Rileybiz

The majority of today’s U.S. workforce is comprised of women. And since research has consistently demonstrated that having women in top management positions correlates with financial success for organizations, retaining them is critical. Paying attention to what is important to women in the workplace can increase retention and in turn positively affect the overall health and viability of an organization.

A new report from the Center for Creative Leadership’s World Leadership Study conducted over the course of the recession shows that women have become less trusting of their bosses and co-workers than men, despite the fact that they remain more trusting of people in general.

The effects of the recession on trust seemed to be particularly profound for women. In the second quarter of 2008 (early in the recession), women’s trust in their bosses dipped to its lowest point in the two-year study, dropping from 61 percent who indicated they “trusted their bosses a lot” in the first quarter of 2008 to 42 percent in the second quarter of 2008. While women’s trust level dipped nearly 19 points, men’s trust level dipped only 6 points (from 58 percent to 52 percent) during that same time.

(more…)

Facebook, the social network, is set to change the way that consumers follow brands on its pages, in an effort to increase the number of users who participate in this activity.

The pioneering portal, which has 400 million active members worldwide, has attracted a large number of major advertisers, which are keen to engage with this rapidly-growing audience.

Starbucks, the coffee house chain, and Coca-Cola, the soft drink, and are among the operators that have enjoyed the most success on this platform to date, signing up 6.4 million and 5.8 million “fans” in turn.

(more…)

By John Riley

 When President Obama appointed The Commission on Cyber Security to advise him on the subject, their report contained an ominous challenge: America’s failure to protect cyber space  is one of the most urgent security problems facing the administration. This was no doubt influenced by the testimony of Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence, March 10, 2010, who said the intelligence community assessment is that a number of nations already have the capability to conduct crippling attacks against the United States.  

 In a recent Harvard law school paper, “Cyberlaw: Difficult Issues Winter 2010”, the scope of the problem was discussed. Their conclusion was that cyber security is perceived as an almost insurmountable problem. The group’s approach was to look at the vulnerable points in cyberspace by focusing on the most likely points of attack. They concluded the Internet is vulnerable to attack at several different key points, each with a different result and security concern:

 Assessing the Internet’s vulnerability

 The Internet is a large decentralized network which complicates its defense. “A clever hacker could shut down the Internet itself in an extreme case, or more conservatively can re-route the Internet to prevent users from getting where they need to go,” concluded  the paper.  

 When a message is sent through the Internet network, there are many different paths it can take. The path it takes is not necessary the shortest path to its’ destination. Usually the path is determined by which avenue has the least traffic (resistance). To disconnect or disrupt traffic, hackers can reconfigure the message address.

 Remedies are being explored. If network providers can be notified automatically when the virtual location of an Internet address changes, action can be taken to control the situation. A second approach is to handle broadcasts where changes of addresses can be detected as potential threats until  they can be evaluated. That usually takes 24 hours and then they can be accepted as legitimate.

 Assessing network endpoints vulnerability

 SCADA Systems

Every computer connected to the Internet is an endpoint which makes it vulnerable to attack. Computer systems that oversee industrial computer systems are known as supervisory control and data acquisition systems (SCADA). These are the computer systems that control the power grids, traffic lights, regulate dams and other components of civilian infrastructure. According to John Avlon, Right Side News, November 13, 2009, several al Qaida computers were seized in Pakistan that show details of the SCADA systems in America.  Authorities also found one al-Qaida safe house in that was devoted to the operational study of Internet attacks.

 Servers

It is not necessary for an attacker to target individual computers.  By singling out servers and providers, a terrorist can infect and compromise all computers connected to those servers. That includes internal computers and sensitive servers usually assumed to be shielded from unauthorized penetration by hackers. However, when infection occurs, regulators can step in and shut down the systems to prevent further distribution.

