Allen: “You have a nice office, Mr. Jansen. Thanks for having me over. This is fun and interesting, and I hope we can have a solid discussion on what we were talking about before.”

            Davis: “We’ve got an hour of tape here. Let’s start off with something straight forward, please.”

            Jansen: “Not a problem. Let’s begin with the federal income tax in the United States of America. Sound good?”

            Davis: “We’ve been over this one before.”

            Jansen: “Yes, and we’re going to do it again here for the record and because Mr. Allen was adamant at getting an answer. So here it is, the simplest question anybody could ask about this subject. Where is the law that states that American workers must pay federal income tax?”

            Allen: “In our constitution?”

Jansen: “If you were to go out after we finished here and try and find the law which states that you have to pay your federal income tax here in the United States, you won’t find it.”

Allen: “How so?”

Davis: “Because there is no law. There is no law present today that requires the American worker to pay a direct, un-apportioned tax on their income. This includes you, me, Mr. Jansen, our families, friends, and most people that we know.”

            Allen: “So you are telling me that for ninety-five years, the entire American public has been paying an illegal tax on their income?”

            Jansen: “I’m sure there are people who find away around the problem. But in short, the federal income tax here in the U.S.A. is a lie. Anybody who pays it is probably doing it more out of fear of the law than anything else. It certainly isn’t based on the knowledge of the law, since there isn’t one.”

Davis: “Bottom line…they won’t avoid paying their illegal income tax without having to go through some legal process.”

            Allen: “What about other countries?”

            Davis: “We haven’t looked into it that far, but we should. When the government issues a $700 billion bailout package for our financial system, it seems to me that this would be a good time to start asking why, start opening doors to these questions, and not just on the bailout itself, but how things escalated to this point.”

            Jansen: “How is it possible that the entire American population, some three-hundred million people today, have been paying an illegal tax on their income to the interest charged by a private banking corporation, the Federal Reserve, for the last ninety-five years? And how is it possible that this issue has been ignored by the media, ignored by the education system, and never brought to attention in a country that is built on its laws and financial system?”

            Davis:   “On December 23, 1913, Woodrow Wilson, twenty-eighth president of the country, signed into law the Federal Reserve act which handed over our monetary policy to a private bank which is today called the Federal Reserve. