requires a closer look at what the partnership actually rewards, how partner contributions are evaluated, and whether the decision-making process reinforces the strategy or works against it. In this episode of The Lawyer's Edge Podcast, Elise Holtzman talks with Michael Roch of MHPR Advisors about why compensation systems fall behind as firms grow, how origination credit can create conflict around client relationships, what firms should consider when compensating managing partners and other leaders, and why money is only one of the tools law firm leaders can use to influence behavior and retain talent. 3:45 - The three elements that shape a partner compensation system 5:20 - Why compensation systems fall behind as firms grow 10:19 - What a firm's compensation system reveals about its real values 14:58 - Why annual compensation memos cannot replace ongoing performance dialogue 20:13 - Origination credit, collaboration, and control of client relationships 24:23 - Putting rules and governance around origination disputes 28:38 - How firms should compensate managing partners and practice group leaders 35:16 - Why paying more rarely solves a retention problem 38:21 - The leadership responsibility partners have to associates and counsel 40:08 - Why reward involves more than compensation Mentioned In How Partner Compensation Can Undermine Your Firm's Strategy MHPR Advisors | LinkedIn Michael Roch on LinkedIn The Partner Remuneration Handbook by Michael Roch and Ray D'Cruz SmarterReward™ Dr. Heidi Gardner | How Law Firms Can Increase Revenues, Grow Client Loyalty, and Improve Diversity Get connected with the coaching team: hello@thelawyersedge.com The Lawyer's Edge SPONSOR FOR THIS EPISODE This episode is brought to you by the coaching team at The Lawyer's Edge, a training and coaching firm that has been focused exclusively on lawyers and law firms since 2008. Each member of the team is a trained, certified, and experienced professional coach—and either a former practicing attorney or a former law firm marketing and business development professional. Whatever your professional objectives, our coaches can help you achieve your goals more quickly, more easily, and with significantly less stress. To get connected with your coach, fill out our contact form.

For years, businesses have relied on a simple formula to motivate employees: pay them more. Need better performance? Offer a bonus. Need to improve retention? Raise wages. Need people to work harder? Add another incentive program. Compensation matters, but it isn't always the deciding factor leaders think it is. In a recent conversation with Joe Rockey, founder of Elite Business Cruises, we explored a different angle: the strongest organizations don't win because they pay the most. They win because they've built a culture where employees actually want to succeed together. About Joseph Rockey Jr. Joseph Rockey Jr. is the founder of Elite Business Cruises, a serial entrepreneur who has launched nearly 30 businesses, an international best-selling author, and a business consultant specializing in employee motivation, leadership, and business culture. Rather than focusing solely on traditional training programs, Joe helps organizations improve employee engagement, strengthen workplace relationships, and create cultures that attract and retain top talent. His work centers on the idea that businesses succeed when they build stronger relationships with both their employees and their customers. The Problem Isn't Always the Paycheck Joe shared a story from the COVID era, when businesses found themselves competing for workers by constantly raising hourly wages. Restaurants on the same intersection kept outbidding each other by a few cents or a dollar, hoping to attract staff. Workers simply moved to whichever place paid more. It became an endless cycle. The real problem wasn't compensation—it was that every business was running the same play. Eventually, Joe helped one business try something different. Instead of asking "How do we pay people more?" they asked "How do we give people a reason to care?" The answer wasn't another raise. It was building an experience employees wanted to earn together. Most Businesses Don't Actually Have Teams One of the biggest ideas from our conversation was surprisingly simple: many companies aren't really teams. They're collections of individuals who happen to work in the same building. Everyone shows up, does their assigned work, collects a paycheck, and goes home. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but it makes engagement, accountability, and loyalty hard to build. Joe described the unspoken agreement at many workplaces: "Don't ask about my personal life, and I won't ask about yours." That mindset creates employees who work beside each other instead of with each other. Culture Creates Motivation What made Joe's approach interesting wasn't the cruise itself—that was just the reward. The real work happened long before anyone boarded the ship. Employees worked toward a shared goal, and instead of competing against each other, they started helping each other succeed because everyone's outcome was tied together. That shift changes everything. People start sharing knowledge, helping coworkers solve problems, and investing in each other's success instead of only their own. That's culture, and it's incredibly hard to build with money alone. Training Only Works When People Care Another insight that stood out: most organizations pour real time into onboarding programs, documentation, and training sessions, then wonder why nobody seems to pay attention. Joe's take is that people don't tune out training because the material is bad. They tune out because they aren't emotionally invested in the organization delivering it. When employees feel connected to the company's mission and the people around them, they engage with training far more readily. Better Culture Attracts Better Talent Great cultures recruit themselves. Employees tell friends where they enjoy working, positive experiences spread, and strong teams become magnets for talented people. Instead of constantly chasing someone else's best employee, companies can build an environment where great people choose to join because they want to be part of something meaningful. That's a very different recruiting strategy than posting another job listing with a slightly higher salary. What Leaders Can Learn Technology, AI, and automation keep changing how businesses operate, but none of it replaces culture. If anything, it makes culture more important. The organizations that thrive over the next decade won't be the ones with the newest tools or the biggest tech budgets—they'll be the ones that know how to align people around shared purpose and build environments where employees genuinely want to contribute. Technology can improve productivity. Culture determines whether people want to use that productivity to help your organization succeed. Final Thoughts Compensation will always matter. People deserve to be paid fairly. But if your only strategy for motivation is another raise or another bonus, you'll eventually find yourself in a race someone else can always outbid. Culture isn't built overnight, and it isn't created with one team outing or one incentive program. It's built by giving people a reason to believe they're working toward something together. When that happens, motivation stops being something leaders have to manufacture—it becomes part of the organization's identity. Stay Connected: Join the Developreneur Community

President Trump is demanding compensation from Iran for Americans killed or wounded in attacks and conflicts dating back decades, as Tehran seeks compensation for damage from the current war and negotiators work toward an agreement on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump also saying Tehran should be held responsible for deaths and damage in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Gaza, as well as for harm done to the Iranian people themselves.Republican Senators Rand Paul and Ron Johnson on Monday released more than 34,000 text messages that Dr. Anthony Fauci sent and received on the safety of COVID-19 vaccine for pregnant women. The main focus was conversations with Dr. Vivek Murthy and Dr. Rochelle Walensky. Fauci and Walensky initially said there wasnt any data that showed pregnant women should get the vaccine, but later Fauci acknowledged that the way some people respond to the second dose ‘could be associated with miscarriage in the first trimester.'Alabama voters are casting ballots on Tuesday in special congressional primaries after four House districts were redrawn following a court battle over the state's congressional map. The marquee race is in District 2, where six Republicans are competing for a shot at unseating Democratic Congressman Shomari Figures in November. Trump-endorsed state Representative Rhett Marques is the front-runner. He's also backed by Senator Katie Britt and House Speaker Mike Johnson.

Being a great landlord is not just about being nice. It can directly affect your vacancy, tenant turnover, repair costs, rental income, and ultimately the profitability of your real estate portfolio. In today's episode of the Canadian Real Estate Investing Morning Show, Wayne and Gabby break down what it actually means to be a great landlord and why landlord quality has a much bigger impact on returns than many investors realize. The core idea is simple: If tenants feel respected, appreciated, and taken care of, they are more likely to stay longer, communicate better, treat the property properly, and renew their lease. That means fewer turnovers, less vacancy, lower costs, and better long-term returns.