 The most common approaches used by hackers are brute force password guessing attacks and web application attacks.  If a valid username/password pair can be identified, it will enable the attacker to penetrate Microsoft SQL, FTP, and SSH servers. Microsoft applications have been a major hacker target in recent years.

 Computers

 One of the most attractive qualities of a computer is its’ ability to create things. However, it is also the computer’s greatest vulnerability. As the paper frames it, the issue becomes, “how do you preserve the generativity, while addressing the growing vulnerabilities that are innate to it?” It is not clear if there is an answer to the question.

 Government Computers

 In 2009, three incidents occurred that were quietly investigated: data about the Presidential helicopter appeared on Iranian laptops, the federal government’s job listing was taken, and a 19 year-old hacker breached Air Force, Navy, Department of Defense , NASA and MIT systems.  This after the Pentagon had spent $100 million to protect its’ systems.  As mentioned in the previous article, the problem was highlighted again earlier this year when it was revealed hackers broke into the Pentagon’s $300 million state-of-the-art Joint Strike Fighter program which raised significant military concerns.

 The policy vulnerability

 The National Security Cyberspace Institute reported March 5, 2010, that a study by the National Research Council, “Technology, Policy, Law and Ethics regarding the U.S. Acquisition and use of Cyberattck Capabilities”  revealed the U.S. has no formal policy for dealing with foreign government-led threats against U.S. interests in cyberspace. It cites three key points:

 1)      The U.S. policy and legal framework for the United States’ use of cyber attacks is “ill-formed, undeveloped, and highly uncertain”.

 2)     “the decision-making apparatus for cyber attack and the oversight mechanists for that apparatus are inadequate”, and

 3)     “secrecy has prevented us from being able to effectively share information and debate about the nature and implications of cyber attacks.”    

 The Cyber Espionage (3 of 5): Threats are Many and Varied,  will appear April 3.

By John Riley

  Chinese hackers penetrated White House e-mail archives and were able to sneak onto the network several times according to The Register, a British publication in 2008. 

 North Korean hackers managed to penetrate a website and obtain a secret U.S.-South Korean plan to defend the Korean peninsula in case of war according to a recent Defense News report.

 An investigation by The Wall Street Journal revealed an unnamed intruder was able to penetrate the Pentagon computers and steal terabytes of information about the design and electronic systems for the new $300 billion state-of-the-art Joint Strike Fighter project.  

 Every day, the Department of Defense detects 3 million unauthorized computer probes of its networks while the Department of State fends off 2 million probes according to a Right Side News report November 29, 2009.

 Several countries have state-of-the-art cyber espionage capabilities

 These incidents are typical of the daily threats that military, government contractors, and industry organizations are facing. Global Cyber CEO, Jody Westby, said in USA Today in January that China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Israel, France, the United States and the United Kingdom are recognized as possessing state-of-the-art cyber espionage expertise which they use for economic and military intelligence gathering. Alan Paller, director of research for the Sans Institute said on Fox News, January 22, 2010, that over 100 countries have cyber espionage capabilities.  

 “It’s espionage on a massive scale” says Paul B. Kurtz, a former high-ranking national security official. In 2008, over 12,900 cyber security attacks had been reported to the Homeland Security Dept. which was triple the number from two years earlier. Air Force Lt. General, Robert Elder points out “ while much of the focus is on data loss or data gain, the biggest concern should be that an adversary manipulates data and we do not even recognize it.”

 U. S. power plants are vulnerable

 To make the point, a PC World story in early 2009 talked about hackers believed to be from China or Russia, had penetrated the U.S. electrical grid and were able to install “software tools” that would disrupt the grid system. The degree to which the grid had been accessed was not revealed, but investigators said the attack was ‘pervasive’ to the extent that control of U.S. power plants could be taken over by the hackers.

 Several studies have been made of U.S. cyber security policies and programs to improve security, each with a set of recommendations. One of the most recent was the Commission on Cyber Security under the leadership of Melissa Hathaway, which made its recommendations to the White House and congress in February, 2009, but little or no implementation has taken place. The most important proposal calls for the government to work more closely with the private sector, but also pointed out the need for emphasis on key infrastructure and coordination of preventive and responsive activities.

