Podcasts about lee thanks

Jenny Lee, vice president for Arizona International, dean of international education, and professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona, leads the conversation on U.S. international academic collaboration and how U.S.-China tensions are affecting higher education. FASKIANOS: Welcome to CFR's Higher Education Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach here at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/academic. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We're delighted to have Jenny Lee with us to discuss U.S. international academic collaboration. Dr. Lee is vice president for Arizona International, dean of international education, and professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona. She is also a fellow of the American Educational Research Association. Dr. Lee formerly served as a senior fellow of NAFSA, the Association of International Educators, as chair for the Council of International Higher Education, and as a board member for the Association for the Study of Higher Education. And she has also served as a U.S. Fulbright scholar to South Africa, as a distinguished global professor at Korea University, and as an international visiting scholar at the City University of London, the University of Pretoria, and the University of Cape Town in South Africa. So, Dr. Lee, thank you very much for being with us for today's topic. I thought you could begin by giving us an overview of current trends in U.S. international academic collaboration, especially looking at what's happening with our relations with China. LEE: Sounds great. Well, thank you for the opportunity, Irina. It's a pleasure to be here and to speak with you and all those listening right now. I'll speak for about ten or so minutes, and then open it up and engage with the audience. Hopefully, you all have some good questions that will come up during my remarks. So, clearly, we're entering a very interesting and somewhat uncertain chapter in how we understand the role of higher education globally. So I will begin with some general observation so all our viewers are on the same page. Now, first and foremost, the U.S. is mostly at the top when it comes to the higher education sector. Most of us already know that the United States houses the most highly ranked institutions. And this allows the country to be the largest host of international students and scholars from around the world. According to the latest IIE Open Doors report published a couple of weeks ago, the U.S. attracted over a million students from all over the world. And we're almost back to pre-pandemic levels. We also host over 90,000 scholars. And the primary purpose for them being here is research, for about two-thirds to 75 percent of them. These international scholars, as well as international graduate students, contribute significantly to the U.S. scientific enterprise. The U.S. is also among the leading countries in scientific output and impact, and the largest international collaborator in the world. In other words, the U.S. is highly sought because of its prestigious institutions, drawing top faculty and students from around the world. And with that comes the ability to generate cutting-edge scientific breakthroughs which further secures the U.S.' global position in academia. At the same time, of course, we've seen China's economy rise significantly as the country surpassed the United States in scientific output, and more recently in impact as measured by publication citations, and is outpacing the U.S. in the extent of R&D investment. Chinese institutions have also made noticeable jumps in various global rankings, which is a pretty big feat considering the fierce competition among the world's top universities. What we're witnessing as well are geopolitical tensions between the two countries that have impacted the higher education sector. While these two countries, the U.S. and China, are the biggest global collaborators—and they collaborate more with each other than any other country—they're also rival superpowers. As global adversaries, what we are witnessing as well is increased security concerns regarding intellectual theft and espionage. I'm going to spend some time summarizing my work for those who are not familiar to provide some further context. I and my colleagues, John Haupt and Xiaojie Li, also at the University of Arizona, have conducted numerous studies about U.S.-China scientific collaboration. And what we're observing across these studies is how the scientific pursuit of knowledge, which is fundamentally borderless, is becoming bordered in the current geopolitical environment. International collaboration, long valued as positive-sum, is being treated as zero-sum. Besides the rise of China and the accompanying political rhetoric that posed China as a so-called threat, tensions also grew among accusations, as you may recall, about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and a corresponding sharp increase in anti-Asian hate crimes in the United States. Public opinions about China were not favorable, and thus there was not a whole lot of public resistance when the FBI's China Initiative was launched in 2018. This initiative basically signaled that anyone of Chinese descent was a potential enemy of the state, including possible Chinese Communist Party spies in our own universities, even though there was no pervasive empirical or later judicial cases that proved such a damaging assumption. Nevertheless, world-renowned Chinese scientists were falsely accused of academic espionage and their careers and personal finances ruined. In my research that followed with Xiaojie Li, with support from the Committee of 100, we surveyed about 2,000 scientists in the U.S.' top research universities during the China Initiative. And we found that one in two Chinese scientists were afraid that they were being racially profiled by the FBI. We also observed that consequently scientists, especially those with Chinese descent, were less inclined to collaborate with China, less inclined to pursue federal grants, less inclined to even stay in the United States but rather to take their expertise to another country where they felt safer to pursue their research, including in China. In sum, the federal government's attempts to weed out possible Chinese spies was highly criticized as a damaging form of racial profiling affecting even U.S. citizens and, in the end, undermined the U.S.' ability to compete with China. Especially now, as we continue to observe Chinese scientists leaving the U.S. and taking their skills and talents elsewhere. With John Haupt and two academics at Tsinghua University in China, Doctors Wen Wen and Die Hu, we asked about two hundred co-collaborators in China and in the United States how were they able to overcome such geopolitical tensions and the challenges associated with COVID-19 during the pandemic? And we did learn something somewhat unexpected, and I hope valuable. Basically, we found that mutual trust between international collaborators helped overcome such perceived hurdles, including risks of being unfairly targeted. What this tells us is that a chilling effect is certainly real and remains possible, but in the end scientists have tremendous agency on what they study, where they study, and whether or not they seek funds, or where they seek funds. Regardless of the host or home country, international collaboration is important to all countries' scientific enterprise. Coauthors from different countries improve the knowledge being produced, its applicability, enlarges global audiences, and thereby increases the impact of the work. So considering the value, yet risks, where do we begin? Firstly, federal and institutional policies, of course, matter, for better or for worse. But policies do not manufacture trust. The formation of an academic tie does not suddenly occur over a cold call in the middle of a global meltdown, as often portrayed in Hollywood. Rather, this is a gradual process. And the longevity of the relationship helps strengthen that trust over time. According to our research, these collaborative relationships begin as graduate students, postdocs, visiting researchers. They occur at academic conferences and other in-person opportunities. Cutting short-term fellowships, for example, will impact the potential of a future scientific relationship, but its effects may not be felt for years. Same with denied visas and opportunities for travel. Fewer graduate students from particular countries or fields also means a different shape when it comes to global science. U.S. for instance, was not too long ago Russia's biggest foreign scientific collaborator, with the war in Ukraine, those research relationships, as well as much—with much of the Western world, have ceased. All of this, and my related empirical research, was conducted when I was a professor at my home institution. And since July, I've been serving, as Irina mentioned, as the dean and vice president of international affairs at my own institution. And I've been thinking a lot of, what does this mean for institutional practice? For those in university leadership positions, as mine, you know this is a tough challenge. Especially as domestic demand and state funding for higher education is generally declining. And at the same time, internationalization is increasingly central to senior leadership strategies. Universities are continuing vying to attract the world's students, even despite a decline of interest from China. And at the same time, research universities in particular are quite dependent on federal grants. We have our own research security offices that need to ensure our universities have good reputations and relations with our large federal funding agencies and taking every precaution to not be seen as a vulnerable site of intellectual theft. These units tend not to operate within international affairs. And I'm very well aware that in my role of trying to attract as many students from China and develop international partnerships, all of them can be suddenly erased if a Chinese University partner does not pass visual compliance or there is a sudden presidential executive order, as we experienced under the Trump administration. I'm also very well aware that of senior leaders have to choose between my educational offerings and partnerships in China versus risking a major grant from a federal agency, I will lose. We witnessed that with the shutting down of over 100 Confucius Institutes in the U.S., despite a lack of evidence of systematic espionage occurring through these centers. Public perceptions, informed or not, strongly affect the nature of our international work, as in the case of Florida. Such negative perceptions are not one country-sided, of course. A key concern for Chinese and other international students and their parents relate to safety. Gun violence, including on our own college campuses, anti-Asian hate crimes in surrounding neighborhoods, and unfavorable political environment in which studies might be interrupted as in the case of Proclamation 10043, or visa non-renewals are all contributing factors for the decline of interest from China, and uncertain future student exchange as well. In closing, when it comes to China these days no practices are guaranteed. However, I can recommend some while also keeping in mind geopolitical conditions can suddenly change for worse, or perhaps better. I mentioned earlier the value of mutual trust. At my university, we have long-standing relationships with university leaders at Chinese institutions. We've set up dual degree programs in China. Actually, about 40 percent of our international student enrollment are through such partner relationships throughout the world, in which we go to where they are. Hiring staff who speak the language and know the culture are also essential. And, like any relationship, these arrangements have developed over time. They are not built overnight. It takes intention. It takes effort. But in my experience, as trust is established the numbers have grown, and the positive impact is still being felt. Thank you. FASKIANOS: Thank you very much for that. That was terrific. Let's go now to all of you for your questions, comments. You can use this to share best practices and what you're doing to your universities or institutions. Please click the raise hand icon on your screen to ask a question. On your iPad or tablet, you can click the “more” button to access the raise hand feature. And when you're called upon, please accept the unmute prompts, state your name and affiliation, followed by your question. You can also submit a written question, they've already started coming in, by the Q&A icon. And if you can also include your affiliation there, I would appreciate it, although we will try to make sure we identify you correctly. So let's see. I'm looking for—no raised hands yet, but we do have questions written. So first question from Denis Simon, who's a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Many U.S. universities have curtailed their exchanges and cooperation with China. You referenced that. Officials at these universities are worried that if they appear too friendly toward China they will lose all sorts of federal funding. Are these concerns justified? Are there any regulations or legislation that actually says federal funding can be removed assuming these universities are in compliance with the export controls, et cetera? LEE: All right. Well, thanks, Denis, for your question. I know there—when I saw the list of those who signed up, I know there are many here who can speak to this directly. So I encourage those to also raise their hands and provide input in the Q&A, maybe in the form of an A instead of a Q. But in any case, going to that question, you know, it's a tough environment. And so much in my role, but what I even experienced in my research, is about that perception, that overinterpretation. So maybe signaling that we have this exchange program might draw attention in ways that might lead to suspicions that, oh, well is this, you know, somehow creating an opportunity for us to disclose military secrets? I mean, that's where we take it. A friendly exchange or visit is oftentimes now having to be scrutinized and ensuring that there is no remote violation of export controls, even in educational delivery in a non-STEM field. And what we're seeing is that this—we have our highly sensitive fields, but that kind of scrutiny we're also seeing applied to the institution more broadly. So these seemingly benign programs about language or culture, about fields that are enhanced or help promote so-called American values, are also being watched. So I believe as an institutional leader, again, as I mentioned earlier, having to deal with the possibility of unwanted or unwarranted attention versus not having that program, I think some, as Denis has pointed out, are leaning towards being more cautious. Unfortunately, China—any work with China is considered a risk, even if there is no reason for risk, as we've witnessed under—or, observed under the China Initiative. I don't know if I've fully answered that question, but please follow up if I haven't. And I know others can probably say more to that issue. FASKIANOS: Great. I'll take the next question from Peter—I don't know how to pronounce— LEE: Peter Becskehazy. Hi, Peter. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: There you go. Thank you very much. LEE: I know Peter. FASKIANOS: All right. Good. Well, I'd love if Peter asked his question directly, if he can. Oh, good. From Pima Community College. Go ahead, Peter. Q: Hello, Jenny. Nice to see you. LEE: Hi, Peter. Q: Now my question is, the University of Arizona and other universities have had an inflow of dozens of countries, adding up to the million that you mentioned. Are other countries trying to fill in slots left vacant by Chinese students and scholars? LEE: Yeah. Great question, Peter. And I think you can also share what you've observed at Pima in terms of the patterns you've witnessed. But for us, and as we are seeing nationally, we're seeing India rise. Not at the—not at higher numbers in many institutions, compared to China, but the rate is rising. It's not so simple, though, because we also have relations in India, and trying to set up agreements, and bring students. The competition in India is intense. So even though there's a relatively so-called large market, and the U.S. has been quite successful in attracting Indian students, that is perhaps where the attention is as a more, I would say—I hate to use the word “market,”—but a stable student market. There's a lot more interest in graduate-level education globally, as we've observed. These countries that formerly didn't have capacity now do have capacity. They have online offerings. They have branch campuses, dual degrees, lots of other options. And so the niche for the U.S., whereas before we didn't really have to think about a niche, is really in graduate education. Now, of course, that's not good news for Pima, that's thinking about a community college and other kinds of educational offerings. But for us, we're thinking about India a lot. Southeast Asia, of course, has always been an important partner to us. Africa continues to be a challenge. We know that when we think about population growth, Africa is the future. There's still challenges and trying to identify places where there is capacity. But also the affordability of a U.S. education is a huge challenge. So it's a great question. And, again, I'm curious to know other places in the world people recommend. Of course, Latin America, given our location, is a key strategic partner. But again, affordability becomes an issue. And again, I'm just talking about the traditional international student who would choose to come to Arizona. Not talking about research collaboration, which is less bound by affordability issues. Irina, you're muted. FASKIANOS: How long have I been doing this? OK. (Laughs.) I'm going to take the next written question from Allison Davis-White Eyes, who is vice president for diversity, equity, and inclusion at Fielding Graduate University: We have tried to work on collaborations with European universities and African universities, and met with much difficulty. What trends are you seeing in these regions? And what are emerging global markets beyond China? LEE: Great question, Allison. I mean, if you could leave the question in the future, so because I am visually looking at the question at the same time. FASKIANOS: Oh, great. Sorry. LEE: So, Allison, I'm not sure if you're referring to academic or research. Of course, within Europe, where the government does highly subsidized tuition, it's just becomes financially a bad deal, I suppose—(laughs)—for a student in the world who would normally get a free or highly reduced tuition to pay full price at our institution. So that kind of exchange of partnership, especially when it's about—when it's financially based, becomes almost impossible from my experience. But thinking about research collaboration, it depends on the level. So if it's an institutional agreement, you know, it's—often, these MOUs tend to just be on paper. It takes quite a bit of—it's very ceremonial. You need to get legal involved. It's a whole process to get an MOU. We really don't need these non-binding MOUs for research agreements. Some countries like it, just to display that they have an MOU with a U.S. institution. But essentially, it doesn't stop me as a professor to reach out to another professor at the University of Oslo, and say, hey, let's do a study. Which we actually are doing. So, yeah, feel free to be more specific, or if you want to raise your hand or speak on—and elaborate on that question. So, again, for educational exchange, it is difficult because we are—there's already a process within the EU that makes it very affordable and highly supported within the EU, or if you're part of that bigger program. Africa, again, my challenge from my role as an institutional leader is identifying places where there is already enough mass education up through high school where one would be able to consider, first of all, being admitted to a U.S. institution, but secondly, to be able to pay the cost. FASKIANOS: Allison, do you want to expand a little bit? Q: Oh, sorry. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: There you go. There you go. Q: Right. Dr. Lee, thank you for your response. I think it was helpful, especially regarding the subsidizing of education in Europe. We've been working on some research partnerships. And we have just—you know, really, it has just been extremely difficult with European universities. And I do think part of it has to do with the way things are subsidized in Europe. I was just wondering if there were new and different ways to do it. I do appreciate your comment about the MOUs being largely ceremonial. I agree. And would like to see something with a little more substance. And that will take some creativity and a lot of partnership and work. As for Africa, we have tried to create partnerships with South Africa. I think there's some potential there. Certainly, some excitement. We've had a few students from Nigeria, extremely bright and motivated. I just would—you know, would like to hear, maybe from some other colleagues as well on the call, if there are creative ways in working with these students as well. So, thank you. LEE: Yeah, no. And just to follow up quickly, and, again, opportunities for others to share, academic collaboration, as I mentioned during my remarks, is largely built upon mutual trust. And not to say it can't happen from top down, but really does—is most successful from bottom up. And I don't mean to refer to professors at the bottom, but meaning those that are actually engaged with that work. And so just some considerations is rather than a top-down initiative or strategy, is to identify those that are visiting scholars, already from that country, have networks within that country. What's interesting, as I learned in my current role, is how little my predecessors worked with professors in these area's studies programs, because they're oftentimes treated as a separate or having different interests in mind when actually there is a lot of overlap to identify those that are actually there. Allison, by the way, I lived in South Africa for eight years. And I know it actually takes a long time. My Fulbright started off as a one year, and I had to extend it because even getting the data while I was on the ground takes time. And I'll be honest, I think part of it was taking some time just to build trust the intentions of my work, what was I going to do with that data, how is that going to be used? Was it actually going to be ways to empower them? You know, for those who study international collaboration, know this north and south divide, and I think there are places in the world that are—maybe have some guardrails up from those—not saying this is what's happening in your institution—but someone that they don't know coming from the Global North to study someone else in the Global South. And so how do we create or initiate a collaboration that is clearly, expressly mutual at the onset? And, again, this is where trust can be operationalized lots of different ways, but that even begins with that initial message. I mean, I remember when I started my work, nobody responded to me. They're like, who are you? And I don't care who you are or what your CV says. And it takes time. You know, building that relationship, and that person introducing me to that other person. Like, you know, this is how scientific networks form. And I think, to some extent, this is also how institutional collaborative relationships also form. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to David Moore, who has a raised hand. Q: OK, thank you. I just got unmuted. FASKIANOS: Great. Q: Lee, I appreciate your comments. And I heard your reference to Florida earlier. I don't know if we have colleagues on this call from Florida, but I think they'll know what I'm about to say. I'm the dean of international education at Broward College in Fort Lauderdale. And as of tomorrow, December 1, Florida has to—all institutions in Florida, public institutions, colleges and universities, must be completely devoid of any partnerships in China. And not just China. There are seven countries of concern. And you probably can cite them, most of you would know the other six. But of the seven countries, Broward had four partnerships in China alone, none in the other countries that were active. And so we are now officially done, have to be. And I've had to notify the partners as well as our accrediting body, because these were international centers of Broward where they literally offer—we offered associate degrees, two-year degrees. And students could then transfer to an institution in the United States. Now, this didn't catch us too much by surprise because two and a half years ago our Florida legislature started in on this, really probably before that, where they isolated universities in Florida and said: You cannot do research—sensitive research, whatever, you know, engineering, computer science, et cetera—any research without notifying the state. And there's an elaborate process that had to be—you know, they had to go through to do this. But now it's not just research institutions. Now it's not just those kinds of collaborations. It is, in fact, all partnerships of any kind. We had to end our agent agreements where we were recruiting students from China that were—where the companies were based in China. And in course our programs were not research. They're just general education, two-year associate's degree, maybe some business. But we've been informed now it's completely done. And so I'm actually looking for institutions outside of Florida who might be willing to take over the role that we've had in transcripting students who later want to come to the United States. At least for the first two years in China, and then transferring to the upper division to the U.S. So I'm not sure. You're probably quite familiar with this. I don't know if you know the details of how it was worked out in practice. We were the only community college in the state that had any partnerships. So we were the ones that had to desist. So I want to—there are probably people on the call that are familiar with this, but there might be many others. And I just wanted to say that I'm looking to, you know, open that door to other institutions outside of Florida that might be willing in, yes, take a risk to go into China, but to—I've always felt that these kinds of programs were very good to build relationships, partnerships, communication. Ambassadors really. Where we feel like we were representing American education, whatever, you know, we call American values, democracy, you know, community. We thought we were doing good. But we found out we were—we were not. We were—we were doing something that went opposed to the prevailing political climate, at least in Florida. So that's my comment. I think people should know about it. And thank you for letting me speak to it a bit. Maybe someone will speak up and say they're interested in they can get in touch with me, David Moore at Broward College, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. LEE: David, thank you for sharing what you did. This is a really important example of where other states could very well head. And what's interesting, as David noted, we're talking about a community college. When we normally think about cutting ties, it's usually around the concerns about national security. Now, how this translates to a two-year degree that is solely educational based is a pretty far stretch, and yet is being impacted quite severely. So I think we should continue to follow this example—unfortunate example. And, David, yeah, your partners have reached out to my office, and I'm sure to others. But thank you for being available. Q: You're welcome. We have partners—we are also working with your Jakarta, Indonesia center there. So we have that connection. Thank you. LEE: Mmm hmm. Thanks. FASKIANOS: And if anybody wants to share contact information in the Q&A box, you can certainly do that. That would be great. There is a written question from Tutaleni Asino at Oklahoma State University: There was an article today in SEMAFOR highlighting that there are currently 350 U.S. students studying in China compared to 11,000 in 2019. Comparatively, there are 300,000 Chinese students in the United States. Is this a one-way problem, where the U.S. is not investing in international engagements as a result of being more inward looking and other countries having more options of who to collaborate with? LEE: Yeah. Tutaleni, that's—I think your question is an answer. And I think it's—I agree with your observation. So we are seeing that as there's state and public disinvestment in higher education, and including scrutiny about international higher education, we're also seeing a decline and cutting of foreign language programs in the United States. So here we are, a monolingual country whose students mostly go to Europe or other English-speaking countries to study abroad. A very limited number of international—U.S. students who pursue undergraduate degrees in a foreign country. And knowing that the future is global and international, at least in my opinion, does not set the U.S. up well to be globally competitive, even though much of its international policy is around this rhetoric of we need to compete with China. And so you raise a good point. How is this possible if U.S. citizens don't speak Chinese, or have no interest in learning about Chinese culture, or there's reduced opportunities even in our own institutions, I think is something to think about and ask more questions about. FASKIANOS: I'm going to take the next question from Zhen Zhu, chair and professor of marketing, director of faculty excellence, and director for international engagement at Suffolk University: How do you see the trend of U.S. students' interest in study abroad to China? LEE: There is actually growing interest. As many of you know, China—offering Chinese language in high schools is not as unusual as it used to be. There is growing interest as students are thinking about employability in global markets in multinational or international organizations or corporations. It would be fundamental, in fact, for someone who has any interest in international work to pick up the language if they can, and at your own institution. FASKIANOS: Great. Let's see. From—I'm going to take the next question from Jeff Riedinger: Is there a role for universities to play in knowledge diplomacy to sustain international relationships and collaborations in addressing global problems such as climate change and pandemics when national governments may be at odds with each other? LEE: Thanks, Jeff. And hi, Jeff. I'm just going to read over that question so I can kind of digest it a bit. Is there a role for institutions to play in knowledge diplomacy, such as climate change, pandemics, when national governments may be at odds with each other? Absolutely, 200 percent. It is occurring—knowledge diplomacy, science diplomacy. That one individual going on a Fulbright or coming to study here for some extended visit, having these collaborations and, ultimately, you know, science—knowledge production—I mean, there's no bounds. And when we think about the kind of research that may not occur because of these national governments are at odds when it comes to addressing climate change or other global issues, you know, the world is paying somewhat of a price when it comes to that in—when there are overarching concerns about national security. So, you know, my issue has always been with policy you overlook nuance, and with sweeping policies that overlook the disciplinary distinctions and contributions, what is lost in the pursuit of trying to stay ahead of another country in fields and areas that really have no economic or military value, right? But yet, have an important cultural value, or maybe will address something bigger, such as COVID-19. So as I mentioned, the work that I referenced earlier about U.S.-Chinese scientists coming together during COVID-19, were actually scientists who studied COVID-19 together. And again, this was not—this was fraught with risks. They were very well aware that there was a lot of scrutiny about any research about COVID-19 coming from China. There was scrutiny about, you know, where the data was held, who was analyzing it, who was funding it. And yet, these scientists took these risks in order to address how does the world deal with the pandemic. And this was based on interviews of those studies that were actually successful and published. This is where that mutual trust, as I've mentioned earlier, is so important. And without that mutual trust, these studies, I'm pretty certain, would never have been published, because it was not an easy path when it comes to that particular geopolitical climate during the pandemic. FASKIANOS: Jenny, I'm just going to ask a question. President Biden and President Xi met during APEC. Did anything come out of that meeting that could affect U.S.-China academic collaboration? LEE: Yeah. You know, this is tough. I mean, how do you analyze political statements? What do they really mean? And what is really going to change? I think what's clear is that there's an acknowledgment that we're interdependent, but we're also adversaries. Almost a love/hate codependent, in a relationship that we can't just easily separate but we do need each other. But the form that it takes, I think there's an understanding it needs to be more specific. And I don't think that has been clarified yet. I realize I missed part of Jeff's question on what can institutions do? That's such a good question. And I got more into the topic than the actual to-do. What can institutions do? Honestly—(laughs)—I'll just speak as a researcher, to back off a bit, right? To let scientists do what they want to do. Yes, we need to follow disclosures. We need to make sure there's no conflicts of interest. We need to follow all of these procedures. But what I also found during the China Initiative, there was also this chilling climate in which there's an overinterpretation that may put institutions at risk. And to my knowledge, institutions were not at risk to the extent to which their scientists, especially those of Chinese descent, felt scrutinized. FASKIANOS: Thank you. We have a raised hand from Dan Whitman. Q: OK, I think I'm unmuted. Thank you, Irina. And thanks, Professor Lee, for mentioning the Great Wall that that prevents us from dealing with even Europeans who have subsidized education or Africans who have no money. And just an anecdote, since you have welcomed anecdotes, I am an adjunct at George Washington University. But totally unrelated to that, just for free and just for fun, pro bono, nobody pays, nobody gets paid. A course that I'm giving by webinar, it's zero cost. The topic is crisis management, but it could be any topic. And in that group, which there are about eighty people who tune in twice a week, fifteen Kenyans, twenty-five Ukrainians, and forty Kazakhs. I mean, I don't know if there's ever been exchange between Kazakhstan and Kenya. Anyway, my point is things can be done. We share it for free. What motivates the students? A certificate. It's so easy to give them a certificate. And in many countries, they very highly value that, even though it's not a—there's no formality, there's no formal academic credit. But the students are very motivated. And possibly, there may be universities in the U.S. that could—that might want to give a professor a small stipendium to do an informal webinar course, which would create connections, which would be zero cost, basically, and would bridge that gap of funding that you've alluded to. Thank you. LEE: Yeah. Dan, thank you for that. And I think this leads to a kind of a spin-off comment about certificates. Absolutely. Micro-credentials or alternative forms of education, where there's maybe not a full-fledged undergraduate degree but some certificate, I think, is important niche, especially for returning adults or communities where they're not able to afford to take time off. So that flexibility, and obviously now with online education, just becomes so much more accessible and very low cost. Something else to keep in mind, though, is that, depending on the institution you're from, that will make a difference in certificates. I mean, an institution like George Washington University offering a certificate may have some symbolic or perceived value that may be higher than an institution that is lower or are not ranked at all. So this is where, unfortunately—I'm a big critic of global rankings. But unfortunately, it does play a role in how that certificate is being perceived and the attractiveness of that certificate. But absolutely, this is definitely a way to open access especially for places in the world that just cannot physically move or have the funds to support their studies. FASKIANOS: Great. There are two comments/questions in the Q&A that I wanted to give you a chance to respond to about Africa, from Tutaleni Asino and Fodei Batty. Dr. Asino talks about English is the language of instruction and governments in Africa where they're funding education to a higher degree, and thinks that there are opportunities there, but it sounds like all fifty-four countries are grouped together. And Dr. Batty talks a little bit about there are a lot of students from African countries pursuing graduate education in the United States. But South Africa is usually an exception to the higher education American norm in Africa. Most South Africans don't like to travel, especially travel to America. I thought maybe you could just clarify some—respond to those comments. LEE: Yeah. Absolutely. Thank you for sharing those comments. There's a book I edited called Intra-Africa Student Mobility. And I agree with the comments. And one of the things I didn't mention that I think is important to help us understand the broader global context is that there's actually considerable international activity within the continent. And there's actually considerable intra-Africa mobility within the continent. South Africa is the most important country player in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is globally ranked—has more globally ranked institutions than any other African country. And so South Africa then becomes an important hub. And, yes, as an English-speaking, among many other languages, country, that does attract African students to go oftentimes for a similar sense of shared culture, despite sometimes different languages and customs and backgrounds. And yet, nevertheless, South Africa is an important player within the continent. Not to say that there is no international mobility occurring, but there is increased capacity within the continent that would allow students and interested students to travel within the continent. Not the same extent, of course, as Europe. But the least we're seeing that rise over time. And so it's called Intra-Africa Student Mobility. Chika Sehoole and I coedited the book. We were able to get about eight African scholars to talk about the various reasons students would choose that particular African country, and what draw them. And what was really interesting about this phenomenon is that it goes against this prevailing notion of Africa's victim of brain drain or all going to the north. That's actually not what is happening. But that there is capacity building within the continent. So in trying to answer a different question, I skirted over a lot of the things I could go further into. But hopefully that book will shed light on what's happening within that continent, at least from the perspective of eight different countries. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. Thank you for that. I'm going to go next to Jonathan Scriven at Washington Adventist University in Maryland: What are some of the strategies universities are using to make education more affordable in the United States? If that is a challenge, are schools investing more or less in setting up campuses in foreign countries as a way to reach foreign students? LEE: I'm just going to read over that question. OK, yeah. Great question, Jonathan. So what's happening in my institution and many others is a way to attract students is we're providing considerable aid, merit aid, financial aid, aid even to international students. The majority may not even be paying the full sticker price. Now this, of course, will affect the revenue that would have otherwise been generated, but nevertheless is a way to deal with the fierce competition across U.S. institutions for these top students. So how to make it affordable? There's a lot of aid going around at the undergraduate, not just the graduate, levels. And so what are institutions doing? Well, for example, at the University of Arizona for our dual degrees, it's a fraction of the cost of what it would cost to be a student at our main campus. When you have a combination of hybrid or online delivery with a campus partner maybe providing most of the gen ed's and then we would teach most of the major courses as an example, that does significantly lower the cost where that student will still get a bona fide University of Arizona degree, just like they would at main campus. So these alternative forms of delivery certainly make it more affordable, especially for those that opt to stay in their home country and receive an online education, or a flipped classroom model, or a dual degree. FASKIANOS: Great. Denis Simon, if you can—why don't you ask your question? Q: Here I am. OK. Recently, on a trip to China in September, a number of faculty have told me they're no longer wanting to send their best students abroad. They want to keep them in China. And this is all part of the rise of Chinese universities, et cetera. And so it may not be simply the souring of Sino-U.S. relations that has causal effect here, but simply the fact that China now is becoming a major, you know, educational powerhouse. And that also could change the dynamics. For example, even the BRI countries could start to send their students to China instead of sending them to the United States. Do you see anything evolving like this or—and what might be the outcome? LEE: Yeah. Spot on, David. That halo effect of a U.S. degree is not the same as it was when I was a university student. Chinese students, as well as students in the world, are much more savvy. They have access to information. They have access to rankings. They know all universities are not the same. And they know that they have some institutions that are highly ranked and may offer better quality education than the U.S. So that the image of a U.S. degree, of course, is not as universally perceived as it may have been, I don't know, pre-internet, or without the—all sorts of rankings in which institutions are rated against one another. And absolutely, Chinese institutions are very difficult to get into, fiercely competitive, producing far more scientific output than some of our leading institutions. And there's another factor when it comes to Asian culture just more broadly speaking, is that social network tie. Sociologists refer to it as social capital. When a Chinese student, a Korean student, Japanese student decides to study in the United States, they may lose that social tie that may possibly put them in a disadvantage when they decide to come back and compete for a position when they may just have that U.S. credential, but may have either lessened or no longer have that relationship that may have allowed them to get a position at the university, or in a place where that alumni network would have been especially useful. So again, I don't want to generalize, you know, in any place to the world, but there is that component that I think sometimes is missed in the literature. Maintaining that social network is pretty key, especially as jobs, of course, global, you know, unemployment—places where students are competing for positions need to have every edge possible. So that also can be part of that reason they decide to stay. FASKIANOS: Great. The next question from Michael Kulma, who's at the University of Chicago. He's following on David Moore's comments about Florida: Do you know how many other states in the U.S. are enacting or are considering such policies against partnerships with China? LEE: I do not know the answer. So if anyone wants to raise their hand and share about their own state, or put it on the answer part of the question and answer. There are related concerns about DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Some of that may spill over to China. Hopefully, at some point at the Council of Foreign Relations will have a discussion on Israel and Hamas conflict and how institutions are dealing with that. And so we're seeing a pretty challenging political environment that is clearly spilling over to our classrooms and to our international activities, our domestic recruitment. But I'm not answering your question, Michael. (Laughs.) I'll leave it up to someone else to answer. FASKIANOS: Great. Thank you. So we don't have very much time left. I thought maybe you could, given your research and expertise, could suggest resources—recommend resources for higher ed leaders and administrators to better understand how to promote collaboration. LEE: Sure. So promoting collaboration, it really—each person at a time. You know, again, MOUs may be signed, and maybe overarching presidents will come together and have an agreement, but there's no guarantee that will ever happen. I'd love to do a study on how many MOUs never actually materialized into real action. So where do we begin? International affairs SIOs out there, identify who are your area studies experts? Who are your visiting postdocs? Who are your Fulbright scholars from other parts of the world? They all represent their own network and are certainly are valuable resources to consider. What I've sometimes have heard even at my own institution is, you know, how do we bring these people to the table? Why are they not at the table to begin with, and then how do we bring them there? And this is a relatively low-cost way to go about this, right? Like, faculty engaged in service. What kind of opportunities can your university provide for faculty service that is aligned with their area of expertise, the areas of the world they represent, the networks they have? And many of—some of you already have experienced this directly. These partnerships often begin with our alumni, international—former international students who decide to go back home. So, again, there's just a lot of exciting opportunity. I love this field because it's never boring. There's always new ways to grow, expand new partners. But it really does begin with that essential element of trust. And that often begins with our own institutions and identifying those who've already started to build that network. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Thank you very much. Really appreciate your being with us and for sharing your expertise and background, Dr. Lee. It's been fantastic. And to all of you, for your questions and comments, and sharing your experiences as well. You can follow Dr. Lee on X, the app formerly known as Twitter, at @JennyJ_Lee. I will send out a link to this webinar, the transcript, and the video, as well as the link to the book—your book that you mentioned, and any other resources that you want to share with the group. And I encourage you all to follow @CFR_academic on X, visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. We also—just putting in a plug for our other series, Academic Webinar series, which is designed for students. We just sent out the winter/spring lineup and we hope that you will share that with your colleagues and your students. It is a great way for them to have access to practitioner scholars and to talk with students from around the country. So if you haven't received that lineup, you can email cfracademic@CFR.org, and we will share that with you. So, again, thank you, Jenny, for being with us, and to all of you. And wishing you safe and happy holidays. And good luck closing out this semester before we get to the holidays. (Laughs.) So thank you again. (END)