Today on America in the MorningIran & The US Demand Compensation To End War The back and forth between Iran and the US continues as Iran is demanding compensation for the war waged against it, and now President Trump is demanding compensation for all of the people Iran has killed, all while the Strait of Hormuz remains closed.  John Stolnis reports from Washington.   Vaccine Executive Order President Trump on Monday signed an executive order calling for revamped childhood vaccine recommendations, renewing the focus on a topic that has raised concerns among some public health officials but also puts the vaccine decision-making in the hands of parents.  Correspondent Jennifer King reports.   Questions Over The Guard Some residents and politicians in Washington, DC are at odds with the White House after President Trump ordered National Guard troops to remain in the Nation's Capital into 2029.  Lisa Dwyer reports some of the grumbling is over the more than $1 billion dollar price tag paid for by taxpayers.   Congresswoman's Son Arrested Colorado Congresswoman Lauren Boebert's 21-year-old son, Tyler Boebert, was arrested on suspicion of sexual exploitation of a child and other charges.     Maine Shark Attack Shark sightings at beaches from Delaware to Maine have increased this summer, and now precautions are being taken at one beach in Maine after a lifeguard says he was pulled under water by a shark.  Correspondent Clayton Neville reports the situation was like a scene out of the movie “Jaws.”   New Details On Idaho Shooting More details and video has been released by authorities following the shooting at an Idaho In-N-Out Burger drive-thru.  Correspondent Ed Donahue reports.   Fauci Emails Released Two Republican Senators are releasing text messages they say Dr. Anthony Fauci sent and received in 2021 regarding the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine for pregnant women.  Correspondent Clayton Neville reports this comes as the DOJ is considering contempt of Congress charges against Fauci.    Western Wildfires Grow The finals weeks of summer may be winding down, but the amount of land falling victim to wildfires continues to increase, now including Minnesota and California.  The latest from correspondent Rich Johnson.   Base Renamed For Graham Dignitaries from Washington including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth were on hand as a military base in South Carolina was renamed for the late Senator Lindsey Graham.  Correspondent Jennifer King reports.   DOJ Lawsuit Over Tuition The Department of Justice is suing three Northeastern states to challenge laws that let non-citizens benefit from college tuition rates that are offered to in-state residents.  Gulf Coast Concern Health officials in Louisiana are warning of a deadly flesh-eating bacteria found in Gulf of America coastal waters.  Correspondent Donna Warder reports.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A1 Tyrepower Wangaratta owner and operator Harrison Coatsworth told host Tom Elliott it was frustrating having to constantly be the bearer of bad news.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jobs aren't changing once every few years anymore. They're evolving constantly.  Skills are shifting, AI is reshaping roles, and organizations are redefining jobs faster than traditional job architectures can keep up. At the same time, Talent Acquisition and Compensation teams often evaluate talent through different lenses. Recruiters are responding to hiring realities and candidate expectations, while Compensation is balancing market data, internal equity, and long-term pay strategy.  In this episode, we explore how these two functions can stop speaking different languages and start working from the same playbook. We'll discuss what alignment looks like in practice, how organizations can create a shared understanding of talent and market value, and why stronger collaboration leads to better hiring decisions and more sustainable compensation strategies.     Host:  Ruth Thomas – Chief Compensation Strategist, Payscale     Guests:   Danielle DuBois – Director of Global Rewards, HR Technology, HR Operations & Talent Acquisition, American Dairy Queen Corporation   Michelle Antonsen – Talent Acquisition Leader, American Dairy Queen Corporation   Join us for our upcoming live events to get your questions answered in real time by compensation experts and earn HRCI and SHRM recertification credits: https://www.payscale.com/events

REDIFF - Dominique a partagé son inquiétude concernant son amie qui a subi une décompensation due à l'arrêt brutal de son traitement pour trouble bipolaire. Il a décrit les comportements inhabituels et inquiétants de son amie, qui ont conduit à son hospitalisation en psychiatrie. Dominique essaie de gérer la situation tout en maintenant une attitude positive et en restant en contact avec elle. Du lundi au jeudi à partir du 17 août, retrouvez Caroline Dublanche en direct sur RTL ! Pour participer, contactez l'émission au 09 69 39 10 11 (prix d'un appel local) ou sur parlonsnous@rtl.fr.Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Listen for the latest from Bloomberg News See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode OverviewIf you've been scheduled for a VA Compensation & Pension (C&P) exam for depression, you may be wondering what to expect. Many veterans feel anxious about the process, but understanding how the exam works can help you prepare.In this episode, we explain the purpose of a C&P exam for depression, what the examiner is evaluating, common questions you may be asked, and how your symptoms may affect your VA disability rating. We also discuss common mistakes veterans make before and during the examination.Topics CoveredWhat Is a C&P Exam? The purpose of a Compensation & Pension examination  Why the VA orders mental health C&P exams  Difference between diagnosis, nexus, and severity evaluations  Who performs the examination Conditions That May Be Evaluated Major Depressive Disorder (MDD)  Persistent Depressive Disorder (Dysthymia)  Depression secondary to another service-connected disability  Depression related to chronic pain or physical limitations  Depression associated with military trauma or life events What the Examiner ReviewsThe examiner may review: Your VA claims file (if provided)  VA treatment records  Private mental health records  Service treatment records  Personnel records  Prior C&P examinations  Lay statements from you, family members, or friends Common Questions You May Be AskedThe examiner may ask about:Military History Your military service  Stressful experiences during service  Changes in behavior during service Mental Health Symptoms Depressed mood  Loss of interest or motivation  Anxiety  Irritability  Feelings of hopelessness  Guilt  Difficulty concentrating  Memory problems  Panic attacks  Emotional numbness Sleep Insomnia  Oversleeping  Nightmares  Fatigue Daily Functioning Personal hygiene  Household responsibilities  Ability to manage finances  Driving  Shopping  Cooking Employment Ability to work  Missed work  Conflicts with supervisors  Difficulty concentrating  Reduced productivity Relationships Marriage  Family interactions  Friendships  Social isolation Safety QuestionsThe examiner may ask about: Suicidal thoughts  Previous suicide attempts  Thoughts of self-harm  Homicidal thoughts These questions are a routine part of nearly every mental health examination.Mental Status ExaminationDuring nearly every mental health C&P exam, the examiner documents observations including: Appearance  Eye contact  Behavior  Speech  Mood  Affect  Thought processes  Memory  Attention  Judgment  Insight  Orientation  Concentration VA Rating ConsiderationsThe VA generally evaluates depression based on occupational and social impairment, rather than simply counting symptoms.Ratings commonly include:0%10%30%50%70%100%The overall severity of functional impairment is often more important than any single symptom.Tips Before Your ExamConsider the following: Be honest and accurate.  Describe your symptoms on your worst typical days—not your best day.  Do not exaggerate symptoms.  Do not minimize symptoms because of military culture or pride.  Answer the questions asked without trying to guess what the examiner wants to hear.  If you don't understand a question, ask for clarification.  If symptoms fluctuate, explain how often they occur and how severe they are. Common Mistakes Veterans Make Saying "I'm fine" out of habit  Downplaying symptoms  Forgetting to discuss how symptoms affect work and relationships  Assuming the examiner has already read every medical record  Focusing only on the diagnosis instead of discussing functional limitations  Trying to memorize answers instead of speaking honestly Can You Bring Evidence?Depending on the circumstances, you may bring: Medication lists  Recent treatment records  Private mental health evaluations  Symptom journals (if applicable) However, not every examiner will accept or review documents during the examination, so it's generally best to ensure important evidence is submitted to the VA as part of your claim.Key TakeawaysA C&P exam is not a therapy session or a treatment appointment. Its purpose is to gather information that helps the VA evaluate your claim. The examiner assesses your symptoms, reviews relevant records, and evaluates how your depression affects your occupational and social functioning.Being honest, specific, and prepared can help ensure the examination accurately reflects your condition.DisclaimerThis episode is for educational purposes only and is not legal or medical advice. Every VA disability claim is unique, and the outcome depends on the individual evidence in the record. If you have questions about your specific case, consider consulting an accredited VA representative or attorney.