 The U. S. has no formal policy dealing with foreign threats

 Another reason for adopting Hathaway’s study recommendation for closer government-private sector coordination is the fact most of the critical infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector. Without that coordination, it is very difficult to determine the targets and the nature of the threats.

 According to a Wall Street Journal online report, “the U.S. government and private industry seem to be in a reactive role, detecting intrusions and information losses only after the fact, with no cross-government or industry coordinated response. Efforts to coordinate standards and policies across the private sector and in government, therefore appear stalled.” A Computer World story adds, “The U.S. has no formal policy for dealing with foreign government-led threats against U.S interest in cyberspace.

 While there are obvious areas of concern about the state of  U.S. cyber security, it is entirely possible some of the recommendations of various organizations have not been ignored. Cyber security techniques are not something the government would want to share in any detail. Time will tell if the government may have quietly adopted some or many of the recommendations and advanced our cyber security more than is generally recognized.

 The next article, Cyber Espionage- (2 0f 5) Vulnerabilities are Many, will appear March 30..

From Leading Effectively Newsletter

Nobody likes a braggart, so why are attention hogs and show-offs often first in line for promotions, funding and plum assignments? “Part of the problem is with you, the boss,” says CCL’s Cindy McLaughlin, co-author of The Truth About Sucking Up: How Authentic Self-Promotion Benefits You and Your Organization.

Bosses, team leaders and project managers are on the receiving end of information about who is doing the work and who has the right skills. “Leaders need to be able to sort through the noise to get an accurate picture of individual talent and how the team functions,” says McLaughlin. “Many of the problems that result from over-eager self-promoters can be avoided if you are skilled at separating the facts from the hype and acting accordingly.”

To be a shrewd evaluator, you must balance openness to influence with discernment, according to McLaughlin and co-authors Gina Hernez-Broome and Stephanie Trovas. Bosses tend to fall into four categories, based on the way they perceive and evaluate the promotional efforts of others.

The clueless. This kind of boss is neither open to being influenced nor very discerning. You might be clueless if you:

• You do not ask enough questions or do your homework regarding people.
• You take information at face value.
• You do not differentiate between difficulty of work and levels of success.
• You have little or no knowledge about work outside your expertise or function.

Clueless bosses are not aware of the role self-promotion plays in today’s workplace. They tend to believe the hype and overlook hard workers. As a result, direct reports feel undervalued and unmotivated because their work is not recognized or rewarded. Over time, cluelessness erodes your credibility and, in the big picture, the organization is truly ignorant of the talent it possesses.

The gullible. A boss who is gullible is one who is highly open to influence, but low on discernment. Typically, a gullible boss is ambitious. The desire for recognition and success makes gullible bosses susceptible to anyone or any information that makes them look good or feel good about themselves. You might be gullible if:

• You don’t dig any deeper if you receive the message you want to hear.
• You are easily dazzled by people or projects that have “sparkle” or are high-profile.
• You avoid people you consider to be downers.
• You are strongly driven by a need to feel good about yourself.

With a gullible boss at the helm, many hardworking, effective employees don’t get recognized. Incompetent people are rewarded and the wrong people get promoted, since the gullible are bedazzled by those who suck up to them. Many employees are alienated, demoralized and frustrated by seeing the suck-ups get the rewards.

The skeptical. This kind of boss is not very open to influence but is highly discerning. The skeptic hears information with a very discriminating ear. You might be a skeptic if:

• You value integrity and capability above all. You are highly skeptical of self-promotion.
• You are naturally suspicious and have a difficult time taking people at face value.
• You process information through a complex system of filters (Why are you telling me this? What’s your motivation/What’s in it for you?) before you accept it and act on it.

