Podcasts about Fuqua School

 If you're a scientist, and you apply for federal research funding, you'll ask for a specific dollar amount. Let's say you're asking for a million-dollar grant. Your grant covers the direct costs, things like the salaries of the researchers that you're paying. If you get that grant, your university might get an extra $500,000. That money is called “indirect costs,” but think of it as overhead: that money goes to lab space, to shared equipment, and so on.This is the system we've used to fund American research infrastructure for more than 60 years. But earlier this year, the Trump administration proposed capping these payments at just 15% of direct costs, way lower than current indirect cost rates. There are legal questions about whether the admin can do that. But if it does, it would force universities to fundamentally rethink how they do science.The indirect costs system is pretty opaque from the outside. Is the admin right to try and slash these indirect costs? Where does all that money go? And if we want to change how we fund research overhead, what are the alternatives? How do you design a research system to incentivize the research you actually wanna see in the world?I'm joined today by Pierre Azoulay from MIT Sloan and Dan Gross from Duke's Fuqua School of Business. Together with Bhaven Sampat at Johns Hopkins, they conducted the first comprehensive empirical study of how indirect costs actually work. Earlier this year, I worked with them to write up that study as a more accessible policy brief for IFP. They've assembled data on over 350 research institutions, and they found some striking results. While negotiated rates often exceed 50-60%, universities actually receive much less, due to built-in caps and exclusions.Moreover, the institutions that would be hit hardest by proposed cuts are those whose research most often leads to new drugs and commercial breakthroughs.Thanks to Katerina Barton, Harry Fletcher-Wood, and Inder Lohla for their help with this episode, and to Beez for her help on the charts.Let's say I'm a researcher at a university and I apply for a federal grant. I'm looking at cancer cells in mice. It will cost me $1 million to do that research — to pay grad students, to buy mice and test tubes. I apply for a grant from the National Institutes of Health, or NIH. Where do indirect costs come in?Dan Gross: Research generally incurs two categories of costs, much as business operations do.* Direct or variable costs are typically project-specific; they include salaries and consumable supplies.* Indirect or fixed costs are not as easily assigned to any particular project. [They include] things like lab space, data and computing resources, biosecurity, keeping the lights on and the buildings cooled and heated — even complying with the regulatory requirements the federal government imposes on researchers. They are the overhead costs of doing research.Pierre Azoulay: You will use those grad students, mice, and test tubes, the direct costs. But you're also using the lab space. You may be using a shared facility where the mice are kept and fed. Pieces of large equipment are shared by many other people to conduct experiments. So those are fixed costs from the standpoint of your research project.Dan: Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR) is how the federal government has been paying for the fixed cost of research for the past 60 years. This has been done by paying universities institution-specific fixed percentages on top of the direct cost of the research. That's the indirect cost rate. That rate is negotiated by institutions, typically every two to four years, supported by several hundred pages of documentation around its incurred costs over the recent funding cycle.The idea is to compensate federally funded researchers for the investments, infrastructure, and overhead expenses related to the research they perform for the government. Without that funding, universities would have to pay those costs out of pocket and, frankly, many would not be interested or able to do the science the government is funding them to do.Imagine I'm doing my mouse cancer science at MIT, Pierre's parent institution. Some time in the last four years, MIT had this negotiation with the National Institutes of Health to figure out what the MIT reimbursable rate is. But as a researcher, I don't have to worry about what indirect costs are reimbursable. I'm all mouse research, all day.Dan: These rates are as much of a mystery to the researchers as it is to the public. When I was junior faculty, I applied for an external grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) — you can look up awards folks have won in the award search portal. It doesn't break down indirect and direct cost shares of each grant. You see the total and say, “Wow, this person got $300,000.” Then you go to write your own grant and realize you can only budget about 60% of what you thought, because the rest goes to overhead. It comes as a bit of a shock the first time you apply for grant funding.What goes into the overhead rates? Most researchers and institutions don't have clear visibility into that. The process is so complicated that it's hard even for those who are experts to keep track of all the pieces.Pierre: As an individual researcher applying for a project, you think about the direct costs of your research projects. You're not thinking about the indirect rate. When the research administration of your institution sends the application, it's going to apply the right rates.So I've got this $1 million experiment I want to run on mouse cancer. If I get the grant, the total is $1.5 million. The university takes that .5 million for the indirect costs: the building, the massive microscope we bought last year, and a tiny bit for the janitor. Then I get my $1 million. Is that right?Dan: Duke University has a 61% indirect cost rate. If I propose a grant to the NSF for $100,000 of direct costs — it might be for data, OpenAI API credits, research staff salaries — I would need to budget an extra $61,000 on top for ICR, bringing the total grant to $161,000.My impression is that most federal support for research happens through project-specific grants. It's not these massive institutional block grants. Is that right?Pierre: By and large, there aren't infrastructure grants in the science funding system. There are other things, such as center grants that fund groups of investigators. Sometimes those can get pretty large — the NIH grant for a major cancer center like Dana-Farber could be tens of millions of dollars per year.Dan: In the past, US science funding agencies did provide more funding for infrastructure and the instrumentation that you need to perform research through block grants. In the 1960s, the NSF and the Department of Defense were kicking up major programs to establish new data collection efforts — observatories, radio astronomy, or the Deep Sea Drilling project the NSF ran, collecting core samples from the ocean floor around the world. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) — back then the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) — was investing in nuclear test detection to monitor adherence to nuclear test ban treaties. Some of these were satellite observation methods for atmospheric testing. Some were seismic measurement methods for underground testing. ARPA supported the installation of a network of seismic monitors around the world. Those monitors are responsible for validating tectonic plate theory. Over the next decade, their readings mapped the tectonic plates of the earth. That large-scale investment in research infrastructure is not as common in the US research policy enterprise today.That's fascinating. I learned last year how modern that validation of tectonic plate theory was. Until well into my grandparents' lifetime, we didn't know if tectonic plates existed.Dan: Santi, when were you born?1997.Dan: So I'm a good decade older than you — I was born in 1985. When we were learning tectonic plate theory in the 1990s, it seemed like something everybody had always known. It turns out that it had only been known for maybe 25 years.So there's this idea of federal funding for science as these massive pieces of infrastructure, like the Hubble Telescope. But although projects like that do happen, the median dollar the Feds spend on science today is for an individual grant, not installing seismic monitors all over the globe.Dan: You applied for a grant to fund a specific project, whose contours you've outlined in advance, and we provided the funding to execute that project.Pierre: You want to do some observations at the observatory in Chile, and you are going to need to buy a plane ticket — not first class, not business class, very much economy.Let's move to current events. In February of this year, the NIH announced it was capping indirect cost reimbursement at 15% on all grants.What's the administration's argument here?Pierre: The argument is there are cases where foundations only charge 15% overhead rate on grants — and universities acquiesce to such low rates — and the federal government is entitled to some sort of “most-favored nation” clause where no one pays less in overhead than they pay. That's the argument in this half-a-page notice. It's not much more elaborate than that.The idea is, the Gates Foundation says, “We will give you a grant to do health research and we're only going to pay 15% indirect costs.” Some universities say, “Thank you. We'll do that.” So clearly the universities don't need the extra indirect cost reimbursement?Pierre: I think so.Dan: Whether you can extrapolate from that to federal research funding is a different question, let alone if federal research was funding less research and including even less overhead. Would foundations make up some of the difference, or even continue funding as much research, if the resources provided by the federal government were lower? Those are open questions. Foundations complement federal funding, as opposed to substitute for it, and may be less interested in funding research if it's less productive.What are some reasons that argument might be misguided?Pierre: First, universities don't always say, “Yes” [to a researcher wishing to accept a grant]. At MIT, getting a grant means getting special authorization from the provost. That special authorization is not always forthcoming. The provost has a special fund, presumably funded out of the endowment, that under certain conditions they will dip into to make up for the missing overhead.So you've got some research that, for whatever reason, the federal government won't fund, and the Gates Foundation is only willing to fund it at this low rate, and the university has budgeted a little bit extra for those grants that it still wants.Pierre: That's my understanding. I know that if you're going to get a grant, you're going to have to sit in many meetings and cajole any number of administrators, and you don't always get your way.Second, it's not an apples-to-apples comparison [between federal and foundation grants] because there are ways to budget an item as a direct cost in a foundation grant that the government would consider an indirect cost. So you might budget some fractional access to a facility…Like the mouse microscope I have to use?Pierre: Yes, or some sort of Cryo-EM machine. You end up getting more overhead through the back door.The more fundamental way in which that approach is misguided is that the government wants its infrastructure — that it has contributed to through [past] indirect costs — to be leveraged by other funders. It's already there, it's been paid for, it's sitting idle, and we can get more bang for our buck if we get those additional funders to piggyback on that investment.Dan: That [other funders] might not be interested in funding otherwise.Why wouldn't they be interested in funding it otherwise? What shouldn't the federal government say, “We're going to pay less. If it's important research, somebody else will pay for it.”Dan: We're talking about an economies-of-scale problem. These are fixed costs. The more they're utilized, the more the costs get spread over individual research projects.For the past several decades, the federal government has funded an order of magnitude more university research than private firms or foundations. If you look at NSF survey data, 55% of university R&D is federally funded; 6% is funded by foundations. That is an order of magnitude difference. The federal government has the scale to support and extract value for whatever its goals are for American science.We haven't even started to get into the administrative costs of research. That is part of the public and political discomfort with indirect-cost recovery. The idea that this is money that's going to fund university bloat.I should lay my cards on the table here for readers. There are a ton of problems with the American scientific enterprise as it currently exists. But when you look at studies from a wide range of folks, it's obvious that R&D in American universities is hugely valuable. Federal R&D dollars more than pay for themselves. I want to leave room for all critiques of the scientific ecosystem, of the universities, of individual research ideas. But at this 30,000-foot level, federal R&D dollars are well spent.Dan: The evidence may suggest that, but that's not where the political and public dialogue around science policy is. Again, I'm going to bring in a long arc here. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was, “We're in a race with the Soviet Union. If we want to win this race, we're going to have to take some risky bets.” And the US did. It was more flexible with its investments in university and industrial science, especially related to defense aims. But over time, with the waning of these political pressures and with new budgetary pressures, the tenor shifted from, “Let's take chances” to “Let's make science and other parts of government more accountable.” The undercurrent of Indirect Cost Recovery policy debates has more of this accountability framing.This comes up in this comparison to foundation rates: “Is the government overpaying?” Clearly universities are willing to accept less from foundations. It comes up in this perception that ICR is funding administrative growth that may not be productive or socially efficient. Accountability seems to be a priority in the current day.Where are we right now [August 2025] on that 15% cap on indirect costs?Dan: Recent changes first kicked off on February 7th, when NIH posted its supplemental guidance, that introduced a policy that the direct cost rates that it paid on its grants would be 15% to institutions of higher education. That policy was then adopted by the NSF, the DOD, and the Department of Energy. All of these have gotten held up in court by litigation from universities. Things are stuck in legal limbo. Congress has presented its point of view that, “At least for now, I'd like to keep things as they are.” But this has been an object of controversy long before the current administration even took office in January. I don't think it's going away.Pierre: If I had to guess, the proposal as it first took shape is not what is going to end up being adopted. But the idea that overhead rates are an object of controversy — are too high, and need to be reformed — is going to stay relevant.Dan: Partly that's because it's a complicated issue. Partly there's not a real benchmark of what an appropriate Indirect Cost Recovery policy should be. Any way you try to fund the cost of research, you're going to run into trade-offs. Those are complicated.ICR does draw criticism. People think it's bloated or lacks transparency. We would agree some of these critiques are well-founded. Yet it's also important to remember that ICR pays for facilities and administration. It doesn't just fund administrative costs, which is what people usually associate it with. The share of ICR that goes to administrative costs is legally capped at 26% of direct costs. That cap has been in place since 1991. Many universities have been at that cap for many years — you can see this in public records. So the idea that indirect costs are going up over time, and that that's because of bloat at US universities, has to be incorrect, because the administrative rate has been capped for three decades.Many of those costs are incurred in service of complying with regulations that govern research, including the cost of administering ICR to begin with. Compiling great proposals every two to four years and a new round of negotiations — all of that takes resources. Those are among the things that indirect cost funding reimburses.Even then, universities appear to under-recover their true indirect costs of federally-sponsored research. We have examples from specific universities which have reported detailed numbers. That under-recovery means less incentive to invest in infrastructure, less capacity for innovation, fewer clinical trials. So there's a case to be made that indirect cost funding is too low.Pierre: The bottom line is we don't know if there is under- or over-recovery of indirect costs. There's an incentive for university administrators to claim there's under-recovery. So I take that with a huge grain of salt.Dan: It's ambiguous what a best policy would look like, but this is all to say that, first, public understanding of this complex issue is sometimes a bit murky. Second, a path forward has to embrace the trade-offs that any particular approach to ICR presents.From reading your paper, I got a much better sense that a ton of the administrative bloat of the modern university is responding to federal regulations on research. The average researcher reports spending almost half of their time on paperwork. Some of that is a consequence of the research or grant process; some is regulatory compliance.The other thing, which I want to hear more on, is that research tools seem to be becoming more expensive and complex. So the microscope I'm using today is an order of magnitude more expensive than the microscope I was using in 1950. And you've got to recoup those costs somehow.Pierre: Everything costs more than it used to. Research is subject to Baumol's cost disease. There are areas where there's been productivity gains — software has had an impact.The stakes are high because, if we get this wrong, we're telling researchers that they should bias the type of research they're going to pursue and training that they're going to undergo, with an eye to what is cheaper. If we reduce the overhead rate, we should expect research that has less fixed cost and more variable costs to gain in favor — and research that is more scale-intensive to lose favor. There's no reason for a benevolent social planner to find that a good development. The government should be neutral with respect to the cost structure of research activities. We don't know in advance what's going to be more productive.Wouldn't a critic respond, “We're going to fund a little bit of indirect costs, but we're not going to subsidize stuff that takes huge amounts of overhead. If universities want to build that fancy new telescope because it's valuable, they'll do it.” Why is that wrong when it comes to science funding?Pierre: There's a grain of truth to it.Dan: With what resources though? Who's incentivized to invest in this infrastructure? There's not a paid market for science. Universities can generate some licensing fees from patents that result from science. But those are meager revenue streams, realistically. There are reasons to believe that commercial firms are under-incentivized to invest in basic scientific research. Prior to 1940, the scientific enterprise was dramatically smaller because there wasn't funding the way that there is today. The exigencies of war drew the federal government into funding research in order to win. Then it was productive enough that folks decided we should keep doing it. History and economic logic tells us that you're not going to see as much science — especially in these fixed-cost heavy endeavors — when those resources aren't provided by the public.Pierre: My one possible answer to the question is, “The endowment is going to pay for it.” MIT has an endowment, but many other universities do not. What does that mean for them? The administration also wants to tax the heck out of the endowment.This is a good opportunity to look at the empirical work you guys did in this great paper. As far as I can tell, this was one of the first real looks at what indirect costs rates look like in real life. What did you guys find?Dan: Two decades ago, Pierre and Bhaven began collecting information on universities' historical indirect cost rates. This is a resource that was quietly sitting on the shelf waiting for its day. That day came this past February. Bhaven and Pierre collected information on negotiated ICR rates for the past 60 years. During this project, we also collected the most recent versions of those agreements from university websites to bring the numbers up to the current day.We pulled together data for around 350 universities and other research institutions. Together, they account for around 85% of all NIH research funding over the last 20 years.We looked at their:* Negotiated indirect cost rates, from institutional indirect cost agreements with the government, and their;* Effective rates [how much they actually get when you look at grant payments], using NIH grant funding data.Negotiated cost rates have gone up. That has led to concerns that the overhead cost of research is going up — these claims that it's funding administrative bloat. But our most important finding is that there's a large gap between the sticker rates — the negotiated ICR rates that are visible to the public, and get floated on Twitter as examples of university exorbitance — and the rates that universities are paid in practice, at least on NIH grants; we think it's likely the case for NSF and other agency grants too.An institution's effective ICR funding rates are much, much lower than their negotiated rates and they haven't changed much for 40 years. If you look at NIH's annual budget, the share of grant funding that goes to indirect costs has been roughly constant at 27-28% for a long time. That implies an effective rate of around 40% over direct costs. Even though many institutions have negotiated rates of 50-70%, they usually receive 30-50%.The difference between those negotiated rates and the effective rates seems to be due to limits and exceptions built into NIH grant rules. Those rules exclude some grants, such as training grants, from full indirect cost funding. They also exclude some direct costs from the figure used to calculate ICR rates. The implication is that institutions receive ICR payments based on a smaller portion of their incurred direct costs than typically assumed. As the negotiated direct cost falls, you see a university being paid a higher indirect cost rate off a smaller — modified — direct cost base, to recover the same amount of overhead.Is it that the federal government is saying for more parts of the grant, “We're not going to reimburse that as an indirect cost.”?Dan: This is where we shift a little bit from assessment to speculation. What's excluded from total direct costs? One thing is researcher salaries above a certain level.What is that level? Can you give me a dollar amount?Dan: It's a $225,700 annual salary. There aren't enough people being paid that on these grants for that to explain the difference, especially when you consider that research salaries are being paid to postdocs and grad students.You're looking around the scientists in your institution and thinking, “That's not where the money is”?Dan: It's not, even if you consider Principal Investigators. If you consider postdocs and grad students, it certainly isn't.Dan: My best hunch is that research projects have become more capital-intensive, and only a certain level of expenditure on equipment can be included in the modified total direct cost base. I don't have smoking gun evidence, it's my intuition.In the paper, there's this fascinating chart where you show the institutions that would get hit hardest by a 15% cap tend to be those that do the most valuable medical research. Explain that on this framework. Is it that doing high-quality medical research is capital-intensive?Pierre: We look at all the private-sector patents that build on NIH research. The more a university stands to lose under the administration policy, the more it has contributed over the past 25 years — in research the private sector found relevant in terms of pharmaceutical patents.This is counterintuitive if your whole model of funding for science is, “Let's cut subsidies for the stuff the private sector doesn't care about — all this big equipment.” When you cut those subsidies, what suffers most is the stuff that the private sector likes.Pierre: To me it makes perfect sense. This is the stuff that the private sector would not be willing to invest in on its own. But that research, having come into being, is now a very valuable input into activities that profit-minded investors find interesting and worth taking a risk on.This is the argument for the government to fund basic research?Pierre: That argument has been made at the macro-level forever, but the bibliometric revolution of the past 15 years allows you to look at this at the nano-level. Recently I've been able to look at the history of Ozempic. The main patent cites zero publicly-funded research, but it cites a bunch of patents, including patents taken up by academics. Those cite the foundational research performed by Joel Habener and his team at Massachusetts General Hospital in the early 1980s that elucidated the role of GLP-1 as a potential target. This grant was first awarded to Habener in 1979, was renewed every four or five years, and finally died in 2008, when he moved on to other things. Those chains are complex, but we can now validate the macro picture at this more granular level.Dan: I do want to add one qualification which also suggests some directions for the future. There are things we still can't see — despite Pierre's zeal. Our projections of the consequence of a 15% rate cap are still pretty coarse. We don't know what research might not take place. We don't know what indirect cost categories are exposed, or how universities would reallocate. All those things are going to be difficult to project without a proper experiment.One thing that I would've loved to have more visibility into is, “What is the structure of indirect costs at universities across the country? What share of paid indirect costs are going to administrative expenses? What direct cost categories are being excluded?” We would need a more transparency into the system to know the answers.Does that information have to be proprietary? It's part of negotiations with the federal government about how much the taxpayer will pay for overhead on these grants. Which piece is so special that it can't be shared?Pierre: You are talking to the wrong people here because we're meta-scientists, so our answer is none of it should be private.Dan: But now you have to ask the university lawyers.What would the case from the universities be? “We can't tell the public what we spend subsidy on”?Pierre: My sense is that there are institutions of academia that strike most lay people as completely bizarre.Hard to explain without context?Pierre: People haven't thought about it. They will find it so bizarre that they will typically jump from the odd aspect to, “That must be corruption.” University administrators are hugely attuned to that. So the natural defensive approach is to shroud it in secrecy. This way we don't see how the sausage is made.Dan: Transparency can be a blessing and a curse. More information supports more considered decision-making. It also opens the door to misrepresentation by critics who have their own agendas. Pierre's right: there are some practices that to the public might look unusual — or might be familiar, but one might say, “How is that useful expense?” Even a simple thing like having an administrator who manages a faculty's calendar might seem excessive. Many people manage their own calendars. At the same time, when you think about how someone's time is best used, given their expertise, and heavy investment in specialized human capital, are emails, calendaring, and note-taking the right things for scientists [to be doing]? Scientists spend a large chunk of their time now administering grants. Does it make sense to outsource that and preserve the scientist's time for more science?When you put forward data that shows some share of federal research funding is going to fund administrative costs, at first glance it might look wasteful, yet it might still be productive. But I would be able to make a more considered judgment on a path forward if I had access to more facts, including what indirect costs look like under the hood.One last question: in a world where you guys have the ear of the Senate, political leadership at the NIH, and maybe the universities, what would you be pushing for on indirect costs?Pierre: I've come to think that this indirect cost rate is a second-best institution: terrible and yet superior to many of the alternatives. My favorite alternative would be one where there would be a flat rate applied to direct costs. That would be the average effective rate currently observed — on the order of 40%.You're swapping out this complicated system to — in the end — reimburse universities the same 40%.Pierre: We know there are fixed costs. Those fixed costs need to be paid. We could have an elaborate bureaucratic apparatus to try to get it exactly right, but it's mission impossible. So why don't we give up on that and set a rate that's unlikely to lead to large errors in under- or over-recovery. I'm not particularly attached to 40%. But the 15% that was contemplated seems absurdly low.Dan: In the work we've done, we do lay out different approaches. The 15% rate wouldn't fully cut out the negotiation process: to receive that, you have to document your overhead costs and demonstrate that they reached that level. In any case, it's simplifying. It forces more cost-sharing and maybe more judicious investments by universities. But it's also so low that it's likely to make a significant amount of high-value, life-improving research economically unattractive.The current system is complicated and burdensome. It might encourage investment in less productive things, particularly because universities can get it paid back through future ICR. At the same time, it provides pretty good incentives to take on expensive, high-value research on behalf of the public.I would land on one of two alternatives. One of those is close to what Pierre said, with fixed rates, but varied by institution types: one for universities, one for medical schools, one for independent research institutions — because we do see some variation in their cost structures. We might set those rates around their historical average effective rates, since those haven't changed for quite a long time. If you set different rates for different categories of institution, the more finely you slice the pie, the closer you end up to the current system. So that's why I said maybe, at a very high level, four categories.The other I could imagine is to shift more of these costs “above the line” — to adapt the system to enable more of these indirect costs to be budgeted as direct costs in grants. This isn't always easy, but presumably some things we currently call indirect costs could be accounted for in a direct cost manner. Foundations do it a bit more than the federal government does, so that could be another path forward.There's no silver bullet. Our goal was to try to bring some understanding to this long-running policy debate over how to fund the indirect cost of research and what appropriate rates should be. It's been a recurring question for several decades and now is in the hot seat again. Hopefully through this work, we've been able to help push that dialogue along. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