Jenny Lee, vice president for Arizona International, dean of international education, and professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona, leads the conversation on U.S. international academic collaboration and how U.S.-China tensions are affecting higher education. FASKIANOS: Welcome to CFR's Higher Education Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach here at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/academic. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We're delighted to have Jenny Lee with us to discuss U.S. international academic collaboration. Dr. Lee is vice president for Arizona International, dean of international education, and professor of educational policy studies and practice at the University of Arizona. She is also a fellow of the American Educational Research Association. Dr. Lee formerly served as a senior fellow of NAFSA, the Association of International Educators, as chair for the Council of International Higher Education, and as a board member for the Association for the Study of Higher Education. And she has also served as a U.S. Fulbright scholar to South Africa, as a distinguished global professor at Korea University, and as an international visiting scholar at the City University of London, the University of Pretoria, and the University of Cape Town in South Africa. So, Dr. Lee, thank you very much for being with us for today's topic. I thought you could begin by giving us an overview of current trends in U.S. international academic collaboration, especially looking at what's happening with our relations with China. LEE: Sounds great. Well, thank you for the opportunity, Irina. It's a pleasure to be here and to speak with you and all those listening right now. I'll speak for about ten or so minutes, and then open it up and engage with the audience. Hopefully, you all have some good questions that will come up during my remarks. So, clearly, we're entering a very interesting and somewhat uncertain chapter in how we understand the role of higher education globally. So I will begin with some general observation so all our viewers are on the same page. Now, first and foremost, the U.S. is mostly at the top when it comes to the higher education sector. Most of us already know that the United States houses the most highly ranked institutions. And this allows the country to be the largest host of international students and scholars from around the world. According to the latest IIE Open Doors report published a couple of weeks ago, the U.S. attracted over a million students from all over the world. And we're almost back to pre-pandemic levels. We also host over 90,000 scholars. And the primary purpose for them being here is research, for about two-thirds to 75 percent of them. These international scholars, as well as international graduate students, contribute significantly to the U.S. scientific enterprise. The U.S. is also among the leading countries in scientific output and impact, and the largest international collaborator in the world. In other words, the U.S. is highly sought because of its prestigious institutions, drawing top faculty and students from around the world. And with that comes the ability to generate cutting-edge scientific breakthroughs which further secures the U.S.' global position in academia. At the same time, of course, we've seen China's economy rise significantly as the country surpassed the United States in scientific output, and more recently in impact as measured by publication citations, and is outpacing the U.S. in the extent of R&D investment. Chinese institutions have also made noticeable jumps in various global rankings, which is a pretty big feat considering the fierce competition among the world's top universities. What we're witnessing as well are geopolitical tensions between the two countries that have impacted the higher education sector. While these two countries, the U.S. and China, are the biggest global collaborators—and they collaborate more with each other than any other country—they're also rival superpowers. As global adversaries, what we are witnessing as well is increased security concerns regarding intellectual theft and espionage. I'm going to spend some time summarizing my work for those who are not familiar to provide some further context. I and my colleagues, John Haupt and Xiaojie Li, also at the University of Arizona, have conducted numerous studies about U.S.-China scientific collaboration. And what we're observing across these studies is how the scientific pursuit of knowledge, which is fundamentally borderless, is becoming bordered in the current geopolitical environment. International collaboration, long valued as positive-sum, is being treated as zero-sum. Besides the rise of China and the accompanying political rhetoric that posed China as a so-called threat, tensions also grew among accusations, as you may recall, about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and a corresponding sharp increase in anti-Asian hate crimes in the United States. Public opinions about China were not favorable, and thus there was not a whole lot of public resistance when the FBI's China Initiative was launched in 2018. This initiative basically signaled that anyone of Chinese descent was a potential enemy of the state, including possible Chinese Communist Party spies in our own universities, even though there was no pervasive empirical or later judicial cases that proved such a damaging assumption. Nevertheless, world-renowned Chinese scientists were falsely accused of academic espionage and their careers and personal finances ruined. In my research that followed with Xiaojie Li, with support from the Committee of 100, we surveyed about 2,000 scientists in the U.S.' top research universities during the China Initiative. And we found that one in two Chinese scientists were afraid that they were being racially profiled by the FBI. We also observed that consequently scientists, especially those with Chinese descent, were less inclined to collaborate with China, less inclined to pursue federal grants, less inclined to even stay in the United States but rather to take their expertise to another country where they felt safer to pursue their research, including in China. In sum, the federal government's attempts to weed out possible Chinese spies was highly criticized as a damaging form of racial profiling affecting even U.S. citizens and, in the end, undermined the U.S.' ability to compete with China. Especially now, as we continue to observe Chinese scientists leaving the U.S. and taking their skills and talents elsewhere. With John Haupt and two academics at Tsinghua University in China, Doctors Wen Wen and Die Hu, we asked about two hundred co-collaborators in China and in the United States how were they able to overcome such geopolitical tensions and the challenges associated with COVID-19 during the pandemic? And we did learn something somewhat unexpected, and I hope valuable. Basically, we found that mutual trust between international collaborators helped overcome such perceived hurdles, including risks of being unfairly targeted. What this tells us is that a chilling effect is certainly real and remains possible, but in the end scientists have tremendous agency on what they study, where they study, and whether or not they seek funds, or where they seek funds. Regardless of the host or home country, international collaboration is important to all countries' scientific enterprise. Coauthors from different countries improve the knowledge being produced, its applicability, enlarges global audiences, and thereby increases the impact of the work. So considering the value, yet risks, where do we begin? Firstly, federal and institutional policies, of course, matter, for better or for worse. But policies do not manufacture trust. The formation of an academic tie does not suddenly occur over a cold call in the middle of a global meltdown, as often portrayed in Hollywood. Rather, this is a gradual process. And the longevity of the relationship helps strengthen that trust over time. According to our research, these collaborative relationships begin as graduate students, postdocs, visiting researchers. They occur at academic conferences and other in-person opportunities. Cutting short-term fellowships, for example, will impact the potential of a future scientific relationship, but its effects may not be felt for years. Same with denied visas and opportunities for travel. Fewer graduate students from particular countries or fields also means a different shape when it comes to global science. U.S. for instance, was not too long ago Russia's biggest foreign scientific collaborator, with the war in Ukraine, those research relationships, as well as much—with much of the Western world, have ceased. All of this, and my related empirical research, was conducted when I was a professor at my home institution. And since July, I've been serving, as Irina mentioned, as the dean and vice president of international affairs at my own institution. And I've been thinking a lot of, what does this mean for institutional practice? For those in university leadership positions, as mine, you know this is a tough challenge. Especially as domestic demand and state funding for higher education is generally declining. And at the same time, internationalization is increasingly central to senior leadership strategies. Universities are continuing vying to attract the world's students, even despite a decline of interest from China. And at the same time, research universities in particular are quite dependent on federal grants. We have our own research security offices that need to ensure our universities have good reputations and relations with our large federal funding agencies and taking every precaution to not be seen as a vulnerable site of intellectual theft. These units tend not to operate within international affairs. And I'm very well aware that in my role of trying to attract as many students from China and develop international partnerships, all of them can be suddenly erased if a Chinese University partner does not pass visual compliance or there is a sudden presidential executive order, as we experienced under the Trump administration. I'm also very well aware that of senior leaders have to choose between my educational offerings and partnerships in China versus risking a major grant from a federal agency, I will lose. We witnessed that with the shutting down of over 100 Confucius Institutes in the U.S., despite a lack of evidence of systematic espionage occurring through these centers. Public perceptions, informed or not, strongly affect the nature of our international work, as in the case of Florida. Such negative perceptions are not one country-sided, of course. A key concern for Chinese and other international students and their parents relate to safety. Gun violence, including on our own college campuses, anti-Asian hate crimes in surrounding neighborhoods, and unfavorable political environment in which studies might be interrupted as in the case of Proclamation 10043, or visa non-renewals are all contributing factors for the decline of interest from China, and uncertain future student exchange as well. In closing, when it comes to China these days no practices are guaranteed. However, I can recommend some while also keeping in mind geopolitical conditions can suddenly change for worse, or perhaps better. I mentioned earlier the value of mutual trust. At my university, we have long-standing relationships with university leaders at Chinese institutions. We've set up dual degree programs in China. Actually, about 40 percent of our international student enrollment are through such partner relationships throughout the world, in which we go to where they are. Hiring staff who speak the language and know the culture are also essential. And, like any relationship, these arrangements have developed over time. They are not built overnight. It takes intention. It takes effort. But in my experience, as trust is established the numbers have grown, and the positive impact is still being felt. Thank you. FASKIANOS: Thank you very much for that. That was terrific. Let's go now to all of you for your questions, comments. You can use this to share best practices and what you're doing to your universities or institutions. Please click the raise hand icon on your screen to ask a question. On your iPad or tablet, you can click the “more” button to access the raise hand feature. And when you're called upon, please accept the unmute prompts, state your name and affiliation, followed by your question. You can also submit a written question, they've already started coming in, by the Q&A icon. And if you can also include your affiliation there, I would appreciate it, although we will try to make sure we identify you correctly. So let's see. I'm looking for—no raised hands yet, but we do have questions written. So first question from Denis Simon, who's a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Many U.S. universities have curtailed their exchanges and cooperation with China. You referenced that. Officials at these universities are worried that if they appear too friendly toward China they will lose all sorts of federal funding. Are these concerns justified? Are there any regulations or legislation that actually says federal funding can be removed assuming these universities are in compliance with the export controls, et cetera? LEE: All right. Well, thanks, Denis, for your question. I know there—when I saw the list of those who signed up, I know there are many here who can speak to this directly. So I encourage those to also raise their hands and provide input in the Q&A, maybe in the form of an A instead of a Q. But in any case, going to that question, you know, it's a tough environment. And so much in my role, but what I even experienced in my research, is about that perception, that overinterpretation. So maybe signaling that we have this exchange program might draw attention in ways that might lead to suspicions that, oh, well is this, you know, somehow creating an opportunity for us to disclose military secrets? I mean, that's where we take it. A friendly exchange or visit is oftentimes now having to be scrutinized and ensuring that there is no remote violation of export controls, even in educational delivery in a non-STEM field. And what we're seeing is that this—we have our highly sensitive fields, but that kind of scrutiny we're also seeing applied to the institution more broadly. So these seemingly benign programs about language or culture, about fields that are enhanced or help promote so-called American values, are also being watched. So I believe as an institutional leader, again, as I mentioned earlier, having to deal with the possibility of unwanted or unwarranted attention versus not having that program, I think some, as Denis has pointed out, are leaning towards being more cautious. Unfortunately, China—any work with China is considered a risk, even if there is no reason for risk, as we've witnessed under—or, observed under the China Initiative. I don't know if I've fully answered that question, but please follow up if I haven't. And I know others can probably say more to that issue. FASKIANOS: Great. I'll take the next question from Peter—I don't know how to pronounce— LEE: Peter Becskehazy. Hi, Peter. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: There you go. Thank you very much. LEE: I know Peter. FASKIANOS: All right. Good. Well, I'd love if Peter asked his question directly, if he can. Oh, good. From Pima Community College. Go ahead, Peter. Q: Hello, Jenny. Nice to see you. LEE: Hi, Peter. Q: Now my question is, the University of Arizona and other universities have had an inflow of dozens of countries, adding up to the million that you mentioned. Are other countries trying to fill in slots left vacant by Chinese students and scholars? LEE: Yeah. Great question, Peter. And I think you can also share what you've observed at Pima in terms of the patterns you've witnessed. But for us, and as we are seeing nationally, we're seeing India rise. Not at the—not at higher numbers in many institutions, compared to China, but the rate is rising. It's not so simple, though, because we also have relations in India, and trying to set up agreements, and bring students. The competition in India is intense. So even though there's a relatively so-called large market, and the U.S. has been quite successful in attracting Indian students, that is perhaps where the attention is as a more, I would say—I hate to use the word “market,”—but a stable student market. There's a lot more interest in graduate-level education globally, as we've observed. These countries that formerly didn't have capacity now do have capacity. They have online offerings. They have branch campuses, dual degrees, lots of other options. And so the niche for the U.S., whereas before we didn't really have to think about a niche, is really in graduate education. Now, of course, that's not good news for Pima, that's thinking about a community college and other kinds of educational offerings. But for us, we're thinking about India a lot. Southeast Asia, of course, has always been an important partner to us. Africa continues to be a challenge. We know that when we think about population growth, Africa is the future. There's still challenges and trying to identify places where there is capacity. But also the affordability of a U.S. education is a huge challenge. So it's a great question. And, again, I'm curious to know other places in the world people recommend. Of course, Latin America, given our location, is a key strategic partner. But again, affordability becomes an issue. And again, I'm just talking about the traditional international student who would choose to come to Arizona. Not talking about research collaboration, which is less bound by affordability issues. Irina, you're muted. FASKIANOS: How long have I been doing this? OK. (Laughs.) I'm going to take the next written question from Allison Davis-White Eyes, who is vice president for diversity, equity, and inclusion at Fielding Graduate University: We have tried to work on collaborations with European universities and African universities, and met with much difficulty. What trends are you seeing in these regions? And what are emerging global markets beyond China? LEE: Great question, Allison. I mean, if you could leave the question in the future, so because I am visually looking at the question at the same time. FASKIANOS: Oh, great. Sorry. LEE: So, Allison, I'm not sure if you're referring to academic or research. Of course, within Europe, where the government does highly subsidized tuition, it's just becomes financially a bad deal, I suppose—(laughs)—for a student in the world who would normally get a free or highly reduced tuition to pay full price at our institution. So that kind of exchange of partnership, especially when it's about—when it's financially based, becomes almost impossible from my experience. But thinking about research collaboration, it depends on the level. So if it's an institutional agreement, you know, it's—often, these MOUs tend to just be on paper. It takes quite a bit of—it's very ceremonial. You need to get legal involved. It's a whole process to get an MOU. We really don't need these non-binding MOUs for research agreements. Some countries like it, just to display that they have an MOU with a U.S. institution. But essentially, it doesn't stop me as a professor to reach out to another professor at the University of Oslo, and say, hey, let's do a study. Which we actually are doing. So, yeah, feel free to be more specific, or if you want to raise your hand or speak on—and elaborate on that question. So, again, for educational exchange, it is difficult because we are—there's already a process within the EU that makes it very affordable and highly supported within the EU, or if you're part of that bigger program. Africa, again, my challenge from my role as an institutional leader is identifying places where there is already enough mass education up through high school where one would be able to consider, first of all, being admitted to a U.S. institution, but secondly, to be able to pay the cost. FASKIANOS: Allison, do you want to expand a little bit? Q: Oh, sorry. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: There you go. There you go. Q: Right. Dr. Lee, thank you for your response. I think it was helpful, especially regarding the subsidizing of education in Europe. We've been working on some research partnerships. And we have just—you know, really, it has just been extremely difficult with European universities. And I do think part of it has to do with the way things are subsidized in Europe. I was just wondering if there were new and different ways to do it. I do appreciate your comment about the MOUs being largely ceremonial. I agree. And would like to see something with a little more substance. And that will take some creativity and a lot of partnership and work. As for Africa, we have tried to create partnerships with South Africa. I think there's some potential there. Certainly, some excitement. We've had a few students from Nigeria, extremely bright and motivated. I just would—you know, would like to hear, maybe from some other colleagues as well on the call, if there are creative ways in working with these students as well. So, thank you. LEE: Yeah, no. And just to follow up quickly, and, again, opportunities for others to share, academic collaboration, as I mentioned during my remarks, is largely built upon mutual trust. And not to say it can't happen from top down, but really does—is most successful from bottom up. And I don't mean to refer to professors at the bottom, but meaning those that are actually engaged with that work. And so just some considerations is rather than a top-down initiative or strategy, is to identify those that are visiting scholars, already from that country, have networks within that country. What's interesting, as I learned in my current role, is how little my predecessors worked with professors in these area's studies programs, because they're oftentimes treated as a separate or having different interests in mind when actually there is a lot of overlap to identify those that are actually there. Allison, by the way, I lived in South Africa for eight years. And I know it actually takes a long time. My Fulbright started off as a one year, and I had to extend it because even getting the data while I was on the ground takes time. And I'll be honest, I think part of it was taking some time just to build trust the intentions of my work, what was I going to do with that data, how is that going to be used? Was it actually going to be ways to empower them? You know, for those who study international collaboration, know this north and south divide, and I think there are places in the world that are—maybe have some guardrails up from those—not saying this is what's happening in your institution—but someone that they don't know coming from the Global North to study someone else in the Global South. And so how do we create or initiate a collaboration that is clearly, expressly mutual at the onset? And, again, this is where trust can be operationalized lots of different ways, but that even begins with that initial message. I mean, I remember when I started my work, nobody responded to me. They're like, who are you? And I don't care who you are or what your CV says. And it takes time. You know, building that relationship, and that person introducing me to that other person. Like, you know, this is how scientific networks form. And I think, to some extent, this is also how institutional collaborative relationships also form. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to David Moore, who has a raised hand. Q: OK, thank you. I just got unmuted. FASKIANOS: Great. Q: Lee, I appreciate your comments. And I heard your reference to Florida earlier. I don't know if we have colleagues on this call from Florida, but I think they'll know what I'm about to say. I'm the dean of international education at Broward College in Fort Lauderdale. And as of tomorrow, December 1, Florida has to—all institutions in Florida, public institutions, colleges and universities, must be completely devoid of any partnerships in China. And not just China. There are seven countries of concern. And you probably can cite them, most of you would know the other six. But of the seven countries, Broward had four partnerships in China alone, none in the other countries that were active. And so we are now officially done, have to be. And I've had to notify the partners as well as our accrediting body, because these were international centers of Broward where they literally offer—we offered associate degrees, two-year degrees. And students could then transfer to an institution in the United States. Now, this didn't catch us too much by surprise because two and a half years ago our Florida legislature started in on this, really probably before that, where they isolated universities in Florida and said: You cannot do research—sensitive research, whatever, you know, engineering, computer science, et cetera—any research without notifying the state. And there's an elaborate process that had to be—you know, they had to go through to do this. But now it's not just research institutions. Now it's not just those kinds of collaborations. It is, in fact, all partnerships of any kind. We had to end our agent agreements where we were recruiting students from China that were—where the companies were based in China. And in course our programs were not research. They're just general education, two-year associate's degree, maybe some business. But we've been informed now it's completely done. And so I'm actually looking for institutions outside of Florida who might be willing to take over the role that we've had in transcripting students who later want to come to the United States. At least for the first two years in China, and then transferring to the upper division to the U.S. So I'm not sure. You're probably quite familiar with this. I don't know if you know the details of how it was worked out in practice. We were the only community college in the state that had any partnerships. So we were the ones that had to desist. So I want to—there are probably people on the call that are familiar with this, but there might be many others. And I just wanted to say that I'm looking to, you know, open that door to other institutions outside of Florida that might be willing in, yes, take a risk to go into China, but to—I've always felt that these kinds of programs were very good to build relationships, partnerships, communication. Ambassadors really. Where we feel like we were representing American education, whatever, you know, we call American values, democracy, you know, community. We thought we were doing good. But we found out we were—we were not. We were—we were doing something that went opposed to the prevailing political climate, at least in Florida. So that's my comment. I think people should know about it. And thank you for letting me speak to it a bit. Maybe someone will speak up and say they're interested in they can get in touch with me, David Moore at Broward College, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. LEE: David, thank you for sharing what you did. This is a really important example of where other states could very well head. And what's interesting, as David noted, we're talking about a community college. When we normally think about cutting ties, it's usually around the concerns about national security. Now, how this translates to a two-year degree that is solely educational based is a pretty far stretch, and yet is being impacted quite severely. So I think we should continue to follow this example—unfortunate example. And, David, yeah, your partners have reached out to my office, and I'm sure to others. But thank you for being available. Q: You're welcome. We have partners—we are also working with your Jakarta, Indonesia center there. So we have that connection. Thank you. LEE: Mmm hmm. Thanks. FASKIANOS: And if anybody wants to share contact information in the Q&A box, you can certainly do that. That would be great. There is a written question from Tutaleni Asino at Oklahoma State University: There was an article today in SEMAFOR highlighting that there are currently 350 U.S. students studying in China compared to 11,000 in 2019. Comparatively, there are 300,000 Chinese students in the United States. Is this a one-way problem, where the U.S. is not investing in international engagements as a result of being more inward looking and other countries having more options of who to collaborate with? LEE: Yeah. Tutaleni, that's—I think your question is an answer. And I think it's—I agree with your observation. So we are seeing that as there's state and public disinvestment in higher education, and including scrutiny about international higher education, we're also seeing a decline and cutting of foreign language programs in the United States. So here we are, a monolingual country whose students mostly go to Europe or other English-speaking countries to study abroad. A very limited number of international—U.S. students who pursue undergraduate degrees in a foreign country. And knowing that the future is global and international, at least in my opinion, does not set the U.S. up well to be globally competitive, even though much of its international policy is around this rhetoric of we need to compete with China. And so you raise a good point. How is this possible if U.S. citizens don't speak Chinese, or have no interest in learning about Chinese culture, or there's reduced opportunities even in our own institutions, I think is something to think about and ask more questions about. FASKIANOS: I'm going to take the next question from Zhen Zhu, chair and professor of marketing, director of faculty excellence, and director for international engagement at Suffolk University: How do you see the trend of U.S. students' interest in study abroad to China? LEE: There is actually growing interest. As many of you know, China—offering Chinese language in high schools is not as unusual as it used to be. There is growing interest as students are thinking about employability in global markets in multinational or international organizations or corporations. It would be fundamental, in fact, for someone who has any interest in international work to pick up the language if they can, and at your own institution. FASKIANOS: Great. Let's see. From—I'm going to take the next question from Jeff Riedinger: Is there a role for universities to play in knowledge diplomacy to sustain international relationships and collaborations in addressing global problems such as climate change and pandemics when national governments may be at odds with each other? LEE: Thanks, Jeff. And hi, Jeff. I'm just going to read over that question so I can kind of digest it a bit. Is there a role for institutions to play in knowledge diplomacy, such as climate change, pandemics, when national governments may be at odds with each other? Absolutely, 200 percent. It is occurring—knowledge diplomacy, science diplomacy. That one individual going on a Fulbright or coming to study here for some extended visit, having these collaborations and, ultimately, you know, science—knowledge production—I mean, there's no bounds. And when we think about the kind of research that may not occur because of these national governments are at odds when it comes to addressing climate change or other global issues, you know, the world is paying somewhat of a price when it comes to that in—when there are overarching concerns about national security. So, you know, my issue has always been with policy you overlook nuance, and with sweeping policies that overlook the disciplinary distinctions and contributions, what is lost in the pursuit of trying to stay ahead of another country in fields and areas that really have no economic or military value, right? But yet, have an important cultural value, or maybe will address something bigger, such as COVID-19. So as I mentioned, the work that I referenced earlier about U.S.-Chinese scientists coming together during COVID-19, were actually scientists who studied COVID-19 together. And again, this was not—this was fraught with risks. They were very well aware that there was a lot of scrutiny about any research about COVID-19 coming from China. There was scrutiny about, you know, where the data was held, who was analyzing it, who was funding it. And yet, these scientists took these risks in order to address how does the world deal with the pandemic. And this was based on interviews of those studies that were actually successful and published. This is where that mutual trust, as I've mentioned earlier, is so important. And without that mutual trust, these studies, I'm pretty certain, would never have been published, because it was not an easy path when it comes to that particular geopolitical climate during the pandemic. FASKIANOS: Jenny, I'm just going to ask a question. President Biden and President Xi met during APEC. Did anything come out of that meeting that could affect U.S.-China academic collaboration? LEE: Yeah. You know, this is tough. I mean, how do you analyze political statements? What do they really mean? And what is really going to change? I think what's clear is that there's an acknowledgment that we're interdependent, but we're also adversaries. Almost a love/hate codependent, in a relationship that we can't just easily separate but we do need each other. But the form that it takes, I think there's an understanding it needs to be more specific. And I don't think that has been clarified yet. I realize I missed part of Jeff's question on what can institutions do? That's such a good question. And I got more into the topic than the actual to-do. What can institutions do? Honestly—(laughs)—I'll just speak as a researcher, to back off a bit, right? To let scientists do what they want to do. Yes, we need to follow disclosures. We need to make sure there's no conflicts of interest. We need to follow all of these procedures. But what I also found during the China Initiative, there was also this chilling climate in which there's an overinterpretation that may put institutions at risk. And to my knowledge, institutions were not at risk to the extent to which their scientists, especially those of Chinese descent, felt scrutinized. FASKIANOS: Thank you. We have a raised hand from Dan Whitman. Q: OK, I think I'm unmuted. Thank you, Irina. And thanks, Professor Lee, for mentioning the Great Wall that that prevents us from dealing with even Europeans who have subsidized education or Africans who have no money. And just an anecdote, since you have welcomed anecdotes, I am an adjunct at George Washington University. But totally unrelated to that, just for free and just for fun, pro bono, nobody pays, nobody gets paid. A course that I'm giving by webinar, it's zero cost. The topic is crisis management, but it could be any topic. And in that group, which there are about eighty people who tune in twice a week, fifteen Kenyans, twenty-five Ukrainians, and forty Kazakhs. I mean, I don't know if there's ever been exchange between Kazakhstan and Kenya. Anyway, my point is things can be done. We share it for free. What motivates the students? A certificate. It's so easy to give them a certificate. And in many countries, they very highly value that, even though it's not a—there's no formality, there's no formal academic credit. But the students are very motivated. And possibly, there may be universities in the U.S. that could—that might want to give a professor a small stipendium to do an informal webinar course, which would create connections, which would be zero cost, basically, and would bridge that gap of funding that you've alluded to. Thank you. LEE: Yeah. Dan, thank you for that. And I think this leads to a kind of a spin-off comment about certificates. Absolutely. Micro-credentials or alternative forms of education, where there's maybe not a full-fledged undergraduate degree but some certificate, I think, is important niche, especially for returning adults or communities where they're not able to afford to take time off. So that flexibility, and obviously now with online education, just becomes so much more accessible and very low cost. Something else to keep in mind, though, is that, depending on the institution you're from, that will make a difference in certificates. I mean, an institution like George Washington University offering a certificate may have some symbolic or perceived value that may be higher than an institution that is lower or are not ranked at all. So this is where, unfortunately—I'm a big critic of global rankings. But unfortunately, it does play a role in how that certificate is being perceived and the attractiveness of that certificate. But absolutely, this is definitely a way to open access especially for places in the world that just cannot physically move or have the funds to support their studies. FASKIANOS: Great. There are two comments/questions in the Q&A that I wanted to give you a chance to respond to about Africa, from Tutaleni Asino and Fodei Batty. Dr. Asino talks about English is the language of instruction and governments in Africa where they're funding education to a higher degree, and thinks that there are opportunities there, but it sounds like all fifty-four countries are grouped together. And Dr. Batty talks a little bit about there are a lot of students from African countries pursuing graduate education in the United States. But South Africa is usually an exception to the higher education American norm in Africa. Most South Africans don't like to travel, especially travel to America. I thought maybe you could just clarify some—respond to those comments. LEE: Yeah. Absolutely. Thank you for sharing those comments. There's a book I edited called Intra-Africa Student Mobility. And I agree with the comments. And one of the things I didn't mention that I think is important to help us understand the broader global context is that there's actually considerable international activity within the continent. And there's actually considerable intra-Africa mobility within the continent. South Africa is the most important country player in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is globally ranked—has more globally ranked institutions than any other African country. And so South Africa then becomes an important hub. And, yes, as an English-speaking, among many other languages, country, that does attract African students to go oftentimes for a similar sense of shared culture, despite sometimes different languages and customs and backgrounds. And yet, nevertheless, South Africa is an important player within the continent. Not to say that there is no international mobility occurring, but there is increased capacity within the continent that would allow students and interested students to travel within the continent. Not the same extent, of course, as Europe. But the least we're seeing that rise over time. And so it's called Intra-Africa Student Mobility. Chika Sehoole and I coedited the book. We were able to get about eight African scholars to talk about the various reasons students would choose that particular African country, and what draw them. And what was really interesting about this phenomenon is that it goes against this prevailing notion of Africa's victim of brain drain or all going to the north. That's actually not what is happening. But that there is capacity building within the continent. So in trying to answer a different question, I skirted over a lot of the things I could go further into. But hopefully that book will shed light on what's happening within that continent, at least from the perspective of eight different countries. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. Thank you for that. I'm going to go next to Jonathan Scriven at Washington Adventist University in Maryland: What are some of the strategies universities are using to make education more affordable in the United States? If that is a challenge, are schools investing more or less in setting up campuses in foreign countries as a way to reach foreign students? LEE: I'm just going to read over that question. OK, yeah. Great question, Jonathan. So what's happening in my institution and many others is a way to attract students is we're providing considerable aid, merit aid, financial aid, aid even to international students. The majority may not even be paying the full sticker price. Now this, of course, will affect the revenue that would have otherwise been generated, but nevertheless is a way to deal with the fierce competition across U.S. institutions for these top students. So how to make it affordable? There's a lot of aid going around at the undergraduate, not just the graduate, levels. And so what are institutions doing? Well, for example, at the University of Arizona for our dual degrees, it's a fraction of the cost of what it would cost to be a student at our main campus. When you have a combination of hybrid or online delivery with a campus partner maybe providing most of the gen ed's and then we would teach most of the major courses as an example, that does significantly lower the cost where that student will still get a bona fide University of Arizona degree, just like they would at main campus. So these alternative forms of delivery certainly make it more affordable, especially for those that opt to stay in their home country and receive an online education, or a flipped classroom model, or a dual degree. FASKIANOS: Great. Denis Simon, if you can—why don't you ask your question? Q: Here I am. OK. Recently, on a trip to China in September, a number of faculty have told me they're no longer wanting to send their best students abroad. They want to keep them in China. And this is all part of the rise of Chinese universities, et cetera. And so it may not be simply the souring of Sino-U.S. relations that has causal effect here, but simply the fact that China now is becoming a major, you know, educational powerhouse. And that also could change the dynamics. For example, even the BRI countries could start to send their students to China instead of sending them to the United States. Do you see anything evolving like this or—and what might be the outcome? LEE: Yeah. Spot on, David. That halo effect of a U.S. degree is not the same as it was when I was a university student. Chinese students, as well as students in the world, are much more savvy. They have access to information. They have access to rankings. They know all universities are not the same. And they know that they have some institutions that are highly ranked and may offer better quality education than the U.S. So that the image of a U.S. degree, of course, is not as universally perceived as it may have been, I don't know, pre-internet, or without the—all sorts of rankings in which institutions are rated against one another. And absolutely, Chinese institutions are very difficult to get into, fiercely competitive, producing far more scientific output than some of our leading institutions. And there's another factor when it comes to Asian culture just more broadly speaking, is that social network tie. Sociologists refer to it as social capital. When a Chinese student, a Korean student, Japanese student decides to study in the United States, they may lose that social tie that may possibly put them in a disadvantage when they decide to come back and compete for a position when they may just have that U.S. credential, but may have either lessened or no longer have that relationship that may have allowed them to get a position at the university, or in a place where that alumni network would have been especially useful. So again, I don't want to generalize, you know, in any place to the world, but there is that component that I think sometimes is missed in the literature. Maintaining that social network is pretty key, especially as jobs, of course, global, you know, unemployment—places where students are competing for positions need to have every edge possible. So that also can be part of that reason they decide to stay. FASKIANOS: Great. The next question from Michael Kulma, who's at the University of Chicago. He's following on David Moore's comments about Florida: Do you know how many other states in the U.S. are enacting or are considering such policies against partnerships with China? LEE: I do not know the answer. So if anyone wants to raise their hand and share about their own state, or put it on the answer part of the question and answer. There are related concerns about DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Some of that may spill over to China. Hopefully, at some point at the Council of Foreign Relations will have a discussion on Israel and Hamas conflict and how institutions are dealing with that. And so we're seeing a pretty challenging political environment that is clearly spilling over to our classrooms and to our international activities, our domestic recruitment. But I'm not answering your question, Michael. (Laughs.) I'll leave it up to someone else to answer. FASKIANOS: Great. Thank you. So we don't have very much time left. I thought maybe you could, given your research and expertise, could suggest resources—recommend resources for higher ed leaders and administrators to better understand how to promote collaboration. LEE: Sure. So promoting collaboration, it really—each person at a time. You know, again, MOUs may be signed, and maybe overarching presidents will come together and have an agreement, but there's no guarantee that will ever happen. I'd love to do a study on how many MOUs never actually materialized into real action. So where do we begin? International affairs SIOs out there, identify who are your area studies experts? Who are your visiting postdocs? Who are your Fulbright scholars from other parts of the world? They all represent their own network and are certainly are valuable resources to consider. What I've sometimes have heard even at my own institution is, you know, how do we bring these people to the table? Why are they not at the table to begin with, and then how do we bring them there? And this is a relatively low-cost way to go about this, right? Like, faculty engaged in service. What kind of opportunities can your university provide for faculty service that is aligned with their area of expertise, the areas of the world they represent, the networks they have? And many of—some of you already have experienced this directly. These partnerships often begin with our alumni, international—former international students who decide to go back home. So, again, there's just a lot of exciting opportunity. I love this field because it's never boring. There's always new ways to grow, expand new partners. But it really does begin with that essential element of trust. And that often begins with our own institutions and identifying those who've already started to build that network. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Thank you very much. Really appreciate your being with us and for sharing your expertise and background, Dr. Lee. It's been fantastic. And to all of you, for your questions and comments, and sharing your experiences as well. You can follow Dr. Lee on X, the app formerly known as Twitter, at @JennyJ_Lee. I will send out a link to this webinar, the transcript, and the video, as well as the link to the book—your book that you mentioned, and any other resources that you want to share with the group. And I encourage you all to follow @CFR_academic on X, visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. We also—just putting in a plug for our other series, Academic Webinar series, which is designed for students. We just sent out the winter/spring lineup and we hope that you will share that with your colleagues and your students. It is a great way for them to have access to practitioner scholars and to talk with students from around the country. So if you haven't received that lineup, you can email cfracademic@CFR.org, and we will share that with you. So, again, thank you, Jenny, for being with us, and to all of you. And wishing you safe and happy holidays. And good luck closing out this semester before we get to the holidays. (Laughs.) So thank you again. (END)