Why Your Business Won't Let You Go - Letting Others Take Ownership with Jason Henneberry   You have hired good people. You have tried to step back. And yet, every time something important goes sideways, it still lands on your desk. Jason Henneberry says that is not a people problem or a systems problem. It is a dependency problem, and it has a specific structural cause. Jason is the founder of Dependency Design, a senior partner in a national Canadian mortgage brokerage with more than 600 professionals, and the author of "Why Your Business Won't Let You Go," which you can download free at dependencydesign.com. He built and sold a technology product to Rocket Mortgage, nearly went bankrupt in 2008 after committing a full consumer marketing budget into a market that was about to collapse, and has started from scratch at least twice. He knows what the trap looks like from the inside.   In This Episode: Why handing over a task and handing over accountability are two completely different acts The moment you step in to fix something, what you actually teach your business The blast radius principle: how to let your team fail safely and build real ownership Jason's three C's framework: Clarity, Capacity, and Commitment How to design compensation so salespeople, administrators, and leaders each care about what they actually control Why launching a new product line before your core is stable is a structural trap, not just a strategic mistake What Jason learned from losing nearly everything in 2008   Key Insights: Every time you rescue your team from a problem, you teach the entire business that you are the solution. The rescue and the trap are the same act. Real delegation means handing over the outcome, not just the task, including the outcome of failure. Before branching into anything new, ask honestly: could I generate the same return by doing five to ten percent more of what I am already good at? Compensation alignment is structural. Sales on revenue, administration on task fulfillment, and leadership on gross profit creates a team where everyone cares about what they control. Starting over with hard-won knowledge is not losing. It is compounding.   About Jason Henneberry: Jason Henneberry is the founder of Dependency Design and the author of Why Your Business Won't Let You Go. He has built and operated multiple successful companies, serves as a senior partner in a national brokerage with more than 600 professionals, and has spent 30 years leading founder-driven organizations. Jason works with producing team leads, small business owners, and operators who feel the weight of growth but cannot clearly see where it's coming from.  His work challenges the common advice to simply delegate more, work harder, or install better systems. Instead, Jason helps leaders see where responsibility has quietly settled inside their organization. Through his structural lens, founders learn to distinguish between chosen dependency and accidental dependency, reduce invisible fragility, and build businesses that grow without getting heavier. His approach is observational, practical, and grounded in real operational experience, not motivation or hustle culture.   Links: Website: https://dependencydesign.com/    LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasonhenneberry/    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jasonhenneberry/    YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@JasonHenneberry      Watch the full episode on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@richersoul Richer Soul Life Beyond Money. You got rich, now what? Let's talk about your journey to purposeful, intentional, amazing life. Where are you going to go and how are you going to get there? Let's figure that out together. At the core is the financial well being to be able to do what you want, when you want, how you want. It's about personal freedom! Thanks for listening! Show Sponsor: http://profitcomesfirst.com/ Schedule your free no obligation call: https://bookme.name/rockyl/lite/intro appointment 15 minutes If you like the show please leave a review on iTunes: http://bit.do/richersoul https://www.facebook.com/richersoul http://richersoul.com/ rocky@richersoul.com Some music provided by Junan from Junan Podcast Any financial advice is for educational purposes only and you should consult with an expert for your specific needs.

In this episode, Micah and Trey sit down with Colby Allen, an M&A advisor, valuation and exit planning consultant. Colby deep dives on the current state of compensation, valuations, and perpetuation, but from the producer side of things. They talk post-acquisition golden handcuffs, how lift-outs actually get done, what it really means to vest into your book......Resources & Links:

In this episode, Greg Lois explores the Medicare Secondary Payer Act's impact on workers' compensation, and helps enhance your ability to navigate this critical area of practice. This episode explores the intersection of New York Workers' Compensation and the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (MSP), focusing on compliance, legal implications, and practical strategies. Whether you're an attorney, claims professional, or self-insured entity, this course equips you with essential knowledge to navigate the complex landscape. How to attend these webinars live and ask questions Join us for our monthly webinars on New York workers' compensation law. Register for a New York Workers' Compensation Webinar Schedules and Information Handout materials are provided in advance of each session. The webinar courses follow the "life cycle" of a claim and correspond to chapters in the Workers' Compensation Handbooks offered by the Firm. Disclaimer This webinar is not legal advice! The materials presented by this webinar/podcast and any affiliated website are for informational purposes only and are not offered as legal advice as to any particular matter. No viewer/listener/reader should act on the basis of these materials without seeking appropriate professional advice as to the particular facts and applicable law involved. The materials are not represented to be correct, complete, or up-to-date. Opinions presented by this video/podcast are the opinions of the author. Neither the use of this web site nor the transfer of information to or from this web site shall create or constitute an attorney-client relationship between Greg Lois, the presenter in the video/podcast, or LOIS LAW FIRM LLC and any person. You should not send any confidential information to this web site until after you have entered into a written agreement for the performance of legal services.

28% of physicians say they don't earn enough for what their family needs. The lowest-paid specialty still makes $266,000. Medscape's 2026 physician compensation report surveyed roughly 6,000 doctors across 29+ specialties, and the numbers tell a stranger story than "doctors are underpaid." Average pay rose 3%, barely clearing inflation, and nine specialties were flat or down. Jimmy and Justin unpack what the data says about physician pay, negotiation, and the 40% side-gig statistic. What you'll learn: Why primary care averaged $298K and specialists $417K — and which specialties outpaced inflation What percentage of physicians negotiated their compensation, and how many just took what they were given Why "we don't negotiate" pay models push high performers out The paradox: 53% feel personally fairly paid, but 61% say the profession is underpaid What the 40% side-gig number reveals about autonomy and moral injury Resources mentioned: Money Meets Medicine Disability — moneymeetsmedicine.com/disability Need a new CPA or a better Tax Strategy? Get a 10% discount when working with Gelt, the tax strategy team that Jimmy Turner uses: https://moneymeetsmedicine.com/Gelt Medscape Physician Compensation Report 2026 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, we explore the nuances of workers' compensation law, practice management, and building a sustainable legal career with experienced workers' comp lawyer Alan Cleveland. Discover insights on case management, practice scaling, and the importance of community and mindset in law.

What if compensation wasn't just about spreadsheets and salary surveys, but about trust, communication, and leadership?In this episode of the Build a Vibrant Culture Podcast, Nicole Greer sits down with Brenna Fitzsimmons, a compensation and HR leader with 18 years of experience, to explore how strong leaders build fair pay systems that people actually trust.This conversation dives into key topics like compensation philosophy, pay transparency, leadership communication, and organizational culture. You'll learn how to align compensation strategy with business goals, build a career ladder that retains talent, and have honest conversations about pay.In this episode, you'll learn:How to define and communicate your organization's compensation philosophy A better approach to preparing managers for difficult pay conversationsWhat most leaders get wrong about pay transparency and employee motivationPractical strategies to use AI as a tool in compensation decisions, not a decision-makerThis episode is for leaders, managers, HR professionals, and business owners who want to build a stronger organizational culture through fair, transparent compensation practices. The Build a Vibrant Culture Podcast helps leaders improve work culture, communication, and business performance through real-world leadership strategies and practical insights. Click here to view the episode transcript. Learn more about training, coaching, and courses at https://vibrantculture.comConnect on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/build-a-vibrant-culture-nicole-greer/For speaking inquiries: https://vibrantculture.com/speaker-kit-request/Download our training catalog: https://vibrantculture.com/catalog-request/Want to be a guest? Send your request to podcast@vibrantculture.com

Why Your Business Won't Let You Go - Letting Others Take Ownership   You have hired good people. You have tried to step back. And yet, every time something important goes sideways, it still lands on your desk. Jason Henneberry says that is not a people problem or a systems problem. It is a dependency problem, and it has a specific structural cause. Jason is the founder of Dependency Design, a senior partner in a national Canadian mortgage brokerage with more than 600 professionals, and the author of "Why Your Business Won't Let You Go," which you can download free at dependencydesign.com. He built and sold a technology product to Rocket Mortgage, nearly went bankrupt in 2008 after committing a full consumer marketing budget into a market that was about to collapse, and has started from scratch at least twice. He knows what the trap looks like from the inside.   In This Episode: Why handing over a task and handing over accountability are two completely different acts The moment you step in to fix something, what you actually teach your business The blast radius principle: how to let your team fail safely and build real ownership Jason's three C's framework: Clarity, Capacity, and Commitment How to design compensation so salespeople, administrators, and leaders each care about what they actually control Why launching a new product line before your core is stable is a structural trap, not just a strategic mistake What Jason learned from losing nearly everything in 2008   Key Insights: Every time you rescue your team from a problem, you teach the entire business that you are the solution. The rescue and the trap are the same act. Real delegation means handing over the outcome, not just the task, including the outcome of failure. Before branching into anything new, ask honestly: could I generate the same return by doing five to ten percent more of what I am already good at? Compensation alignment is structural. Sales on revenue, administration on task fulfillment, and leadership on gross profit creates a team where everyone cares about what they control. Starting over with hard-won knowledge is not losing. It is compounding.   About Jason Henneberry: Jason Henneberry is the founder of Dependency Design and the author of Why Your Business Won't Let You Go. He has built and operated multiple successful companies, serves as a senior partner in a national brokerage with more than 600 professionals, and has spent 30 years leading founder-driven organizations. Jason works with producing team leads, small business owners, and operators who feel the weight of growth but cannot clearly see where it's coming from.  His work challenges the common advice to simply delegate more, work harder, or install better systems. Instead, Jason helps leaders see where responsibility has quietly settled inside their organization. Through his structural lens, founders learn to distinguish between chosen dependency and accidental dependency, reduce invisible fragility, and build businesses that grow without getting heavier. His approach is observational, practical, and grounded in real operational experience, not motivation or hustle culture.   Links: Website: https://dependencydesign.com/    LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasonhenneberry/    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jasonhenneberry/    YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@JasonHenneberry      Watch the full episode on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@richersoul Richer Soul Life Beyond Money. You got rich, now what? Let's talk about your journey to purposeful, intentional, amazing life. Where are you going to go and how are you going to get there? Let's figure that out together. At the core is the financial well being to be able to do what you want, when you want, how you want. It's about personal freedom! Thanks for listening! Show Sponsor: http://profitcomesfirst.com/ Schedule your free no obligation call: https://bookme.name/rockyl/lite/intro appointment 15 minutes If you like the show please leave a review on iTunes: http://bit.do/richersoul https://www.facebook.com/richersoul http://richersoul.com/ rocky@richersoul.com Some music provided by Junan from Junan Podcast Any financial advice is for educational purposes only and you should consult with an expert for your specific needs.

When the Title Changes but the Authority Doesn't: Family Business Succession with Paul Edelman Most family business succession plans fail not because the legal structure is wrong, but because authority never actually moves. In this episode of Wealth Actually, Frazer Rice talks with Paul Edelman, PhD of Edelman & Associates about how to tell the difference between a real handoff and a cosmetic one. Edelman unbundles succession into six separate questions, explains the three behavioral tells that reveal who is really in charge, draws a hard line between a legitimate safeguard and an open-ended veto, and makes the case that agreement from a family is not the same thing as ownership of a decision. https://youtu.be/p2KCsftvM74 Key Takeaways Succession is not one decision — it is at least six. Who gets the economic benefit of ownership, who votes the shares, who appoints and removes directors, who runs operations, who receives what information, and who retains informal influence after formal authority ends. Watch behavior, not titles. Compensation changes and org charts are easy to read and easy to fake. How decisions actually get made — and whether they get reversed — is the real signal. Three tells that authority hasn't moved: the next management layer still routes real decisions to the founder; the successor has never had a disputed call stand; and in a genuine crisis, the founder is the one who walks into the room. Speed is not the test. A five-year transition can be disciplined development; a six-month transition can be denial with a deadline. The test is whether milestones and readiness criteria are observable and stable, or whether the goalposts keep moving. “Not ready” is not a concern — it is a placeholder. If a founder cannot restate it in specific, testable terms, the obstacle is emotional rather than substantive, and it needs a different path. Advisor impatience often masquerades as clarity. When you catch yourself thinking “why can't they just do this,” ask whose timeline is actually being served — the family's, or your need to close the file. A safeguard is bounded; a veto is not. Reserve specific extraordinary decisions with defined scope, thresholds, triggers, evidence, and duration. “The successor is in charge unless the founder feels uncomfortable” is an undefined operational veto. Agreement is not ownership. A family can be outvoted and formally agree while owning nothing. Ownership comes from having weighed the trade-offs and the implications of each option in the room. Timestamps [00:00] Cold open — why “he's just not ready” is untestable [01:05] Welcome: founders at the sell-or-transfer crossroads [01:48] Unbundling succession into six separate questions [02:23] Running a diagnostic on where the founder actually is [03:00] Watch behavior, not titles — and what the CFO tells you [04:00] Decision reversals and the second-guessing test [05:00] The crisis test: who owns the emergency [05:36] Fast handoff vs. staged succession and prolonged ambiguity [06:10] Milestones that show it's working — and goalposts that keep moving [08:00] Inside vs. outside successors and family dynamics [08:54] Competing heirs and the outside CEO as bridge or avoidance [09:47] Reading resistance: making “not ready” addressable [11:10] The advisory ecosystem's frustration with stalled progress [12:16] Whose timeline is being served? [13:31] Push, pause, or reframe — the art and science of advising [15:00] When to change the forum, the decision rights, or bring in a facilitator [15:36] Safeguards vs. vetoes and the trap doors founders build [17:37] Board composition: independence vs. familiarity [20:00] Restructuring boards to create seats for new expertise [20:54] Income-dependent family members vs. growth-minded owners [21:34] Agreement is not ownership: dividends vs. reinvestment [23:31] Matching complexity to the outcomes you need [25:00] Communicating decisions to people who weren't in the room [25:26] How to reach Paul Edelman [25:46] The Edelman–Shenkman trilogy for estate planning attorneys [29:19] Close Pull Quotes “If the CFO briefs the new successor CEO and then confirms things with Dad, then the org chart is not telling the real story.” — Paul Edelman “To have authority when things are going well is fine. But the person who owns the crisis is the one who's really owning the leadership.” — Paul Edelman “A safeguard should be limited, explicit, and connected to some extraordinary risk. A veto is an ongoing ability to stop or reverse any old ordinary decision.” — Paul Edelman “Just because there's an agreement in name doesn't mean there's ownership of the decision.” — Paul Edelman About the Guest Paul Edelman, PhD is a coach, facilitator, and mentor at Edelman & Associates, where he works with family enterprise and family office leaders on decisions that cannot be delegated. He holds a PhD in developmental psychology from Harvard University and a BS in physics from MIT, and serves as faculty at The UHNW Institute and the Bertarelli Institute for Family Entrepreneurship at Babson College. Contact Paul Edelman Email: paul@edelmancoaching.com Website: edelmancoaching.com (contact form on site) LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/pauledelman The Edelman & Shenkman Trilogy Paul and Martin M. “Marty” Shenkman, CPA, MBA, JD, PFS, AEP (Distinguished), of Shenkman Tietz, have written a three-part series aimed at estate planning attorneys: Simplicity and its trade-offs — When Clients Ask for a Simple Estate Plan, WealthManagement.com / Trusts & Estates, July 8, 2026. The language of estate planning conversations — published in Steve Leimberg's LISI Estate Planning Newsletter (subscriber archive). Beneficiary education — forthcoming October 2026, expected in Estate Planning. Paul's running author archive: wealthmanagement.com/author/paul-edelman More from Paul Edelman Approval Is Not Ownership: Helping Family Office Investment Decisions Hold Under Pressure — Family Wealth Report, July 1, 2026 How Families Can Override Emotions to Make Better Judgments — Family Business Magazine, April 9, 2026 Lessons For Families And Their Advisors From A Hit TV Series — Family Wealth Report, February 24, 2026 Stronger Family Bonds and Better Strategic Decisions — FFI Practitioner, January 20, 2026 Frequently Asked Questions What are the six questions a family business succession decision should be broken into?Who receives the economic benefit of ownership; who votes the shares; who appoints and removes directors; who runs the company operationally; who receives what information; and who continues to hold influence after formal authority ends. Bundling these into a single “handoff” decision is what creates ambiguity. How can you tell whether authority has really transferred to a successor?Watch three behaviors. First, where the next management layer goes for real decisions — employees are excellent at reading where power actually lives. Second, whether the successor has ever made a call the founder disagreed with and had it stand. Third, the crisis test: when a covenant breaks or a key employee leaves, who walks into the room and who gets briefed afterward. Is a fast succession better than a gradual one?Speed itself is not the test. A five-year transition can represent disciplined development, and a six-month transition can be avoidance followed by an arbitrary deadline. What matters is whether responsibility moves against observable milestones, whether the successor learns from outcomes instead of being rescued, and whether readiness criteria stay fixed rather than shifting each time the successor advances. What is the difference between a safeguard and a veto?A safeguard is limited, explicit, and tied to extraordinary risk — selling the company, debt above a threshold, issuing new equity, changing core strategy, or related-party transactions — with defined scope, thresholds, process, duration, trigger, evidence, and who decides. A veto is an ongoing ability to stop or reverse ordinary decisions. If the founder can intervene whenever they feel uncomfortable, that is an undefined operational veto. How should advisors handle their own frustration with a stalled family?Notice that impatience often feels like clarity. When you think “I see exactly what they need to do, why can't they just do it,” that is often the moment to slow down and ask whose timeline is being served — whether the ambiguity is genuinely damaging the company, or whether the recommendation mainly closes the case and relieves the advisor's discomfort with uncertainty. What makes an independent director genuinely independent in a family company?The ability to exercise business judgment and fiduciary duty free from undue family influence or loyalty to a particular branch. A director who is the founder's golfing buddy or tied to one family faction will struggle to deliver the value independence is supposed to provide. Why isn't agreement good enough?Because agreement in name is not ownership. A family branch can be outvoted, formally accept the outcome, and still feel no responsibility for it. Ownership comes from working through the trade-offs — what each option makes better and worse — so participants can say they helped weigh the considerations even if the result was not their first choice. Full Transcript [00:00] Paul Edelman: The resistance often takes the form of some sort of concern that is stated like, for example, the most general concern that people will say is, well, he or she, the likely successor, is just not ready. But that phrase “not ready” is at a very high level of generality. It's not specific enough to be testable or to be capable of being satisfied. So the challenge is to work with the founder to help them express their concern in terms that are actually addressable. [00:36] Announcer: Welcome back to the Wealth Actually podcast, the show that features experts, entrepreneurs, and commentators that will give you the right knowledge, planning, and guidance so you can preserve your assets and enjoy your wealth. Learn more and subscribe today at wealthactually.com. This podcast is for educational and entertainment purposes. It is neither investment, legal, nor tax advice and does not represent the opinions of the employers of the host or guests. [01:05] Frazer Rice: Welcome aboard, Paul. [01:07] Paul Edelman: Thanks, Frazer. Looking forward to our conversation. [01:09] Frazer Rice: Well, it's important because I deal with a bunch of founders and a bunch of other business owners, families, et cetera, that are trying to make sense out of the concept of passing along the business either to the next generation or deciding to sell it, and all sorts of parts of that tough crossroads that everybody has to go through at some point. And that's really the crux of your practice — to help people with those conversations. [01:34] Paul Edelman: Yes. [01:35] Frazer Rice: So when we're thinking about that and kind of unbundling the decision to pass the business along, when a family wants to talk about that, what are the separate parts of that decision that need to be contemplated? [01:48] Paul Edelman: Well, I see at least six different questions that need to be separated. One is who receives the economic benefit of ownership in the company. Another is who gets to vote the shares. And a third is who appoints