Financial expert Tricia M. Taitt shares her journey from Wall Street and Broadway to writing the Amazon bestseller Dancing with Numbers and founding FinCore, a financial planning platform for women entrepreneurs. Discover the mindset shifts that define a CEO, why financial literacy is essential for women entrepreneurs, and the most overlooked opportunity for increasing your business profit. Tricia also reveals the two biggest asks that transformed her life, including deferring a six-figure job offer to pursue her passion for dance. You'll hear Tricia discuss: The CEO Mindset Shift: Why she avoided the CEO title for years, and how she realized the role means building a team, not doing everything herself. From Layoff to Liberation: The pivotal moment in 2009 that led Tricia to combine her expertise (Wharton, Duke, Wall Street) with her passion for dance to create FinCore. Unlocking Profit: The single most overlooked profit opportunity Tricia sees across industries. Tough Love with Honey: How she balances compassion and accountability to help entrepreneurs face their money stories and understand the consequences of inaction. The Bold Ask: Tricia's most uncomfortable asks, including the time she asked a major corporation to defer her employment to dance. Important Links:Savvy Ladies (https://www.savvyladies.org/)Precious Williams' LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/precious-l-williams/)Lisa Zeiderman's LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/lisazeiderman/)Tricia M. Taitt's LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/triciataitt/)Important Links for Tricia:FinCore Website (https://fincorestrong.com/)Dancing with Numbers (https://a.co/d/7WZIpem)About Tricia Taitt:Tricia M. Taitt is the CEO of FinCore and Author of the Amazon best-selling book, "Dancing with Numbers: Grow A Financially Healthy Business and Choreograph the Life You Want".   She holds an M.B.A from The Fuqua School of Business of Duke University, and a BS in Economics with a Finance concentration from The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. For over 20 years, she's been a finance professional. Half of the time was spent working on Wall Street while the other half was spent in the trenches side by side with small business owners.  As a result of working with FinCore, clients have been able to take control of their numbers and feel more confident in their ability to make decisions, while increasing profits by 10% and building a cash stash to invest in growth. 

