Alan Weiss' The Uncomfortable Truth

Bonanza: A situation or event that creates a sudden increase in wealth, good fortune, or profits. It was also a TV show in the heyday of westerns, and ran from 1959 to 1973, second only to Gunsmoke in longevity. It’s still shown in reruns on a variety of cable channels. By accident, I happened to see one the other day with a disclaimer on the screen, citing racial stereotyping on the show and to be aware of it. My first reaction was that this racial and gender stereotyping was all-too-common in the past. My second, however, is that wouldn’t a viewer know that and understand how far we’ve come and how far we still may need to go? (I don’t readily recall stereotyping on Bonanza, although maybe their Asian cook was the problem somehow.) I believe we’re all adults above a certain age, imbued with intelligence and judgment, which allows us to hold jobs, drive cars, and feed ourselves. (If a child were watching that rerun, somehow, would the kid understand the “trigger warning”?) Is this a legitimate warning or

The Second Smartest Guy in the Room by Alan Weiss

We are in the midst of the largest transgenerational shift in wealth in the history of the country. Part of this are the maturing retirement funds created under the Reagan administration, and part is the succession of small business owners from founders to the second (or third) generations. Barry Banther has worked with hundreds of family businesses, from $50 million to $500 million in revenues. He creates strategies for continuity and succession, from family ownership to outright sales with proceeds going to the family. He distinguishes between family-owned and run businesses and family owned but not run businesses (run by professional executives employed for that reason). He's worked with some of the most well-known families in the country whom we can’t name here but whom you would recognize instantly, as well. He talks of the three major factors involved in positioning successful family businesses, and of the sometimes incredible factors overlooked (trusts, wills, successions plans, etc.). He points out

Is an economically disadvantaged kid better off because of an insistence on how many black film editors, or baseball executives, or executive chefs receive awards? Is climate change really helped by expensive legislation that kills jobs and causes inefficiencies? (The prohibition of gas-powered anything.) Virtue signaling is the public expression of opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one’s good character or social conscience or the moral correctness of one’s position on a particular issue. It’s often expressed as being against something. Remember: Live and let live People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones Do unto others as you would have them do unto you Do as I say not as I do (that didn’t work coming from my father) I don’t care whose picture is on a beer can. I don’t believe you’re a “better” person because you have a black lives matter sign on your lawn. I see too many people praying in church who won’t merge leaving the parking lot. Virtue signaling is the expression of a

Jeff has been representing me for over 30 years, and was responsible for acquiring publishers (McGraw-Hill, Wiley, Macmillan, AMACOM, et. al.) for my four best-sellers, including the 30-year, 6-edition Million Dollar Consulting. He is responsible for thousands of published works and hundreds of authors’ happiness. For example, he represented the famous Why Bad Things Happen to Good People. We talk of the takeover of publishing by large venture capital firms. We discuss why hard copy books have never disappeared or even greatly diminished, despite the false prophets of electronic dominance. Learn how to create a query letter and formal proposal to “sell” an agent to represent you, and why publishers are expecting the authors to market and sell enough books to pay for the entire initial press run (sad, but true, and publishers know next-to-nothing about marketing these days, and wouldn’t invest in it even if they did). Publishers once paid for advances, but now they want the “advance” from you in terms of i

I received a letter from someone who had subscribed to one of my newsletters for $250 annually. He was late, but I accepted him, and he demanded—not requested—that I send him all the issues he has missed. I did that and he complained that they weren’t always in the same format, although I think that was a matter of his equipment, not mine. Now he’s complained that he didn’t get the final (August) issue and went on to lecture me about responsibilities, living up to promises, what constitutes professional businesses, yada yada, yada—sanctimony on parade. And, of course, I had sent it, who knows why he didn’t get it. Ordinarily, I simply provide what’s requested, but I told this guy to buzz off, except with my New Jersey vocabulary. The vast probability with these things is that the problem is on the receiving end. But, more than that, we’re looking at: • A return of Covid • Wildfires around the world, including absolute carnage in Maui • A seemingly endless war in Ukraine • Poor public services (this guy

Elin Hilderbrand has a new book called Five Star Weekend. In my view, it’s awful, not at all up to her earlier work, predictable, with paper-thin characters and a dumb plot. You may disagree with me, most people do according to the reviews on Amazon. But I posted a very critical review. Amazon accepted it. However, after accepting it, someone clearly complained, because I received this obtuse communication today: I never mentioned “authenticity” (in a book??). I’m a veteran reviewer on Amazon. But I think someone from the publisher or author is muting negative reviews and Amazon is going along with it. This is the world we’re living in today, nonsensical responses from automated programs that distort and hide free speech. My critique was purely literary, noting the weaknesses in the book and the writing, nothing ad hominem.  When they start to remove dissenting points of view, where does that leave us?

An “old fashioned” is a fabulous cocktail. The official origin of the drink is still heavily debated. While the Waldorf-Astoria in New York by way of the Pendennis Club, a private social club in Louisville, KY has been crested as the birthplace of the cocktail as we know it today, the publication of Modern American Drinks, by George Kappeler, in 1895 mentions the recipe for the Old Fashioned Whiskey Cocktail that Simonson describes as the evolutionary link between the whiskey cocktail and Old-Fashioned as we know it. I will admit to being “old fashioned.” I believe in courtesy and a balance of personal preference with societal conformance. Recently in Toppers, a world-class restaurant in Nantucket’s Wauwinet Inn, some people had on jackets (once a must) but most had on “resort casual,” shirts and slacks for men, summer dresses for women. One woman, dressed in that manner, came in with a man who had on shorts, a polo shirt, and flip-flops. You might say he was an individualist. Or you might say he was a slob

In 1973, D. Keith Mano wrote his only science fiction book, The Bridge. It takes place in 2035, over 60 years since its original publication, but only 12 years from today. It is about radical environmentalism run amok with a “green” socialist government.  The government decides to give earth back to nature, after already protecting all animal and plant life, but the fact that we destroy microbes every time we breathe is the final straw. Cars have been eliminated, people return to the fields. The world is incapable of complex technology. Obesity is social standing.  There is resistance, but it is ineffective. Diseases must go untreated. Tumors are declared autonomous life forms, and protected.  Everyone must commit suicide, squads are deployed to kill those who don’t and then they will commit suicide, until the earth is free of all humans.  The hero, Priest, is determined not to die but to find his wife. He must cross the decayed and destroyed George Washington Bridge, hence, the book’s name. When I re

When we see an empty ballroom, or stadium, or theater, we can see unlimited possibilities if we have any creative juices at all. We can stage performances, meetings, athletic events, entertainment, networking opportunities, and so forth. But then we think of our fictitious “business life” and “personal life” duality, and we bifurcate that huge space with a wall right down the middle, a line of demarcation with separate pursuits on each side. And then we create meetings, obligations, failure work, responsibilities, “bucket lists,” one-way streets, detours, “do not enter” zones, a great deal of noise, and misdirection. We become mice in a maze of our own creation, and that once huge, empty, high-potential space has become a tiny, oppressive place. The fact is, we have one “life,” period. Personally, I have no problem whatsoever taking a few phone calls at the beach on vacation, just as I have no problem taking a weekday afternoon and spending it at my pool. I can engage in one of my hobbies on a Thursday mor

Let me harshly deal here with people who provide you with feedback you didn’t ask for, don’t require, and can’t use. That applies to feedback which is too positive as well as too negative. We talk here about the trivialists, the hypocrites, the projectionists, and the general pains in the ass. Those who claim the only thing to do with feedback is to consider it are directing you toward the life of the ping pong balls or pickle balls being whacked back and forth. You’ll hear some of my standard replies when offered unsolicited feedback and why even my mother fell into my feedback hell. No one is erecting statues to critics in the park, even to replace those Columbus statues so ardently removed. We honor creators, not critics. Thus: Defend yourself against the time wasters and underminers and passive-aggressives who would, with a patina of supposed good intention, try to derail you. Our job is not to please everyone, not to be liked, but rather to help improve people and be respected. We do that through