Description:  Behind the scenes with Katie and her friend C.Lee Cawley, a certified professional home organizer and organizing educator.  This is your behind the scenes bonus experience where I introduce you to my friend C.Lee and you get a little more candid insight into my life and who I tend to hang out with. We also chat about why she's perfect to take over the podcast this week.       Transcript Katie: Welcome to Everyday Happiness, where we create lasting happiness in about 2 minutes a day. But today is a very, very special bonus episode. I am here with one of my dearest, closest amazingest friends, C.Lee Cawley and I can not wait for you to meet her because she is taking over the whole next week of the podcast. This is going to be so much fun. Welcome, C.Lee! We're so excited you're here. C.Lee:Thank you, Katie, so much. I love the idea of a podcast takeover. Katie: We're going to totally crush it. I can not wait to dive into all the things, but first, tell my audience a little bit about you. What are you all about? C.Lee: Absolutely. I am a Certified Professional Organizer. There are actually fewer than 400 of us worldwide, something I'm very proud of. And I've been organizing for 20 years now. I started my business in 2003 and we're coming up on 2023.  I originally started doing residential organizing in people's homes. And now I've transitioned to being an online expert and educator in all things organizing. And I'm teaching students around the world, so it's a super exciting time. Katie: This is so fascinating. You know, I love organizing. Part of my Intentional Margins® is order. Like making sure things are in order, like the squirrels that are running around like they have ADD in my head, making sure they're in order, making sure my papers are in order. I love a clean kitchen in the morning. We talked about that during my family meeting. Somebody's always doing the dishes, so when the children go to school, the kitchen is clean.  So I, of course, have always been picking your brain about all things order and organizing, which I love. But also you're a really happy person. C.Lee: Yes, I am an optimist, for sure. I think it came from my father. My dad, Pete Cawley, never met somebody who didn't become a friend, never had a bad day in his life. And I do think there is and you've talked about this on the podcast, some of it's nature and some of it's nurture, and I am a naturally optimistic person, so it served me very well in life, I have to say. I can't imagine being any other way. Katie: I love it so much. Very similar. Again, which I don't know if we mentioned this to the listeners before, maybe in a previous episode, because I have talked about my friend before, but we're basically neighbors. We live just a couple of miles apart from one another, so we get to see each other in real life, which is so much fun. And I want to talk about something that I haven't brought up yet, but you and I became part of a little happy hour group right before COVID started, and I would like you to tell our listeners about that. And then I will, like, pipe in with my perception and see how it is and how it changes. So do you remember what we did in February of 2020? C.Lee: Yes, and I was so excited. So you invited me to join our friends, Ellice and Lyndsey, both of whom I knew. I knew Ellice fairly well. Lyndsey, not so much, but I knew, and I knew you. But we weren't close friends by any stretch of the imagination, and you invited us to a happy hour at a local wine bar. And I remember being so excited, thinking, “Oh, my God, the cool kids invited me out to play!”. And I was thrilled! And I think to myself, Katie, what kind of divine intervention was for us all to meet in person and have such a bonding experience? We laughed, we ate, we drank, we talked and talked and talked, and I feel like we were there for hours because we all were connecting on so many levels, and we were able to do that in person just before the pandemic. Katie: Yes. It really was crazy. And you know what I was thinking to myself, how lucky I am to be surrounded by these three amazing individuals and be invited to the same happy hour. So I was feeling all the feels, too. Do you remember what we decided to call it that night in February? We decided we needed a group name. C.Lee: Yeah, it was the “Happiest People Happy Hour” because we were all happy, optimists, and people were going “what?” because you know, I had just lost my sister. One of our friends was going through a divorce. One had gone through a divorce. We had some obstacles, but yet we knew in our heart of hearts that we were the happiest people, and together we were unstoppable. Katie: I think it's so fascinating because you look back at those times, I wasn't even diving into the happiness science like I am now, and yet we were attracted to people. They always say behavioral contagion, birds of the same feather flock together, you emulate what you're around, like, all of these scientific principles, and yet we were just doing it because we thought it felt good. C.Lee: Right. And then once pandemic hit, because we had made plans to get together again in March, and of course, that physically didn't happen, but we made it a priority. We met  every other week on a Zoom Happy Hour and really cemented our relationship very solidly through those times. I'm so very thankful for that connection. Yes, and it's true. It's amazing how we all were able to bring our different perspectives - from young children to how  we lliterally span two decades in ages, the four of us, and yet we had so much in common. Katie:  Yeah, I don't know if it's kismet, the universe, all the things, but coming up with “Happiest People Happy Hour” and then following through during the isolation, we were all in lockdown and really prioritizing being on Zoom, like cameras on, focused, being able to nurture  one another and have connections I think we're almost like a testament to how you can really do that online. There's so many things where people are like, you could never do that online. But we weren't that close yet. We really became like an unstoppable force.Like, we got this and then we started text group chains and like all those. C.Lee: Yes. And I think one of the very first time that all of us got together in person again was in your backyard where we could be safely distant and how excited we were to see each other in person. We didn't hug because it was too early on, but yeah, I agree. It was a wonderful thing that we are still keeping up and probably will for the rest of our lives. I hope so! Katie:  Definitely, 100%. I love it so much. So this just goes to show you how relationships evolve and how happiness comes into your life and how you just grab onto that, how strong it can be. So, C.Lee, you're probably a born optimist to some extent, right? Like me, glasses are always half full and you are a professional organizer. You help individuals find that calm and find that peace. And especially now through your course, The Paper Cleanse, which I got to tell you, is magic. I've always been pretty organized and this took it to the next level. So I'm like, I listen to every single module. I did all of the homework and I am 100% in love. I will show you my before and after pictures later, but just know it's legit. Amazing. And so what we're going to do for the next few days is I'm going to pop off and then C.Lee is going to takeover this podcast episode. So, friends, stay tuned. You get an entire week of C.Lee Cawley where you get to learn so much more about what she's up to, what she thinks, how she creates this positive, happy experience in her life and all the magic. So with that, remember, kindness is contagious and you will hear from C.Lee tomorrow. C.Lee: Thanks so much, Katie. I can't wait to take over!   About C.Lee:  As an award-winning Certified Professional Organizer – of which there are fewer than 400 worldwide - C.Lee is an “agent of change” for her thousands of clients, students, and followers - transforming their lives and homes with her adroit advice and insightful instruction. Her current mission is to clear desks and minds around the world with her signature course “The Paper Cleanse”. In it, she teaches people how to declutter their paper piles and curate frustrating files for a lifetime of paper organization.  C.Lee lives in Arlington, Virginia with her husband of over 30 years and considers herself "indoorsy".  She delights in having friends over for decadent drinks and deep discussions.  And it appears that she adores alliteration!  You can connect with C.Lee:  On Instagram = https://www.instagram.com/c.leecawley_simplifyyou/ On Facebook = https://www.facebook.com/DMVOrganizing And at her website which offers tips, tools and a resourceful blog = https://www.cleecawley.com/  *   *   *    Get Everyday Happiness delivered to your inbox by subscribing at: https://www.katiejefcoat.com/happiness And, let's connect on social at @everydayhappinesswithkatie  and join the community on the hashtags #IntentionalMargins and #everydayhappinesswithkatie on Instagram Links:  https://onamission.bio/everydayhappiness/