In this engaging conversation, Lori Adams-Brown interviews Mita Mallick about her book "The Devil Emails at Midnight: What Good Leaders Can Learn from Bad Bosses." Mita shares personal stories and insights on leadership, workplace culture, and the impact of bad bosses on mental health. The discussion covers the importance of self-awareness, setting boundaries, and the role of personal relationships in professional settings. The genesis of Mita's book started with a personal experience of her mother's home being flooded. Mita found an old notebook with stories about bad bosses, which inspired her book. Fear-driven workplaces may achieve short-term results but harm long-term culture. Mita shares a 'water test' to identify toxic workplaces during interviews. Setting boundaries is crucial for respect and inclusion in the workplace. Personal relationships can complicate professional decisions, especially in leadership roles. Mita emphasizes the importance of self-care for effective leadership. The conversation highlights the normalization of toxic behavior in workplaces. Mita advises doing reference checks on potential employers. The book encourages readers to learn from bad bosses to become better leaders. My special guest is Mita Mallick Mallick is a highly sought-after speaker who has advised Fortune 500 companies and start-ups alike. She is a LinkedIn Top Voice and was named to the Thinkers 50 Radar List. She's a contributor to Harvard Business Review, Fast Company, Adweek, and Entrepreneur. Mallick has been featured in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Time Magazine, Forbes, Axios, Essence, Cosmopolitan Magazine and Business Insider. Mallick holds a B.A. from Barnard College, Columbia University and an M.B.A. from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business. Learning from Bad Bosses The Devil Emails at Midnight Leadership Lessons from Mita Mallick Navigating Toxic Workplaces Setting Boundaries for Success The Impact of Bad Bosses Self-Care in Leadership Identifying Toxic Workplaces The Role of Personal Relationships in Leadership Transforming Workplace Culture Key topics: leadership, workplace culture, bad bosses, mental health, self-awareness "The Devil Emails at Midnight" "Fear kills culture in the longterm" "Set boundaries for respect" "Personal relationships complicate decisions" "Self-care is key to leadership" "Normalize toxic behavior in workplaces" "Do reference checks on employers" "Learn from bad bosses" "Water test for toxic workplaces" "Respect is a basic need" 00:00:01 Introduction and Book Overview 00:00:29 Inspiration Behind the Book 00:01:27 Fear-Driven Workplaces 00:02:27 Impact of Bad Bosses 00:04:10 Setting Boundaries 00:07:30 Personal Relationships in Leadership 00:11:39 Self-Care and Leadership 00:18:54 Cultural and Personal Background 00:25:20 Advice for Navigating Workplace Dynamics 00:30:51 Conclusion and How to Connect with Mita Connect with us: https://www.aworldofdifferencepodcast.com Linkedin YouTube Substack FaceBook Instagram Threads Patreon (for exclusive episodes just for Difference Makers) Bluesky TikTok Subscribe to the podcast, leave a review, and share this episode with someone who might need to hear it. Your support helps the community grow and keeps these important conversations going. If you need professional help, such as therapy: https://www.betterhelp.com/difference If you are looking for your next opportunity, sign up for Lori's Masterclass on Master the Career Pivot: https://www.loriadamsbrown.com/careerpivot Difference Makers who are podcast listeners get 10% offf with the code: DIFFERENT Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this engaging conversation, Lori Adams-Brown interviews Mita Mallick about her book "The Devil Emails at Midnight: What Good Leaders Can Learn from Bad Bosses." Mita shares personal stories and insights on leadership, workplace culture, and the impact of bad bosses on mental health. The discussion covers the importance of self-awareness, setting boundaries, and the role of personal relationships in professional settings. The genesis of Mita's book started with a personal experience of her mother's home being flooded. Mita found an old notebook with stories about bad bosses, which inspired her book. Fear-driven workplaces may achieve short-term results but harm long-term culture. Mita shares a 'water test' to identify toxic workplaces during interviews. Setting boundaries is crucial for respect and inclusion in the workplace. Personal relationships can complicate professional decisions, especially in leadership roles. Mita emphasizes the importance of self-care for effective leadership. The conversation highlights the normalization of toxic behavior in workplaces. Mita advises doing reference checks on potential employers. The book encourages readers to learn from bad bosses to become better leaders. My special guest is Mita Mallick Mallick is a highly sought-after speaker who has advised Fortune 500 companies and start-ups alike. She is a LinkedIn Top Voice and was named to the Thinkers 50 Radar List. She's a contributor to Harvard Business Review, Fast Company, Adweek, and Entrepreneur. Mallick has been featured in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Time Magazine, Forbes, Axios, Essence, Cosmopolitan Magazine and Business Insider. Mallick holds a B.A. from Barnard College, Columbia University and an M.B.A. from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business. Learning from Bad Bosses The Devil Emails at Midnight Leadership Lessons from Mita Mallick Navigating Toxic Workplaces Setting Boundaries for Success The Impact of Bad Bosses Self-Care in Leadership Identifying Toxic Workplaces The Role of Personal Relationships in Leadership Transforming Workplace Culture Key topics: leadership, workplace culture, bad bosses, mental health, self-awareness "The Devil Emails at Midnight" "Fear kills culture in the longterm" "Set boundaries for respect" "Personal relationships complicate decisions" "Self-care is key to leadership" "Normalize toxic behavior in workplaces" "Do reference checks on employers" "Learn from bad bosses" "Water test for toxic workplaces" "Respect is a basic need" 00:00:01 Introduction and Book Overview 00:00:29 Inspiration Behind the Book 00:01:27 Fear-Driven Workplaces 00:02:27 Impact of Bad Bosses 00:04:10 Setting Boundaries 00:07:30 Personal Relationships in Leadership 00:11:39 Self-Care and Leadership 00:18:54 Cultural and Personal Background 00:25:20 Advice for Navigating Workplace Dynamics 00:30:51 Conclusion and How to Connect with Mita Connect with us: https://www.aworldofdifferencepodcast.com Linkedin YouTube Substack FaceBook Instagram Threads Patreon (for exclusive episodes just for Difference Makers) Bluesky TikTok Subscribe to the podcast, leave a review, and share this episode with someone who might need to hear it. Your support helps the community grow and keeps these important conversations going. If you need professional help, such as therapy: https://www.betterhelp.com/difference If you are looking for your next opportunity, sign up for Lori's Masterclass on Master the Career Pivot: https://www.loriadamsbrown.com/careerpivot Difference Makers who are podcast listeners get 10% offf with the code: DIFFERENT Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Rehlko Engines President Eric Fontaine shares his inspiring journey from the United States Naval Academy and Duke's Fuqua School of Business to leading the historic Kohler-to-Rehlko transition, while diving into the groundbreaking Command Pro 41 HP—their most powerful engine yet—the EFI-enhanced Command Pro 888, and key takeaways from Equip Expo 2025.

Clint Padgett is the President and CEO of Project Success Inc., a global leader in project management consulting that for over 30 years has empowered Fortune 500 companies to plan, execute, and deliver complex initiatives across industries. A dynamic thought leader, Clint is also a ForbesBooks author and the host of the popular podcast The Conversation with Clinton M. Padgett, where he explores the intersection of people, leadership, and project success with C-suite executives and renowned authors.Early in Clint's career he served as an electrician's mate aboard an aircraft carrier in the U.S. Navy. This formative experience forged the discipline, resilience, and mission-focused mindset that would come to define his leadership philosophy. Following his military service, he transitioned into technical roles, including serving as a sales equipment engineer at The Coca-Cola Company. Clint holds a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology and an MBA from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business—credentials that reflect his rare blend of technical acumen and strategic insight. His people-first, process-driven approach is further shaped by decades of experience leading complex projects around the globe, and by his continued commitment to learning, teaching, and mentoring.Clint is best known for championing the human side of project management. He believes that successful projects are not driven by charts or software—but by empowered people and real conversations. His methodology emphasizes commitment, clarity, and collaboration in matrixed organizations, helping clients create plans their teams can believe in and deliver on. This philosophy is codified in his two books: The Project Success Method and How Teams Triumph: Managing by Commitment.Through Project Success Inc., Clint has helped global teams with executing high-stakes, high-visibility projects—including multiple Olympic Games and FIFA World Cups for brands like Coca-Cola—ensuring every objective is met with precision and alignment.Clint's insights have been featured in Forbes, Harvard Business Review, and numerous industry podcasts and panels. Whether training project managers, consulting senior leadership, or speaking on global stages, Clint brings three decades of experience, candid wisdom, and a relentless drive to help organizations thrive through project excellence.

Superpowers for Good should not be considered investment advice. Seek counsel before making investment decisions. When you purchase an item, launch a campaign or create an investment account after clicking a link here, we may earn a fee. Engage to support our work.Watch the show on television by downloading the e360tv channel app to your Roku, LG or AmazonFireTV. You can also see it on YouTube.Devin: What is your superpower?Greg: Making complex concepts relatable.Improving compliance with annual reporting requirements for crowdfunding campaigns could transform the market, creating a more transparent and effective system for investors and entrepreneurs alike. In today's episode, Greg Burke, Assistant Professor of Accounting and Business Law at Loyola University Chicago, highlighted a key finding from his research: less than a third of crowdfunding issuers file their required annual reports on time, and fewer than half ever do.Greg explained that this lack of compliance undermines investor trust and market legitimacy. “Investors are looking for regulation crowdfunding annual reports,” he said. “Sometimes they're just not finding it. If investors are demanding it and they're not getting it, it certainly may impact their investment decisions and the potential growth in this market.”The consequences of this gap in transparency are significant. As Greg noted, compliance with annual reporting requirements provides investors with critical information to make better decisions. This transparency fosters trust, encourages repeat investments, and helps attract new capital to the space.Greg's research also uncovered ways to increase compliance. In a field experiment conducted with King's Crowd, a marketing campaign emphasized the regulatory risks of failing to comply with reporting requirements. This simple approach increased compliance by 20%. “A simple email reminder tailored towards emphasizing regulatory risk can make a difference,” Greg said.Platforms and intermediaries also play a critical role. Greg suggested that crowdfunding platforms could incorporate reporting support into their services, either by helping issuers directly or partnering with third-party providers. He noted that the process doesn't have to be costly or complicated. “There are services out there that can provide these reports for less than a thousand dollars,” Greg explained.By addressing this issue, we could unlock the full potential of regulated crowdfunding. Transparent reporting not only satisfies investor demand but also legitimizes the marketplace, opening doors for more diverse founders and innovative solutions to access much-needed capital.Improving compliance with reporting requirements might seem like a small step, but it's a foundational one. As Greg put it, “Any kind of movement in this space to increase reporting compliance only adds legitimacy to the space.”tl;dr:Greg Burke highlights low compliance with annual reporting requirements in the regulated crowdfunding market.Improved compliance fosters investor trust and market growth, benefiting entrepreneurs and diverse founders.Greg's research shows emphasizing regulatory risks can increase reporting compliance by 20%.Crowdfunding platforms and third-party services can simplify compliance for resource-constrained entrepreneurs.Greg's superpower is making complex topics relatable by tailoring messages to his audience's needs.How to Develop Making Complex Concepts Relatable As a SuperpowerGreg's superpower is making complex, seemingly dull topics engaging, relatable, and accessible. As Greg explained, “I think what I've come down to is making seemingly uninteresting, confusing, or unimportant things seem interesting, understandable, and relevant.” He emphasized that the key to this skill lies in understanding the audience, creating an engaging environment, and translating complicated ideas into relatable concepts.Illustrative Story:Greg shared an example from his classroom, where he taught students about safeguarding assets, a topic that might seem boring at first glance. By comparing company practices to personal experiences—like hiding cash from a roommate—he made the concept tangible and easy to understand. Through relatable analogies, Greg transformed a dry academic topic into a conversation his students could connect with and apply.Actionable Tips for Developing the Superpower:Know Your Audience: Understand what matters to the people you're speaking to and tailor your message.Make It Relatable: Use analogies or examples drawn from everyday life to explain complex ideas.Create an Open Environment: Foster a safe, genuine, and engaging space to encourage curiosity and interaction.Observe and Adjust: Pay attention to how people respond to your explanations and refine your approach accordingly.Be Brave: Don't be afraid to try new ways of communicating, even if it doesn't work perfectly the first time.By following Greg's example and advice, you can make “making complex concepts relatable” a skill. With practice and effort, you could make it a superpower that enables you to do more good in the world.Remember, however, that research into success suggests that building on your own superpowers is more important than creating new ones or overcoming weaknesses. You do you!Guest ProfileGreg Burke (he/him):Assistant Professor of Accounting and Business Law, Quinlan School of Business at Loyola University ChicagoAbout Quinlan School of Business at Loyola University Chicago: Loyola University Chicago's business school educates responsible leaders through master's, undergraduate, and executive education.Website: gregory-burke.comOther URL: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5463161Biographical Information: Greg Burke, Ph.D., CPA, is an Assistant Professor of Accounting at the Quinlan School of Business at Loyola University Chicago, located in the heart of downtown Chicago. Greg earned his Ph.D. in Accounting from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, completing his doctoral studies with a two-year visit at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business. He also holds an active CPA license in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.Greg's research focuses on financial accounting, with an emphasis on securities regulation and enforcement, financial reporting and disclosure, entrepreneurial finance, and corporate governance. He is particularly interested in the securities market created by Regulation Crowdfunding, where much of his current work is centered. His research primarily employs empirical-archival methods but also incorporates experimental, survey, and analytical approaches to address questions where archival data proves less effective.With a deep passion for teaching, Greg has instructed undergraduate and graduate courses in financial and managerial accounting as well as basic mathematics. Additionally, he has trained new hire assurance associates at PwC and provided instruction to professionals at a start-up incubator. Before joining Loyola, Greg was a faculty member at Fairfield University, where he taught financial and managerial accounting. His professional background includes auditing at PwC in Boston, where he worked on asset management and employee benefit plan engagements. Greg also spent a year as a volunteer in Ecuador, reflecting his commitment to service and community.Outside of academia, Greg enjoys outdoor activities, tackling DIY home improvement projects, and hunting for unbeatable sales. His diverse experiences and expertise make him a dynamic contributor to both the academic and professional accounting communities.LinkedIn Profile: linkedin.com/in/gregory-burkeSupport Our SponsorsOur generous sponsors make our work possible, serving impact investors, social entrepreneurs, community builders and diverse founders. Today's advertisers include FundingHope, and Rancho Affordable Housing (Proactive). Learn more about advertising with us here to help us Power Up October.Max-Impact Members(We're grateful for every one of these community champions who make this work possible.)Brian Christie, Brainsy | Carol Fineagan, Independent Consultant | Hiten Sonpal, RISE Robotics | John Berlet, CORE Tax Deeds, LLC. | Lory Moore, Lory Moore Law | Mark Grimes, Networked Enterprise Development | Matthew Mead, Hempitecture | Michael Pratt, Qnetic | Dr. Nicole Paulk, Siren Biotechnology | Paul Lovejoy, Stakeholder Enterprise | Pearl Wright, Global Changemaker | Scott Thorpe, Philanthropist | Sharon Samjitsingh, Health Care Originals | Add Your Name HereUpcoming SuperCrowd Event CalendarIf a location is not noted, the events below are virtual.Impact Cherub Club Meeting hosted by The Super Crowd, Inc., a public benefit corporation, on October 28, 2025, at 1:30 PM Eastern. Each month, the Club meets to review new offerings for investment consideration and to conduct due diligence on previously screened deals. To join the Impact Cherub Club, become an Impact Member of the SuperCrowd.SuperCrowdHour, November 19, 2025, at 12:00 PM Eastern — Devin Thorpe, CEO and Founder of The Super Crowd, Inc., will lead a session on “Investing with a Self-Directed IRA.” In this session, Devin will explain how investors can use self-directed IRAs to participate in regulated investment crowdfunding while managing taxes and optimizing returns. He'll break down when this strategy makes sense, how to choose the right custodian, and what fees, rules, and risks to watch for. With his trademark clarity and real-world experience, Devin will help you understand how to balance simplicity with smart tax planning—so you can invest confidently, align your portfolio with your values, and make your money work harder for both impact and income.SuperGreen Live, January 22–24, 2026, livestreaming globally. Organized by Green2Gold and The Super Crowd, Inc., this three-day event will spotlight the intersection of impact crowdfunding, sustainable innovation, and climate solutions. Featuring expert-led panels, interactive workshops, and live pitch sessions, SuperGreen Live brings together entrepreneurs, investors, policymakers, and activists to explore how capital and climate action can work hand in hand. With global livestreaming, VIP networking opportunities, and exclusive content, this event will empower participants to turn bold ideas into real impact. Don't miss your chance to join tens of thousands of changemakers at the largest virtual sustainability event of the year.Community Event CalendarSuccessful Funding with Karl Dakin, Tuesdays at 10:00 AM ET - Click on Events.Impact Accelerator Summit is a live, in-person event taking place in Austin, Texas, from October 23–25, 2025. This exclusive gathering brings together 100 heart-centered, conscious entrepreneurs generating $1M+ in revenue with 20–30 family offices and venture funds actively seeking to invest in world-changing businesses. Referred by Michael Dash, participants can expect an inspiring, high-impact experience focused on capital connection, growth, and global impact.If you would like to submit an event for us to share with the 10,000+ changemakers, investors and entrepreneurs who are members of the SuperCrowd, click here.We use AI to help us write compelling recaps of each episode. Get full access to Superpowers for Good at www.superpowers4good.com/subscribe

It's human nature to be curious about AI. Get the download on the growth of artificial intelligence, and hear how it can help you at work and in your personal life in an increasingly digital world, in the latest episode of The Huddle. John Furner peers into the future with Ronnie Chatterji, Chief Economist at OpenAI and distinguished professor at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business.