Seth Magaziner and I met when he ran for, and served as, Rhode Island State Treasurer for eight years. I asked that we make this conversation non-partisan, to which he agreed, and as always was gracious with his time and accessibility. We talk about his view of the three biggest issues he sees facing America: climate change, income and opportunity inequality, and the rise of non-democratic movements inside and outside of the country. He talks about the House of Representatives as the purest elected part of government, since Senators can be appointed by governors when the office falls vacant, and the President is actually placed in office by the Electoral College. (Originally and Constitutionally, Senators were appointed by state legislatures and there was no popular vote until the 17th Amendment in 1913.) The discussion covered Ukraine, a war that originally was to see Russia in Kiev in two weeks, and is now in its 500th+ day with Russia on the defensive. I asked what we learned about our own military pre

What do you mean? What do we mean? What is “meaning”? We seem to be engaged existentially in some search for meaning. The Beatles were famous for a spiritual odyssey with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. We seek such spiritual guidance in many (often strange) forms: sweat tents, therapy, 12-step programs, trodding on hot coals. The meaning in our lives needn’t be religious or spiritual, but one would think it’s above and beyond the trite and every day, sort of a North Star providing guidance. Yet it’s often normative, derived from others. We compulsively seem to emulate others’ styles, behaviors, and beliefs. The definition of meaning is “an important and worthwhile quality or purpose.” We often consider it a magical breakthrough. We picture the guru on the mountaintop (somehow living without running water or electricity, but strangely content) to be consulted and answering in runic complexity. Is this a practical pursuit? Does it matter? Does it make a difference in our daily lives, suiting us when it’s convenien

I could share theater stories with Tony all day long. As both an actor and director of great stature, his knowledge of the theater and its strengths and weaknesses is impressive. We talk about the myth of the “dying” theater and the “aging” demographic. Tony points out that both the theater and the audiences have been “dying” since birth, to be replaced by new cohorts. His view is that people most appreciate the arts in their middle age and beyond. It’s not all that surprising that younger people often have far less interest. I brought up the “drama within a drama” when an audience medical emergency stops a play, and those times when the “fourth wall” needs to be broken (or shouldn’t be). We’re both big Kevin Kline fans, and we have appropriate “fourth wall” stories (Tony’s is far better). Money is a chronic problem for the arts, because debt kills the ability to experiment and the freedom to fail. It’s dangerous for the arts to become conservative and afraid. We’ve both been colleagues of Oskar Eustis,

Remember “the benefit of the doubt”? That was meant to convey the belief that, when something was in doubt, give the other person a break. Don’t assume guilt, or fault, or ulterior motive. Maybe it was just a mistake, or an accident, or your misunderstanding. So we tended to ask, “Is that what you meant to say?” or “Why exactly did you do that?” or “Perhaps I’m not understanding this correctly.” We also forgave people when it was their fault, they did make an error. Marriages generally have not ended because of a forgotten anniversary or the divorce rate would be even higher than it is. Today, we almost always assume fault and flaw, and often we assume malice. We don't just believe someone inadvertently causes us pain, we default to the belief that they intentionally wanted to harm us. We don’t see accidents, we see conspiracies. And we don’t forgive or forget. We get even. We’ve moved light years away from “Do unto others….” to “undo others.” The other person isn’t wrong or even mistaken, they are ignor

Randy told me once that you don’t end poverty by creating more of it. He’s an independent thinker on prosperity and success. He doesn’t connect prosperity solely to financial well-being, but rather to an intelligent combination of factors, happiness being one of them. He very pessimistic about our news sources and you’ll be fascinated by his personal, daily routine. He actually times himself on Twitter and eschews the other social media platforms. He’s overall an optimistic guy, but admits his pessimism has slightly increased of late. (Here’s his blog post on social media killing prosperity: https://randygage.com/social-media-is-killing-your-prosperity/) We both agree that young people have it harder today with extreme normative pressures, poor educations, and more limited opportunities. Once upon a time you were graduated from college with an assortment of useful business and life skills. Today, not so much. Consequently, we discuss the “fall of conventional universities” and their increasing irrelevance.