John Lee has thanked the central government for appointing him as Hong Kong's sixth-term chief executive. He pledged to live up to expectations and do his utmost to implement the principle of "One Country, Two Systems," "Hong Kong people administering Hong Kong," and a high degree of autonomy in accordance with the Basic Law.

Episode 15: Charlie Cowan Salesforce Career Conversation with ROD. Charlie is an Enterprise Tech AE and published Author of "How to sell Tech". Listen to Charlie talk about his career journey, with a surprise master class in selling pipe cleaners. Charlie has sold both Salesforce professional services and products, and talks about why empathy is important within his role. Lee Durrant: Hi, I'm Lee Durrant. In this episode of RODcast, we're speaking with Charlie Cowan about his Salesforce career to date and any little tips or nuggets he's learned over the years, particularly as a now published author of sales books, I think plural. Let's just dive straight in and say hi, Charlie. How are you doing, mate?  Charlie Cowan: Hi there, Lee. I'm good, thank you. Thank you for having me on.  Lee: Thanks for agreeing to do it. Obviously, you and I have known each other for quite a long time in this Salesforce ecosystem. I did notice your recent news about publishing a software sales book. I thought it might be good to get you on and have a chat for people that are listening about, I suppose, your journey in Salesforce and how you got into it, and all the way through to this point now where you're a published author of sales books, which is brilliant.  Charlie: I'd be happy to share that journey. Hopefully, it's useful either for people that are in sales, but also people that are not in sales and more in either the consulting ranks or interested in what it might take to get into sales.  Lee: Yes, absolutely. It's a growing part of the Salesforce ecosystem, of course, but even the wider cloud software space, I would imagine. It'd be quite interesting to dig into that. If you're happy to maybe give us a little overview of yourself and then we can dive into how it all began, if you like. Fire away, tell us what you're doing.  Charlie: I'm an enterprise tech AE. I've worked in cloud sales pretty much since I started working. '99 seems a long time ago now, but when I left The Agricultural College, which is what I studied in, and just through pure coincidence, the town that I was studying in, which is a town called Cirencester, also had a number of tech companies that got set up there. I was lucky enough to get a job in one, pretty much straight out of uni. I did a quick transition from agriculture into technology. Then I've stayed on that path the whole way through, sometimes selling the tech, sometimes selling services. I spent my career in that space.  Lee: Like a lot of people I speak to, it wasn't necessarily your plan to get into tech, then. Obviously, the agricultural thing that was-- You had a totally different life plan.  Charlie: It was pure coincidence and a little bit of luck. While I was at uni, I was also working in my evenings in a local pub. To get from uni to that pub, I used to drive through a little industrial estate in Cirencester. I used to go past this building there, and it had a little car park at the back of it. There was some nice cars in that car park. There was a Lamborghini Diablo, there was a Ferrari 355. There was some good stuff going on. One day, on my way to work, I had a little bit of time before my shift started. I parked up and I went and knocked on the door.  I spoke to the receptionist, and I was like, "What on earth do you do here?"  Charlie: She said, "Oh, we're a business-only ISP." I said, "I've got absolutely no idea what that means but can I have a job?" I didn't even really ask for a specific type of job. I didn't really know what kind of jobs were available. She put me in touch with the sales director there, a guy called Johnny. I popped in a week later to have an interview with him, and had some initial chats about what I wanted to do and what interested me. I was just like, "I'm a student. Obviously, I want a big telly." That was the only thing I could really remember saying.  Lee: Not a Lamborghini.   Charlie: Not a Lamborghini. Yes, start small. Luckily,

Email: jackyroadstudios@gmail.com This week's song: Thanks For Tuning In - https://youtu.be/H-jdvqAY_e0 Hamish & Andy Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/hamish-andy/id213334232 Hamish & Andy new podcast, Remembering Project: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/hamish-andys-remembering-project/id1534252348 Andy's kids book series, Do Not Open This Book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/32726970-do-not-open-this-book 