China will firmly defend its interests and support the multilateral trading system, while urging the United States to engage more in equal dialogue to ease friction and seek common ground in pursuit of a more open global economy, said analysts and business leaders on Sunday.分析人士及商界人士于周日表示，中国将坚定维护自身利益，支持多边贸易体制，同时敦促美方更多地开展平等对话，以缓解摩擦、寻求共识，推动构建更加开放的全球经济。As He Lifeng, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and vice-premier of the State Council, China's Cabinet, leads a delegation in Madrid, Spain, for talks with US counterparts from Sunday to Wednesday, market watchers said the meetings are aimed at addressing long-standing friction and exploring constructive solutions.中共中央政治局委员、国务院副总理何立峰率团于周日至周三在西班牙马德里同美方代表举行会谈。市场观察人士指出，此次会谈旨在解决长期存在的经贸摩擦，并探讨建设性解决方案。The two sides will discuss economic and trade issues, such as unilateral tariff measures adopted by the US, the abuse of export controls and the TikTok issue, according to the Ministry of Commerce.据商务部介绍，双方将围绕美方单边关税措施、滥用出口管制、TikTok等经贸议题展开讨论。Wang Wen, dean of Renmin University of China's Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, said the previous three rounds of trade talks between China and the US signaled willingness on both sides to find common ground, bringing much-needed optimism to international markets.中国人民大学重阳金融研究院院长王文表示，此前中美三轮经贸会谈已释放出双方寻求共识的积极意愿，为国际市场注入了亟需的信心。"With global economic momentum faltering, the international community is watching closely the talks in Spain, hoping both sides can translate dialogue into more substantive progress that would benefit not just the two nations, but all," he said.他指出：“当前全球经济增长动能不足，国际社会正密切关注此次西班牙会谈，期待双方能将对话转化为更具实质性的进展，这不仅惠及中美两国，更将造福世界各国。”Li Yong, a senior research fellow at the Beijing-based China Association of International Trade, said that under such circumstances, effectively addressing topics such as unilateral US tariff measures and the abuse of export controls is essential to fostering smoother China-US economic and trade relations, particularly in rebuilding trust and stabilizing cooperation.中国国际贸易学会高级研究员李永表示，在此背景下，有效解决美方单边关税措施、滥用出口管制等问题，对于推动中美经贸关系顺畅发展至关重要，尤其是在重建互信、稳定合作方面具有重要意义。Chen Wenling, former chief economist at the China Center for International Economic Exchanges, said the path to productive dialogue requires mutual respect and effort. She warned that Washington's recent unilateral moves — including a fresh wave of sanctions against Chinese companies — risk undermining the very foundation of engagement.中国国际经济交流中心前首席经济学家陈文玲认为，开展富有成效的对话需要双方相互尊重、共同努力。她警示，美方近期采取的单边行动——包括新一轮对华企业制裁——可能会破坏双方交往的基础。These are not good-faith gestures, but pressure tactics that Beijing will firmly oppose rather than concede to, Chen said.陈文玲强调：“这些并非善意之举，而是施压手段，中方将坚决反对，绝不妥协。”"China always remains open to dialogues with the US, but only based on mutual respect and equal standing. The onus is now on Washington to decide whether it will approach the negotiating table as an equal partner seeking mutually acceptable solutions," she added.她进一步指出：“中方始终愿与美方开展对话，但对话必须建立在相互尊重、平等相待的基础之上。当前，美方需作出抉择：是否以平等伙伴的身份坐到谈判桌前，寻求双方都能接受的解决方案。”On Saturday, the Ministry of Commerce responded to a US move to add multiple Chinese entities to its export control list. A spokesperson said that China firmly opposes the move, which targets Chinese entities in the semiconductor, biotechnology, aerospace, and commercial and trade logistics sectors.周六，商务部就美方将多家中国实体列入出口管制清单一事作出回应。发言人表示，中方坚决反对这一做法，此次美方制裁针对的是中国半导体、生物技术、航空航天、商贸物流等领域的实体。Noting that the two countries are scheduled to hold economic and trade talks in Spain starting on Sunday, the spokesperson said the US decision to sanction Chinese businesses raises questions about its true intentions.发言人指出，中美双方定于周日在西班牙举行经贸会谈，美方此时制裁中国企业，其真实意图令人质疑。The Ministry of Commerce also announced on the same day that it has initiated an anti-dumping investigation into imports of certain analog integrated circuit chips originating in the US, and it launched an anti-discrimination investigation into relevant US measures targeting China's integrated circuit sector.同日，商务部还宣布，已对原产于美国的部分模拟集成电路芯片发起反倾销调查，并就美方针对中国集成电路产业的相关措施发起反歧视调查。Following these moves, the Beijing-based China Semiconductor Industry Association issued a statement stressing that the healthy development of the semiconductor industry requires a fair competitive environment.此后，位于北京的中国半导体行业协会发表声明强调，半导体产业的健康发展需要公平的竞争环境。The China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products called for domestic companies to boost innovation, strengthen industrial coordination and deepen global cooperation, while warning that unilateral measures risk disrupting international industrial and supply chains.中国机电产品进出口商会呼吁国内企业加大创新力度、加强产业协同、深化国际合作，同时警示，单边措施可能扰乱国际产业链供应链。John Quelch, a professor at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, said: "The recent trend toward decoupling, particularly in technology and supply chains, reflects a deeper anxiety about dependence and vulnerability. But we must not lose sight of the broader truth: China and the US remain deeply intertwined."杜克大学福库商学院教授约翰・奎尔奇表示：“近期在技术和供应链等领域出现的‘脱钩'趋势，反映出各方对依赖风险和脆弱性的深层担忧。但我们不能忽视一个更重要的事实：中美经济仍深度交融。”He said the two sides must search for new equilibrium, one that balances competition with cooperation, and national interest with global responsibility.他认为，双方需寻求新的平衡，在竞争与合作之间、国家利益与全球责任之间找到平衡点。Olaf Schmidt, vice-president of Messe Frankfurt Exhibition, a German trade fair and event organizer, said his company has always championed global free trade, believing that it is vital to connect people, products and markets.德国展会运营商法兰克福展览集团副总裁奥拉夫・施密特表示，集团始终倡导全球自由贸易，坚信自由贸易对于连接人与人、产品与市场至关重要。multilateraladj.多边的；涉及多方的/ˌmʌltiˈlætərəl/frictionn.摩擦；矛盾；不和/ˈfrɪkʃn/unilateraladj.单边的；单方面的/ˌjuːnɪˈlætrəl/onusn.责任；义务；负担/ˈəʊnəs/decouplingn.脱钩；分离/ˌdiːˈkʌplɪŋ/

Our guest on the podcast today is Scott Bondurant. Scott is the founder and chief investment officer of Bondurant Investment Advisory, a registered investment advisor based in the Chicago suburbs. He is also an adjunct professor at Northwestern University, where he teaches an undergraduate course on the history of investing. He recently published a white paper about the importance of incorporating mean reversion in financial planning and portfolio construction, which we'll be discussing in this podcast. Scott has a BA from Stanford University and an MBA from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business. He started his career at Kidder Peabody and also worked for Paine Webber and Morgan Stanley before becoming a managing director for UBS.BackgroundBioBondurant Investment AdvisoryMean Reversion“Hidden in Plain Sight: The Dramatic Impact on Financial Planning and Portfolio Construction When Mean Reversion Is Incorporated in Risk and Return Expectations,” by Scott Bondurant, papers.ssrn.com, Nov. 25, 2024.“Understanding ‘Mean Reversion' Can Make or Break Retirement,” by Scott Bondurant, rethinking65.com, June 13, 2024.“Mean Reversion: Unlocking a Foundational Investing Principle,” sbondinvest.com, Feb. 8, 2024.OtherFair Disclosure, Regulation FD“Charley Ellis: Indexing Is a Marvelous Gift,” The Long View podcast, morningstar.com, Aug. 5, 2025.Devil Take the Hindmost: A History of Financial Speculation, by Edward ChancellorStocks for the Long Run: The Definitive Guide to Financial Market Returns & Long-Term Investment Strategies, by Jeremy Siegel“Anomalies: The Equity Premium Puzzle,” by Jeremy Siegel and Richard Thaler, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Winter, 1997.“Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to Be Justified by Subsequent Changes in Dividends?” by Robert Shiller, papers.ssrn.com, April 12, 2004.Nebo Wealth

On this episode of Deans Counsel, Jim Ellis and Ken Kring speak with Blair Sheppard, Special Advisor to Duke Kunshan University, and previously Dean of Duke's Fuqua School of Business. Blair is responsible for directing all of Duke Kunshan's fundraising, corporate development, non-degree program development and regional development for the newly formed campus in China.From 2012-2024, Blair served as Global Leader for Strategy and Leadership at PwC, where he focused on building resilient strategies and leadership for PwC worldwide, and further sharpened his ability to see further into the future than most of the rest of us.In this episode, we hear very compelling observations from Blair about four key mega-trends -- climate, technology, global forces and aging -- that he feels will fundamentally reshape every aspect of society (including business, of course). With us, he shares some insight into how business schools, through their research and teaching, must soon lean into these abrupt changes in societal needs. In so doing, he also lends advice as to how we as leaders should go about the change process of taking faculty through this difficult process, touching on topics such as:- Why some long-held assumptions are no longer holding- Our rapidly changing world's impact on curriculum- Rethinking the teaching of strategy- How Ai will shape demand for the MBALearn more about Blair SheppardComments/criticism/suggestions/feedback? We'd love to hear it. Drop us a note.Thanks for listening.-Produced by Joel Davis at Analog Digital Arts--DEANS COUNSEL: A podcast for deans and academic leadership.James Ellis | Moderator | Dean of the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California (2007-2019)David Ikenberry | Moderator | Dean of the Leeds School of Business at the University of Colorado-Boulder (2011-2016)Ken Kring | Moderator | Co-Managing Director, Global Education Practice and Senior Client Partner at Korn FerryDeansCounsel.com

Welcome to another special episode of the Clear Admit MBA Admissions Podcast, recorded live at the Clear Admit MBA Fair at MIT Sloan School of Management in May 2025. In this panel session, "Admissions Tips: What You Say – Goals, Essays & Interviews," we dove into four core components of the MBA application: career goals, application essays, professional recommendations, and the admissions interview. Our expert panel includes Eric Askins, Executive Director of Admission, University of California, Berkeley Haas School of Business; Allison Jamison, Assistant Dean of Admissions, Duke University, Fuqua School of Business; Katya Gonzalez-Willette, Marketing Manager, MBA Admissions, Harvard Business School; and Jim Holmen, Director of Admissions and Financial Aid, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business.

The U.S. workforce landscape is changing as technologies advance and Artificial Intelligence continues to impact job and education territories. The education technology company, YouScience, is keeping up with the times, guiding students on how to prepare for college and advanced careers, while re-skilling and up-skilling a workforce for industries needing to fill jobs. On this episode, YouScience Co-founder Edson Barton and Joseph Watt, Vice President of ECMC Group, discuss how the two organizations are building on the education to workforce movement.  Edson Barton, Founder and CEO of YouScience and founder of Industry CertificationsAs a 25-year EdTech veteran, he leads YouScience as it revolutionizes the personalization of career education—bridging the edtech and talent tech markets and solving critical education-to-workforce issues such as the skills gap and program equity and diversity. By providing students a more direct and tangible way to connect their education to their future careers, YouScience improves academic outcomes including high school graduation rates and postsecondary enrollment and completion rates.As a leader in the education technology industry, Edson has been quoted in numerous reports and media articles, most notably in Forbes, US World & News Report, MSN, and eSchool News.Prior to leading YouScience, Edson was the CEO and co-owner of ProCert Labs, a standards alignment and validation organization, and served as a senior director with Certiport where he oversaw client activities for Adobe, Autodesk, Intuit, and Microsoft, including worldwide publisher channels. Additionally, he was a sales vice president for Imergent and the executive director for Kids Voting Utah.Joseph Watt, Vice President at ECMC Group and Managing Director of EIFJoe grew up in the rural Midwest, where he was inspired daily by his mother's commitment to educating others, going above and beyond to reach her students, especially those who came from difficult family circumstances. After graduating high school with a class of 40 students, then joining a student body of more than 40,000 at the University of Illinois, and finally completing graduate school at Duke University, he has experienced firsthand the wide variations, challenges and ultimately, the transformative impact of education across a multitude of learning environments.Shortly after joining ECMC Group, Joe co-led the creation of the Education Impact Fund, driven by the opportunity to utilize patient, impact-aligned capital to propel transformative educational outcomes. By investing in scalable ventures that are addressing educational inequities and empowering underserved and overlooked groups, Joe aims to further demonstrate the strong correlation between long-term impact and outsized financial returns, thereby, inspiring increased investment in impactful educational change.Before ECMC Group, Joe's experience spans corporate strategy, M&A, private equity and investments within the technology and education sectors. He is a graduate of Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, where he was an Impact Investing Fellow, and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He lives outside of Durham, North Carolina, with his wife, son and dog.

