Redo: Keep Your Employees’ Noses to the Grindstone

Determining which carrots and sticks drive results are easier than you think. [The Rude Awakening] July 03, 2023 [WEBSITE]( | [UNSUBSCRIBE]( Redo: Keep Your Employees’ Noses to the Grindstone - It’s hard to believe that money isn’t the sole motivation of most employees. - But according to numerous studies, that’s true, especially in creative endeavors. - Luckily, we know what things motivate them. And they’re easy to implement. [Download My New Survival Guide Today!]( I’ve created a BRAND-NEW “2023 Crisis Survival Guide” that I’m making available to all of my Strategic Intelligence readers today. This short 54-page document has everything you need to know to protect yourself and your family in times of crisis. Things like what foods to stock up on now, staying safe during periods of rioting and looting and more. Inside I break down all of the coming threats you face and how to prepare. [>> To see how to download your copy, click here now](. [Click Here To Learn More]( [Sean Ring] SEAN RING Good morning from Sicily! This is one of my pieces from January. I hope you enjoy it and your day off! --------------------------------------------------------------- If you’re unaware, I now write for the Daily Reckoning’s new Morning Reckoning newsletter on Thursdays. My latest piece gives you steps to build your [Free State of Me](. One of the pieces of advice is to start an online business. But many don’t know how to do that. With that in mind, and since we don’t have any economic figures to report and the market is getting ready for the Fed meeting, I thought I’d briefly shift focus from macroeconomics to microeconomics. Microeconomics deals with the behavior of individuals and firms in making decisions about allocating scarce resources and the interactions among these individuals and firms. It’s critical to understand many microeconomic concepts to run a successful business, but perhaps none more so than how to keep your employees or freelancers motivated. Daniel Pink authored a book called Drive, published in 2009. It’s not about cars but what drives us to do the things we do. There’s an [excellent YouTube video]( that summarizes his findings. I encourage you to watch it after you read this. In this Rude, I’ll relay to you his excellent points. Just Pay People More! This works. Just not universally. Only in the right jobs with the right people. This is the most shocking finding among economists. For decades, the mantra was, “If you want higher performance, pay people more.” And this works for people doing mechanical jobs. That is, digging ditches or smashing rocks. But once a job requires even basic cognitive skills, this incentive no longer works. (As a former banker, I found this hard to believe. But bankers are a weird lot. Study after study replicates this finding.) Once the work task goes above rudimentary cognitive skills and into something like creativity, the motivation game changes. Innovative employees need something else: things that don’t involve money. Of course, you still have to pay people. But with intelligent employees, Pink says the trick is to pay them enough “to take money off the table.” That is, pay them enough that they don’t have to worry about cash. Once you’ve paid them well enough not to worry about their bills, what else do these employees need? [Biden to Replace US Dollar?]( Thanks to President Biden’s Executive Order 14067, a former advisor to the CIA and Pentagon predicts the 3rd Great Dollar Quake has begun. The first was Roosevelt confiscating private gold in 1934. The second was Nixon abandoning the gold standard in 1971. Now, Biden’s plan could pave the way for “retiring” the US dollar. Your dollars could soon be confiscated – or made worthless. [Click here to see how to save your investment and retirement accounts](. [Click Here To Learn More]( The Three Things Smart Employees Need What gets and keeps good employees motivated are autonomy, mastery, and purpose. I’ll explain each in turn. Autonomy According to Pink, autonomy is the ability to direct one’s work. Autonomy allows employees to feel empowered in their positions rather than like their success is out of their hands. Autonomous employees manage their time and decide how to do their work rather than having someone else dictate it for them. This sense of control gives them the freedom to be productive and engage in their job tasks. Anecdotally, one of the things I love most about my job here at the Rude is that my publisher, Matt Insley, never tells me what to write about day-to-day. (Though he does give great advice, particularly about my headlines!) Mastery The second element of employee motivation Pink discusses is mastery. Mastery is the desire to get better at what you do. When employees are allowed to improve themselves and hone their skills, it creates a sense of satisfaction that leads to increased motivation and productivity. Why do people play musical instruments on the weekends for free? Because they want to master something (and enjoy their melodious tunes, too, I’m sure). When we focus on mastering a skill or task instead of just completing it, it often leads us to new levels of engagement and creativity that are essential for any organization’s success. Purpose Finally, Pink proposes that purpose is a crucial factor when it comes to motivating employees as well. When one feels connected with the purpose behind their job tasks and understands how their work contributes towards something larger than themselves, it gives them a sense of meaning. That can help drive them forward even when things seem challenging or boring. It helps them stay