It's the final week of Pride Month 2019. The guys wish everyone celebrating World Pride in NYC a wonderful time. Jeff talks about being homesick for New York and missing playing hockey. Pose's early season 3 renewal is praised. Will talks about the special Masterwork Experiment happening on The Story Grid Podcast where they are breaking down and analyzing the story structure of Annie Proulx's Brokeback Mountain. Jeff and author/blogger Lee Wind have an extended interview in which Lee discusses his debut YA novel, Queer as a Five Dollar Bill and how he's become engaged in discovering queer history. They also talk about the YA book blog I'm Here. I'm Queer. What the Hell Do I Read? that Lee began over a decade ago. Lee also recommends a couple of his favorite YA books and the queer history project he's trying to jump start on Instagram. Complete shownotes for episode 194 along with a transcript of the interview are at BigGayFictionPodcast.com. Interview Transcript - Lee Wind This transcript was made possible by our community on Patreon. You can get information on how to join them at patreon.com/biggayfictionpodcast. Jeff: Lee, welcome to the podcast. It is so great to have you here. Lee: Thank you so much. I'm really excited to be here, Jeff. Jeff: Now, I recently read your debut novel, "Queer as a Five-Dollar Bill". In fact, I reviewed it back in Episode 189. And absolutely love it. Now, tell people in your own words what this YA novel is about. Lee: So it's all about the fact that I don't have a time machine. When I went...in 2011, I went to a game in summer camp kind of weekend. And there was a guy talking about the letters that Abraham Lincoln wrote Joshua Fry Speed that convinced him that Abraham was in love with Joshua. And I just thought he was full of it. Like how could that have been possibly been true? It's the first time I heard about it. And I went to the library, and I got the letters and I read them and because the emotions Lincoln speaks about are the same emotions I experienced when I was closeted in dating girls and sort of judging it the right thing to do, but not feeling it, I had this moment of sort of goosebumps, and I was like, "Oh my gosh, I think maybe Lincoln was in love with speed." And I thought, "Oh, if I had a time machine and go back and tell my 15-year-old self that the guy on Mount Rushmore, the guy on the $5 bill, the guy on the penny, was maybe in love with another guy, I think it would have changed my whole life. I don't think it would have taken me until I was 25 years old to fully come out. I think it would have been a game changer. But I don't have a time machine. So "Queer as a Five-Dollar Bill" is my paying it forward. I'm a writer, I wanted to write the story about a 15-year-old who's closeted and bullied and dating a girl because he kind of judges it's the right thing to do, but he doesn't feel it. And then he's assigned a book report on Lincoln and he gets the same book that I got from the library, he reads the actual letter, where Lincoln is asking his best friend, after the best friend has gotten married to a woman, "Are you now, in feeling as well as judgment, glad you're married as you are? From anybody but me, this would be an impudent question not to be tolerated, but I know you'll tolerate it for me." And he ends the letter saying, "Please tell me quickly, I feel very impatient to know." And we don't have Joshua's answer, because Mary Todd burned all the letters on that side of the correspondence. But we do know it was only four weeks later that Abraham had married Mary. So to me, it felt like wow, that, like what would happen if a kid today found that out and decided that he wants the world to know? Because everyone loves Abraham Lincoln in our country. And he thought, "Well, okay, so if he tells - the main character, Wyatt - if he tells the whole world that Abraham Lincoln was in love with another guy, he thinks it's going to change how everyone feels about gay people, cue the songbirds and the rainbow and happy ending." I do think if in our culture today if someone was to go really viral with the information that Abraham Lincoln was, wrote these letters and was in love with Joshua Fry Speed, I think there would be a huge conservative backlash and media firestorm. And that's really that what I wanted to show in the novel, how this Wyatt, how Wyatt, this main character makes his way through this incredible maelstrom of fury that he's ignited by just sharing what actually is part of American history. And then to kind of ratchet the stakes up even further, I wanted to make it, like, how was it important for a teenager today? Why is Abraham Lincoln important? So I kind of situated him in Lincolnville, Oregon, a town I kind of made up. His parents own the Lincoln Slept Here Bed & Breakfast. And when the economy of the town kind of starts to tank and they're threatened with losing their business, they bring in a civil rights attorney to help and she has an openly gay son and sparks fly between the two teens. But the main character Wyatt can't do anything about it. Because gay kids saying Lincoln is gay is really different than a straight kid saying Lincoln is gay. And he's faced with his choice, does he follow his heart and see if something might be happening with this guy, Martin? But the cost of that is letting this secret fade back into history, and nothing will ever change in our world. Or does he sort of sacrifice himself and his own happiness, and persist with the story that Lincoln was indeed in love with another guy and see if he can change the world a little bit, even though it won't change for him? So that's the story of "Queer as a Five-Dollar Bill". Jeff: And I feel like even before I read this book that I had heard, you know, some of the rumblings that Lincoln may have had a relationship, may have been gay. So I think it kind of dances around the edge of what some people know, because I can't even begin to tell you where I heard it or anything else, just that it had been kind of back there somewhere in the memory of I don't know, something. Does that even make sense? Lee: Well, it's been a big thing on "Will & Grace", the revived series. They've been doing a whole run on jokes about Jack doing a one-man play called Gaybraham Lincoln, which is sort of all about Lincoln being gay, which I think has been good on the one hand, because it's letting more people know that this is something that people are talking about, but it's also doing so as if it's a farce, as if it's not true at all, and completely made up in a complete flight of fancy on the part of this bigger than life character. When in fact, if you read the letters, it is remarkable how to me it feels so clear that Lincoln was in love with Joshua. Jeff: What was your process for researching the history? Because there's more in here than just the letters themselves. There's a lot of Lincoln history, there's comparisons drawn between Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. In my review, you know, I kind of likened it a little bit, you know, you go see "Hamilton" and you get this big infusion of history, while you're wildly entertained. What was kind of your process around gathering all the pieces you needed? Lee: Well, first of all, thank you for comparing it to "Hamilton." That is like the best compliment ever. I need to embroider that on a pillow or something. I did a lot of research. I started out with the letters and then I realized that I just didn't know enough. I looked around and I live in Southern California. And it turns out in Redlands, California, there is an Abraham Lincoln Memorial shrine and museum. And it's like a three-room edifice that has display cases and a gift shop. And so many of the things that ended up being part of the bed and breakfast that Wyatt's parents own were kind of taken from that real-world experience of going to this place and seeing that they actually had, you know, civil war chess sets. And they had, you know, little teddy bears that were gray or blue. And they had, you know, Confederate Flag and a Union Flag. And that was hugely helpful. And then just starting to dig in deeper to some of the things I discovered there, there's a whole sort of subplot about how Wyatt feels that there's no one he can actually talk to. And so he's developed this strange internal dialogue with this image of a soldier in the background of one of their display cases. And I actually have a photo of it from when I went to this Lincoln shrine. And it was there, it was behind all these ammunitions. And I don't know that my gaydar works 150 some years later, but definitely, there's somebody in that, they're one of the soldiers in that photo does look like he could be gay. And I thought, "Wow, what if this was the only way that Wyatt felt that he could have somebody that recognized who he was, and how sad that was that he didn't really have a friend?" And that was why I was excited to create the character of Martin so he had somebody. Jeff: Were you a history buff all along? Lee: No, I hated history. And I'm sure that they're all these teachers that are like hitting their foreheads in shame right now. But like, honestly, I never had a history teacher that kind of got me excited about the stories of history, because I really feel like the way we teach history today, and my daughter's in 10th grade right now and her history textbook could have been my history textbook from the 1980s, where basically, it's the stories of rich, white, straight, cis-gendered, able-bodied men from Europe. And, you know, history is more than that. There are the stories of disabled people and people of color and women and men who loved men and women who loved women and people who looked outside gender boundaries in history. And I kind of feel like, we have to crack that facade of that false facade of history and let people know that that there's all this amazing light and you can see yourself in history. And, you know, Lincoln and Joshua are just sort of like the tip of the iceberg. There's, you know, Eleanor Roosevelt and Lorena Hickok, there's Mahatma Gandhi and his love for this German Jewish architect, Hermann Kallenbach. There's the pharaoh Hatshepsut in Egypt, there is Safa, there's so many stories that impact us today. But we don't really know them because they don't get taught, or when they are taught, they're not taught in a sort of, queer inclusive or respectful manner. So I kind of feel like now I love history. And in fact, I wrote this novel, but as I was writing the novel, there was so much history, there was so many things that came up, so many more pieces of evidence, so many more pieces of the pie, things that made me surprised, like, I didn't really know that Lincoln was sort of a racist, even though he's credited with freeing all the slaves, he had this whole plan that he signed off on with Congress at that time to sort of, you know, explore shipping all black people back to Africa. And I didn't know that. And the deeper I dug, when I found a piece of information that kind of contradicted what I knew, I really wanted to find a way to include it in the story. Because I feel like that's what we should be doing when we find things that show that history is complex, and that people are not black and white, that it just makes it all so much more real and so much more relatable. And if we can see reflections of ourselves in the past, like if we know that there were men who love men in the past, then we can believe that we have a place at the table today. And if we know that we have a place at the table today, we can envision a future that is sort of limitless. And I want that for everyone that doesn't feel like their history is included. I want it for all the women and all the people of color and the disabled people and the women who love women and the people who lived outside gender boundaries, too. Because that's, you know, we call it LGBTQAI+ or QUILTBAG or whatever. But really, the job is about being an ally to other people. And me as a gay man, I have to think, "Well, how can I be an ally to everybody else?" And hopefully, they're thinking the same thing. And that's how we start to create societal change. Jeff:: That is wildly profound. And especially, given that this episode of the podcast is dropping in the last week of June, as you know, the queer community celebrates Stonewall 50. Lee: Oh, yeah. Well, you know, I love that we're celebrating Stonewall, I love that the gender non-conforming people that were there, the transgender people, the drag queens are getting some respect now that they were part of that and they were in fact, the leaders of standing up to the police finally. But for many, many years, Stonewall had a banner, the Stonewall Inn had a banner outside that read "Where Pride Began". And I think that's really misleading. And we talk in the queer community in America as if that's where pride began, right. Like, pride, "Hey, we're celebrating 50 years of Stonewall, Hooray." But wait a minute, Karl-Maria Kertbeny came up with the word homosexual 100 years before Stonewall. Right? Like Lincoln and Speed were writing these letters to each other 20 years before that. You know, you can go back thousands and thousands of years and there's this beautiful story from China before China was unified, where the State of Wey that the guy that ruled it, his name was Duke Ling and he had a guy he loved his name is Mizi Xia. And they were walking through the orchard one day and Mizi Xia picks a peach off a tree and starts to eat it. And halfway through, he stops because it's so delicious. He wants to share it and he gives the half eaten peach to the Duke and the Duke makes a really big deal out of it. Like, "I can't believe your love for me is so profound that you would sacrifice your own happiness to give me the peach." And something about that moment captured the imagination of people in that pre-unified China. And for over 1,000 years, the way in Chinese that they said gay love was love of the half-eaten peach. Like we have this amazing, amazing history. And we just need to kind of breakthrough that facade and let all this amazing rainbow light shine through. So that's kind of what I feel my mission is to kind of let people know that we have all this amazing history, and we can start to dive into it. Jeff: Is this all history? Because you mentioned earlier that you're not, you weren't a history buff and you hated history. Have you gathered up all of this new knowledge since you were researching to write "Queer as Five-Dollar Bill"? Lee: Yeah. So while I was writing "Queer as a Five-Dollar Bill," like I mentioned, there was just so much stuff that came up, so much evidence that I was like, "I can't really cram all this into a novel, because at the end of the day, the novel is really about a kid today." And I didn't want it to feel like a historical novel. I wanted it to be this page-turner. So I realized that maybe it was two books, maybe there was the novel. But what if there's a nonfiction book as well that presents the primary source materials, like a popup video thing on MTV or VH1, whatever it was, helps interpret, or at least how I interpret the thing? So like, there's all this talk about Shakespeare's Sonnets, and how, while they're very rarely taught, over 100 of the sonnets, Shakespeare wrote to another guy. And these are love sonnets that include really, really famous lines that we all recognize, like, "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day. Thou art more worthy, yet more temperate." That's a line that Shakespeare wrote to another guy. For hundreds of years, they had changed the pronouns of that in one of the folios. So it ended up being that for hundreds of years, people thought that Shakespeare wrote all those poems to a woman, to the Dark Lady. But when "The Riverside Shakespeare" came out, the editor of that section, he talked about how, "Well, we've restored the sonnets to their original, you know, pronouns, but you shouldn't mistake that, you know, the affection men felt for each other in the 1500s was nothing like the homosexual attraction today." He wrote this in 1970s. And I'm like, "Really? Really?" Because, you know, "A man in hue all hues in his controlling, Which steals men's eyes and women's souls amazeth," it sounds pretty romantic to me. So what I realized what I wanted to do is to create a book that wouldn't be just a book about Lincoln and Speed, but it would be a book about the broader thing, about men who love men and women who love women and people who lived outside gender boundaries. So there's 15 chapters. One is about Lincoln and Speed, one is about Shakespeare. And then there's, like, you know, a bunch of other amazing people in history, and it really presents the primary source material. And I'm really excited because today - that we're recording this - is the day that I'm signing the contract for that book with a publisher. Jeff: Oh, that is exciting. Congratulations. Lee: Thank you. It's been a long journey, long and crazy journey. Because the book originally was set up at one of the big five publishers, and I worked on it for a year and a half with them. It was approved, we were talking cover design. And then two weeks after our current president was elected, they canceled the book. I think they were concerned that it was going to be too controversial. They just didn't have the courage to proceed. And that was really devastating. And it took a long time to find a new home for it. There were a lot of shenanigans, a lot of plot twists. The agent I had had at the time turned out to be a criminal who, well, she was telling all her clients she was submitting things and that they were having all these pending book deals. She was lying. And the book was never submitted anywhere. Even after it was returned, the rights were returned to me. And the novel, "Queer as a Five-Dollar Bill" ended up getting crowdfunded because I thought that I was being, well, stonewalled by the children's book industry and they didn't want word to get out about Lincoln and Speed so much so that no one would even respond to the submissions. So I crowdfunded it. I have a blog, I think we're talking about that a little bit later. But I have a bunch of people that know who I am and what I was trying to do, and they all supported me to not just publish the book professionally, but also, what I wanted to do is raise enough money to donate at least 400 copies of the novel to LGBTQ and allied teens, and the Kickstarter funded in six days, it was amazing. And then it went on for another 24 days. So we ultimately raised enough money to give away 910 copies. So that's been really, really gratifying. Jeff: That's incredible. I mean, it's really one of the great things about publishing today is that there's really no more gatekeepers out there. Anybody can publish, get it on Amazon, get an audiobook done, etc, and get their messages out there. Lee: There still is the thing, though, that being with a traditional publisher, you generally can reach more, especially when we're talking about like middle grade, you know, or books, where you go into libraries, which I think that this nonfiction book really is a, you know, hopefully, it'll sell like hotcakes. But also, I do think that to get it adopted more broadly into schools and into libraries, I think that coming from an established publisher is really useful and really helpful. So I'm excited about that. I do think that yeah, that there are many, many fewer boundaries than there used to be - or barriers than there used to be. But at the same time, we have the additional challenge that while access to the marketplace has never been easier, the marketplace has never been bigger. So getting noticed in a marketplace, where there's over a million books that are published every year now in the U.S., is a challenge. And that's why it's so important to have safe places to find out about these things, like your podcast, and my blog. Jeff: Yes, absolutely. To spin back on "Five-Dollar Bill" a little bit and talk a little bit more about it. What were your inspirations for both Wyatt and Martin and the type of teenagers they would be? Lee: When I was growing up, or when I was coming out, I think it felt like you couldn't be gay if you lived anywhere except for one of the big cities like San Francisco or New York. And I really wanted to have a character that felt connected to nature. And that one of the thematic subplots would be, 'Could he be himself where he was? Could he be himself in small town America, in a rural community, was there a way through for him to be successfully himself and authentic?' I feel like I spent so much of my life being inauthentic, that I want to do everything I can to help teens be authentic now. So on the one hand, Wyatt was the study of a kid that was on a journey to be authentic and Martin was the flip side of that. Martin was the character that already was authentic, and was already reaping the benefits of that level of confidence. And you know, as soon as you, for me, when I came out, it was like this huge burden off of me. And suddenly, I realized the weight of it was on everyone else, right? Like, if they had a problem with it, that was their problem. But it wasn't me hiding or holding back, or pretending or acting, which I did for so long. My husband and I have a joke, where when you go to a Starbucks or something, they're always like, "What's your name?" And every time my husband changes his name. Like he just makes up different names every single time. And they ask me and I'm always Lee because it took me 25 years to even start to like myself and to accept myself. And I finally got here. And I'm like, "Yeah, I'm not anybody else. I am me. I am Lee." It's funny. I take a spin class and as a motivational thing the spin instructor does, "Who do you want to be today?" I'm always like, "Me, I want to be me." I spent so long being other people. And then also, it was really cool when I was creating Martin's character, to think about him being African American. And that being an opportunity for me to talk about the complexity of Abraham Lincoln and him not being so perfect and explore those themes a little more. And it's funny because I hear from a lot of people how much they love Martin. And yeah, he's pretty lovable. Jeff: Yeah, I really liked them both in their individual ways. For sure Wyatt...I grew up, I spent like middle school, high school, college in Alabama. So I could totally relate to where Wyatt was in his journey like he knows, but there's no way he's telling anybody. And I didn't have a Martin for a best friend. So I also loved Martin, because he was the ideal friend to have for Wyatt in the moment to show him what could be. Lee: Yeah, exactly. Jeff: What do you hope the audience takes away from this kind of history/fiction mashup? Lee: So I think a lot about words, you know, being a writer, and I think that the word homosexual isn't helping us. I think that if we, because we're so reactive and weird in our culture, in America about sex, and we are obsessed with it, and we don't want to acknowledge it. And especially we don't want to talk about it to teens. So when we talk about homosexual rights and homosexual history, all straight people are hearing, you know, to paint with a broad brush, is they're thinking about sex and that we have sex differently than they do and how do we have sex. And I just don't think that's particularly helpful. And I think that if we talked about love as sort of the binding element that makes me and my husband and our teenage daughter a family, or the love between you and your husband, if we talked about HomoLOVEual rights and HomoLOVEual history, I think we'd have a very different cultural conversation. So what the tagline of my book is, "What if you knew a secret from history that could change the world?" And I love this because it gets a little meta. But it's the challenge that Wyatt faces, right? He finds out the secret about Abraham Lincoln writing these letters and maybe being in love with Joshua Fry Speed. And he decides that he's going to tell the world because it could change the world. And then it's the same challenge that I faced because I knew the secret from history and I thought this drumming sense of responsibility, like I had to share it, I had to get it out in the world. And because I wasn't getting anywhere with traditional publishing, I thought, "Okay, well, I'm going to crowdfund it, I'm going to get it out in the world, myself." And then what I am really excited about is that it's also the challenge that the reader faces. Because when you've read the book, or you even heard me talk about the book, you know that there is something more to the story of Abraham Lincoln that has been taught to you. And it's that first crack in that facade of history. And it makes you think, "Well, wait a minute, when you see the picture of Mount Rushmore, or when you pick your kid up at the Lincoln middle school, or you're driving on Lincoln Boulevard, you know, does it occur to you that, you know, our culture has not shared that part of who Lincoln is? And does it make you feel a little more pride about the fact that you know what, we do have history, queer people, and we need to lean into it? And we have the opportunity to because there are hundreds of years of historians that are going to argue with us and that are going to say, "Yeah, yeah, it's not true. It was very typical for men to share beds on the frontier." Not that Springfield, Illinois was the frontier. But for four years, you know, Abraham and Joshua shared a bed long after Abraham could afford his own bed. "Well, it was cold." Okay, yeah. But they shared a bed for four years. It's not proof. But it's interesting. And I think that as all those things add up, we can all make our own determination of what we think, you know. Is it important for me that I convince the world that Abraham Lincoln was in love with Joshua Fry Speed? No. I think a lot about Anne Lamott, she's a writer, and she writes about writing. She has a beautiful book called "Bird by Bird". And in that book, she talks about lighthouses, and how they don't run all over an island looking for boats to save, they just sort of stand there and they shine. And I think a lot about that. Like, I need to be a lighthouse. Like I found out this amazing, cool stuff about history, and how it relates to today, and how empowering it is. And I just want to shine. And if people are interested, they can come closer to the light. And if they're not interested, no worries, you know, watch out, there's some rocks over there. Jeff: Any chance of a sequel? Because I know I would love to see more of Wyatt and Martin at some point Lee: I haven't really come up with a good angle on a sequel, I had this funny idea for...one of the other pieces of history that really struck me was Mahatma Gandhi and the story of his love for Hermann Kallenbach. And we talk a lot about Gandhi having this sort of breakthrough where he talked about it doesn't matter whether you pray facing left and I pray facing right - I may have that reversed. We're all praying to the same God. Like he had this huge breakthrough, not just in terms of, you know, a peaceful protest, Satyagraha. He changed our world in such profound ways. And at the same time, he was in love with this German Jewish architect named Hermann Kallenbach. And if he was in love with a Jewish guy, like that's actually really interesting and really germane. Like maybe that's why he had that inspiration, that insight about it doesn't matter who you're praying to, because it's, we're all sort of bonded by this sense of spiritual connection. Like, that's really exciting. And I feel like there's so many stories like that, like Eleanor Roosevelt and Lorena Hickok. Eleanor Roosevelt was the woman that after, you know, her husband died, she went to the UN and became this advocate for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And would she had done that if she didn't have this experience of being in love with another woman, and feeling that sort of outsider status, while at the same time being this empowered woman in our world? History starts to open up like a flower. So I don't have an exact idea for a sequel for Wyatt and Martin, but I will put it in the hopper as ideas. Reason I brought up Hermann Kallenbach and Mahatma Gandhi was that I thought, that would be an interesting thing to talk about a kid finding out about that, and how that would have changed their life. And then about, "Wait, that's the exact same story over again, I don't need to do that. I already wrote that." So for now, I'm going to focus on the nonfiction piece and some other fiction writing that I want to get to that, actually, I'm very inspired by your book too, by the "Codename: Winger" series, because I love the idea of mashing up a gay teen with a sort of spy thriller. Jeff: And I can't wait to read what you might do with that. So please, bring that to the marketplace. Lee: Thank you. I keep thinking, "Is there a way I can get gay history in here somehow?" I haven't figured that either yet. But, you know, I'll work on it. Jeff: You'd mentioned earlier that you've got your blog, which I was so excited to find right around the same time as finding the book. You've been a YA blogger for more than a decade now. I believe you said it'll be 12 years in September. And the blog is called "I'm Here. I'm Queer. What the Hell do I Read?" What led you to starting that? Lee: Thanks. Yeah, there was no safe space to find out what were the books with queer characters for kids and teens. And I remember, there was a review on Amazon for a really sweet picture book called "The Family Book" by Todd Parr. And it's sort of a cartoon-y book. And there's like one page, it says, "Some families look alike." And it's a bunch of dogs that they all have similar features. "Some families look different." And it's a tree with all these different kind of animals in it. "Some families adopt children." And it's a bunch of ducks. And on the back of one duck is a penguin. And then you turn the page and it's, "Some families have two moms or two dads." And it's a picture of two women and two men. And then it continues, and there was a review, pretty high up that said, "If you tear out the page with the two moms and dads, then this is a lovely book on diversity." And I thought, "Wow, way to miss the entire point of what diversity is." And I got so upset and so hurt, you know, because I'm a gay dad. And I thought this was an amazing book for my daughter, but also for all of my daughter's classmates to see and recognize, "Yeah, yeah, you know, some families do have two moms and two dads." And to Amazon, that wasn't hate speech, it didn't violate their terms of service, it was just somebody's opinion. Albeit kind of, you know, nasty, or at least I interpreted as nasty. And it got me thinking about how there really needed to be a safe place online, where a kid could go and find out what are the books that were out there. And when I started, there were maybe 30 books total that were inclusive of LGBTQ characters and themes for kids and teens. And what's happened over the years is that by keeping this curated safe space, where I'm not vetting all the books, but I'm making sure that no nastiness is happening on the site. We have over 500 books now in many, many categories. And it's been really exciting to see that sort of explosion of content. And yet, it's that sort of similar problem again. Like now, suddenly, there's so much content, how do you make your way through it? How do you find the things that you want? So the idea behind it was to post about the books, what's queer about the books, and then let readers add their own reviews. There hasn't been a lot of review, there's just too many places for people to leave reviews these days. So I don't see a lot of that. But I also didn't want to make it, you know, "Lee's favorite book site" because I think that that has a limited value, I thought that there was more value in it being a site that felt really comprehensive. And that's what I aim for. And then it just became a place where I could talk about the stuff that I really care about, that I want queer and allied teens to know about. And over the years, what I've discovered is that the readership is split into thirds. There's about a third, queer teens and queer and allied teens on it. There about a third of librarians and teachers and people that work with LGBTQ teens. And then there's a whole bunch of adults that are sort of reading the books for themselves and sort of healing their inner teen. And I think that there is a healing that happens. Every time I read a queer book that has a happy or even a hopeful ending, there's a healing that happens. And I think maybe that's part of why romance as a genre is so popular. I know Will was saying in a previous episode that people get on his case for like ruining the ending, but it's all romance, you know it's going to be a good ending. And I think maybe that's why people turn to it. So I know how empowering it is for me when I read something where I see a reflection of myself, and it's a positive thing. Because when I was growing up, there was nothing to read, nothing positive. The only queer characters were like evil pedophile villains, it wasn't particularly helpful. Jeff: Yeah, that's, unfortunately, the case in the history that you and I have from that era when we were growing up. In the decade-plus that you've been running the site, other than just more YA, how have you seen it all evolve? Lee: There's more, and there's better and there's deeper, and there's less preachy and there's room for it all. It's funny, there was a kind of push a few years back for...well, maybe we're beyond the coming out story. And I kind of got my dander up a little bit on that. And I felt like, "Well, we're never going to be beyond the first love story when it's, you know, a straight romance. So, Andrew Solomon has this great book that he wrote called "Far From the Tree" and it's a nonfiction piece. And he talks about how, you know, when your identity is...where you're the apple that does fall far from the tree, or falls from the tree and rolls across the, you know, down the hill and across the orchard, when you're queer, most likely your parents were not. And so you have this moment where you have to find your sense of community outside of the family that you grew up in. A lot of other identities, you share that. Like, usually, like me, I was raised Jewish and so I would, you know, my parents were Jewish. So I sort of shared that identity. For all of our identities, we sort of are either sort of close to the tree or far from the tree. And when you're far from the tree, there's more work involved. So coming out, I think is going to continue to be this universal thing. Because just like, you know, my daughter has two dads, but she's straight. So in a funny way, she's going to have to, you know, she had a bit of a coming out where she had to tell us, sort of, you know, abashed, hoping that we'd be okay with it, that she was straight. And we had a good laugh about it. Because it's not that big a deal for us. We just want her to be her authentic self and to be happy. So we do want to have coming out books, and we also want to have books where being gay, like your character Winger, Theo, where it's the least interesting thing about him. I loved when you said that in your interview. Because yeah, we want those stories, too. It's like in acting, right? In improv, the rule is yes/and. So we want these books, and we want those books. We want the fantasy, we want the romance, we want the science fiction, we want all of it because truly, if you look at the numbers of books that are published - traditionally there about 5,000 books published a year for kids and teens. And then, if you look at the world of self-publishing, let's say that 5,000 are doing it really beautifully. And the books are indistinguishable with the quality of that from traditional publishing. That's 10,000 books a year, a year. And you have all those years going back too. So what we want is the opportunity to sort of have all of those books and right now we still only have like 500. So we have a long way to go. We need lots more books, we need lots more voices, we need people writing their own voices, stories, we need more diversity included in everybody's stories because truly, you're not going to have a classroom today that doesn't include someone that's LGBTQ, we need it all. Jeff: That's very true. Given that you had the blog, did you always see yourself eventually writing the YA novel that you did? Or did that just kind of manifest itself because you have the story to tell? Lee: I've always been a writer. I've written...I remember one summer when I was like between 9th and 10th Grade in high school, I was like, "I'm going to write a novel." I sometimes think of those poor characters still trapped in the broken space station that was orbiting the Earth. And I'm like, "Oh man, I have to do something with that someday." I don't think I will. I've always written. I think that for the last 14 years, I've really focused on writing for kids and teens. I also write picture books and middle grade. And when I found out this thing about Lincoln and Speed, it really inspired me to focus on writing that as a novel. I think that the blog has been a way to have my voice heard in a more direct way, and not wait for somebody to tap me on the shoulder and say, "Okay Lee, we're ready for what you have to share." So that's been really empowering. I remember, when I started the blog, there were very few people reading it, and I would get all excited, I'd be like, and I'd tell my husband, "Hey, 15, people went to my blog today." And I was so, so excited. And now, all these years later, we passed 2.6 million page loads. I get between, you know, 15,000 to 25,000 page views a month. It's remarkable, and humbling, and also a really cool responsibility to continue to maintain this safe place. And at the same time, I'm trying to keep writing and work on the new stuff, which has been really a good thing, because balancing the day job and the blogging, there's a lot but I have stories I want to tell. And I'm going to keep trying to tell them. Jeff: Good. Yeah, keep putting it out there. Because we always need more, to be sure. For people who haven't seen the site yet, and we're certainly going to link to it in the show notes. It has an amazing hero image across the top of the superhero. Where did that come from? And where did the name come from? For folks who might question the name too, because I have a pretty good idea where the name came from. But let's hear it from you. Lee: Sure. So "I'm Here. I'm Queer. What the Hell do I read?" is a play on words of something we chanted in Act Up in the '80s and '90s. The chant was "We're here. We're queer. Get used to it." And I thought, well, my issue is a little more "What the hell do I read?" Because I felt so starved for any books that included somebody like me. I mean, you know, I grew up and I really and truly thought I was the only person in the world that felt the way I felt about other guys. And which was super ironic, because I have an older brother, who's five and a half years older, and he's gay too, but we never spoke about it. We are the children of immigrants and when my parents came from Israel, they sort of brought all their homophobia with them. And the American culture at the time was super homophobic, especially where we lived outside Philadelphia. It was not a safe place. And it's so amazing to think that you can grow up and feel like you're the only person and everything I read, I was obsessed with the series by Anne McCaffrey called the Dragonrider series. And there was this super between the lines, sort of thematic thing that you could maybe interpret that there was gay stuff happening in that world, but you had to really stretch for it. And looking back, I think, well, maybe that's why I was so obsessed with that book, with that series, because there was some faint, not even mirror reflection, but like the gleam of a tarnished piece of silverware. I was like, "Wait, wait, maybe that's me." So that's where "I'm Here. I'm Queer. What the Hell do I read?" came from. The image happened a few years later. I had been running the site for about two years, it had been doing really well. And I realized I wanted to have a customized image. And yet, it's a pretty wordy title. So I realized I needed an image that didn't have any additional words to it. So I contacted someone I knew, an artist I knew, Jim DeBartolo. And, I said, "Look, I need an image that says empowerment." And he came up with this sort of superhero moment of like ripping the denim shirt off. And there's this sort of T-shirt underneath with the sort of superhero logo, which is the website, which is leewind.org. And it was funny. We tried to play with the sort of partial face that you see, we tried to, you know, could we make it a person of color? Could we do some things with you, know, the physique? But ultimately, it was sort of an avatar of me, and it took me years to admit it that's sort of what of course it is, it's an avatar of me, but I don't have that good a jawline. But at least in my mind, I think that it's been this sort of symbol of empowerment. And that's really what I hope that people get from visiting the site, from reading anything I write. I want them to feel empowered. Jeff: I like that. That's a great story behind that. Lee: Thanks. Jeff: So relying on your...I'm going to call it a YA expertise because of the site that you run. What are three or four titles of current YA that you would recommend our audience to take a stab at? Lee: Sure. So I have to start with "Carry On" by Rainbow Rowell. I know it's not super recent. But this is the gay Harry Potter book that I wanted so badly. And I was so frustrated that JK Rowling didn't include Dumbledore as being gay in the canon. It sort of was outside the books that that revelation happened and you can go back and sort of, you know, read subtexts and stuff. But I really was hoping that there would be some sort of, you know, on the page, queer love or something, and it didn't happen, there was really nothing. And, you know, Rainbow Rowell, she wrote two books, one about the girl that writes the fan fiction, which is called "Fangirl", which is really good. And then there was this book, which was the fan fiction, that ended up being a huge success on its own, called "Carry On". And I don't want to say too much, but it is absolutely brilliant. And if you are queer, or love queer stories, and you had any connection to Harry Potter, and that sort of world of magic, you've got to go read this. It's just wonderful. Jeff: Excellent. Her books have been on my TBR forever. And I actually need to take the leap and read them. Lee: Read this one first. It's just you will be so happy you did. Jeff: So you mentioned the nonfiction that you've just signed the contract on and other stuff noodling around in your head... anything else you want to shout out that's coming up soon for you? Lee: So there are a bunch of things percolating. But nothing has come to full boil yet. So I will let you all know when it does. Jeff: That is fair. I can't wait to hear what they are. Because I think that, yeah, having read the one book from you, I'm looking forward to reading so much more. So where can people keep up with you? There's leewind.org as we talked about, which is the "I'm Here. I'm Queer. What the Hell do I read?" site. Anyplace else people should be looking for updates? Lee: Yeah. I mean, I'm playing around with Instagram. I'm trying to do this thing. I had the idea that we could do a #queerhistoryiseverywhere. And I wanted people to upload photos of Abraham Lincoln or the word Lincoln wherever they saw it and just start posting it on Instagram. It hasn't exactly caught on yet. But I still like that idea. Jeff: Maybe our podcast listeners will play along with that. Lee: Oh, yeah, that would be really fun. And also, I mean, as, you know, more queer history happens. I was speaking at the Bay Area Book Festival recently and someone came up after my panel and they said, "Did you know that Bābur from the Bāburnāma when he was a teen he was in love with another boy?" I was like, "Really?" Totally, I have sitting on my desk right next to me right now the "Bāburnāma" and indeed, when he was 18, he was in love with this other boy. And it's so exciting to find out this stuff. So I feel like because it's been hidden, the more we can crowdsource this information and share it and then all amplify each other. I think it's very, very exciting. Jeff: Very cool. So we will link to all that stuff, the books we talked about - everything else - in our show notes. And Lee, I'm so glad we got the opportunity to talk, spread the word a little bit more about this book and the website and thank you for all you're doing to get more out there about YA literature too. Lee: Thank you, Jeff. I really want to say thank you to you and to Will. I'm really a fan of the podcast and getting to be on it as a real thrill. So thanks.