Today's guests are Rob Arnott, founder and Chairman of the board of Research Affiliates, and Campbell Harvey, Head of Research at Research Affiliates and Professor of Finance at the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University. In today's episode, Rob and Cam touch on the state of value investing in a megacap dominated market, emphasizing the potential consequences of large scale passive investing. They also touch on the rapid change presented by AI, what it may be capable of, and its impacts on how we should view investing. Finally, they address the global investing environment and macro trends, instability, and the role of government in changing world markets. (0:00) Starts (1:46) Introduction of Rob Arnott & Cam Harvey (7:35) Passive investing risks (14:22) The opportunity in small caps and foreign markets (24:22) Similarities between today & the Dot-Com era (34:43) REITs, gold and investor sentiment (47:14) Government spending & US national debt concerns (1:03:27) US debt service, defense spending, and financial crisis risks (1:05:09) Cam on the inverted yield curve (1:08:09) Closing remarks and listener feedback ----- Follow Meb on X, LinkedIn and YouTube For detailed show notes, click here To learn more about our funds and follow us, subscribe to our mailing list or visit us at cambriainvestments.com ----- Sponsor:⁠ YCharts⁠ enables financial advisors to make smarter investment decisions and better communicate with clients. Get 20% off your initial YCharts Professional subscription when you start your free trial. ----- Follow The Idea Farm: X | LinkedIn | Instagram | TikTok ----- Interested in sponsoring the show? Email us at Feedback@TheMebFaberShow.com ----- Past guests include Ed Thorp, Richard Thaler, Jeremy Grantham, Joel Greenblatt, Campbell Harvey, Ivy Zelman, Kathryn Kaminski, Jason Calacanis, Whitney Baker, Aswath Damodaran, Howard Marks, Tom Barton, and many more.  ----- Meb's invested in some awesome startups that have passed along discounts to our listeners. Check them out here!  ----- Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant (https://thepodcastconsultant.com). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ever felt like you're working nonstop but still falling short? This episode cracks open the myth of busyness and builds a bold new definition of real productivity — one that actually holds up in today's complex, chaotic work world. Because endurance in leadership isn't about doing more — it's about doing what matters, for the long haul.Imagine this: You're checking every box, attending every meeting, and still wondering: Is any of this actually moving the needle? Or you are a manager or leader wondering, "Is this the best I can get out of my people? Are the performing at their highest levels? Are we efficient enough?" In this episode, we pull apart the illusion of productivity that keeps high-performing teams spinning and introduce a sharper, saner standard rooted in long-term impact. You'll hear insights gained from a study of 30 senior leaders across industries who've worked with the most productive people and teams of their careers — and what they've learned about real, sustainable output. We explore why the old metrics are failing, what effective leaders do differently, and how to reset the conversation about work that actually matters. If you're ready to stop sprinting on autopilot and start leading with intention, hit play.Emma Browning is a management consultant and founder of Paradox Consulting Partners, a woman--owned consulting company and Certified B Corporation that aligns talent strategy with business strategy to create high-performing, great places for all to work. She has her MBA from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and has advised hundreds of clients including Fortune 100 and 500 companies over her 20-year consulting career. She is an expert in helping organizations operate both productively and equitably through structure, process, and systems design.www.linkedin.com/in/emmabrowninghttps://paradoxcp.com#RedefiningProductivity #SustainableLeadershipHabits #BusyVsProductive #WorkThatActuallyMatters #TheHardSkillsTune in for this empowering conversation at TalkRadio.nyc

Will generative artificial intelligence lead to nirvana or dystopia? Great question, which we don't exactly answer in this week's podcast, but we do weigh the most critical downstream effects of the technology based on recent research done by urban economists Frank Levy and Scott Abrahams. We assess how GenAI impacts the benefits of a college degree, the nation's political dynamics, and which metro area economies will win (think Savannah) and lose (think San Francisco).Guests: Frank Levy, Visitor in the Strategy Group of the Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, and Scott Abrahams, Professor of Economics at Louisiana State UniversityRead Frank and Scott's recent research on Gen AI here: From San Francisco to Savannah? The Downstream Effects of Generative AI (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4874104)Hosts: Mark Zandi – Chief Economist, Moody's Analytics, Cris deRitis – Deputy Chief Economist, Moody's Analytics, Marisa DiNatale – Senior Director - Head of Global Forecasting, Moody's AnalyticsFollow Mark Zandi on 'X', BlueSky or LinkedIn @MarkZandi, Cris deRitis on LinkedIn, and Marisa DiNatale on LinkedIn Questions or Comments, please email us at helpeconomy@moodys.com. We would love to hear from you. To stay informed and follow the insights of Moody's Analytics economists, visit Economic View.

Best known for his seminal work on the information content of the US Treasury yield curve nearly 4 decades ago, Campbell Harvey has produced meaningful academic research in all corners of empirical finance. In this episode of the Alpha Exchange, I caught up with Campbell, now a Professor of Finance at Duke and Partner at Research Affiliates, on his recent work on gold, an asset near and dear to me. We discuss his piece “Is There Still a Golden Dilemma?", with Claude Erb that updates work they did back in 2013 on the yellow metal.Our conversation explores the financial properties of gold, with emphasis on its capacity to hold its purchasing power and to help defend against equity market drawdowns. On the first, Campbell makes the point that over the past two decades, gold has easily outperformed inflation. He adds, however, that gold is considerably more volatile than inflation is. Thus, there are periods when gold can also underperform inflation. On the equity drawdown front, Campbell's work shows that, while not an explicit hedge like an S&P 500 put option is, gold has proven durable during risk-off periods.We move to the drivers of the gold price and here Campbell discusses the role of both ETFs and Central Banks. Lastly, and importantly, Campbell's work shows that entry price matters. When the price of gold deviates from fair value, the forward return profile tends to be worse. Today's substantial rally may easily continue, but investors must be mindful of the risks of buying at extended levels.I hope you enjoy this episode of the Alpha Exchange, my conversation with Campbell Harvey.

Are you stuck in an endless cycle of job applications with little to no results? You're not alone. The job search game has changed, and today's guest, Steve Dalton, is here to help you hack the process with research-backed strategies that eliminate guesswork. Steve is the author of The Two-Hour Job Search and The Job Closer, two groundbreaking books that have transformed how professionals land jobs. A former senior career consultant at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, he specializes in simplifying and systematizing the job search process—so you don't have to guess your way through it. In this episode, Steve and I break down: ✅ Why traditional job search methods don't work anymore ✅ The power of precision networking over mass applications ✅ A step-by-step system to land interviews faster ✅ Why your next job won't come from applying online—and what to do instead ✅ How AI is shaping the job market and where job seekers go wrong ✅ The #1 mistake people make in networking (and how to fix it!) ✅ How to sell yourself in interviews using storytelling frameworks ✅ The psychology behind negotiating job offers with confidence This episode is packed with actionable strategies to help you take control of your job search without wasting time on outdated tactics. If you're serious about making a strategic career move, you don't want to miss this one.

In this podcast episode, Dr. Jonathan H. Westover talks with Robert J. Khoury about weaving dignity into the internship process. Robert J. Khoury is the co-founder and CEO of Agile Rainmakers, a high-impact advisory firm based in Chicago's Gold Coast. His 20+ year career in the financial industry has seen him in many roles: an equity derivatives trader, portfolio manager, corporate strategist, recruiter, hedge fund executive and private equity investor. Rob earned a BSE in Electrical Engineering at Princeton University and his MBA from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business. He takes great pleasure in supporting organizations, college students and recent graduates in experiencing outstanding internships. Rob has developed and managed a comprehensive internship program for college students that has resulted in a significant impact for dozens of students and clients alike. He has a passion for ensuring success. As a member of the Princeton Club of Chicago, for over a decade he organized intern luncheons for Princeton students eager to find opportunities in Chicago. He is the co-author of Intern Management: Principles for Designing an Exceptional Internship and How To Intern Successfully: Insights and Actions to Optimize Your Experience. Rob led personal and professional development seminars for Landmark Worldwide for several years; enjoys philanthropy and family vacations; and lives with his wife, Mary – a freshwater ecologist – and their two children in downtown Chicago overlooking beautiful Lake Michigan.  Check out all of the podcasts in the HCI Podcast Network!

Prelude Ventures is a climate tech investment firm focusing on early-stage startups. They invest primarily in seed and Series A rounds, supporting founders with innovative technologies addressing climate challenges. They began in 2009 and have about $2 billion under management. Matt Eggers, Managing Director at Prelude Ventures, has a wealth of experience in climate tech investing and manufacturing. Plus, he serves on one of our boards at Duke University, the EDGE Center at our Fuqua School of Business, so you know he can pick great teams! Prior roles include Partner at Breakthrough Energy Ventures and operational roles at Sunrun, Tesla, Genentech, and Bloom Energy.  Here are four topics we covered: Climate Tech Investment Strategy: Prelude focuses on strong teams, scalable technologies, and significant markets for venture-backed growth. A great team can overcome deficiencies in technology or business models and drive a startup's success. Creative Financing Solutions: Examples of combining venture capital, grants, and equipment financing for first-of-a-kind manufacturing facilities like Lux Wall. Biogenic Carbon Capture: Insights into innovative approaches like Graphite and Vaulted Deep, which address both carbon removal and waste management. Personal Habits for Leaders: Matt highlights outdoor activities, meditation, and self-reflection as critical practices for mental well-being and leadership focus.

Sophia Rowland, Senior Product Manager at SAS, discusses her journey from data science to product management at SAS, focusing on the integration of AI and analytics. She explains the concepts of Model Ops and ML Ops, the challenges organizations face in operationalizing machine learning models, and the critical role of analytics in this process. Key Takeaways:  Dependency management errors that occur when IT and data science teams work in silos The connection between algorithms and psychology, using data and software to tap into motivation How to discern hype from meaningful advancements in emerging technologies The influence of user behavior on AI adoption Ways to stay updated in the rapidly evolving field of AI Guest Bio: Sophia Rowland is a Senior Product Manager focusing on ModelOps and ML Ops at SAS. In her previous role as a data scientist, Sophia worked with dozens of organizations to solve a variety of problems using analytics. As an active speaker and writer, Sophia has spoken at events like the AI Summit, All Things Open, SAS Explore, and SAS Innovate; she has also written dozens of articles and blog posts. As a lifelong North Carolinian, Sophia holds degrees from both UNC-Chapel Hill and Duke, including bachelor's degrees in computer science and psychology, and a Master of Science in Quantitative Management: Business Analytics from the Fuqua School of Business. Outside of work, Sophia enjoys reading an eclectic assortment of books, hiking throughout North Carolina, and trying to stay upright while ice skating. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About this Show: The Brave Technologist is here to shed light on the opportunities and challenges of emerging tech. To make it digestible, less scary, and more approachable for all! Join us as we embark on a mission to demystify artificial intelligence, challenge the status quo, and empower everyday people to embrace the digital revolution. Whether you're a tech enthusiast, a curious mind, or an industry professional, this podcast invites you to join the conversation and explore the future of AI together. The Brave Technologist Podcast is hosted by Luke Mulks, VP Business Operations at Brave Software—makers of the privacy-respecting Brave browser and Search engine, and now powering AI everywhere with the Brave Search API. Music by: Ari Dvorin Produced by: Sam Laliberte

If you've ever tried to change things at work, you know the headwinds you face. Teams and processes are often trapped in longstanding, ineffective patterns that are hard to budge. Dan Heath, senior fellow at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, explains proven techniques to reset. Those include making the problem visible, jolting incremental progress to start gaining traction, and motivating teams into a new direction. He shares real-life examples of how leaders and teams broke through seemingly intractable work situations. Heath is the author of the new book Reset: How to Change What's Not Working.

Nick Palmisciano is a United States Military Academy graduate of West Point and Duke University's Fuqua School of Business MBA Program. He served six years as an infantry officer before moving into the business world, creating the successful marketing firm Diesel Jack Media, and Ranger Up, which grew to prominence as the first military lifestyle brand. He is the co-author of Tim Kennedy's Book - Scars and Stripes, and the creator of the new series Office Joe. Austin Von Letkemann, known as “MandatoryFunDay,” 1st Lt. is currently a platoon leader assigned to Alpha Company, 303rd Intelligence and Electronic Warfare Battalion, 504th Expeditionary Military Intelligence Brigade. Von Letkemann creatively uses his free time to make parody videos that apprise the humor of day-to-day military operations, while simultaneously connecting civilians to the everyday life of a service member. Watch Office Joe Here: https://www.primevideo.com/detail/Office-Joe/0Q7Q14CQ5IGEU91Z3M4OU6Z7B2  

Professor Campbell Harvey, professor of finance at the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University and the inventor of the most famous recession indicator — the inverted yield curve — returns to The Julia La Roche Show for episode 219 to discuss the state of the economy, the yield curve, and what's ahead for U.S. growth. Links:   DeFI and the Future of Finance: https://www.amazon.com/DeFi-Future-Finance-Campbell-Harvey/dp/1119836018 https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/faculty/campbell-harvey https://people.duke.edu/~charvey/ https://twitter.com/camharvey Timestamps: 00:02 Introduction to Professor Campbell Harvey 00:51 BlackRock's "end of boom-bust cycle" thesis 04:15 Historical perspective on market cycles 06:14 Impact of wealthy consumers on economy 07:13 Role of technological innovation 11:37 U.S. leadership in innovation 14:31 Growth prospects and productivity potential 16:09 Post-election growth outlook 24:56 U.S. debt and deficit challenges 28:16 Social Security sustainability issues 32:51 Inverted yield curve indicator discussion 40:11 Impact of technological innovations 45:21 Federal Reserve policy critique 50:20 Distortions from Fed's zero-rate policy 54:18 Future consequences of Fed decisions 59:40 Closing thoughts on U.S. prospects

Messier is a smartphone app designed with input from a team of scientific advisors including one of today's guests, Dr. Zorana Ivcevic Pringle, and also Dr. James Kaufman, who was the guest in episode 6 of “The Science of Creativity.” In this episode, I interview Dr. Zorana Ivcevic Pringle and co-founder Josh Seidenfeld. We talk about ways you can enhance your creativity through daily practice. Dr. Zorana Ivcevic Pringle is a Senior Research Scientist at the Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence. She is the Director of the Creativity and Emotions Lab. She's an expert in the psychology of art, creativity, and emotions. Josh Seidenfeld is the Chief Executive Officer of Messier. Josh has his MBA from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business. He's been a consultant on business development, fundraising, and corporate climate policy, including at both Meta (formerly Facebook) and Apple. For more information: Messier's web site Dr. Zorana Ivcevic Pringle's web site Music by license from SoundStripe: "Uptown Lovers Instrumental" by AFTERNOONZ "Miss Missy" by AFTERNOONZ "What's the Big Deal" by Ryan Saranich Copyright (c) 2024 Keith Sawyer