Guido and I have known each other for a quarter century. He introduced my concept of value-based fees in Germany in building his multi-million euro boutique consultancy. We talk here about the post-pandemic atmosphere in Germany and in Europe. These issues include: • labor shortages • remote vs. in-person work • post-Brexit realties • existential vs. pragmatic issues We discuss what his clients are most concerned about today, and whether those concerns are valid. As is the case elsewhere, we examine the motivation, productivity, and work ethic of people in organizations, and what they’re seeking. On the morning we chatted it was reported that Germany had “slipped into recession” and Guido pointed out the irony of the government complaining that consumers weren’t spending enough! The difference between strategic business and tactical concerns, relative to the nature of the types of meetings was an important distinction in communication which we can all learn from. And we examine the current French env

How much have times changed in the past 50 years? What is the difference in view point, expectation, and options for college graduates today versus those in 1968? Of course, 1968 was no picnic. The Tet Offensive raged in the Viet Nam War, Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy were assassinated, and the inner cities burned. But in ’68, seniors in college became engaged and married soon after graduation, having children in the next few years. That was the sequence then, as religious institutions, schools, and the family dinner table imparted values. An “intact family” (two parents married for the first time and one or more children) constituted 85% of all family units. Today that number is 7%. That is not a misprint. In ’68, young adults were looking at rental apartments leading to buying a home, independence, jobs, travel (no matter how modest), reliance on an extended family—the world was wide open for us. Today, there is the sinkhole of social media, dismal job prospects with ugly commutes or distracting

50s: Constancy, GI Bill, Levittown, Sputnik, Korean War, Univac, DNA discovered, Joe McCarthy, Hungarian uprising, Montgomery bus boycott 60s: Kennedys shot, King shot, Woodstock, the Beatles, Watts riot and cities burn, Cuban missile crisis, Viet Nam, Bay of Pigs, first televised presidential debate, USSR had hydrogen bomb 70s: Kent State shootings, Watergate, Nixon and Agnew resign, Mars landing, Viet Nam ends, gay liberation movement 80s: CNN begins, Iranian hostages released, Falklands war, Sandra Day O’Connor first female on Supreme Court, Sally Ride first woman astronaut, Challenger explodes, Macintosh computer, Cold War ends with Reagan/Gorbachev, Berlin Wall falls, intense materialism and consumerism, MTV emerges 90s: LA riots, Oklahoma City bombing, Columbine shootings, Persian Gulf War, TWA flight 800 is blown up, relative peace and prosperity, end of USSR, rise of the Internet, Dow Jones clears 2,900 for first time 00s: Al-Qaeda attacks world trade center and Pentagon 9/11, Department of Home

Chris gave up his commission as a full Colonel in Afghanistan to assist three, four-star generals and two Secretaries of State to try to negotiate with the Taliban. He was the only combat officer ever asked to do so. The lessons he learned he’s applied to both business and charity. Chris specializes in helping leaders, entrepreneurs, and our “wounded warriors.” We talk about the readily-transferable leadership traits that lead to success in private business, including the great discipline and self-accountability that we encounter in most officers. But then there is the difficulty in moving from a world where feedback from below is rarely solicited—and Chris demonstrates how that can best be accomplished—to one where it’s essential to listen to subordinates and customers. He explains his battlefield webinars where executives learn “on the ground” why battles were won or lost, and then examine what those principles mean in their own businesses and lives. You’ll hear about Chris’s remarkable work with woun