Welcome to the 3 Point Perspective podcast. This is the podcast about illustration; how to do it, how to make a living at it, and how to make an impact in the world with your art. Your hosts are Jake Parker, Will Terry, and Lee White. For the last 25 years, they've all worked with just about every major publisher and every publication in the biz. They've collectively published about 50 books, and have all taught at universities. Each week, they're going to tackle a subject related to illustration from their three different perspectives. Sometimes they'll agree, sometimes they're gonna argue, but you are gonna learn something new every time. Here are some of the questions that will be discussed: How do you get discovered as an artist? Once you're discovered, how do you negotiate a deal if you've got a job? How do you get an agent to represent you? What are the tools that illustrators use (computers, software, pens, pencils, brushes)? Why do you create? How do you stay motivated? How do you battle creative block? How do you balance work and life and still have a successful career and have a successful family life? Message from Jake, Terry, and Lee: Thanks for checking out 3 Point Perspective. We'd love it if you would subscribe to our podcast so you'll know whenever new episodes drop and you'll be able to listen to them right away. We would also love any sort of feedback you have. Did you like how the topic was presented? What's your perspective on the topics? What are things that you wanna learn about? What are questions that you have about illustration? Please hit subscribe and join us for future episodes of the Three Point Perspective podcast, and we will see you in the next episode. Jake, Terry, Lee Visit SVSLearn.com to learn more, or subscribe to the show in Apple Podcasts.

Episode 6 is, even more than usual pretty damn NSFW... It's the podcast where we decide which is the best out of things with similar or identical names! What are you doing this week Sammy and Lee? Thanks for asking. This wee, we decide which is the best, the WWF (People who like animals) or WWF (Wrestling and that) Also, controversially, we decide the winner between Animal Farm (Orwellian allegory) and Animal Farm (A video that one of us has seen some of and wishes he (Or she...) hasn't)

Merra Lee thanks her wage earner husband for sticking with an entrepreneur!

Merra Lee thanks her wage earner husband for sticking with an entrepreneur!

Audio File:  Download MP3Transcript: An Interview with Amanda Steinberg CEO and Co-founder, Daily Worth and Soapbxx Date: December 13, 2010 NCWIT Entrepreneurial Heroes [intro music] Lee Kennedy: Hi, this is Lee Kennedy. I'm a board member for the National Center for Women & Information Technology or NCWIT and I also started Bolder Search. And today, we are here to do yet another interview as part of series of interviews that we are having with just fabulous female entrepreneurs. And they're women who have started IT companies in a variety of sectors, all of whom just have fabulous stories to tell us. With me, here today, is Larry Nelson from w3w3. Hey, Larry. Larry Nelson: Hey, I'm happy to be here. This has been a wonderful series. We host all the interviews not only in the NCWIT.org website but also w3w3.com and we get very heavy traffic and that makes us feel good. Lee: Super. And also today, we are interviewing Amanda Steinberg, whose professional experience spans entrepreneurship, website and software development, business development, and online community development. So, Amanda is one busy gal and she's had two really interesting ventures going on now. She's CEO and co-founder of Soapbxx. Did I say that right, Amanda? Amanda Steinberg: Yes, you did. Lee: OK. Well, welcome Amanda. We are really excited to have you today. Just a little more about Soapbxx, and Amanda you can expound if I leave anything out, it's a Web 2.0 consultancy firm. Tell me a little more about it, because I'm probably just going to mess it all up. Amanda: No problem. So, yes, I run two companies and I have two children under the age of four. Larry: Wow. [laughter] Lee: Yeah, as parents of three and five kids here, we know what you're up against. Amanda: Yeah, definitely. It gets exhausting but I love every second of all of it. So, yes, I run two companies right now and I'll talk about the management structure of each and how I am able to run two companies in the limited work day that I do have. So, Soapbox is a website consultancy. We are most specifically focused on online fundraising and marketing strategies for nonprofit organizations. I was previously the Internet director for the American Civil Liberties Union and I was able to take that experience from back in 2004/2005 and bring it into a consulting environment. And we have been serving many other national nonprofits in the same capacity of what I did for the ACLU. Lee: Cool. Larry: Yeah, that's fantastic. Now, tell us about the other company. Amanda: DailyWorth.com is a long-time dream of mine coming to fruition. DailyWorth is very simple actually. It is a daily email, a free daily email, that teaches women about basic finance. We currently serve 50,000 members and it's growing quite rapidly. And having run Internet consultancies of one form or another for 10 years, I really was drawn to the "low overhead, high margin" nature of a daily email, daily newsletter company. Lee: Wow, I love it. Larry: Yeah, fantastic. Lee: I'm signing up. Larry: Yeah, my four daughters are, too. Amanda: Fantastic. Larry: Yeah. Lee: So Amanda, we just love to hear about how you really got into technology, and today, what are some of the coolest technologies you think are out there? Amanda: Well, I got into technology, funny enough -- my mother, back in college in 1964, majored in math and minored in computer science. The industry had just come to fruition. Lee: Trailblazer. Amanda: And I think she was the only woman in her class doing this. Lee: That is so cool. Amanda: And then when I was three or four years old, she got her MBA in Management Information Systems. So whereas most kids were doing arts and crafts, my mom plunked me down in front of the computer. And I think I really got into technology. You know, I actually was following a career path of politics, but through many convoluted means I got an administrative position in college where I graduated into doing BB scripting for databases. And despite my leanings -- my extroverted leanings towards politics -- I actually really fell in love with technology in college and realized, "Hey, my brain actually kind of works this way. I think I'm going to do this as a career." Lee: And that is such a cool story because how many of us had mothers that we learned from, at least the technology side. So it's very cool. Amanda: Yeah, it is very rare. It's a very rare situation, indeed. Lee: Yeah. Larry: So, what are some of the technologies that you think today are very cool? Amanda: I'm such an Apple geek these days. I mean, lately, I'm just amazed at how connected I feel to my iPhone, much to my husband's some sadness at times. My latest and favorite technology right now is -- I guess I'll talk about two things. The first is something called HeyTell, H-E-Y-T-E-L-L. It's an iPhone app that turns my phone into a walkie-talkie. So I'm able to have these kind of intermittent conversations with all sorts of people in my life -- anyone that I've convinced to download it. And it is much better than voicemail, but it's more personal than an instant message and I'm really encouraging everyone to try it out. The other thing, from a work context, is that I'm just getting into Skype Group Video Chat. I have probably 12 employees and contractors reporting to me now across two companies and no one is in a central location. So we all talk as a team throughout the day, and I really appreciate the group video technology that enables that. Lee: So glad that you brought that up because it is such a... Well, I should say "underused technology," but so many people are starting to use it and it is so cool. Larry: Yes. I use it from time to time, also. We have clients overseas and that really is handy then. Amanda: Really. Yeah, and the fact that we can all save time and money and a commute, and I can hire my director of marketing in Bozeman, and be coached by my mentor in LA, and I'm based out of Philadelphia. You know, it really just makes all of that so much more fluid. Larry: Yeah, that's fantastic. Lucy Sanders really likes us to ask this question. Why are you an entrepreneur today? Amanda: Oh! How could I not be an entrepreneur? I spent -- in the two years that I spent at the ALCU, which I loved, by 11:00 a.m. I was kind of banging my head against the table because I need to have my hands... I did not like being "siloed" in the IT department. I wanted to be involved in strategy, and I wanted to be involved in creative, and I wanted to... As much as I was in a leadership role there, it just felt segmented for me, and I know that would be the case for me in any corporate environment. And the reality is, is that I really thrived as an entrepreneur. I was the managing director of a website consultancy when I was 22, and I was the top-selling manager there. And I realized that because I'm able to generate business and because I do have certain leadership attributes that I have to be an entrepreneur, it's just not even a choice for me. Larry: Excellent. Well, then what is it about entrepreneurship that makes you tick? I know you hit a number of points, but is there anything else? Amanda: I just really enjoy setting big goals and working toward them, and building teams and building networks. Despite the fact that I'm a home-based mother entrepreneur, I'm highly extroverted and need to be constantly connecting and interacting with people. So, I'm not sure if that's entrepreneurship that's making me tick or if it is the way that I tick that feeds into the fact that I'm an entrepreneur. But it's kind of this... I love kind of wild chaos towards big goals and seeing things come to fruition. And especially with DailyWorth, as we've grown to 50,000 members and we've signed on sponsors including ING Direct and H&R Block, and we have a pipeline of advertising revenue that makes my heart sing. After two years of constant endless workdays into the wee hours of the morning, I'm really seeing it come to fruition, and it's just -- I can't imagine doing anything else. Lee: I think you've summed up being an entrepreneur. Larry: Yeah, you got it. Lee: It's wild, chaotic, and thriving on it. Amanda: Yes, for sure. Lee: So, you had mentioned earlier that your mom was a big influence that really opened your eyes to the whole IT world. Who would you say have been other role models or mentors? Amanda: I have so many. It's really impossible to summarize. I think everyone I've worked for and worked with, I've learned something in some way. But I guess I'll talk about two in particular that have really helped me as of late. The first is a gentleman by the name of David Ronick. He runs something called upstartbootcamp.com. When I had my idea for DailyWorth two years ago, he was the one who really said, "OK, you need a business model. You need to understand your inflection points. You need to understand the revenue and the funds that you have to raise." And he really helped me put this -- what seemed like a wildly complex business model, spreadsheet together at the time, that now is really the blueprint of how I'm growing the company. So, he's been critical. I recommend that everyone has an MBA to lean on. And then the second person who's really, really transformed my world is a woman by the name of Jen Boulden. She is based in LA. I talk to her... It was twice a day. I think now it's probably three times a week as I've matured. She built the company called Ideal Bite which she successfully sold to Disney two years ago, using a very similar email newsletter model that I'm using. So she, as I joked, she's actually not very nice to me -- she is very nice to me, but she's not there to be nice to me. She's there to hold me to very high standards and point out all of my shortcomings and I've grown so much as a result of having her. I owe so much to her. Larry: Yeah. Boy, that's fantastic. You have two young children. You have two companies that you are running. What is the toughest thing you've ever had to do in your career? Amanda: The toughest thing I had to do in my career, no doubt, was back in 2001, after 9/11. As I mentioned, I was the managing director of a different website consultancy and we had grown to about 20 people and the sales just were not there to support the office. We had really high overhead and it was extremely painful. And I was responsible for laying off five people in a single go at the same time. I know you hear stories about people being fired and how horrible that is and it is absolutely excruciating. It was definitely, probably one of the worst days of my life, when I had to deliver those words to a group of people at once. Lee: I have to say that's probably about 95 percent of the other gals that we've interviewed have said. It seems to be unanimous, almost. Larry: You bet. Lee: So, Amanda, one of the things we'd like to do is have you give your advice about being an entrepreneur. We have a lot of young people, and people that are just starting to think about being an entrepreneur, so what advice would you give them? Amanda: The advice I would give them is that I find a lot of entrepreneurs that are really interested in coming up with their idea, their big money idea. And what I found is that I'm not so particularly interested in entrepreneur's ideas. I'm more interested in their business models, and how those models make money. Because I have seen countless times, amazing ideas fall flat because there wasn't the revenue or the scale to support them. And at the same time, I've seen some businesses entering crowded markets that don't seem so innovative that are really successful because they're simply improving upon one or two things that the rest of the market isn't. So, I would say, look at the businesses that really interest you. What is it about the operations of that business that are really exciting? And then, figure out your idea. That's what I did, and I can't tell you how happy I am that I took that path. Lee: That's great because it's probably a little-known fact that most of the most successful businesses out there weren't started with the actual idea. It morphed and changed along the way to find something that was really successful and a niche in the market at that time. Larry: Yeah. Amanda: Absolutely. Both of my businesses look nothing like what they were when they started. Larry: [laughs] Amanda, what are the personal characteristics, I know you've hit on some as we've gone through this but, that has given you the advantage of being an entrepreneur? Amanda: The first thing is I think I'm a little bit crazy. I don't seek balance in my life. I love to work. Work is very much enmeshed in my life. I am very ambitious, and I think you really kind of need that manic optimism to be successful, because it can just be so hard, so hard on so many levels. So, I think that's been helpful, honestly. I've definitely met other entrepreneurs who I think mirror those traits, and we often kind of laugh about how crazy we feel and yet how instrumental that is in being successful as an entrepreneur. The second thing is just being highly extroverted. I love nothing more than being dropped in a room with a thousand people I don't know. So much of building a business is about building a team and building the people to support you, not necessarily about what you can do on your own. So, I collect people as a hobby. I love -- I'm just genuinely interested in other people, and I think that's absolutely critical to any business as well. Lee: That's cool. Well, you kind of put me in a conundrum here because our next question is how do you bring balance into your...? Amanda: I did that on purpose. [laughter] Lee: So, obviously, you don't bring balance. But how do you survive? Maybe that's the better question. Amanda: You know, it was 11:00 last night, and I was making my son's and my daughter's egg salad sandwich for their lunch, and I was thinking about this slide I needed to update for my investor presentation at 9:00 a.m. this morning, and I really was cross-eyed. I was thinking "Oh, my God! I am in the depths of darkness right now. I am so tired. All I want to do is go to sleep." But somehow, I am able to survive. This is not my long-term plan -- to be living like this -- but I think if you have a certain level of ambition, you have to match it with that energy, and you have to make some sacrifices. I'd say my day is 95 percent energizing and five percent exhausting when I reach the darkness of 11:00 and the lunches still aren't packed, and I still haven't done the laundry to get their socks ready for the next day. So, I'll take that 95 percent positive, five percent pain point for what I look forward to in the future. Larry: Wow. Well, Amanda, you've got two companies that you're working and running right now. You've had successes in the past. Amanda: I've had a lot of failures, too. I've had so many failures. Larry: Oh, I'm so happy to hear that, yes. My wife and I, we started 12 companies and some were learning experiences. Amanda: Yeah. I've started probably seven to date, so, yes. Larry: Wow. Well, what's next for you? Amanda: What's next for me? Well, DailyWorth is really interesting because it's about empowering women in the area of finance. We have 50,000 members, and I know that it's applicable to reach millions of members. So, what's next for me is I'm raising around about 750,000 in Angel capital which will enable me to take my amazing DailyWorth team full time, and work toward our goal -- which is to reach 300,000 by the end of next year, and then a million over the next four years. So, that's really what I'm focused on. Larry: Excellent, that is super. Boy, I want to say that I am so happy that we had this opportunity to interview you. This interview will be heard by many people, many managers, entrepreneurs, and a number of young people who are looking into technology and entrepreneurship, so thank you for all your ideas. Lee: Thanks so much, Amanda. Amanda: My pleasure, and if I could just invite everyone to check out DailyWorth.com. For all the women interested in finance, I invite you to sign up. For anyone in the nonprofit world, Soapbxx -- spelled S-O-A-P-B-X-X -- .com is a great solution provider in the nonprofit space. Thank you. [laughs] Larry: That's excellent, and yes, we will. We'll also put it on our website so that people can link right to it if they hadn't taken that down. They can listen to this 24/7 at w3w3.com and ncwit.org. Lee: Thanks so much, Amanda. Amanda: Thank you. [music] Series: Entrepreneurial HeroesInterviewee: Amanda SteinbergInterview Summary: Like many women, Amanda Steinberg came to a tech career through a back door. But when she realized that it interested her and she was good at it, she used it to kick-start her career as an entrepreneur. Release Date: December 13, 2010Interview Subject: Amanda SteinbergInterviewer(s): Larry Nelson, Lee KennedyDuration: 16:13