and removes the directors. Then there's who runs the company from an operational standpoint, and who receives what information. And then, who continues to have influence even though they may no longer have formal authority. [02:23] Frazer Rice: So once you get into the… it always seems to me to be tough to sort of say, okay, here are six things that have to happen, and that's a lot for somebody to digest in the course of one or two meetings and get the buy-in from all the different constituencies that are interested in what the business is up to. How do you run a diagnostic to understand where a founder is — or generation one — in their own head space, and understanding what control being passed on looks like in summary form on those six different aspects that you brought up? [03:00] Paul Edelman: I think the key thing is to watch behavior more than titles. People often pay a lot of attention to when the titles have shifted or compensation shifts, things like that. But they pay less attention to how decisions are being made and whether those decisions get reversed. So when the title has moved but the authority hasn't moved, you tend to see three different things. First of all, you can see something going on at the next level down in management — not with the founder and successor per se, but with the other executives. You can ask yourself, who do they go to for the real decisions? If the CFO briefs the new successor CEO and then confirms things with Dad, then the org chart is not telling the real story. [04:00] Paul Edelman: Employees are excellent at reading where the actual power lives, because they can't afford to be wrong about that sort of thing. So that's one clue. Another is to look at decision reversals, or what is more commonly called second-guessing. You want to look for whether the successor has made a call that the founder disagreed with. And if so, did it stand, or did it get reversed? If the company is two years into succession and that's never happened, it's possible that the successor is pre-clearing everything with the former CEO and only making decisions that they know will be approved. So in that case, it's not real authority. And a third situation is what you could call a crisis test. [05:00] Paul Edelman: So when something genuinely bad happens — there's a breach of a covenant, or a key employee departs, or a lawsuit — the question is, who do people go to? Who walks into the boardroom and into the decision-making situation, and who ends up getting briefed afterwards? To have authority when things are going well is fine, but the person who owns the crisis is the one who's really owning the leadership, in a sense. [05:36] Frazer Rice: So one of the avenues that I think is interesting, that I read in your materials ahead of time, was the idea that a quick succession oftentimes — and maybe not often, but can be — a better avenue in terms of moving the succession forward, as opposed to having a staged succession where a long period of ruminating and decision-making often perpetuates ambiguity, or even confusion, amongst different constituencies both managerially and ownership-wise. [06:10] Paul Edelman: Speed itself is not the test. You could have a five-year transition that represents disciplined development of the successor, and you could also have a six-month transition that essentially is a denial of what needs to happen, followed by some kind of a deadline. But you certainly don't want to allow things to drift. If the transition is proceeding gradually, you can tell it's working if responsibility and authority are moving according to observable milestones. So the successor is making increasingly consequential decisions. They're learning from the outcomes rather than being rescued by the founder or the prior leader from their mistakes. [07:01] Paul Edelman: They're developing important relationships and they're becoming someone that others rely on. The criteria for readiness also should become clearer over time, and the founder's involvement should change in ways that are recognizable. So that's the ideal. But sometimes a gradual transition represents avoidance, and in those cases you see criteria — sometimes people refer to them as the goalposts — that keep moving. And decisions are repeatedly returned to the founder. Also, each step that the successor takes toward greater authority may be followed by a new reason why the founder feels that they're not ready. So the question that can be asked is: what are the capabilities that the successor is developing, and what specific evidence would demonstrate that? [08:00] Frazer Rice: When you're diagnosing what those capabilities are, as part of that diagnosis, if the successor is inside the family versus outside the family, how do you diagnose whether that is a positive or a negative, in addition to maybe the harder skill sets that are being dealt with? [08:29] Paul Edelman: If the successor is from inside or outside the family, I would say that many of the capabilities needed for leadership are the same. [08:40] Frazer Rice: Yeah, I was going to say — if you run into situations where a family member is capable skill-wise, but there are dynamics issues that have prevented their succession to the throne, essentially. [08:54] Paul Edelman: Sometimes there may be a situation in which you have more than one potential successor and they're in competition with one another, and the family is reluctant to declare a winner. And so one move that can be made in that situation is to essentially bypass the decision by going to the outside to bring in someone. It could be a kind of conflict avoidance mechanism. On the other hand, if no successor is really ready, then sometimes going to the outside can be an interim move. So some companies will hire an external candidate for CEO with the expectation that part of the responsibility will be to develop one of the family members who ultimately may take over. [09:47] Frazer Rice: And so part of your methodology is to read resistance in the room and understand where those pain points are. How does a founder, or generation one, or the successive generations understand what the resistance is? And how do you help them overcome that? [10:02] Paul Edelman: The resistance often takes the form of some sort of concern that is stated like — for example, the most general concern that people say is, well, he or she, the likely successor, is just not ready. But that phrase “not ready” is at a very high level of generality. It's not specific enough to be testable or to be capable of being satisfied. So the challenge is to work with the founder to help them express their concern in terms that are actually addressable. If you try to do that and you're unable to, that's an indication that the concern is less about something specific and addressable, and more about some unpleasant feelings that the founder is experiencing — and that implies a different path for how to address those, or what needs to be done. [11:10] Frazer Rice: For those of us in, let's call it the advisory ecosystem — that can be the wealth manager, or the lawyer, or the accountant, the people who help guide the technical succession issues, whether it's tax planning or trusts and estates or even just the corporate handoff — oftentimes we're presented with situations that just get muddled, and we look at lack of progress with frustration. How does an advisor deal with that, when the instinct and in a sense the business model is to try to push, to get resolution and to get progress on these types of issues? [12:16] Paul Edelman: The signal that I watch for is what that impatience feels like to the advisor. Sometimes it feels like clarity. The advisor says to himself, oh, I see exactly what they need to do — why can't they just do this? And in my experience, that's often the moment when it's helpful for the advisor to slow down. Not because the family should be allowed to delay indefinitely, but because the advisor's own need for resolution may begin to shape what they say and do, and the advice that they give. [13:00] Paul Edelman: One useful check that advisors can use for themselves is to ask whose timeline is being served. There may be a genuine business reason to act — it may be, for example, that the continued ambiguity is hurting the company, or weakening the successor, or leaving employees unsure about who's in charge. But I would also ask myself, and other advisors can ask themselves, whether their recommendation is mainly to help them close the case, or to demonstrate progress, or to relieve their own discomfort with uncertainty. [13:31] Frazer Rice: The concept of — this is really, I guess, the mix of art and science of advising — between push versus pause versus a total restructure or a reframing of the conversation. There's an intersection of, you have to have the technicals down, but then experience in dealing with personalities, experience with dealing with the specific family and situation, and guiding that. [14:15] Frazer Rice: I imagine occasionally you run into situations where, at the intersection between the advisors and the family, they feel stuck. And so then the concept of getting them unstuck — yet there is resistance to maybe bringing in a facilitator to help grease the skids and get the conversation moving again. How do you help that reframing discussion? [14:40] Paul Edelman: I guess the question I would ask is, where do things stand? Has a decision actually been made, or is the obstacle substantive, or is it the process? So when a decision has been reached through a legitimate process and what you see is some sort of executional drag or discomfort, those are the situations where I think it's helpful to hold the boundary. You can acknowledge whatever feelings may be slowing things down, but there's not a need to reopen the decision. [14:55] Paul Edelman: On the other hand, if the discomfort that people are feeling suggests that there's some sort of important concern that hasn't yet been understood, then that's where I would pause. And that pause can involve useful work. You can ask people, what is it you're trying to protect? What are the consequences that you fear? What would need to be true for proceeding to feel responsible rather than reckless? And then there are times when it makes sense to restructure or to add structure. So for example, the choices are pretty clear, but the same conversation keeps recurring and producing the same result. In that case, you want to think in terms of either changing the forum, or clarifying the decision rights, or maybe dividing the issue into smaller decisions, or even bringing someone in to help structure the conversation, like a third-party facilitator. [15:36] Frazer Rice: The handoff ultimately — when the founder, or generation one, has gotten to the point where they're ready to move things along to the next set of operators, the next set of owners — and at the same time, in order to feel safe, they've created some safeguards, or let's call it some trap doors or back doors, to be able to help influence decisions if they feel like things are going in a different direction. How do you think about it so that they don't turn into pain points — maybe regret that turns into a veto power that stymies the succession, even if it's already been decided and put in motion? [16:21] Paul Edelman: Well, I think you put your finger on it. There's a key distinction to be made here between a safeguard and a veto. A safeguard should be limited, explicit, and connected to some extraordinary risk, whereas a veto is kind of an ongoing ability to stop or reverse any old ordinary decision. So when it comes to safeguards, a family might reserve certain kinds of decisions — like selling the company, or taking on debt above a certain level, or issuing new equity, or changing the basic business strategy, or entering into a transaction with a family member. [16:59] Paul Edelman: Those kinds of things can be specified, and the scope, the threshold, the decision process and the duration of the safeguard should be clear — as well as who can invoke that protection, what evidence is required, and who decides whether the trigger has occurred, and so on. So the problems arise when the arrangement is essentially one in which the successor is in charge unless the founder feels uncomfortable. If the founder is allowed to intervene anytime they feel uncomfortable, as opposed to for these specific kinds of reasons, then you're dealing with more of an undefined operational veto. [17:37] Frazer Rice: To that end — boards of directors related to these companies, whether they're private or public, but we're really talking about private in most cases. The constitution of those boards: how involved do you get in that? And what is the importance of independence versus familiarity versus family member input, to act as a go-between in many ways between founder, the operational executives, and then ultimately the owners? [18:07] Paul Edelman: Well, in order to really add value — the kind of value that independent directors can potentially offer to a company — they need to be adequately independent. That is to say, they need to be able to exercise their sound business judgment and carry out their fiduciary responsibilities in a way that is free from undue influence by other kinds of family considerations, and potentially loyalty to particular family members. So I think in those cases where a so-called independent board member is actually a golfing buddy of the CEO or the founder, or has a tie to one particular family member or branch of the family, it may be harder for them to bring the full value that an independent director can bring. [18:55] Paul Edelman: Then of course, another reason why companies bring in independent directors is because they have some additional expertise that the current board members or family members lack. So for example, a colleague and I are working with a company right now where the core business has been subject to commoditization, and they've made a strategic decision to diversify. But in order to diversify, they need to bring in people with new expertise, particularly in the line of business that they want to move into. In order to do that, they need to create some space in their board or boards of directors — they have several different kinds of boards. And as part of this, we were brought in to take a look at those existing boards and help them think about how to restructure in a way that could create some open seats while minimizing the displacement of people who are currently board members, including family members who are board members, who may not feel too positively about losing their board seat. [20:54] Frazer Rice: Related to board seats, but more specifically to family ownership — the concept of family members who rely on the family business for income, versus maybe other parts of the family that are looking at the business and thinking of growing the valuation or innovating with the business, that type of thing. With the tension between those two different components, how do you solve for that and have that conversation stay productive, when I imagine it can get emotional very quickly? [21:34] Paul Edelman: This is where a third-party facilitator can be helpful to slow things down. When things begin to get heated, it's often helpful to have a neutral or impartial person present who can help to reduce the heat in the conversations. There are a number of things in particular that can be done under those circumstances. First of all, anytime there are these kinds of tough decisions, there's never a single right answer. There's always trade-offs involved. And some boards work their way through these things by voting. I'm dealing with a situation right now where some members of the family were outvoted. At the end of that vote, they say, okay, we now have an agreement, we're going to move forward with this. But just because there's an agreement in name doesn't mean there's ownership of the decision. [22:34] Paul Edelman: So in order to create ownership, I think it is helpful to have the difficult conversations and to consider the implications of going one way versus another. If we were to distribute all this money in the form of dividends, what would be the benefits of that, and what would be the costs associated with that? And on the other hand, if we were to plow it all back into growth of the business, what's the upside and downside of that? Only by considering different options and the implications of each can the family ultimately arrive at a decision where people feel like, well, I may not have agreed to this, but I was part of the discussion, I was part of the process of weighing the different considerations, and I'm willing to buy into this. In other words, I feel some ownership for this decision. [23:31] Frazer Rice: As we start to wind down here, an interesting concept is what should all the constituencies come away with from the decision-making process. And as a follow-up to that is simplicity versus complexity of the solution. How do you manage that so that you take care of the needs of the business and the needs for structuring, with the need for simplicity, so that everyone who comes away from the discussion and the decision-making understands what's been put in place? [24:06] Paul Edelman: As far as the solution itself goes, the level of complexity should match what's required to accomplish the desired outcomes. So complexity for its own sake is not useful. But when you're trying to accomplish more than one thing at a time, it may require a more complex approach to the solution. So that's on the solution side. Now the other side of it has to do with communication. How do you share what's been decided with other people, especially people who haven't been in the room? And I think that the best way to do that is to try to explain clearly what was the context of the situation in which the need to make this decision arose; what were the desired outcomes that the decision makers were trying to produce, what were they trying to accomplish; and the flip side of that is what were they trying to avoid, or what were they trying to protect. [25:00] Paul Edelman: When you share all of that, the rationale for the decision becomes more understandable, and also you have a better case for justifying any complexity that's part of the decision. As far as complexity goes, of course, you want to use the simplest, most straightforward language to describe what you've come up with. But I think the key thing to getting buy-in is to make sure that the rationale is clear, and people understand that there was a thoughtful and systematic process behind it. [25:26] Frazer Rice: Really good stuff. Paul, how do people find you to hear more about what you're up to? [25:32] Paul Edelman: My website is edelmancoaching.com. So people can go to edelmancoaching.com, read more about the work that I do, and there's a contact form there. Or people can simply email paul@edelmancoaching.com. [25:46] Frazer Rice: Just to — because you're being very humble — you have a couple of articles coming out with Marty Shenkman, where the intersection of probably the trust and estate planning and the actual, let's say, getting the business ready for the next generation, whatever form that takes, is probably front and center there. How would people find that? [26:06] Paul Edelman: So we've written three articles recently, kind of a trilogy, and they're each going to be carried in different places. Two have already come out, and one is due to come out. These are aimed primarily at estate planning attorneys. But the first one is on when the client asks for a simple estate plan. And this relates a little bit to what you were describing, in a different domain — the domain of trusts and estate plans and so on. But the point that we make is that the client's request for simplicity is understandable, and ideally the attorney will validate that. But at the same time, along with the request for simplicity goes potentially some compromises, because when you have multiple desired outcomes, it may take more of a complex structure to achieve those outcomes. So the role of the planner is not to introduce complexity for its own sake, but to make clear to the client [27:06] Paul Edelman: what trade-offs they'd be making if they went with a simpler plan, and what additional protections they can get by considering a more complicated one. Then the second piece is on the use of language in these estate planning conversations. And again, it relates to this concept we were talking about a minute ago, of the difference between agreement and ownership. Some clients are willing to agree to whatever the attorney says. If you say to them, “Well, I think this is the best plan for you,” they say, “Fine, where do I sign?” But the goal, ideally, is more than just agreement. It's ownership. Because in the absence of ownership — and by ownership, I mean that the client understands the trade-offs that are being made, they feel that they had agency in the process of making those trade-offs — [28:06] Paul Edelman: and ultimately, if something doesn't work out as well as hoped, people will not go back and point a finger at the planner and say, “You did this, how could you do this?” or something like that, but rather, “This was a collaborative effort. You made clear what the choices were, and we made them together.” So that piece talks about language, and how, for example, there's a difference between saying to a client “you should do this,” and speaking to them in terms of what they can do. [28:42] Frazer Rice: And then the third piece — when's that coming out? [28:46] Paul Edelman: The third piece is on beneficiary education, and that one will come out in October. And so the first piece came out in a publication called Wealth Management. The second piece came out in a newsletter that's published by, I think it's LISI. And the piece that's coming out in October is, I think, being published in a magazine or a journal, something like Estate Planning. [29:19] Frazer Rice: They're everywhere. So, terrific. Well, Paul, thanks for being on. I'll put all that in the show notes, and look forward to staying in touch. [29:26] Paul Edelman: Thanks very much, Frazer. [29:28] Announcer: This podcast is for educational and entertainment purposes. It is neither investment, legal, nor tax advice, and does not represent the opinions of the employers of the host or guests. Additional Links Mark Tepsich of Family Governance https://www.amazon.com/Wealth-Actually-Intelligent-Decision-Making-1-ebook/dp/B07FPQJJQT/

The first chapter of the IICLE handbook, Workers' Compensation Practice, explores the history of the program's legislation and caselaw, which is extensive because of its 100-year history in the United States. Richard Johnson, of Katz, Friedman, Eisenstein, Johnson, Bareck & Bertuca, authors the chapter on disability evaluations in the 2026 Edition of the handbook and speaks in this month's episode about both the history and the modern-day practice challenges in this area of law.IICLE® is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit based in Springfield, Illinois. We produce a wide range of practice guidance for Illinois attorneys and other legal professionals in all areas of law with the generous contributions of time and expertise from volunteer attorneys, judges, and other legal professionals.

San Francisco trades pitcher Robbie Ray to the Padres for two prospects; Greg and JD break down all the moves today around baseball & make argument to continue to sell before 3pm deadline.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

San Francisco trades pitcher Robbie Ray to the Padres for two prospects; Greg and JD break down all the moves today around baseball & make argument to continue to sell before 3pm deadline.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A guy that got sucked out of a Ryanair flight has been compensated with one (1) flight getting covered to get him home... after a near death experience. So we asked "what was your disappointing compensation?" and we weren't disappointed. Bree Tomasel & Clint Roberts on ZM - find us @breeandclint on Instagram, Facebook and TikTok.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Greg sits down with Allison Wyatt to explore how nonprofit compensation systems can unintentionally reinforce inequity—and what leaders can do about it. They discuss why percentage-based raises often widen pay gaps, where bias can creep into compensation decisions, what today's leaders need to know about pay transparency, and practical strategies for creating clearer, more equitable pay structures that support both employees and organizational mission.

One of the biggest compensation frustrations for junior partners is how to move your comp meaningfully as you are still working to grow your practice and especially to originate work and land new clients. At the same time, compensation is no longer driven primarily by hours worked, responsibility assumed, or even the importance of the matters you manage. Instead, compensation increasingly reflects where you sit within the firm's economic structure, particularly your connection to origination, revenue attribution, and client ownership. Many junior partners are carrying enormous responsibility, leading major client matters, and serving as the day-to-day face of important relationships, only to discover that those contributions do not automatically translate into significant compensation increases. In this episode, I explain why firms distinguish between creating revenue and executing revenue, and why compensation committees place greater value on the lawyers who influence client origination, relationship expansion, and long-term profitability. I walk through the important difference between execution and attribution, explain why being indispensable to a matter is not the same as receiving economic credit for it, and share practical ways junior partners can begin positioning themselves closer to origination. Using real-world examples involving client retention, matter profitability, and identifying new business opportunities, I explain how to frame your contributions in ways that compensation committees recognize as commercially meaningful and directly tied to firm economics. At a Glance 01:20 Why junior partners are surprised by their compensation despite carrying significantly more responsibility 02:37 The associate mindset that equates hours, responsibility, and client work with higher compensation 03:35 How compensation committees focus on revenue attribution instead of execution 04:28 What origination really means beyond simply bringing in a new client 05:25 Howrunning major matters is often viewed as execution rather than economic ownership 05:51 Whyrelationship partners receive credit even when junior partners do the work 06:55 Why compensation follows where revenue originates and expands instead of following legal work performance 07:46 The distinction between creating value through client ownership and delivering value through execution 08:13 How junior partners begin connecting execution to origination without already holding origination credit 09:02 Why comp committees prioritize long-term client ownership and attribution over annual workload increases 10:21 Commercially meaningful ways junior partners can strengthen future compensation discussions 10:47 How stabilizing an at-risk client relationship can become a powerful compensation narrative 12:44 Why improving realization, profitability, and matter scope - even without origination creates economic value 15:02 How identifying adjacent client problems can generate entirely new revenue streams 17:00 Why "revenue-relevant execution" is the framework that changes compensation conversations For Apple Podcasts, click here, scroll to the bottom, tap to rate with five stars, and select "Write a Review." Then be sure to let me know what you loved most about the episode! Also, if you haven't done so already, follow the podcast here!  For Spotify, tap here on your mobile phone, follow the podcast, listen to the show, then find the rating icon below the description, and tap to rate with five stars. Interested in doing 1-2-1 coaching with Laura Terrell? Or learning more about her work coaching and consulting? Here are ways to reach out to her: www.lauraterrell.com  laura@lauraterrell.com   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lauralterrell/  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lauraterrellcoaching/  Show notes: https://www.lauraterrell.com/podcast

This Week’s Featured Interview: Vina Colley Epidemiologist Joseph Mangano on Elevated Cancer Rates Around Piketon: Joseph Mangano Links: The Nuke Resister with Jack Cohen-Joppa Here for another nuclear “milk and cookies” storytelling time is Jack Cohen-Joppa of the Nuke Resister with another story from our shared history of activist resistance to nuclear reactors and weapons....

Send us Fan MailBrian Kirk has been an executive recruiter specializing in the asset management industry (sales/distribution) for 25+ years. He joins the show to discuss data collected during his 2026 Compensation Survey. We highlight some interesting results from his report - including:The premium placed on experienced externals with existing relationshipsPreferences and philosophies that firms have when developing the RIA channelIdeal advisor coverage modelsExamples of comp plans that he's seeing in the field todayLoving Internal Use Only? Subscribe to our newsletter for episode updates, additional resources, and more from the Internal Use Only community.Support the show

July 1 Deal A Week Challenge (Day 3): Reverse Offer Strategy & Decoy Offers to Write More Contracts AND Increase Your Compensation!Access all video replays and VIP here:https://www.skool.com/leads-listings-leverage-7797/classroom/cb792cf4Day 3 of the July “1 Deal A Week” challenge focuses on offers and contracts, introducing the reverse offer strategy and decoy offers to help agents write more contracts and get compensated consistently. The session connects day one's buyer buckets (pocket, portfolio, and institutional buyers) with day two's seven off-market motivated seller “ponds” (FSBO, FRBO, pre-foreclosures, aged expireds, tired landlords, portfolio buyers, and old seller leads). The speaker explains scripts like “go for three nos,” “magic number,” and the pivot phrase “Would you be totally opposed to…,” using institutional offers as anchors that often lead to a retail listing via a “seven-day stress-free home sale” process designed to generate multiple offers quickly. The episode also outlines the paid 1 Deal A Week Accelerator Program, its structure, bonuses, deposit, and the deal-done guarantee.00:00 Day Three Overview02:02 Days One Two Recap08:03 Housekeeping Notes09:08 Offers Meet Road09:42 Go Fish Blueprint12:17 Three Nos Script14:14 Price Bucket Sorting17:18 Decoy Offer Pivot19:28 Seven Day Sale23:49 Reverse Offer Pivot28:16 Accelerator Invite33:29 Program Origin Proof35:58 Five Stuck Points39:31 Accelerator Components45:31 Pricing Deposit49:37 Bonuses Leads Playbooks51:22 Emergency Playbooks52:09 Founders Club Mastermind53:16 Build Your 90 Day Plan54:20 Live Workshop Ticket55:24 Pricing and Deposit55:58 Nine Ways You Win57:45 Deal Done Guarantee01:00:10 Only 12 Spots01:00:51 How To Enroll01:03:03 Program Q and A01:07:15 Reverse Offer Strategy01:09:02 Institutional Offer Examples01:14:37 Seven Day Home Sale01:18:58 LeadDeck How It Works01:24:45 Bonus Session Tomorrow01:28:14 Final Wrap Up