The skeptic’s impact on the organization is two-fold. On the plus side, when skeptics get behind someone or something, you can be confident of its value. But this positive attribute has a negative side as well. Skeptics may overlook a person or information that does not make it through their filters. They may be seen as too negative and at times not very approachable.

The savvy. A savvy boss strikes an effective balance of being open to influence and discerning of information. You might be a savvy boss if:

• You are highly competent in your line of work.
• You are confident without being arrogant.
• You’re very self-aware. You are clear about your knowledge and skills, but also clear about what you don’t know.
• You’re not threatened. You aren’t afraid to admit when you don’t know something and are comfortable deferring to others.
• You are eager for ideas. You welcome the contributions that others make, even when they challenge your views or question you.
• You’re direct and forthcoming. You expect others to be so as well; game-playing isn’t your style.

Savvy bosses call people out, reward and give credit where credit is due. They encourage genuine communication about people’s skills and their work. This supports their ability to put the right people in the right places, helps with employee morale and gives the organization credibility.

“If you’re a savvy boss, clone yourself, coach others and keep doing what you’re doing,” McLaughlin advises. “If not, it’s time to open your eyes to the reality of self-promotion — both the good and the bad.”

Printed with permission of Center for Creative Leadership

One-fifth of small businesses “could not survive” without mobile

Mobile and wireless technologies such as smartphones, Wi-Fi hotspots and laptop data cards are becoming more important for small-business owners, according to the “Small Business Technology Poll” from AT&T.

More than one-fifth of respondents said they could not be in business at all without wireless technologies, and a further 43% claimed it would be a major challenge. That makes mobile and wireless critical for about two-thirds of small businesses.

This reflects the increase in use of mobile and wireless tech among small businesses over the past two years. AT&T found that while one-quarter of respondents reported the same usage as in 2007, 74% of small businesses relied on wireless at least somewhat more.

This reflects the increase in use of mobile and wireless tech among small businesses over the past two years. AT&T found that while one-quarter of respondents reported the same usage as in 2007, 74% of small businesses relied on wireless at least somewhat more.

That dependence is set to increase, according to small-business owners’ plans for the next two years. Nearly three-quarters of respondents plan to up their use of mobile and wireless technologies, including 37% who say they will use the services “much more.”

That dependence is set to increase, according to small-business owners’ plans for the next two years. Nearly three-quarters of respondents plan to up their use of mobile and wireless technologies, including 37% who say they will use the services “much more.”

Small businesses’ top uses of laptop data cards and Wi-Fi hotspots were for checking e-mail (done by more than eight in 10 respondents) and surfing the Web (57%) on the go. Smartphones were used slightly less for those purposes but were of course vital as mobile phones (91%).

“Wireless technology is a critical business tool that allows mobile workers to stay in touch with colleagues and customers, and to access company data on the move,” said Timothy Doherty, associate research analyst for SMB Mobility, IDC, in a statement. “Reliance on wireless technology will only increase, as growing adoption of mobile business applications among small businesses drives the need for fast, reliable connectivity.”

For complete story and data charts go to e-marketer.com

The theft of information and data from business, government and personal computers has escalated dramatically the past year to the extent cyber espionage has become a major national threat.  Because this threat affects everyone, I have tried to prepare an overview of the situation by researching a variety of sources over the past month. I hope you will find the five-part series of interest:

                                                                                                                         Posting Date

 Cyber Espionage:     A Serious Threat Continues to Grow      March 26

Cyber Espionage:      The Vulnerabilities are Many                    March 30

Cyber Espionage:       Threats are Many and Varied                    April 3

 Cyber Espionage:       Prevention Takes Many Forms                April 7

 Cyber Espionage:       Preparing for the Future                              April 11 

John Riley

From World Advertising Research Center

 Behavioral economics can help marketers overcome a variety of obstacles related to both price and broader market competition, McKinsey, the consultancy, has argued.

 McKinsey argued that marketers have actually displayed an “inadvertent leadership” in this area in the past, in the form of offers like “three for the price of two” and “extended layaway plans.”  What has been lacking, it suggested, is a systematic approach, largely as most firms simply used these tactics because they worked, rather than basing them on an in-depth understanding of shoppers.

 Among its recommendations for companies looking to exploit the insights from this emerging discipline is to “make a product’s cost less painful.” Consumers , it argued, can both pick between brands and decide against all the goods available, and often “value a dollar” differently depending on the specific item they are considering.

 Retailers have long-since realized that allowing customers to put off paying for acquisitions can increase their propensity to buy as this tactic offers both financial and emotional benefits.  “Even small delays in payment can soften the immediate sting of parting with your money and remove an important barrier to purchase,” McKinsey’s report said.

 Secondly, positioning a product or service as a “default” typically heightens the probability that it will ultimately be selected, particularly when individuals are presented with a wide variety of alternatives. What is important is to ensure that a default constitutes a “good choice for most people,” and eliminates the need to make difficult decisions.

 This is crucial because the pleasure from being “given” something, which is how defaults are generally perceived, typically results in a stronger attachment than if someone has actively identified a brand. In the absence of defaults, marketers must avoid creating a “choice overload”, which make it harder for consumers to find a preferred option, and thus discourages them for reaching the end of the purchase funnel.

 A “choice overload” can also generate a “negative halo” effect, as picking one brands inevitably incurs a penalty, in the form of foregoing favorable characteristics offered by  other similar rivals. “Reducing the number of options makes people likelier not only to reach a decision, but also to feel more satisfied with their choice,” McKinsey said.

 Finally, it is crucial to understand that while everyone has a different budget, each person has a maximum price they would be willing to pay for certain goods. Marketers can, however, exert an influence in this area by repositioning their brands, often in ways that can initially seem counter-intuitive.

 For example, increasing the price of a product can change perspectives about its quality, while making a more expensive alternative available can lead to an alteration in perceptions of value. Sony, for example, found that , with its headphones, “consumers buy them at a given price, if there is a more expensive option—but not if they are the most expensive option on offer.”

 McKinsey’s own research has also revealed that when deciding on an ice cream, brand consideration typically take primacy, followed by flavor, and then price. “Organizing supermarket aisles according to the way consumers prefer to buy specific products makes customers both happier and less likely to base their purchase decisions on price,” its study concluded.

 Data sourced from McKinsey, additional content by WARC staff.

By Gillian Regan

Project for Excellence in Journalism’s annual state of the news industry study has a few depressing stats for the news sites looking to charge online. Pew Research reported that:

Out of six in 10 Americans who say they get at least some news online during a typical day:

• About 35% of Americans say they have a favorite news site that they check every day.
• Among that small pool, only 19% said they would pay for news online. That includes people who already give cash to news sites.
• 82% of people with favorite news sites said they’d find somewhere else to find their news if  they started asking for payments.
• A person spends an average of three minutes and four seconds per visit on a news site.

“If we move to some pay system, that shift is going to have to surmount significant consumer resistance,” said Tom Rosenstiel, director of PEW’s project. 

“There was this view that we’re retreating into our own world of niche sites and that’s not true,” Rosenstiel told the AP.

The project’s online survey asked 2,259 people from Dec. 28, 2009, to Jan. 19, 2010 about their news habits.

More stats on advertising:

• In 2009, online ads fell for the first time since 2002, according to eMarketer. 4 out of 5 Americans surveyed say they never or hardly ever click on ads.
• Cable news, with Fox News as a frontrunner, is one part of the news industry that is thriving.
• Newspaper advertising revenue fell 26% in 2009 compared to 2008.
• Local TV and radio ad revenue were both down by 22%.
• Network television ad revenue sunk to 8%.
• Newspaper spending on reporting and editing has fallen roughly 30% during the past 10 years