Audio File:  Download MP3Transcript: An Interview with Caterina Fake Co-founder, Hunch and Flickr Date: November 16, 2009 Entrepreneurial Heroes Interview with Caterina Fake [music] Lucy Sanders: Hi, this is Lucy Sanders. I am the CEO of the National Center for Women and Information Technology, or NCWIT. This interview series is a series of discussions with women who have started IT companies, who have really wonderful advice to share with everybody who is interested in becoming an entrepreneur. With me is Lee Kennedy who, herself, is a serial entrepreneur, and as of late, of Bolder Search. Also an NCWIT Board Member. Welcome, Lee. Lee Kennedy: Thanks, Lucy. It's great to be here. Lucy: And also Larry Nelson. W3W3.com. Tell us a little bit about w3w3. Larry Nelson: We are an Internet talk radio show and we've been doing it for over ten years now. We archive everything. You can go back and listen any time. One series here that we've enjoyed so much is the NCWIT series. Lucy: Well, thank you. We are getting a lot of notice lately as well from a couple of people who write books on entrepreneurs from the National Academy of Engineering that wants to feature some of these interviews so we are pretty excited about the series. And today, we are going to have another great interview with Catarina Fake who is the co-founder of Hunch. And Hunch is -- and we are going to ask a little bit more about this in just a minute but for my preparation for this interview, Hunch is -- a collective intelligence decision making system and it uses decision trees to make decisions based on user's interests. And it was just recently launched, Catarina, in June of this year? Catarina Fake: End of this year, that's right. Lucy: What great name, Hunch, that is wonderful. But before that Catarina was the co-founder of Flickr and I'm sure all of our listeners know about Flickr and Flickr was one of those companies that open many people's eyes to the power of Web 2.0 and really taking together those features such as social networking and community. And things that people wanted to share like photos and other things. So it is a wonderful company. Catarina has won many awards and, in 2006, she was named Time 100 Time Magazine's List of World's 100 Most Influential People. That is very awesome. We are happy to have you here, Catarina. Catarina: Thanks for having me. Lucy: And now, tell us exactly what is collective intelligence? Catarina: So, collective intelligence is when a lot of people get together. Not necessarily even people that know each other and create something. So a really great example of that would be Wikipedia. Wikipedia is as the people know that encyclopedia of thousands of thousands of subject where you can find out biography of the Queen of Netherlands or you can find information about biology or just pretty much any topic under the sun that will be in any encyclopedia anywhere. I would also say that Flickr, which is a photo sharing site, is also a kind of collective knowledge system and that there are millions of people I think it just announced that Flickr hit four billion photos. That is four billion photos out there. A large percentage of which are shared publicly among people. And it has become that vast, infinite national geographic that is constantly being updated with things from around the world and all manner of photograph. And so, it itself has become a kind of collective knowledge system. So I think what distinguishes the collective knowledge system, some other kind of social software is that there are a lot of people contributing to it. You can contribute very small amounts of information like for example you can just correct the spelling mistake on Wikipedia. Or you could contribute one photo or leave one comment on Flickr. The system gets better on the more people that you get. Lucy: Well, so those kind of sites then I guess with all those knowledge will lead directly into decision making and how you are going to use algorithms. Is that what part is Hunch is doing? Catarina: Yes, Hunch is another knowledge collective system. It is a new kind of system and it is design very differently from Wikipedia and Flickr in that what people are creating are decision trees. So the way that Hunch work is it ask you to leave a question and give you an answer. And you don't have to do anything. You don't even have to type anything. You just arrive at the topic. So let's say you are trying to figure out what college you should go to. The system will then ask you a series of question such as what do you want to major in? Are you interested in the college that has fraternities or sororities or not? Do you want a large, state college? You want a private college? Would you prefer a larger college that is based on the city? Those kinds of things. It is basically replicating an expert system so you would probably in real life, if you are looking for somewhere to go to college, you would talk to a guidance counselor who would ask you probably the same series of questions. And what Hunch does at the end, it gives you a hunch. It consist of lots of best colleges that apply to the criteria that you have given it. And so this applies to anything. This could apply to a rock bank. New York time best sellers. Should I retire to Florida? What kind of girls should I buy? Pretty much any question that is decision. And when the system works is that people are contributing the topic until somebody has a lot of knowledge about say, yoga classes in Minneapolis. We make a topic that say yoga class in Minneapolis. What are you looking for? What kind of yoga are you doing, etc., and all of this information. And so it is a way for people to get together and help each other with decisions that they are making. Now we are going to do things that I think that I found is directly in my work in the Internet is that I am a big believer that the Internet really flourish because of people's willingness to contribute to help other people. You see this all over the Internet and kind of the background with the Internet is really people uploading pictures of their cat. Started out, people uploading pictures of their cat. People writing little essay. People blogging. People adding information in the Internet. I mean this is really what the Internet is comprised of. And Aaron Key once said the Internet is comprised of words and enthusiasm and I think this is generally true, I think that if I go to the trouble of researching for example what is a good wedding photographer in Boston and I saw a whole bunch of wedding photographer and this person specializes in black and white. This person is formal shot. This person is candid and such and such. If I create a Hunch topic then everybody else can benefit the research that I've done and people can add oh, I actually know a really good wedding photographer that hasn't been mentioned here. Another people can add another question and all that kind of thing. Collaboratively, people can add topic. Lucy: That is pretty interesting and I can see a way to get more girls into computer science. We put something up on Hunch and anytime the girls said, I want to pick a major, it comes back computer science. "I realized that is not..." Catarina: Here's the thing about Hunch. Teach hunch about you. So it is a series of questions that ask you everything under the sun. How do you spend your weekend? Do you live in the city or do you live in the country? Have you ever written a poem that wasn't for school Do you believe that alien abductions are real or fake? Would you rather spoon or be spooned? And all these kinds of questions that teach Hunch about you and it will learn. It will learn gradually over time what you are like that you prefer this kind of music or that you are more likely to go out and party on weekend. More likely to stay home and watch a movie with your family. So what is does it tailors its answers specifically to each user. It doesn't give anybody the same answer. It gives everybody different answers based on how the taught Hunch about themselves. Lucy: And so Catarina, how did you first get into technology? Catarina: I think I had the benefit of having a dad who got us a little PRS 80 computer when we were really little kids. He had a curiosity about technology and he himself is never a programmer or even honestly, he never himself got that much about computers but he was always exposing us to new technology and things like that. He got us little computer which we used and I think nothing really happened with me and computing at all during my youth until I got into college. And then this is actually in the pre-Internet days in the early '90s. In the pre-web days. The Internet was nascent, but had not flourished into the web which made it much more usable for everybody. And so, I went to Vassar College and Vassar had a great, for the time, and since I haven't been back to campus lately, I'm not sure how the computer systems are, but in 1990 when I was there, it had a phenomenal computer system. We had data ports in all of our rooms and we could get on to the Internet from wherever we are. So as a result to that, I just taught myself how to use command line stuff which is all that you could do in those days, and was largely self taught. The thing that I loved about the Internet was that it was a means of communication. It was a way of connecting people. My sister was on the Stanford system out in San Francisco, I was on the east coast in New York. We were able to email each other and this was a revelation to me. You could actually, using IRC chat, have conversations with Dante scholars in Aarhus, Denmark, that you could discuss you paper with that you were writing in college. So that's how I started getting into it. What happened was I graduated from college. I had all of these odd jobs where I did interstitials on Seinfeld on the film crew. I worked in a dive shop in Arkansas. [laughter] I basically had this very peripatetic post college career. And then I was on my way to go backpacking in Nepal, when I decided to stop in and visit my sister who was living in San Francisco. What happened was, my backpacking trip got delayed, and delayed. Pretty soon it was avalanche season and we couldn't go on the trip anymore. So I ended up staying in my sister's spare bedroom for months. She is a very kind and generous older sister and has always been lovely to me. But after six months she said, "You know, maybe you should get a job." [laughter] This is 1994, and the most interesting thing that was going on in those days was the web. And the web was just starting out and was just starting to flourish. A friend of mine worked at one of the first web design shops and he sat down one weekend and taught me the basics of HTML. There were no books around at the time so I taught it to myself by doing View Source as you used to be able to do in those days. I started doing it free lance and then I got a job at one of the first web design shops here in San Francisco. Then took it from there. Lucy: Wow. That is amazing. So you have really just led us into our next question which was, it's clear how you got into technology and really got interested, but what made you want to become an entrepreneur? Caterina: It's interesting I think that entrepreneurialism is something of a personality type. It is very common that people who are entrepreneurs are the kind of people who spend nights and weekends just building stuff. Tinkerers, packers, creators, inventors, or however you want to describe them. People who see the possibility of technology. Or even non-technology entrepreneurs. They're building furniture in their spare time. They are doing electronics, making robotics, those kinds of things. It really is a career that appeals to people who are restlessly inventive, who are curious. Other qualities that entrepreneurs seem to share are that they're very determined, they have a vision they want to make real, they see possibilities in things. I think I had a lot of these characteristics and a lot of these traits that just became very natural career path for me. I have only worked at a large company after my company Flickr was acquired by Yahoo that was the first time I worked at a really large company. It is, I think, a kind of temperament. A choice and a path. Lucy: So what I am hearing is, you really love the tinkering, the building of something, the... Caterina: Creativity of it. Lucy: The creativity. Caterina: Creativity. In some ways you also have to have an appetite for risk. Lucy: Definitely. Caterina: In some ways I think you have to have the ability to take big risks and be fully responsible and be the kind of person where the buck stops with you. Because there is really some white knuckled periods of entrepreneurialism that you have to get through. There is nobody that's going to help you. There is no organization to support you. Often there is not enough money. Often there is a lot of doubt as to whether or not you can pull it off. So I think you also have to have this kind of appetite for risk that is different from people who take on a, I hate to call it a normal career, but a regular job for an employer. That's even the case with people who join startups. Not necessarily even people who found startups, people who joined startups have to have a certain ability to handle uncertainty and risk because it is an uncertain enterprise. It is not like going to work for a government job or the Bank of America or something like that. There are many people who would argue that entrepreneurialism and startups and small companies are actually not nearly as risky as working at big companies. Because there are often big rounds of layoffs and your jobs can be eliminated, some kind of large bureaucratic regime change and all of those kinds of things. So there are risks on both sides. People who work at big companies are not necessarily as secure or protected. I think one time companies in America were much more secure. So I think it is a different kind of thing. Larry: Right. With all the people that you worked with over the years, if you were to pick out one person who was probably your most important role model or a mentor for you, who would that be? Caterina: One of the investors in Flickr is Esther Dyson. I don't know if any of you are familiar with Ester or her works. She is very well known. She has been working in technology for, gosh, I am not even sure, 20 years, 30 years, a very long time and is highly respected and is very much a mentor to me. It is very inspiring to see women who are working in technology and have been working in technology prior to the web. She started a conference called PC Forum which was a huge conference. It is pretty much the conference. I think PC actually stood for personal computer and they stated it stood for personal computer, or something prior to that. But that shows you how far back the conference went. It wasn't really tremendous thing when Esther invested in Flickr. It was a big milestone for us. I think that we had built something that somebody of her stature was interested in investing in. So I have to say that she is somebody who I very much respect and admire. Lucy: I can see it. Esther Dyson investing in your company is a big deal. Caterina: It is a big deal. It is a big deal. Here is the funny story. OK, so this is probably good little anecdote to show how persistent that you need to be. So she ran this conference. We are the six-person company in Vancouver that nobody has heard about. We've got a website and a dream. So Esther Dyson who is a very famous woman who runs a very, very big conference, we really wanted to go to this conference. Because we knew there are a lot of venture capitalists there and we needed people to invest in our company. We needed to show people in technology our website. So we wrote to her and we had no money, we were broke. We said we would love to present at PC Forum and we don't have any money to pay. It was $5,000 a ticket or something like that. And there was just no way that we could afford to go to this conference. As a fact nobody was going to invite us because we are nobodies up in Vancouver. So she wrote back and said, no, I am sorry that we can't do that. So then the following year we decided to try it again. So we write another letter and we say, listen, OK we are still here and we'd still like to come to the conference and we now have this new product called Flickr, which we would love to present. And we wrote to her and we wrote to some of her staff. We received an email from Esther which said no, I am sorry we are all full, or no I am sorry we can't accept your proposal. And I'd say about a half an hour later we received another email from one of her staff that said, oh actually, we'd be interested in having you present at the conference. So they contradicted each other. Of course, we only responded to the one that had the affirmative interest. So we say we'd be delighted to accept your invitation to present at the conference. And so, Esther who happens to sit on a board at a company in Vancouver said, "OK I'm going to find out who these persistent people are up in Canada." And so she scheduled a breakfast with us because she was in town for a board meeting so they ate with us. And it was at that meeting that we presented our website Flickr to her. And she agreed to invest in it. And we were just regular folks completely out of the blue and had managed to get this meeting with Esther. And so, I think that persistence paid off. And if you don't want to ever present something that's not good to people. But, if you feel as if you've got a worthy product and that's worthy or their attention you should definitely apply for, you know every conference presentation that you can. Lucy: That's a great story. It's always good to hear those happy endings. The next question isn't about happy endings maybe, but it centers around the toughest thing you've ever had to do in your career. Caterina: Interestingly, Flickr was the result of our company dying so it's not. I'm not sure how familiar you guys are with the story of how Flickr started but we had started our company to build a massive multiplayer game. It was an online game it was web based. And it was played in the browser. It was called game never ending. And we had tried to raise money for this game. And it was 2002 and the boom had just busted as everybody recalls. And there was no money around and the other thing too is that we were trying to build something that nobody had ever really seen before. And this it seems strange because there are so many people that are playing these things in their browsers now that never existed in 2002. So people didn't really get what we were doing. Is this something you can buy at CompUSA or at your local Wal-Mart or what is this. Is it like online solitaire. And so nobody knew what we were doing and we didn't have any investors. And we had rapidly run out of money building this game. And we were just about to collapse basically. The company was just about to disintegrate. I hadn't been paid for a year. Nobody on the team had gotten paid for six months, three months to six months. There was one guy on the team who had three kids. He was the only guy who was getting paid. And getting up every morning and knowing that your responsible for the paychecks for all of these people. And your company is going under and you haven't been able to find investments and this thing that you love is just about to die. This baby that you created is just about to meet it's sorry end. It's a really horrifying thing. And you like awake and wonder how the hell this is all going to turn out. And I've seen so many startups get to this point, run out of money and die. And it's never, its never a happy thing. But, that said, I would say that going through that is one of the most you know, growth oriented experience of your life. And we managed to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Because what happened was, we had about three months worth of money left that we could keep going. And so we had this idea for this photo sharing thing. And decided that gosh we don't have enough time to build this game, we'll build this little photo sharing site that we came up with the idea for. Because in three months were never going to be able to complete this game. And then another thing that we had fortunately done is applied to the Canadian government for a grant two years before, which we had completely forgotten about. And it was December 23rd when we got a letter from them saying that they were giving us this grant. I think that it was for like $150,000, but $50,000 production budget and then a $50,000 marketing budget and I don't remember we really only ended up collecting a fraction of that, about $50,000 at the time. It was just able to keep us afloat long enough for us to build this new thing which we christened Flickr. So it was very much a Phoenix from the ashes. We were able to pull something out of it. It was one of the stories that ended happily. I think that even when companies go under, what I was about to say before was, even when your company goes under, people look back on their experience starting a company as one of the best experiences that they have had even if it fails; that they learned so much; that they really pushed themselves; they extended themselves to the very limits of their abilities and that feeling is irreplaceable. To succeed or fail, that is a very powerful experience for people. Larry: So you are talking about Flickr, you are talking about your new venture, Hunch. With all these things you have been through, how do you bring balance both into your personal and your professional lives? Caterina: It's interesting. I think that there is a lot of people who talked about this idea of balance being very important and I completely agree. And one of the things that I found is that the first time around you're not as seasoned or practiced, and I wrote a blog post about this recently on my blog at caterina.net. But the first time around we spent a lot of time worrying about things that we didn't need to worry about and basically flipping out about things that didn't need to flip out about -- doing things that were really not important. And I think the second time around I managed to figure out along the way what is worthwhile. Maybe staying at the office around the clock isn't as productive as working really, really hard, for eight or nine hours and then going home at the end of the day and actually having dinner with people. Because you need to sustain yourself over time and I do think that we do end up burning out if you don't pace yourself. You need to pace yourself. I think that you can do, it is very important to be able to pull those work crunch, we are going to get something at the door and we are going to work really hard in anticipation of a launch or that kind of thing. But that as a continual daily thing is probably not advisable. Lucy: Amen. Lee: Yup. It's the toughest thing there is, is balancing that personal and professional. So Caterina, you have achieved so much taking Flickr from nearly in the ashes to a phenomenal success, and now launching Hunch. So tell us what you see down the road with your career in technology? Caterina: I see, hopefully down the road Hunch is wildly successful and we have thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, if not millions of users. I am just really committed to making Hunch the best site that it can be. I think one of the things that I really love to do is build websites and build interactive communities and build things that people use. I think that so long as I am able to keep doing what I love, which is making things and building things and thinking about things and having new ideas. That is not much different from what I am doing. So if you are talking about progression of the career, do I want to take a job as CEO of some massive technology company, I don't think you'll ever see me doing that. I think probably I will continue to be self-employed and an entrepreneur for the rest of my life. Larry: Sounds great. Lucy: I was going to say your passion for this, it just comes oozing out through your voice. It is clearly something that you love to do and that you love entrepreneurship and I think we are all lucky that you are out there inventing all these great sites. Lee: And you have given such great answers to the questions, I am sure everybody is going to love hearing this. Larry: Yes. You Betcha. Lucy: So thanks very much for your time. I wanted to remind folks you can find these interviews at www.w3w3.com and also at the NC website, www.ncwit.org and as well as the Pearson Prentice Hall. Lee: Thanks, Caterina. Lucy: So thank you so much Caterina. Caterina: Thank you guys so much. [music] Series: Entrepreneurial HeroesInterviewee: Caterina FakeInterview Summary: The creation of Flickr, says Caterina Fake, was "very much a phoenix from the ashes...a story that ended happily." Release Date: November 16, 2009Interview Subject: Caterina FakeInterviewer(s): Lucy Sanders, Larry Nelson, Lee KennedyDuration: 27:43