Naresh Vissa discusses his move from Baltimore to Tampa and his reasons for choosing Tampa as his new home. He also talks about his career in digital media and marketing, as well as his venture into real estate investing. Naresh shares his perspective on the Florida housing market and the opportunities it presents. He also discusses his experience as a parent and the challenges and joys of raising two young children. Naresh Vissa discusses the importance of early childhood development and the impact it has on raising confident and independent adults. He shares his own parenting philosophy and the activities he exposes his children to in order to instill passion, values, and principles. Naresh emphasizes the significance of sociability, self-sufficiency, and efficiency in raising adults. He also highlights the importance of confidence and likability in navigating through life. Naresh encourages fathers to be actively involved in their children's lives from a young age and to cherish every moment.About Guest, Naresh Vissa:Naresh Vissa is Founder and CEO of Krish Media & Marketing – a full service online and digital media and marketing agency. He has worked with leading publishers, media firms and institutions such as CNN Radio, JP Morgan Chase, EverBank, The Institute for Energy Research, Houston Rockets, Houston Astros, the American Junior Golf Association, Agora Publishing, and Stansberry Research.Naresh helped launch an online radio network generating six-figures in monthly revenue.  He managed the production and marketing for the first online retail physical precious metals trading platform. He's a #1 bestselling author of PODCASTNOMICS: The Book Of Podcasting… To Make You Millions and has been featured on USA Today, Yahoo!, Bloomberg, MSNBC, Huffington Post, Business Week, MSN Money, Business Insider, India Today, and the Hindustan Times. He was also the Director of Media Strategy at the largest private and independent financial publisher in the world.In 2009, Naresh co-hosted the top-rated financial talk show in the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolis, The Wall Street Shuffle. He has booked more than 1,500 experts in the fields of finance, economics, business management & consulting, self-help, leadership, sales and marketing.Naresh aided the Houston Rockets' staff in selecting draft picks Aaron Brooks, Carl Landry and Donte Greene in the 2007 and 2008 NBA Drafts.Naresh took as many as 27 credit hours a semester while at Syracuse University, and he graduated Magna Cum Laude from the Renée Crown University Honors Program, triple majoring in broadcast and digital journalism, finance, and accounting at the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications and Martin J. Whitman School of Management. Morgan Stanley nominated him as an Emerging Student Leader. During his junior and senior years, he served as an analyst for the Orange Value Fund, where he managed an investment portfolio in excess of $1.2 million of private investor money. Upon graduation, he was awarded as a high-achieving student in his class.Naresh earned a Master's Degree from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, concurrently working as an admissions recruitment coordinator, marketing and communications blogger, and strategy research assistant to Executive in Residence Professor Bill Sax. A former academic tutor, counselor to underrepresented students, and middle school assistant basketball coach at the nationally renowned Village School in Houston, Naresh frequently donates his time to community service and social advocacy. He holds a first-degree Black Belt in Taekwondo.

In his 1986 PhD thesis, Campbell Harvey identified the predictive power of the inverted yield curve through four business cycles. With curve inversion correctly foretelling three more recessions since then, investors this cycle have been anticipating an impending downturn ever since the yield curve inverted nearly two years ago. In this episode, we talk with Dr. Campbell Harvey, Professor of Finance at the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University, about the theoretical foundation connecting the inverted yield curve and recessions, whether this cycle could be different, and what it implies for Fed policy.

In this episode of Ruled by Reason, guest host Leslie Marx, the Robert A. Bandeen Distinguished Professor of Economics at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, sits down with Professor Florian Ederer to discuss his award-winning article, Common Ownership, Competition, and Top Management Incentives, 131 J. Pol. Econ 1294 (2023). Professor Ederer is the Allen and Kelli Questrom Professor in Markets, Public Policy & Law at Boston University's Questrom School of Business. His article, co-authored with Professors Miguel Antón and Mireia Giné of the IESE Business School and Martin Schmalz of the University of Oxford Saïd Business School, won the 22nd Annual Jerry S. Cohen Memorial Fund Writing Award, presented on May 22 at AAI's 2024 Annual Policy Conference,  New Thinking on the Antitrust Treatment of Collective Action: Organized Labor, Countervailing Power, and Algorithmic Price Setting. The article helps explain the existing empirical evidence on the anticompetitive effects of common ownership and meaningfully advances our understanding of the underlying theory behind the effects. Among other things, Professor Marx and Professor Ederer discuss the theoretical and empirical background behind the theory of anticompetitive effects from common ownership (5:06), the mechanism by which common ownership actually leads to anticompetitive effects, notwithstanding that top managers and their delegees (rather than investors) control firms (12:13), and the implications of these findings for enforcers, policymakers, and future research (26:09). Antitrust scholarship that is considered and selected for the Jerry S. Cohen Award reflects a concern for principles of economic justice, the dispersal of economic power, the maintenance of effective limitations upon economic power or the federal statutes designed to protect society from various forms of anticompetitive activity. Scholarship reflects an awareness of the human and social impacts of economic institutions upon individuals, small businesses and other institutions necessary to the maintenance of a just and humane society–values and concerns Jerry S. Cohen dedicated his life and work to fostering.

50. Rebecca Tummers: The Military is Lying about Readiness This week, we are joined by vaccine-injured Rebecca Tummers, Captain in the United States Army. Rebecca is currently leaving military service, as she no longer respects nor supports the current military leadership. As an Army officer, she observed a disturbing trend where individual interests came first, while the mission came last. In our conversation, we discuss her observations, her own vax injury, and how the military is lying about its readiness. Born in Lancaster, CA, Rebecca grew up in a lively household with four brothers and one sister. After high school, Rebecca attended the United States Military Academy at West Point, graduating with a BS in American Politics and French in 2014. Rebecca went on to serve as an intelligence officer in the 82nd Airborne Division and took command of a Military Intelligence Company in the 101st Airborne Division. Rebecca most recently worked as a Targeter at the Joint Special Operations Command, contributing to high-stakes missions with precision and expertise. She completed two tours in Iraq, and one tour in Tunisia.  Currently, Rebecca is furthering her education at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, pursuing a Master's in Business Administration.  Follow Rebecca Tummers on X: @becca_tummers18 Our Sponsor: Triple E Farms: Pure Simple Food… like it was 200 years ago. Triple E Farms ships to all 48 lower states. For more information and to start shopping, visit https://tripleefarming.com   Use the coupon code FEDSFREEDOM for 10% off your first order. Check out Feds For Freedom's new Substack!  Sign the Feds For Freedom DEI Petition: https://conservativechange.org/petition/dei-must-die-ban-taxpayer-funding/ Watch and listen to The Feds on any of these platforms:  https://taplink.cc/fedsforfreedom Support the Work and Become a Member of Feds For Freedom www.fedsforfreedom.org/join Follow Us on Social Media Instagram/X (Twitter)/Facebook:  @feds4freedomusa

Sophia Rowland is a Senior Product Manager focusing on ModelOps and MLOps at SAS. In her previous role as a data scientist, Sophia worked with dozens of organizations to solve a variety of problems using analytics. David Weik has a passion for data and creating integrated customer-centric solutions. Thinking data and people first to create value-added solutions. Extending AI: From Industry to Innovation // MLOps Podcast #246 with Sophia Rowland, Senior Product Manager and David Weik, Senior Solutions Architect of SAS. Huge thank you to SAS for sponsoring this episode. SAS - http://www.sas.com/ // Abstract Organizations worldwide invest hundreds of billions into AI, but they do not see a return on their investments until they are able to leverage their analytical assets and models to make better decisions. At SAS, we focus on optimizing every step of the Data and AI lifecycle to get high-performing models into a form and location where they drive analytically driven decisions. Join experts from SAS as they share learnings and best practices from implementing MLOps and LLMOPs at organizations across industries, around the globe, and using various types of models and deployments, from IoT CV problems to composite flows that feature LLMs. // Bio Sophia Rowland Sophia Rowland is a Senior Product Manager focusing on ModelOps and MLOps at SAS. In her previous role as a data scientist, Sophia worked with dozens of organizations to solve a variety of problems using analytics. As an active speaker and writer, Sophia has spoken at events like All Things Open, SAS Explore, and SAS Innovate as well as written dozens of blogs and articles. As a staunch North Carolinian, Sophia holds degrees from both UNC-Chapel Hill and Duke including bachelor's degrees in computer science and psychology and a Master of Science in Quantitative Management: Business Analytics from the Fuqua School of Business. Outside of work, Sophia enjoys reading an eclectic assortment of books, hiking throughout North Carolina, and trying to stay upright while ice skating. David Weik David joined SAS in 2020 as a solutions architect. He helps customers to define and implement data-driven solutions. Previously, David was a SAS administrator/developer at a German insurance company working with the integration capabilities of SAS, Robotic Process Automation, and more. // MLOps Jobs board https://mlops.pallet.xyz/jobs // MLOps Swag/Merch https://mlops-community.myshopify.com/ // Related Links http://www.sas.com/ --------------- ✌️Connect With Us ✌️ ------------- Join our slack community: https://go.mlops.community/slack Follow us on Twitter: @mlopscommunity Sign up for the next meetup: https://go.mlops.community/register Catch all episodes, blogs, newsletters, and more: https://mlops.community/ Connect with Demetrios on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dpbrinkm/ Connect with Sophia on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sophia-rowland/ Connect with David on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-weik/ Timestamps: [00:00] Sophia & David's preferred coffee [00:19] Takeaways [02:11] Please like, share, leave a review, and subscribe to our MLOps channels! [02:55] Hands on MLOps and AI [05:14] Next-Gen MLOps Challenges [07:24] Data scientists adopting software [11:48] Taking a different approach [13:43] Zombie Model Management [16:36] Optimizing ML Revenue Allocation [18:39] Other use cases - Lockout - Tagout procedure [21:43] Vision Model Integration Challenges [26:16] Costly errors in predictive maintenance [27:25] Integration of Gen AI [34:32] Governance challenges in AI [38:00] Governance in Gen AI vs Governance with Traditional ML [41:53] Evaluation challenges in industries [46:49] Interface frustration with Chatbots [51:25] Implementing AI Agent's success [54:18] Usability challenges in interfaces [57:03] Themes in High-Performing AI Teams [1:00:51] Wrap up

Select MBA admissions experts convened at the Clear Admit MBA Fair to discuss some components of a successful MBA application. In this special podcast episode, Shelly Heinrich, Associate Dean & Managing Director, MBA Admissions, Georgetown McDonough; Allison Jamison: Assistant Dean of Admissions, Duke's Fuqua School of Business; Melissa Rapp, Associate Dean of Graduate Admissions, Emory Goizueta Business School; Amber Walsh, Senior Associate Director, MBA Admissions, Yale SOM, dig into the following questions: What is the role of standardized testing and past academic performance? How much work experience is needed, and what aspects are important? Why do admissions teams look at hobbies, volunteer work, and collegiate involvement?

Send us a Text Message.Extended care has frequently faced challenges in accessing and effectively implementing mental health support for long-term care.This week's guest believes it's time for a change.Join us on HealthBiz Brief as Rocco Coniglio, Business Builder for Red Rock Capital and Advisory, discusses the inadequate state of mental health treatments in long-term care and explains how leveraging advanced-practice nurses and telehealth can better support patients, families, and medical providers.

Christine Moorman is the T. Austin Finch Senior Professor of Business Administration at the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University, where her research explores how consumers, managers, organizations, and financial markets learn about and use marketing knowledge. Christine tells us she didn't set out to become a professor, but through the encouragement of her mentors, she came to see it was the best path for her to pursue. After she received her Bachelor of Science in Marketing and Political Science from Northern Kentucky University, she immediately went on to the University of Pittsburgh, where she got her Ph.D. and MBA in Marketing.In 2008, Christine saw the need for something in her field that would provide benchmarks and elevate the voice of marketers. This led her to found The CMO Survey, which she manages to this day, which gathers and shares insights from marketing leaders to forecast market trends, measure marketing excellence, and enhance marketing's impact on organizations and society.On the show today, Alan and Christine talk about some of the key findings of the survey, including how budgets are moving, the percentage of revenue for marketing spent at different kinds of companies, and the percent of sales versus the percent of the overall budget. They also discuss the types of metrics marketers are tracking and what implications those choices have for being able to communicate the value of marketing. This leads them into a conversation about the rise of technology and martech spending, as well as some important findings around the utilization of these tools and what could be causing gaps in anticipated value. The ROI question continues as Christine outlines her findings on trends of decreased DEI spend and ways companies could address the effectiveness of important DEI efforts. In this episode, you'll learn about:Top-level trends in marketing spend and percentage of revenue allocated What metrics best communicate marketing value? Why DEI investments are decreasing and how we can increase the efficiency of spend Key Highlights:[02:24] Becoming a “cracker-jack” event ticket salesperson[05:45] Why Christine became a professor [06:50] Why start the CMO Survey?[07:35] Where is the budget going? Top-level trends around spending[10:35] Marketers ability to communicate value [15:45] Martech challenges and how they're impacting marketing efforts [19:20] Experiences with failed CRM implementations [22:20] Why has DEI spending dropped?[28:30] Trends Alan has seen through these interviews[30:30] An experience of her past that defines who she is today: mentorship [34:10] Advice to her younger self: worry less and believe more.[34:40] Learning how to ask better questions and interrogate theories [38:30] Trends to watch: marketing for a better world and a base of disciplinary training [40:50] A big opportunity: cross-industry idea sharingLooking for more?Visit our website for the full show notes, links to resources mentioned in this episode, and ways to connect with the guest! Become a member today and listen ad-free, visit https://plus.acast.com/s/marketingtoday. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the years, Choiceology has offered a lot of advice for making better decisions. In this special episode of Choiceology with Katy Milkman, we bring you the story of a video game that is surprisingly effective at reducing decision errors, and you'll hear about a practical checklist for improving choices in many different contexts.Solving fictitious mysteries might sound like fun and games, but the video game MISSING: The Pursuit of Terry Hughes was designed with a serious purpose in mind: to help intelligence analysts avoid decision-making traps. In 2015, James Korris and Carey Morewedge worked together to design a video game for the intelligence agency IARPA, the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity, and measured the biases exhibited before and after playing the series of 90-minute games. The results were remarkable and extremely durable.James Korris is president and CEO of Creative Technologies Inc. in Los Angeles, and is a pioneer in immersive game-based simulation for military learning. You can see a preview of the game James designed titled MISSING: The Pursuit of Terry Hughes.Next, Katy speaks with Carey Morewedge about the game and about his research on effective decision-debiasing techniques. You can learn more in the paper Carey co-authored with James titled "Debiasing Decisions: Improved Decision Making With a Single Training Intervention."Carey Morewedge is a professor of marketing at Boston University Questrom School of Business who studies psychological biases and how to reduce them. Finally, Katy speaks with Jack Soll to hear his checklist of four simple ways to debias yourself before making decisions, big or small. You can read more in the article Jack and Katy co-authored with John Payne titled "Outsmart Your Own Biases." Jack Soll is the Gregory Mario & Jeremy Mario Distinguished Professor of Management and Organizations at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business. Choiceology is an original podcast from Charles Schwab. For more on the show, visit schwab.com/Choiceology.If you enjoy the show, please leave a rating or review on Apple Podcasts.Important DisclosuresThe comments, views, and opinions expressed in the presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily represent the views of Charles Schwab.Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable source. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed and Charles Schwab & Co. expressly disclaims any liability, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from errors or omissions in this publication. All corporate names and market data shown above are for illustrative purposes only and are not a recommendation, offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Investing involves risk including loss of principal.The book How to Change: The Science of Getting from Where You Are to Where You Want to Be is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or endorsed by Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (CS&Co.). Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (CS&Co.) has not reviewed the book and makes no representations about its content.Apple, the Apple logo, iPad, iPhone, and Apple Podcasts are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. App Store is a service mark of Apple Inc.Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB.(0524-2GW1)