The fastest-growing home service companies don't fail because they run out of demand. They fail because they run out of leaders.In this episode of Owned and Operated, John Wilson sits down with Jim Lose of The Military Veteran to discuss what separates great operators from average managers. They cover how to hire executive talent, build a structured interview process, identify red flags before making an offer, and create leadership systems that scale with your business.From scorecards and reference checks to compensation, coaching, and military leadership, this episode is a practical guide to building the team that takes your business from operator-led to professionally managed.In This Episode:• Why leadership becomes the biggest growth constraint• How to identify and hire A-player operators• The interview mistakes most owners make• Building scorecards that drive accountability• Coaching vs. replacing underperforming leaders• Compensation, incentives, and equity for key hires• The next executive hire growing businesses should make————————————————

Ryan Pineda and co-host Brian Davila sit down with Danny Bae to explore how he leveraged 20+ years of direct sales experience and his unique Korean-American background to build a 260,000-person global sales organization that generated over $400 million in Korean skincare revenue outside of Korea, while sharing lessons on leadership, network marketing, entrepreneurship, and scaling through people. ⁣⁣Connect with Danny - ⁣https://www.instagram.com/dannybaeofficial/ ⁣https://www.instagram.com/weareriman/ ⁣⁣Watch the podcast with Brad Sugars - https://youtu.be/nxyAdptUGcw⁣⁣__________⁣If you'd like my team to run your marketing & sales department to scale your business apply here https://www.pinedapartners.com⁣⁣Join our private mastermind for elite business leaders who golf. https://www.mastermind19.com⁣⁣Want to be featured on the Wealthy Way Podcast? Apply here https://www.wealthyway.com⁣⁣If you want to start your real estate investing business, we'll give you 1:1 coaching, seller leads, software, & everything you need. https://www.wealthyinvestor.com⁣⁣Tired of paying so much in taxes every year? We'll give you strategy, tax prep, and accounting all in one place. https://www.taylor-tax.com⁣⁣Join free Bible studies and workshops for Christian business leaders. https://www.tentmakers.us⁣__________⁣Chapters: ⁣00:00 - $400M Sales Success⁣02:19 - Expansion & Team Building⁣06:59 - Recruiting & Training⁣15:02 - Direct Sales & M19⁣18:44 - Career Journey⁣23:13 - K-Pop & Marketing Ideas⁣30:06 - Commission Structure⁣31:48 - Caddy Recruiting Strategy⁣36:48 - Onboarding & Compensation⁣45:14 - Network Marketing Strategy⁣47:01 - Recruiting Golf Pros⁣50:34 - International Expansion⁣1:00:20 - K-Beauty Opportunity⁣1:01:50 - Scaling with TikTok⁣1:07:03 - Caddy Sales Model⁣1:15:23 - Golf Sales Opportunities⁣1:17:02 - Network Marketing Lessons

Bridget Toomey. The Houthis have declared a naval blockade on Saudi Arabia, targeting ports and vessels in the Red Sea to demand compensation for the civil war. While their missile capabilities rely on Iran, the Houthis have refined domestic drone production using Chinese components. Shippers are already rerouting around Africa, as even the threat of sporadic attacks makes transiting the Bab al-Mandeb a risk global enterprises are unwilling to take. (9)1962 SOVIET EMBASSY YEMEN

Nearly 10 years ago, Simon Bedding, who owns a manufacturing company in England, picked up a copy of Boss Life, Paul Downs' memoir about running (and almost losing) a manufacturing company in Pennsylvania. Simon liked the book enough to email Paul. Paul wrote back. And over the years, they've kind of stayed in touch. This year, as we mark the 250th anniversary of the United States spinning off from the United Kingdom, we thought it would be illuminating to get these two business owners together to compare notes. After all, their countries started with the same language and much of the same legal tradition, but two and a half centuries later, running a business on opposite sides of the Atlantic can feel very different.In this conversation, Paul and Simon compare taxes, regulation, hiring, health care, government support, and what it's like to build a manufacturing business in their respective countries. Along the way, there are plenty of moments when one of them can't quite believe how the other has to operate. Wait—you can't fire an employee without going before a tribunal? Wait—you have to spend a week every year figuring out health insurance? Wait—your employees don't have employment contracts?And yet, for all of their differences, Paul and Simon also discover something else: Whether your factory is in Pennsylvania or southeast England, some challenges are universal. It's hard to find great people. It's hard to fight city hall. In short, it's hard to build a successful business. And, as Paul puts it, "You're always going to learn something by talking to other business owners." This episode is brought to you by Grasshopper Bank.

The debate over the Department of Justice's proposed compensation fund is heating up, but is it a necessary safeguard against government overreach or a potential political weapon? Veteran journalist Brian Karem joins When You Know You Know to unpack the controversy.

July 16th, 2026 Follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X Listen to past episodes on The Ticket’s Website And follow The Ticket Top 10 on Apple, Spotify or Amazon MusicSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Rebel News podcasts features free audio-only versions of select RebelNews+ content and other Rebel News long-form videos, livestreams, and interviews. Monday to Friday enjoy the audio version of Ezra Levant's daily TV-style show, The Ezra Levant Show, where Ezra gives you his contrarian and conservative take on free speech, politics, and foreign policy through in-depth commentary and interviews. Wednesday evenings you can listen to the audio version of The Gunn Show with Sheila Gunn Reid the Chief Reporter of Rebel News. Sheila brings a western sensibility to Canadian news. With one foot in the oil patch and one foot in agriculture, Sheila challenges mainstream media narratives and stands up for Albertans. If you want to watch the video versions of these podcasts, make sure to begin your free RebelNewsPlus trial by subscribing at http://www.RebelNewsPlus.com

Curious about a flexible, high-paying nonclinical career that still uses your medical expertise? In this episode, I'm joined by Dr. Keagen Hadley, an occupational therapist who built a successful career in regulatory medical writing without ever stepping into clinical practice. Dr. Hadley shares how he discovered this little-known field while working in clinical research, the persistence it took to break in, and why regulatory writing can be such an appealing option for physicians seeking flexibility, meaningful work, and strong earning potential. We also explore what regulatory writers actually do, who tends to thrive in this role, how AI is impacting the profession, and practical strategies for getting started. If you enjoy structure, attention to detail, and helping bring new therapies to patients, this conversation may open your eyes to an exciting career path you hadn't considered. In this episode we're talking about: What regulatory medical writing is and its role in drug, biologic, and device development The personality traits and skills that help people succeed in regulatory writing Dr. Keagen Hadley's unconventional path from occupational therapy to a thriving writing career How physicians can break into the field through networking, recruiters, and strategic positioning Compensation, flexibility, and career growth opportunities in regulatory writing How AI is influencing regulatory writing and why human expertise remains essential Resources, training recommendations, and practical advice for exploring this career path You can find the show notes for this episode and more information by clicking here: www.doctorscrossing.com/episode251 Links for this episode: The Clinician's Guide to Regulatory Writing | Keagen Hadley | Substack  Keagen Hadley | LinkedIn  Targeted Regulatory Writing Techniques: Clinical Documents for Drugs and Biologics by Wood and Foote 6 Month Road Map to Becoming a Regulatory Writer by Keagen Hadley Regulatory Medical Writing Masterclass  Medical Writing Resource Guide – This 11-page guide gives you an introduction to medical writing as well as links for courses, books, websites, and tips for exploring this diverse area. Includes steps you can take whether you want to do medical writing as a side gig, or work full-time as a freelancer or an employee. Land Your Dream Job With LinkedIn: 5 Steps To Get Started – Following these 5 tips will help you optimize your profile, connect and network with others, and have success applying to jobs on LinkedIn! Thank you for listening!

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.