Audio File:  Download MP3Transcript: An Interview with Kristin Asleson McDonnell CEO, LimeLife Date: July 15, 2008 Kristin McDonnell: LimeLife [music] Lucy Sanders: Hi. This is Lucy Sanders, the CEO of the National Center for Women & Information Technology, or NCWIT. Today we have another interview in our series of interviews with IT entrepreneurs, people who have started just fabulous companies, organizations that use computing information technology. With me is Larry Nelson from w3w3.com. Hi, Larry. Larry Nelson: Hello. I'm happy to be here. Lucy: W3W3 is an Internet radio station. Larry: That's right. Lucy: And these interviews can be found at the W3W3 site as well as at the NCWIT site. Also with me is Lee Kennedy a director of NCWIT, a serial entrepreneur herself and a co-founder of TriCalyx. So welcome, Lee. Lee Kennedy: Thanks. Thanks for having me today. Lucy: Well, and today we have Kristin McDonnell here, CEO of LimeLife, for our interview. In looking at your company, Kristin, it's just such a great company. I think one of the tag lines I saw , "It delivers fun right through your mobile device." Kristin McDonnell: Right. Lucy: And it's fabulous and I know our listeners are going to be very interested in it because it's one of the companies maybe, perhaps the only company, that is developing content exclusively focused on the women's market. So, starting with gaming - OK, Look, you guys. I have a favorite game. Games like "Girls Night Out Solitaire," "Girls Night Out Blackjack." However, my personal favorite is "Law and Order." Ding! Ding! So, Kristin, welcome. We're really happy to have you here. Why don't you tell us just a bit about LimeLife? Kristin: Sure. So, LimeLife is a digital media company focused on the female market. We're focused primarily on females between the ages of about 18 and 34. Although we do know that there are younger teens and women that are more my age group, in their 40s, that are also our customers. We create experiences. Right now what you see on our website is primarily for the mobile platform. So mobile games, lifestyle tools like "People Magazine" on the phone. They leave text messages like horoscope, love tips, beauty tips and also wallpapers working with fashion brands to bring their imagery to mobile wallpapers. What we're launching this summer of 2008 is a web and mobile community for women that is a lifestyle community around shopping, fashion, music, and our tag line for that community is: "Everything I like wherever I am." It allows women to discover, collect, share items of interest, items of inspiration with each other as well as giving them a mechanism to have everything they like wherever they are, whether they're on their mobile phone or on their web-connected PC. So we're very excited about that launch that is coming up very shortly. Lucy: Wow. It sounds really exciting. Kristin: Yeah. Lucy: The mobile market is such an emerging market, such an exciting space, and that gets us to our first question, which is a technology question. Obviously mobility is a cool technology for you, lots of potential there. Are there other things surrounding mobility that you think are the hot technologies of today? Kristin: Sure. The things that I'm very excited about in terms of mobile -- and I think that the iPhone has started to show some of this capability -- is that it really is a connected computer that is with you all day long that can really give you access to your favorite websites, your favorite content, as well as to other people. Also, with the camera phone capabilities improving with each iteration, the ability to really take high quality photos and video with your phone and then to share it with your network is something that we're very focused on. And then as you layer on location-based services as those evolve, where the phone can really understand where are you in relationship to the people who are important to you, or the places that are important to you, or to places or people that the knowledge of the community think might be important to you. And so it's really going to become an amazing device in terms of its capability -- in terms of how we think about it - to make women's lives much easier and much more fun and much more connected in a way that the PC simply cannot and in a way that today's more rudimentary phones simply cannot. Other web technologies that that we see that are very interesting as well, that we do believe are going to migrate to the phone as well, are around creativity and self expression and really giving people capabilities of doing things far more interesting than, let's say, just making lists of photos or lists of things that are of interest, but really to create collages or match ups of content so that you can really self-express why that content is important to you as opposed to just having it in more of a list format. So those are the things I'm very excited about. And then the advertising technologies and capabilities that come as part of that are very interesting as well. Such that, can we provide advertising messages at a point on women's phones where the women really want that ad message or they really want that coupon and it really becomes a very powerful and meaningful dialogue between the consumer and the advertiser, as opposed to the advertiser potentially coming into their lives when the consumer is not welcoming that kind of message. Lucy: Well, it really is interesting when I think about the younger generation. And then we dinosaurs here in the room I'm speaking of. Larry: She looked at me mostly. Lee: Speak for yourself. Lucy: But I look at my teenage daughters and how they use their phone. It's amazing. We were somewhere where we needed my 16-year-old's social security number and she didn't have it memorized. But, "Hold on, mom. I've got it right here in my phone." I'm thinking, "I don't put my social security number in my phone." But everything is in her phone and all of her interactions are with her phone. Lee: Well, and this notion of providing advertising when people want it, I think is spot on. Lucy: That's the key. Lee: Because I don't mind advertising, especially if it gives me something helpful for what I'm doing. Lucy: If it's relevant to what you're doing, it can be really helpful. So, Kristin, that segues us back to the beginning of your career and education. What was it about being an entrepreneur or why were you interested in becoming an entrepreneur? And then now, what is it that you love about it? Kristin: When I think back to what was I doing in junior high or high school that might have indicated that I had this entrepreneurial bent, because one of my first jobs out of college was to join two guys from Arthur Anderson to start a company. So that entrepreneurial bent started very early in my career. And I always gravitated towards organizations that combined creativity and business and I, typically, was the business part of that creative effort. So whether it was the school newspaper or the school yearbook or the plays at school, I just loved being around creative people where we were building something, creating something, and where I took a role, typically, is more of the financial business arm of it, or the ad sales person for the school newspaper or whatever it may be. I just loved being around those creative people. And then in high school, it wasn't until I took the SATs that I realized that I was pretty good in math. I don't know how that - somehow, my teachers didn't tell me that or I just didn't realize it and it was only when I realized, "Hey, I'm better than most people in math," after the SATs that I then went to college and enrolled in the school of engineering and took my first computer science class as a freshman. And that computer science class really introduced me to one of my core loves, which is computer programming. I don't do it anymore, but building models in Excel and things like that, that same logic and building something out of nothing just really excites me. So it was through that, those computer programming classes that I took throughout my college career -- actually, I was just two credits shy of having a computer science degree from Northwestern -- that I really wanted to do something around computer science. So that first entrepreneurial company that I started with the two other gentlemen was to do systems consulting to corporate America just as the PC was starting to enter into the IT environment. Most of the environment thus far has been mainframe-oriented and the PC was just starting to come in, and we'd bring in PCs to act as clients to those mainframes. So that was my first startup. I've been a part of six startups now and I just found that I love building something out of nothing, whether it's a team, or a financial model or a consumer software experience, that I just love that process of building. Larry: Well, along the way, I can't help but wonder with all the different people you've met, the companies you've been involved with, and your success track is really super, have there been any particular role models or mentors along the way? Kristin: Well, my parents have been huge role models and mentors to me from a very early age. Both of my parents have been presidents and CEOs of organizations, both business as well as nonprofits. So that was a very early role model for me going back to when I was three, four, or five years old. And so I was able to see what does it mean to be the CEO or a president of an organization? How do you act around your team? What types of challenges do you have? I remember my mom having to, unfortunately, let somebody go at one point and, as a 10-year-old, we were counseling her on what do you say and how do you make this happen. So they just gave us a lot of great first-hand experiences where we'd be there with them at work, or at the company party, or whatever it may be, where we understood what does it mean to be a leader of a team. And then the entrepreneurs that I've worked for, the CEOs of the companies that I've worked for, have been huge role models for me. Audrey MacLean, who introduced me to all of you guys, has been a successful CEO many times and has been a great adviser to me. And then just also looking at successful media companies in this instance and just understanding what were the various steps that they took at various points in time and how did they shape their strategy as new opportunities evolved. So I'm a sponge for advice and guidance and mentorship, and I just love to hear other people's experiences. There's really a wide variety of people that I draw upon. But it's really my parents that I owe the biggest debt of gratitude to instill in that at a very early age. Lucy: And you mentioned that your mom had faced something that you remember around letting people go as being something quite difficult, and we've heard that in this series of interviews from a number of people, that that is a hard thing to do. What's the toughest thing that you've ever faced in your career and how did you handle it? Kristin: I would say layoffs are probably the most difficult thing. I've had to downsize companies significantly. It's very difficult to have a team that you've had such great experiences with in building a company and then, unfortunately, you have to let them go. So that's definitely extremely difficult. I think that one of my metrics for my own experience and success and just performance is whether people leave feeling good about the experience that they have. And thankfully, I do feel like that is something that even as they're departing unfortunately as part of a layoff that they have said, "This was a great experience for me. Thank you so much." I've actually hired people back after layoffs. But we found,hey, the company's growing again. We need to hire somebody back. And it's just been a really satisfactory experience for me to be able to hire people back and to have them want to rejoin even though they've been through this experience of having been part of a downsizing. So I think that those are very difficult experiences. I think that early on, entrepreneurs face a lot of difficulty, sometimes convincing investors of your vision. That just takes a lot of work and you have to almost think of yourself as a salesperson, where you're anticipating that you're going to get nine "no's" for every one "yes, and that you just want to get through those no's as quickly as possible so you can get to that one yes. So those can be difficult times. I think, especially for people if they can't hear a "no" easily. And I think that, as an entrepreneur, you just need to let it wash off you and to almost make you feel more powerful and more committed to your goals when you do hear those no's and just saying I'm going to show that person someday that they should've invested in our company. So, that's just another difficult thing that entrepreneurs face, especially in the early days of just getting started. Lucy: That in itself is some really great advice for people that are new entrepreneurs and don't realize how many no's you do get along the way. I'd be really curious with all the experience you have over the years, if you were sitting here with some young people that were starting their business, what kind of advice would you give them? What are some pearls of wisdom? Kristin: Sure. I would tell them to focus on something that really excites them, and they should anticipate that they're going to be working at this company and on this idea for seven-plus years. That they should not think of this as something that is going to take 18 months and is suddenly going to be purchased by some huge company. That it really should be something that every day they'll feel excited about working on it. You know when I look back at the six startups that I have been with, four of them have had various liquidity events, either IPOs or being acquired. And when I trace like how long did it really take for those companies to really achieve the vision of what it ultimately could be become, it took between seven and 10 years for that ultimate outcome to actually occur. That's why I think you just have to be really excited about it because it is every day [laughs] for a long period of time. And once they kind of gravitate toward that idea, then to just realizes that it is just every day pushing the ball forward, and that the more that they can create a list every day of those things that only they can do that will create major value for the company and really focus on accomplishing those things and trying to delegate or delay those things that they feel like, "OK, well it would be nice if I could get this thing done but it not going to create a huge value for the company," or, "This is a fun little exercise for me but there are five other people in the company that could do it." Try to deligate those things and really just focus on like what are the major value builders that only I can do today and today, and to get those done as quickly as possible so that the company really catapults forward as opposed to inches forward. Larry: Kristin, you know with all the different things that you are involved with, I have to guess that you probably put in some pretty long hours or maybe some weekends or evenings. How do you bring balance to your personal and professional lives? Lucy: Considering you have three kids, right? Kristin: Yes, yes, I do. I think that what I start with is what really rejuvenates me? What are those things that really feed my soul, and eliminate all the other things that don't truly rejuvenate me. And what are those things that really are critical? Again, I do this in my personal life, what are those things that only I can do? And try to delicate as much of the other things like cleaning the house, to other people. [laughter] Lucy: [sarcastically] My personal favorite. Kristin: Yeah, it actually drains my soul, the cleaning part. The things that I feel like only I can do, only I can be a mom to my kids, only I can be a wife to be husband, only I can be a daughter to my parents. So really focusing in on those very few things, because you're not going to have much time to do something else, and trying to do those things as well as you can with the very limited time that you have. So the one thing that my husband and I try to do as much as possible is to have dinner as a family alone together at least a couple or a few times a week, where there aren't any other people or friends involved and that we're all there together. We just really talk about what happened in your day, what was fun, what was not so fun, so that we are really communicating as a family because we do have so few hours together every day. And just doing those things, trying to play with my kids, trying to interact with my husband. He and I are just kind of passing in the night because he is also very busy with his career. Again, I think just focusing on what's truly emotionally fulfilling. My one hobby is gardening so I try to get in like 10 minutes a day of planting something or pruning something, just so that I can feel like I am doing something other than just working. Lucy: You know, I'm a gardener. [laughs] Kristin: Oh, really? Lee: Me too. Lucy: So, you're talking to some gardeners here. Kristin: Excellent. Lucy: We're right on the same page. I have to say, it's quite heartening, your parents are such role models to you and you're carrying on that tradition. I know your children will look at you as a role model as well because of the values that you hold and the great advice that you have given us on this interview today, so we really appreciate that. You've told us a lot about working on things that excite you, combining creativity and business. You're in a very exciting area. Mobility has got to be one of the most exciting technical areas that there is. In fact, I watched a YouTube session with you talking about the mobility market at Stanford. Kristin: What do you know? Lucy: Yeah, I thought it was quite good and would recommend that to listeners who want to know more about mobility and LimeLife. I thought it was wonderful. Kristin: Great. Lucy: We have one final question. You've done a lot and you're doing a lot, what is next for you? What is next after LimeLife, do you have a vision of that or what? [laughter] Kristin: I don't. Just keep building LimeLife and build it into a really great digital media company and continue to build a great team that's running it day-to-day. Some day hopefully, I think I always would like to be involved with it, but if it does reach a point where I don't have to be as involved with it day-to-day, it would be either starting something new again or helping other entrepreneurs start their vision and get it going. I do feel like I've seen everything from the highest of highs, of taking a startup public, to the lowest of lows, shutting down companies. I feel like I've seen quite a range of things that can happen in an entrepreneur environment. I think that when I'm older and grayer that it would be very satisfying to help other entrepreneurs realize their visions and realize their dreams and impart some of what I have learned to them. Lucy: We have just one final request for you too. One of the things that NCWIT works on is the image of computing, and when you were talking about be a programmer and loving to do that, we may be back in touch for a few quotes from you. Larry: You betcha. Kristin: OK. [laughs] Lucy: So thank you very much. We really did enjoy talking to you. Lee: Thanks, Kristin. Kristin: Thank you. Larry: And one last thing, Kristin, I want you to know that you are already in the process of helping other entrepreneurs, because we spread this out and we have parents, we have also young girls who listen to these interviews. I think your story is very compelling. Kristin: Oh, that's terrific, thank you. Lucy: Yeah, thanks a lot and just to remind listeners they can find these interviews at w3w3.com and ncwit.org. Thanks, you guys. Lee: Thanks. Kristin: Thank you. Take care. Larry: Bye-bye. [music] Transcription by CastingWords Series: Entrepreneurial HeroesInterviewee: Kristin Asleson McDonnellInterview Summary: When Kristin McDonnell and the LimeLife team thought about what they wanted our cell phones to be able to do for us, more fun and more help were at the top of the list: more games and downloadable content like recipes, horoscopes, and lifestyle tips; less blood, bullets, and galactic aliens. Release Date: July 15, 2008Interview Subject: Kristin Asleson McDonnellInterviewer(s): Lucy Sanders, Larry Nelson, Lee KennedyDuration: 20:45

Audio File:  Download MP3Transcript: An Interview with Jeanette Symons Founder and CEO, Industrious Kid Date: October 19, 2007 NCWIT Interview with Jeanette Symons BIO: Jeanette Symons was the founder, Chief Executive Officer of Industrious Kid, and mother of two. Prior to founding Industrious Kid, Ms. Symons co-founded Zhone Technologies, a telecommunications company that builds "last mile" access solutions, where she served as the company's Chief Technology Officer and Vice President, Engineering. Prior to Zhone, Ms. Symons was Chief Technical Officer and Executive Vice President of Ascend Communications, Inc, which Ms. Symons co-founded, from January 1989 until June 1999 when the company was purchased by Lucent Technologies. In addition, Ms. Symons was a software engineer at Hayes Microcomputer, a modem manufacturer, where she developed and managed its ISDN program. Ms. Symons holds a B.S. in Systems Engineering from the University of California at Los Angeles. We are deeply saddened by Jeanette's tragic death in a small plane crash on Friday, February 1, 2008. She was a true technology pioneer and we hope her life will continue to inspire others. Lee Kennedy: Hi, this is Lee Kennedy, a board member for the National Center for Women and Information Technology or NCWIT. This is part of a series of interviews that we are having with fabulous entrepreneurs, women who have started IT companies in a variety of sectors and all of whom have just great stories to tell us about being entrepreneurs. With me I have Larry Nelson from w3w3.com. Hi, Larry. Larry Nelson: Hi. Boy, it's really great to be here today. Lee: So tell us a little bit about w3w3.com. Larry: Well, we are a web‑based Internet radio show. We really started in '96 with full time in '98. This has been probably the most exciting series that we have had, so many neat entrepreneurs going through all different types of things. I have a feeling that Jeanette is going to have a great story today, too. Lee: Great. And we also have with us Lucy Sanders who is the CEO for NCWIT. Hi, Lucy. Lucy Sanders: Hello. How are you? Lee: Great. So, why don't we go ahead and just get right to it. Today we are interviewing Jeanette Symons. Jeanette is the Co‑founder and CEO of Industrious Kid. Hi, Jeanette. Jeanette Symons: Hi. Thanks for having me today. Lee: Sure. So, Jeanette, why don't you start off and tell us a little bit about Industrious Kid? Jeanette: Industrious Kid was actually started to develop web sites for kids. What happened was a couple of years ago my daughter, who is seven, actually came home and said, "Mom, I want to make a MySpace profile." Needless to say, I panicked and ended up setting up a server where they had my kids and the neighbors had their own social network in my closet, literally. We went from there to actually creating a social network for kids where they could have the same safety on the Internet that we actually provided in the closet at the time. Lucy: Wow. I'd say that's one special kid that gets to come home and tell mom what kind of company to start next. Jeanette: It's gone to their heads a little bit. Lucy: That's pretty special. Lee: And also imbee.com; that's your social networking site? Jeanette: That's correct. The social networking site itself is imbee.com, and Industrious Kid is the name of the company. Lee: OK. And I see imbee.com won a Web 2.0 award this year. Jeanette: Absolutely. It's exciting. We are really making these strides and have kids interact with each other and learn to use the Internet in a positive way. We are really enjoying it. This is a company that we started because we wanted to, because it was fun and it's really been exciting all the way along. Lee: Great. Lucy: Well, so now maybe you all think I'm a kid and sometimes I am a kid at heart, but I went over to imbee.com, started playing around, making a baseball card, doing the things that I wanted to do. As a technologist I had to wonder about the technology that you are employing on that site. It is very sophisticated. Jeanette: Well, thanks. It is interesting. I have been building the infrastructure for the Internet for over 20 years now and really hadn't done anything in the way of card sense since the very early days. It's fun. We actually built on open source. We built on Drupal which you can actually go to, download and have a social networking site up in a matter of days. From there we've just added more and more kid centered features to it. It's fun and it's very incremental and dynamic. Lucy: It is a lot of fun. On that note and getting to the first question around technology, as a technologist what technologies do you see on the horizon as being particularly important? Jeanette: I think the biggest thing that's driven us for at least for about 20 years if not longer and then I think will for at least the next 20 years if not longer ‑ it's all about communication. It's what's changing the most and what's driving the most. We talk about the simple evolutions of the telephone and the way we are using them, but what's so amazing to me when I watch is how differently the next generation communicates than we do, even electronically. As adults, we tend to communicate via electronic mail, via personal or group communications that are relatively structured. When I look at the next generation, they're not patient enough for email; they look at me like I'm crazy to waste my time sending them an email message they may not look at till tonight. They want a text message or an instant message. If they want to say something to a group of friends, that just post it on their profile. So the way in which we communicate is changing over time and changing generation to generation. And that's what's really neat. I don't know where it'll be another five or 10 years from now, but it is fun to watch. Lucy: That's really interesting when you think about it, because it's just a cross‑generational difference in the way people are communicating. Larry: That's right. One of the things that we're also curious about ‑ we have a number of young people that are listening to the shows, sometimes their parents tell them about it, because it's so interesting hearing how people like you, an entrepreneur, does what you do. But we kind of wanted to know: why did you become an entrepreneur, and what is it about entrepreneurship that makes you tick? Jeanette: Well, I think the why is because, a long time ago, when I was relatively young, I thought I could do it better. I didn't want to work for someone else. I thought I could do it better. My ideas were better. I could do something better. I think, after a lot of hard work and a lot of years as an entrepreneur, I realize that it's not that easy to do a better job. I really learned how hard it is to do better than average. But it's really fun trying. What do I really love, and why do I keep doing it ‑ this is my third company, and I doubt it's my last ‑ is because there's no greater feeling than creating something from nothing. And that's the products you create. It's watching the people grow. It's creating value within the company. You're really, as an entrepreneur, making something from nothing in so many different ways, and I think that's what makes it really exciting. Lucy: So, Jeanette, that kind of brings us to the next question. When you think about getting into technology and the career path you took, who influenced you, or who were your role models or mentors? Jeanette: I think I got started in technology, really, because I got offered a job writing software that paid $1,000 a month, which was more than I could get with anything else as a student. I had no idea how to do it. I didn't try to get into technology. It was just a lot of money for me at the time. Lucy: That's great. Jeanette: It wasn't a big plan. I always loved math. I always loved science. I had no idea about computers and technology at that point in time. So I really got into it then. And I think it's no different than the excitement of starting a company. As an engineer, it's that sense of creating. It's that sense that you made something that you can put your name on that you can be proud of. And it really is one project at a time ‑ one company, one project, one thing at a time ‑ where you really get to create something. And I think that's what really hooked me, once I got started. Lucy: Were there any role models or mentors along the way? Jeanette: I think one of the most frustrating things, for me, is that I kept looking for a role model and looking for a mentor and looking for someone, especially as I started to become more successful, and I really struggled with it. I was younger than many of the other people starting companies at the time. There were very few women involved in starting companies at the time and having had been successful at it. And I really spent a long time being really frustrated that there weren't people that I thought I could go and emulate. It took me, actually, quite a while to kind of accept that, "Hey, it doesn't matter. You're not going to copy anybody. Get on with life and do what's fun." But it took me a long time to accept that I had to do what I wanted to do and not worry about copying somebody or emulating somebody. Lucy: I think that's a great answer. And I want to also kind of link it back to something you said a minute ago around that it's often very hard to do something better, to have that great entrepreneurial idea and push it across the finish line, and along the way, there are challenges to overcome. And so we'd really like to know the toughest thing that you've ever done in your career, and why it was so hard. Jeanette: I think, unfortunately, that's the easiest answer...The hardest thing to ever do in building a company, in any way, is to lay people off. As with grown companies, even really successful companies, there's a time you've got to lay people off because of the business cycle or whatever. And no matter what the circumstances is, that, I think, is one of the hardest things to do. The second hardest thing: while I started three companies, one of them, I'd say, I walked away from before I was done. The company still was in a growing and struggling phase, and I felt it was time to move on and walk away from the company. And I think that was probably, emotionally, one of the hardest things I've ever done. Larry: I must say, that's probably one of the most common mistakes that many founding people do is they keep on long after they should have left. That's really a strength on your part. Jeanette: Well, thank you. It didn't feel like it at the time. Larry: I bet not. Lucy: That is a hard judgment, though. When is it time to leave? Larry: Mmhmm. It is. Jeanette: Exactly. And we always want to be the one. It's so tempting, especially when you start something, to feel like you need to be the one to finish it, that you need to almost be the hero that makes it successful. Accepting that you're not is just so tough. It's one of those very lonely decisions. Larry: I think you're wonderful. I'm proud you. Now, speaking of that type of thing, if you were, right now, sitting down with a young potential entrepreneur, what kind of advice would you give them about entrepreneurship? Jeanette: I think the real answer ‑ and it's easy to say, it's harder to do. And that is that you've really got to follow what you believe. You can learn from others. You can listen to others. You're going to get a lot of advice, a lot of suggestions, people telling you to do things, how you're doing them, telling you to do differently. But at the end of the day, you've got to do exactly what you believe in. And you won't succeed in creating something great and something that you're really proud of unless you stick to what you know are your core values. And there are so many people that want to push you in different directions, want to change the company, change the product, and change the financing. You've got to really stick with what you know and you believe. Lucy: That's really good advice. Larry: Yeah. Lucy: Sort of along that note, earlier in the interview, you said that you thought you could do things better and you liked creating and building things. So, when you think about getting through all the tough times, what personal characteristics do you think have given you the advantages as an entrepreneur? Jeanette: I think one of the most important things to really get to success is that you've got to have a willingness to fail. You've got to accept that, you know what? Everything you do isn't going to be perfect. You're going to make mistakes. You've got to be able to say, "Oops, I made a mistake" and move forward. You've got to be willing to let little things fail, big things fail, and all sorts of things, in the big picture, to get to success. If you're not willing to take the risk that you're willing to fall through on, you're not going to ever get the big win. So you've got to really be willing to kind of accept that this time might not be it, but there will be a time that will be. Lucy: And do you have examples that happened in your career when there was failure that happened and you guys learned a ton, maybe one of those moments; that was a big turning point in the company? Jeanette: Now, there's so many that it's hard to pick one out. But I think one of the things that we've done a couple of times is we've built the product, we've stood behind it, we've been proud of it, and then realized that, oops, it's not the way people want it. And being willing to do that, and then stop and say, "You know what? We're going to do the right thing going forward." We've lost investors in those decisions a couple of times. They used to say they've regretted it each time... Lucy: I love that. Larry: Yeah. Jeanette: I mean, I remember, 20 years ago, when we changed our company from being a digital telephony company to deciding to build infrastructure for this weird thing called the Internet, we fought tooth and nail. Nobody, none of our investors wanted to back it. They thought it was silly. How would this Internet thing work? There was so much more revenue if you stuck to traditional things. We lost supporters along the way. We're pleased to say those supporters are eating their words. The Internet grew. We had to take a big risk ‑ that now, of course, seems obvious, in hindsight, but at the time, didn't‑‑to say, "We're going to drop what we're doing. We'll see the growth. We're going to take a risk and build something new and different." Larry: Yeah. I'm sitting here kind of groaning because, internally, Pat and I, we had a terrestrial radio show, "Business Talk, " and I made, in 1996, the prediction that the Internet was a fad and would go away soon. So I wish I had known you. Jeanette: You were right. You just have to wait about another 100 years. You have to be patient, Larry. Larry: Yeah. Lucy: Your timing was wrong. Larry: Yeah, timing... Lee: You're still right. Lucy: Yeah, you're still right. Larry: Now, you're a mother of two. You fly in your own Lear jet, from time to time, to conferences and so on. And then, of course, the other thing is that, between your children, your family, and your growing business, how do you bring about kind of the balance to all of this? Jeanette: The answer to that is kids take care of it for me. Larry: Whoa! Jeanette: I was told before I had kids that I was not at all good at balance and I was workaholic that didn't do enough different things. I don't think that's true, but my friends all think it's true. It's just so great and so much fun to do things with my kids, that they keep me home on the weekends. They keep me doing things and being outside and being active. So for me, my kids are my solution, and it's just a lot of fun. Lucy: Well, we've got a nice little airport here by Boulder. You could come see us. Jeanette: I could. I do have that advantage. People go, "Oh, so you just love to fly." And I've got to say, I do. It's one of the most just relaxing things there are. But what it really is ‑ and people make fun of me - is if you go into my airplane, it looks a lot more like a minivan, stacked with stickers and snacks and books and activities and such in the back. The beauty of flying a plane is that it gives me and my family incredible freedom. So I can be in any city in the country in a meeting on Friday morning and home playing with my kids Friday night. Lucy: It's an important thing to balance. Larry: You got it. Wow. Jeanette: We got it. So everybody needs a plane. Lucy: I believe that you're our first pilot that we have interviewed. Well, you have started three companies. You've said that you doubt this one is your last. So, why don't you tell us what you see in the future? What's next for you? Give us some top‑secret stuff. Jeanette: Oh, gosh. You know what? I don't know. I will tell you that, for a very long time, I worried so much about, "OK, now that I'm successful, what am I supposed to do?" Almost like there has to be a road map: "Build successful company, go do blank." And I worried so much that I was doing the right thing next. It's amazing how stressful that became. There has to be an answer. Where do I find the answer? And I finally got it licked. I do what I enjoy. I love building the company I'm building. I love where I'm at today. I have no idea what's next. I have no idea whether we'll be building this company for another five years, another 10 years, another 20 years. I don't know what's next. But I know it'll be interesting, it'll be fun, and if not, then it won't last long and we'll move on. Lucy: That's a great answer. Larry: Yeah, I'll say. Hat's off to Imbee and Lear jets. Lucy: Well, thank you very much, Jeanette. We really appreciated talking to you. Lee: Thanks so much. Jeanette: Thank you. Larry: Thank you. This was great. And by the way, you listeners out there, make sure you pass this interview along, because they can listen to it 24/7, download it as a podcast, and what else could we ask? Lucy: Well, we should remind everybody what site to go to for the podcast. You can get them at w3w3.com or at ncwit.org. Larry: There you go. Thanks, Jeanette. Lucy: Thank you, Jeanette. Jeanette: Thank you. Series: Entrepreneurial HeroesInterviewee: Jeanette SymonsInterview Summary: NOTE: We are deeply saddened by Jeanette's tragic death in a small plane crash on Friday, February 1, 2008. She was a true technology pioneer and we hope her life will continue to inspire others. For Jeanette Symons, motherhood proved to be good for business. Her kids helped her come up with the idea for her award-winning social networking site, imbee.com. Release Date: October 19, 2007Interview Subject: Jeanette SymonsInterviewer(s): Lucy Sanders, Larry Nelson, Lee KennedyDuration: 17:16