In this episode, Bob'nJoyce sit down with Terry Morgan, an accomplished executive known for his change leadership as a CEO, CIO, interim executive, and technology consultant. Terry has led large scale transformations at companies including Food Lion, Delhaize, and Lowe's Home Improvement. Terry shares insights for navigating significant change with a thoughtful approach resulting in successful, high impact outcomes. Some of those insights include: • Ways to address resistance to change • Why taking risk is necessary and the importance of mitigating it • The flywheel of things to consider when leading big change • The importance of getting stakeholder involved in the change process This episode is packed with good stuff so……Come on in. Grab a snack. Welcome! About Terry Morgan Principal, Morgan Advisory Services, LLC. Mr. Terry Morgan is a seasoned senior executive with deep and diverse experience in industry and consulting. He retired as the CEO of Macro Integration Services, Inc. and has been the sole principal of Morgan Advisory Services, LLC (www.morganadv.com) since 2010. He has over 40 years of industry and consulting experience in strategic planning, technology, retail services, business process improvement, cost optimization, and general management. After his grocery career as the Global CIO of Delhaize Group, he served interim executive roles via Morgan Advisory Services at Extended Stay America (Interim CIO), Belk (Interim CTO), AMTdirect (Consultant and Board Member), Delhaize America (Interim CTO, Interim Office of the CIO), Lowe's (Interim CIO, Interim CISO, and Interim SVP of Technology – Canada). In most cases, he hired the permanent replacement as well as ran the function. Mr. Morgan has served in a volunteer mentoring capacity with Rowan County Times Two Mentoring and Queens College. He has his MBA from the Fuqua School of Business with an emphasis in Finance, his BS from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with a major Business Administration and Accounting and is a Certified Management Accountant.

Join Susan Sly, Raw and Real Entrepreneurship host, as she interviews Kevin Bibelhausen, the mastermind behind Fruition Capital and Heritage Fabrics. This isn't your typical business chat; it's a deep dive into the mechanics of buying and selling businesses, focusing on the crucial role of cash flow and profitability. Kevin opens up about his unlikely path from opera singing to dominating the business acquisition game. He breaks down the nuts and bolts of navigating business purchases with minimal initial know-how, from deciphering balance sheets to wrangling SBA loans and rallying investors. He shares his strategic maneuvers in investment, targeting growth-stage companies, and how to cultivate investor relationships to boost business growth skillfully. The conversation also gets honest about the mental grind and emotional rollercoaster of entrepreneurship, giving you a candid look at the personal challenges of raising capital and juggling multiple business ventures.  This episode is packed with critical insights into the strategies, pitfalls, and triumphs of navigating the business landscape while keeping your personal and professional growth at full throttle.  About Kevin Bibelhausen Kevin Bibelhausen is an investor, business owner, and consultant specializing in digital strategy & operations. He's a sought-after conference speaker, podcast guest, and author, passionate about professionalizing SMB acquisitions. Kevin founded Fruition Capital, which invests in SMB acquisition deals. With an MBA from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, he brings over a decade of experience in corporate technology and operations leadership. Kevin's journey from a near-fatal health challenge to small business ownership reflects his dedication to entrepreneurship.  Connect With Kevin LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/bibelhausen/ X https://twitter.com/bibelhausen Website https://bibelhausen.com/ Website https://heritagefabrics.com About Susan Sly Susan Sly is the maven behind Raw and Real Entrepreneurship. An award-winning AI entrepreneur and MIT Sloan alumna, Susan has carved out a niche at the forefront of the AI revolution, earning accolades as a top AI innovator in 2023 and a key figure in real-time AI advancements for 2024. With a storied career that blends rigorous academic insight with astute market strategies, Susan has emerged as a formidable founder, a discerning angel investor, sought after speaker, and a venerated voice in the business world. Her insights have graced platforms from CNN to CNBC and been quoted in leading publications like Forbes and MarketWatch. At the helm of the Raw and Real Entrepreneurship podcast, Susan delivers unvarnished wisdom and strategies, empowering aspiring entrepreneurs and seasoned business veterans alike to navigate the challenges of the entrepreneurial landscape with confidence. Dive deep into the essence of success with Susan Sly, and redefine your entrepreneurial journey. Connect With Susan X @Susanslylive LinkedIn @susansly Website https://susansly.com/

Puja Talati is a co-founder of JT Capital and serves as the Chief Marketing Officer. She co-founded JT Capital in 2020, leading the firm's asset management and marketing arms. Before establishing JT Capital, Talati held a principal role in a real estate firm, successfully leading operations, asset management, and marketing. Her professional journey includes leadership positions in strategy and operations consulting and brand marketing at Deloitte Consulting and The Hershey Company. Mrs. Talati received a B.S. in Business Administration focusing on marketing and social decision sciences from Carnegie Mellon University in 2006 and a Masters of Business Administration from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University in 2011. In this episode, we talked to Puja about the advantages she gained from her background, what she's working on today, opportunities in today's market, the art of hunting for deals, and much more.   Announcement: Register and join our free exclusive apartment investing Q and A on Wednesday, April 24th at 8:00 pm EST, by clicking here.   Strategic Income Fund;   02:22 Puja's background; 05:19 The advantages of Puja gained from her background; 10:35 What Puja's working on today; 16:58 Typical questions she gets regarding the income fund; 19:32 What she looks for while hunting for deals; 22:06 Round of insights     Announcement: Join our Apartment Investing Mastermind here for just $89/month.   Round of Insights   Apparent Failure: Lack of having processes and structures in the earlier stages of her career. Digital Resource: CoStar. Most Recommended Book: Building a StoryBrand. Daily Habit: Rewriting her to-do list every day to stay focused. #1 Insight for investing in diversified funds: Properly understand the structure of the funds, not to miss out on the right opportunity. Best place to grab a bite in Austin, TX: Il Brutto   Contact Puja: https://www.jtcapitalgroup.com/    Thank you for joining us for another great episode! If you're enjoying the show, please LEAVE A RATING OR REVIEW,  and be sure to hit that subscribe button so you do not miss an episode.

Today's guest has held a wide array of leadership positions including, presidential campaign spokeswoman, nonprofit executive director, award-winning journalist, documentary filmmaker, and she received a Master of Theological Studies from Harvard Divinity School. And proving that she can do anything she puts her mind to: two days before this episode aired she became a Grammy-winning jazz producer! All of these experiences inform her work as a marketing strategy consultant, professional speaker, and frequent contributor to many publications including Harvard Business Review, TIME, and Entrepreneur. Recognized as a “branding expert” by the Associated Press, Fortune, and Inc. magazine, she is the author of two books “Reinventing You” and “Stand Out.” For “Stand Out” she interviewed 50 of the world's top experts to understand how they developed powerful ideas and got recognized for them. I'm pleased to share that I was one of the experts she interviewed. Stand Out was named the #1 Leadership Book of 2015 by Inc. magazine and was a Washington Post bestseller. She consults and speaks for a diverse range of clients, including Google, the World Bank, Ford Foundation, Yale University, and the National Park Service. She is also an adjunct professor of business administration at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and a Visiting Professor for IE Business School in Madrid, Spain. She was recognized in Forbes as one of “25 Professional Networking Experts to Watch in 2015” and is quoted frequently in the worldwide media, including NPR, the BBC, and MSNBC. Please join me in welcoming Dorie Clark. 

Join us for an engaging discussion with Katie Kross, sustainability champion from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, as we uncover the secrets to building impactful careers in energy and climate. With over 15 years of experience in this space, Katie understands the importance of building business careers and outcomes that are sustainability forward. From defining positive-impact careers to navigating evolving trends, we explore how to drive change and overcome obstacles in the pursuit of a sustainable future. Learn more about Katie here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/katiekross/details/experience/ Check out Katie's ClimateCAP: https://www.climatecap.org/ Keynotes: - How to weave success and impact into one rewarding career - How to determine what passions drive you - How to build the skills and background to achieve your career goals  

Unveiling the SMB Acquisition Blueprint: Insights from Kevin Bibelhausen, Partner at Fruition Capital! In this electrifying episode, join us as we delve deep into the world of SMB acquisitions with none other than Kevin Bibelhausen, the dynamic investor, business owner, and Partner at Fruition Capital. Kevin, based in High Point, North Carolina, brings to the table a wealth of experience and passion for revolutionizing the landscape of small and medium-sized business acquisitions. Discover Kevin's journey from corporate America to becoming a leading figure in professionalizing SMB acquisitions. With his extensive background in digital strategy and operations, combined with his MBA from the prestigious Fuqua School of Business at Duke University, Kevin offers invaluable insights into the art of finding, financing, and acquiring small businesses. Join us as we explore Kevin's mission to bring order to the once-chaotic realm of SMB acquisitions, all while escaping the confines of corporate norms. Get ready to be inspired as Kevin shares his strategies for success, his thoughts on raising capital, and his vision for the future of entrepreneurship. Whether you're a seasoned investor, an aspiring entrepreneur, or simply curious about the world of SMB acquisitions, this episode is not to be missed. Tune in and prepare to be enlightened by the wisdom and expertise of Kevin Bibelhausen, as we unlock the secrets to SMB success together!

Managing the wealth of the world's richest clientele is an exciting, prestigious, high stakes business.  We sat down with Tony Abbiati, CEO of SCS Financial, an ultra high net worth private wealth management firm to understand the business model of RIAs (Registered Investment Advisors) vs. banks and broker dealers, the demands and challenges of these clients, the path to breaking into the business and achieving success, and the crazy things you may have to do in the name of client service!  Tony co-founded SCS Financial Services in 2002.  He has over 22 years of experience in the investment business.  Prior to SCS, he was a Vice President in the Private Wealth Management Group of Goldman Sachs. Tony began his career at Biogen, Inc. as a process engineer. Tony is actively involved in Year Up, a Boston based non-profit focused on empowering urban young adults. Tony earned a BA in Biochemistry from Bowdoin College and an MBA from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business.Sign up to attend MISS EXCEL'S FREE MASTERCLASS LIVE Wednesday, March 20 (3/20) at 3pm ESTThursday, March 21 (3/21) at 12pm ESTFriday, March 22 (3/22) at 12pm ESTOR to get the replay:Register Here!https://links.miss-excel.com/exclusive?ref=thewallstreetskinnyFollow us on Instagram and Tik Tok at @thewallstreetskinnyhttps://www.instagram.com/thewallstreetskinny/