focused on long-term goals (rather than getting caught up in short-term frustrations) and keeps them motivated throughout the journey toward achieving those goals. Of course, purpose gets confused with wokeness sometimes. I’ve heard horror stories about developers getting hired at tech firms and immediately concerning themselves with hiring policies rather than writing code. That’s no good. Businesses must profit to stay in business. But first, they must create revenue. Then they must collect that revenue and convert it into cash. If you don’t have profits, you won’t have a business. But if you don’t have cash, you don’t have a business. So, the purpose and the business must intertwine to work well. Wrap Up Motivating smart employees requires more than just cash. Strange as it may sound, they need autonomy, mastery, and purpose to flourish. And this isn’t some kumbaya stuff. It’s core to the success of a business and has been proven repeatedly. Motivation is an inherent part of any organization’s internal success strategy. To maximize your company’s potential, you’ll need motivated employees. Until tomorrow. All the best, [Sean Ring] Sean Ring Editor, Rude Awakening Twitter: [@seaniechaos]( In Case You Missed It… Affirmative Action and the YAHEIs [Sean Ring] SEAN RING Happy Friday! Before I get to the end of affirmative action, I just want to let you know that I’ll be on Rickards Uncensored today at 10 AM ET. Dan Amoss, the hardest working analyst in the business, and I will talk about Russia, grain prices, electric vehicles, oil, the terrible European economic numbers, and AI (if we get to it). If you don’t know, Rickards Uncensored is a private Zoom call Matt Insley hosts weekly with Jim Rickards and other team members. This private group meets once weekly every Friday at 10 AM with Jim or a member of his team, where we carefully review all of the important developments from that week. Members of this special group can also directly ask Jim and all of us questions and more. In short, being a part of this group gives you direct access to Jim and his entire research staff – myself included. And it gives you access to all of our best predictions and insights. [Best of all, while Jim has previously charged thousands of dollars for up-close-and-personal access to him, you can join us in this group today for less than $10 per week.]( Of course, just one good insight per week could be worth many times more than that. And while we don’t advertise this special group often, because I’ll be this week’s special guest, I wanted to open this opportunity up to you today. As one of my readers, I’d hate to see you miss out. [To see how to secure your spot in the group today – before I go live this morning – click here now.]( Now, let’s get to affirmative action. Or, rather, past it! Affirmative Action Starts “Affirmative action” is a policy aimed at promoting equal opportunity and increasing representation of historically disadvantaged groups, particularly in education and employment. The concept of affirmative action originated in the United States during the civil rights movement in the 1960s. While various influences and events contributed to the development of affirmative action, one significant catalyst was President John F. Kennedy's [Executive Order 10925]( issued in 1961. This order required government contractors to take affirmative action to ensure that applicants were employed regardless of race, color, religion, or national origin. It was the start of the slippery slope. Another development came in 1964 with the passage of the Civil Rights Act in the United States. [Title VII of this act]( employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The early implementation of affirmative action primarily focused on redressing historical racial discrimination African Americans faced. The purported aim was to provide opportunities and combat the effects of systemic racism that had long limited their access to education, employment, and other societal benefits. Over time, affirmative action expanded to encompass other disadvantaged groups, including women, Native Americans, Hispanics, and other minorities. The goals and specific policies of affirmative action have varied across different jurisdictions and institutions. Still, the underlying objective has consistently been to promote equal opportunity and diversity in various areas of society. But has that worked? Asian Americans would probably disagree. Market Distortion The whole point of affirmative action was to get the right people in the right places. By that, I mean skin color wouldn’t be a barrier to entry. That’s why it was called affirmative action. But over time, it turned into negative action. And I’m not pissing and moaning about white folks only. You should see what it’s done to Asian Americans trying to get into Ivy League schools. Look at this (and especially read the bottom part): [SJN] Credit: [@RitaPanahi]( This translates into a 140-point SAT penalty for Asians. It’s astounding they didn’t fight this earlier. [SJN] Credit: [@TheRabbitHole84]( Harvard’s admission policy has created an entire generation of what I call the YAHEIs (Yet Another Harvard Educated Idiot). The truth is no amount of education will turn a 100-IQ person into Elon Musk. That’s just not the way it works. Instead, we get generations of middlebrow kids who think they’ve turned into genius adults because they’re Ivy League graduates. It’s embarrassing. Read [Michelle Obama’s Princeton thesis]( and ask yourself if this it’s any more intelligent than an average 22-year-old would write. Then ask yourself: Would you ever want an affirmative action surgeon operating on you? Despite the brouhaha, is there more than this than meets the eye? Could this be a stealthy cash grab from failing universities? [Warning: Will “Bidenflation” Destroy Your Retirement?]