“Don't take the straight ladder, go up and across to build your toolkit.” Najoh Tita-Reid is a Black leader of marketing reinvention who's maintained feet on both sides of the world - literally. Najoh spent many years as a Black American living in Europe with her husband and two kids. Najoh's worked across in multinational roles across leading brands like Mars, Logitech, Hero, Bayer, and Merck, after having spent 19 years at P&G - rising through the ranks of marketing and sales. Najoh earned an MBA from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University and a BA in English from Spelman College. She also completed the Executive Leadership Program at IMD in Lausanne, Switzerland, the Woman's Executive Leadership Program at Simmons University and the Design Thinking program at the Stanford School of Design. As a member of The Executive Leadership Council, she serves on the International Steering Committee and the Community Service Committee. Najoh's a longtime mentee of John Pepper (P&G + Disney's former Chairman) who first made the introduction - and you'll enjoy this candid conversation from the perspective of an American on the outside looking in. For Black History Month, we're sharing conversations from Raman's other podcast “Learnings from Leaders” where we have candid mentorship style conversations - with business leaders, entrepreneurs, and philanthropists, many of whom are alums of Procter & Gamble - where many industry leaders got their start with a foundation of purpose, values, and principles.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Don't take the straight ladder, go up and across to build your toolkit.”Najoh Tita-Reid is a Black leader of marketing reinvention who's maintained feet on both sides of the world - literally. Najoh spent many years as a Black American living in Europe with her husband and two kids. Najoh's worked across in multinational roles across leading brands like Mars, Logitech, Hero, Bayer, and Merck, after having spent 19 years at P&G - rising through the ranks of marketing and sales. Najoh earned an MBA from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University and a BA in English from Spelman College. She also completed the Executive Leadership Program at IMD in Lausanne, Switzerland, the Woman's Executive Leadership Program at Simmons University and the Design Thinking program at the Stanford School of Design. As a member of The Executive Leadership Council, she serves on the International Steering Committee and the Community Service Committee. Najoh's a longtime mentee of John Pepper (P&G + Disney's former Chairman) who first made the introduction - and you'll enjoy this candid conversation from the perspective of an American on the outside looking in.For Black History Month, we're sharing conversations from Raman's other podcast “Learnings from Leaders” where we have candid mentorship style conversations - with business leaders, entrepreneurs, and philanthropists, many of whom are alums of Procter & Gamble - where many industry leaders got their start with a foundation of purpose, values, and principles.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Jason discusses the topic of decentralized finance (defi) and its potential advantages in the cryptocurrency world. He also touches on the issue of the US housing shortage and how it presents opportunities for real estate investors. Additionally, Jason highlights the benefits of joining the “Fire Your Managers” program and announced an upcoming Empowered Investor pro meeting that will host a guest who will present a special “tenant insurance” product. Finally, he invites everyone to join their community to grow their real estate portfolio. Jason then interviews Professor Campbell R. Harvey from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and the author of DeFi and the Future of Finance as they talk about the yield curve and Decentralized Finance. Harvey discusses the phenomenon of an inverted yield curve, which has predicted every recession for the last several decades. Harvey expressed his concern about the current inverted yield curve, which has been in place for 12 months, traditionally leading to a recession. Jason and Campbell also discuss the significance of an inverted yield curve and the potential of decentralized finance (defi) in the financial world. They identified problems with the current financial system and the possibility of solutions through DeFi, such as the need for an alternative to the SWIFT system for wire transfers and the ability to store and use value in transactions. With the advent of WEB 3.0 and the decentralization of monetary assets, DeFi is truly set to revolutionize the world in all economic aspects especially finance.     Follow Jason on TWITTER, INSTAGRAM & LINKEDIN Twitter.com/JasonHartmanROI Instagram.com/jasonhartman1/ Linkedin.com/in/jasonhartmaninvestor/ Call our Investment Counselors at: 1-800-HARTMAN (US) or visit: https://www.jasonhartman.com/ Free Class:  Easily get up to $250,000 in funding for real estate, business or anything else: http://JasonHartman.com/Fund CYA Protect Your Assets, Save Taxes & Estate Planning: http://JasonHartman.com/Protect Get wholesale real estate deals for investment or build a great business – Free Course: https://www.jasonhartman.com/deals Special Offer from Ron LeGrand: https://JasonHartman.com/Ron Free Mini-Book on Pandemic Investing: https://www.PandemicInvesting.com

Jason discusses the topic of decentralized finance (defi) and its potential advantages in the cryptocurrency world. He also touches on the issue of the US housing shortage and how it presents opportunities for real estate investors. Additionally, Jason highlights the benefits of joining the “Fire Your Managers” program and announced an upcoming Empowered Investor pro meeting that will host a guest who will present a special “tenant insurance” product. Finally, he invites everyone to join their community to grow their real estate portfolio. Jason then interviews Professor Campbell R. Harvey from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and the author of DeFi and the Future of Finance as they talk about the yield curve and Decentralized Finance. Harvey discusses the phenomenon of an inverted yield curve, which has predicted every recession for the last several decades. Harvey expressed his concern about the current inverted yield curve, which has been in place for 12 months, traditionally leading to a recession. Jason and Campbell also discuss the significance of an inverted yield curve and the potential of decentralized finance (defi) in the financial world. They identified problems with the current financial system and the possibility of solutions through DeFi, such as the need for an alternative to the SWIFT system for wire transfers and the ability to store and use value in transactions. With the advent of WEB 3.0 and the decentralization of monetary assets, DeFi is truly set to revolutionize the world in all economic aspects especially finance.     Follow Jason on TWITTER, INSTAGRAM & LINKEDIN Twitter.com/JasonHartmanROI Instagram.com/jasonhartman1/ Linkedin.com/in/jasonhartmaninvestor/ Call our Investment Counselors at: 1-800-HARTMAN (US) or visit: https://www.jasonhartman.com/ Free Class:  Easily get up to $250,000 in funding for real estate, business or anything else: http://JasonHartman.com/Fund CYA Protect Your Assets, Save Taxes & Estate Planning: http://JasonHartman.com/Protect Get wholesale real estate deals for investment or build a great business – Free Course: https://www.jasonhartman.com/deals Special Offer from Ron LeGrand: https://JasonHartman.com/Ron Free Mini-Book on Pandemic Investing: https://www.PandemicInvesting.com

Professor Campbell Harvey, professor of finance at the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University and the inventor of the most famous recession indicator — the inverted yield curve — joins The Julia La Roche Show for a wide-ranging conversation on the economy, the Federal Reserve, and the yield curve.  In this episode, Professor Harvey highlights how the Federal Reserve made things worse in 2023 with its unnecessary rate hikes. According to Professor Harvey, we're fortunate if the economy delivers slow growth this year in spite of the Fed's damaging actions. He argues that the Fed will need to undo the damage they did with immediate rate cuts no smaller than 50 basis points at the next meeting.  Elsewhere, Professor Harvey shares the origin story of the inverted yield curve indicator and it's 8 for 8 track record in predicting economic recessions. Now that we're in the 9th inversion, he shares that it's way too early to call if we're in a false signal. He also makes a case that the inverted yield curve is causing slower economic growth, and that's not necessarily a bad thing because you avoid a deep recession.  Links:  DeFI and the Future of Finance: https://www.amazon.com/DeFi-Future-Finance-Campbell-Harvey/dp/1119836018 https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/faculty/campbell-harvey https://people.duke.edu/~charvey/ https://twitter.com/camharvey 0:00 Intro  1:00 Big picture macro view  1:30 Understanding the current state of the economy and the role of the consumer 5:20 Fed needs to  5:55 The story has to do with the consumer 8:30 Federal Reserve undoing the damage 10:00 Inflation, the false narrative, and policy errors 18:00 Fed rate cuts need to happen immediately  21:27 What would Professor Harvey do differently at the Fed?  23:30 Inverted yield curve indicator origin story 30:00 Difference between long-term rate and short-term rate is highly predictive of economic growth  36:40 8 out of 8 without a false signal  39:00 If Fed undoes the damage it created, there's a good shot of a soft landing 39:30 What do folks get wrong when it comes to the inverted yield curve?  45:00 The inverted yield curve is causing slower economic growth  47:00 Understanding how the inverted yield curve works  49:30 What keeps Professor Harvey up at night? 

“Whenever you have a choice of what to do, choose the more interesting path." In honor of our upcoming Free Time x Long Game IRL event in Miami on February 1 and 2 (it's not too late to join!), today I'm bringing you a favorite episode from the earliest days of the Free Time pod. In this conversation with Dorie Clark—aka “DC”—one of my closest friendtors, we discuss how she "optimizes for interesting," says no to good opportunities, builds relationships by following her "no asks for a year" rule, and when to call on trusted advisors to ensure you don't quit something too soon. We're discussing her bestselling fourth book, The Long Game: How to Be a Long-Term Thinker in a Short-Term World—be sure to grab your copy for even more insights on how to apply strategic thinking to your biggest vision. This episode originally aired on September 28, 2021. More About Dorie: Dorie Clark helps individuals and companies get their best ideas heard in a crowded, noisy world. She has been named one of the Top 50 business thinkers in the world by Thinkers50, and was honored as the #1 Communication Coach in the world by the Marshall Goldsmith Leading Global Coaches Awards. She is a keynote speaker and teaches executive education for Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and Columbia Business School. Dorie is the author of The Long Game: How to Be a Long-Term Thinker in a Short-Term World, Reinventing You, Stand Out, Entrepreneurial You.

EP 172:  Randy Smith and Paul Khazansky Striving for Cash Flow with Passive Investing and Business Acquisitions As founder of Cascade Capital Group, Paul Khazansky serves as the lead advisor on all investment sale transactions. Focusing primarily on the Sun Belt and the Midwest, Paul leverages his expertise as an accomplished lender and an experienced investor to identify and execute on superior risk adjusted opportunities within the Triple Net space. Paul developed his fundamental credit analysis skills during his time at Moody's Investors Service and at Marathon Asset Management, a New York hedge fund where he was entrusted with identifying loan investment opportunities across a multitude of industries. Paul has spent the last decade in commercial real estate development and lending and understands the unique objectives and risks of these often complex investments. He earned his MBA at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and went on to become a founding partner of Poverni Sheikh Group (www.povernisheikh.com), a real estate development and construction firm with a focus on the self-storage and multifamily sectors ($200 million of AUM as of December 2021) and PSG Lending (www.psglending.com), a nationwide bridge lender covering industrial, multifamily, office, retail, and land asset classes. Under his leadership, PSG Lending has deployed nearly $200 million of commercial real estate financings since 2017. His principal investing background enables Paul to identify creative avenues for structuring real estate transactions while gaining expertise in deal underwriting and negotiations. Through his experience as a developer, investor, and as a direct lender, Paul has cultivated a passion for working with business owners and high-income earners to achieve generational net worth through passive real estate investing. HIGHLIGHTS IN THE SHOW: 00:00 - Intro 01:25 - Paul's Background 07:11 - Impact Equity Ad 08:03 - Underwriting 16:24 - Cashflow 18:50 - Triple Net, Self Storage, Asset Classes 22:31 - Business Acquisition 26:40 - Passive INvestments 29:21 - Trends 35:04 - Final Thoughts CONNECT WITH OUR GUEST: https://www.cascadecapitalgrp.com/ CONNECT WITH OUR HOST:  Connect with our host, Randy Smith, for more educational content or to discuss investment opportunities in the real estate syndication space at www.impactequity.net, https://www.linkedin.com/in/randallsmith or on Instagram at @randysmithinvestor ---------------------------------- Follow us on social media @the.gentle.art.of.crushing.it Listen, like, subscribe, comment: http://thegentleartofcrushingit.com/

Jason discusses the topic of decentralized finance (defi) and its potential advantages in the cryptocurrency world. He also touches on the issue of the US housing shortage and how it presents opportunities for real estate investors. Additionally, Jason highlights the benefits of joining the "Fire Your Managers" program and announced an upcoming Empowered Investor pro meeting that will host a guest who will present a special "tenant insurance" product . Finally, he invites everyone to join their community to grow their real estate portfolio.  Jason then interviews Professor Campbell R. Harvey from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business and the author of DeFi and the Future of Finance as they talk about the yield curve and Decentralized Finance. Harvey discusses the phenomenon of an inverted yield curve, which has predicted every recession for the last several decades. Harvey expressed his concern about the current inverted yield curve, which has been in place for 12 months, traditionally leading to a recession. Jason and Campbell also discuss the significance of an inverted yield curve and the potential of decentralized finance (defi) in the financial world. They identified problems with the current financial system and the possibility of solutions through DeFi, such as the need for an alternative to the SWIFT system for wire transfers and the ability to store and use value in transactions. With the advent of WEB 3.0 and the decentralization of monetary assets, DeFi is truly set to revolutionize the world in all economic aspects especially finance.   Key Takeaways: Jason's editorial 1:27 Today's episode: The future of DeFi 2:25 The 'other' housing crisis- a huge opportunity for real estate investors 5:05 Chart: Housing demand robust on favorable age demographics of FTHBs 6:56 Home prices hit record in September 7:44 FireYourManagers.com 8:38 Join our monthly meeting- go to EmpoweredInvestorPro.com 9:27 Join our cruise- go to EmpoweredInvestorLive.com    Campbell R. Harvey interview 10:07 The inverted yield curve 13:11 Adjusting for inflation and the FED 16:49 Is the future inflationary 18:16 The yield curve- why it inverts and is a predictor of a recession 21:54 Decentralized Finance (DeFi)  27:09 WEB 3.0 30:02 Ethereum 31:30 Competing with the government's #1 product- Fiat currency 36:30 The El Salvador bitcoin experiment   Follow Jason on TWITTER, INSTAGRAM & LINKEDIN Twitter.com/JasonHartmanROI Instagram.com/jasonhartman1/ Linkedin.com/in/jasonhartmaninvestor/ Call our Investment Counselors at: 1-800-HARTMAN (US) or visit: https://www.jasonhartman.com/ Free Class:  Easily get up to $250,000 in funding for real estate, business or anything else: http://JasonHartman.com/Fund CYA Protect Your Assets, Save Taxes & Estate Planning: http://JasonHartman.com/Protect Get wholesale real estate deals for investment or build a great business – Free Course: https://www.jasonhartman.com/deals Special Offer from Ron LeGrand: https://JasonHartman.com/Ron Free Mini-Book on Pandemic Investing: https://www.PandemicInvesting.com

Today Puja Talati talks with us about finding business partners, and what advice she would give new investors.Interested in learning from me? Visit https://www.thetribeoftitans.info/coachingJoin our multifamily investing community for FREE for in-depth courses and live networking with like-minded apartment investors at the Tribe of TitansLink to subscribe to YouTube channel: https://tinyurl.com/SubYouTubeDiaryPodcastApple Podcasts: https://tinyurl.com/AppleDiaryPodcast Spotify: https://tinyurl.com/SpotDiaryPodcast Google Podcasts: https://tinyurl.com/GoogleDiaryPodcast Follow us on:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DiaryAptInv/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/Diary_Apt_Inv Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/diary_of_an_apartment_investor This episode originally aired on November 17, 2023----Your host, Brian Briscoe, has been a general partner in 1000+ units worth over $100 million and has been lead sponsor, asset manager, capital raiser, and key principal on these properties. He has developed a multifamily education community called the Tribe of Titans that helps aspiring investors learn the game, network with other like-minded professionals, and get their apartment investing business to the next level. He is founder of Streamline Capital Group, which will continue to acquire multifamily assets well into the future. He retired as a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Marine Corps in 2021.Connect with him on  LinkedInBrian@Steamlinecapital.com----Puja TalatiPuja is a co-founder of JT Capital Group and oversees asset management and marketing. In her leadership role, she manages a diverse group of high performing individuals and combines her strategic vision with creativity and innovation. Her focus is on optimizing portfolio performance across assets in Florida and Texas. She also oversees and leads the creative direction for the company.   Puja is an alumnus of Carnegie Mellon University, where she earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration. Additionally, she holds an MBA from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business.Learn more about her at: https://www.jtcapitalgroup.com/