( If you’re like most Americans, you’ve worked hard for decades to build your financial legacy. And now, as a result of Biden’s disastrous money printing policies, that’s all at risk. According to one top retirement expert, “Bidenflation” threatens to destroy your retirement and make your hard-earned savings worthless. That’s why you must take action right away to protect yourself… [Click here now to get the simple, step-by-step actions to survive “Bidenflation.”]( [Click Here To Learn More]( Bakke to the Future My good friend and Rude reader, James, posted this on Twitter: [pub] Credit: [@Psyche_OS]( The Supreme Court decided Regents of the University of California v. Bakke in 1978. The case involved Allan Bakke, a white applicant who was denied admission to the University of California, Davis medical school. Allan Bakke argued he was rejected solely based on race, as the medical school had set aside 16 out of 100 seats for applicants from underrepresented minority groups as part of its affirmative action program. Bakke contended that this violated his rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In a closely divided decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bakke… but also upheld the constitutionality of affirmative action. The Court's decision had several key components: - Quota-based affirmative action: The Court held that using racial quotas in university admissions was unconstitutional. It found that the medical school's reserved seats for minority applicants constituted a quota system, violating the Equal Protection Clause. - Diversity as a compelling interest: The Court recognized that diversity in education is a compelling state interest that can be pursued through affirmative action. It acknowledged the importance of considering race as one factor among many in the admissions process to achieve a diverse student body. - Individualized consideration: The Court emphasized that affirmative action programs must engage in individualized consideration of applicants. It concluded that race could be considered a "plus factor," but not the sole determining factor in admissions decisions, underscoring the need for a holistic review of each applicant's qualifications. Could this be just a SCOTUS-induced cash grab? Yikes, that’s cynical. But just because it’s cynical doesn’t mean it’s false. Thanks For Voting For Trump! On average, SCOTUS justices agree with each other. And this makes sense, as the justices are supposed to interpret existing law. Famously, while former Justices Scalia and Ginsberg were on opposite sides of the political spectrum, they agreed with each other on 75% of their cases. And they used to attend opera together. But on significant cases like abortion and affirmative action, thank your lucky stars for one Donald J. Trump. One of the reasons I was so enthusiastic about his re-election in 2020 was the upcoming vacant Supreme Court seat. That outweighed the fact that Trump acted stupidly in shutting down the country. Why? Because SCOTUS decisions last a long time before being overturned. And I still think I was right about that. (The Biden economy proved me correct ages ago, anyway.) But look at the makeup of the court and see for yourself: [SJN] A 6-3 vote determined the UNC case, and a 6-2 vote determined the Harvard case. Justice Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case as she attended Harvard as an undergrad and law school student. Where did those six votes come from? If Trump had been re-elected, it would’ve been 7-2, and the Court would be an originalist court for a generation. Never Trumpers made an enormous mistake voting for Biden. I hope they don’t repeat that mistake next year. Wrap Up I’ll leave the final words on this piece to two genuine heroes. [SJN] Credit: [@RealBenCarson]( [SJN] Credit: [@RickyDoggin]( Have a fabulous long weekend! All the best, [Sean Ring] Sean Ring Editor, Rude Awakening Twitter: [@seaniechaos]( [Paradigm]( ☰ ⊗ [ARCHIVE]( [ABOUT]( [Contact Us]( © 2023 Paradigm Press, LLC. 808 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore MD 21202. By submitting your email address, you consent to Paradigm Press, LLC. delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your Rude Awakening e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from Rude Awakening, feel free to [click here.]( Please note: the mailbox associated with this email address is not monitored, so do not reply to this message. We welcome comments or suggestions at feedback@rudeawakening.info. This address is for feedback only. For questions about your account or to speak with customer service, [contact us here]( or call (844)-731-0984. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We allow the editors of our publications to recommend securities that they own themselves. However, our policy prohibits editors from exiting a personal trade while the recommendation to subscribers is open. In no circumstance may an editor sell a security before subscribers have a fair opportunity to exit. The length of time an editor must wait after subscribers have been advised to exit a play depends on the type of publication. All other employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. Rude Awakening is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. Please read our [Privacy Statement.]( If you are having trouble receiving your Rude Awakening subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by [whitelisting Rude Awakening.](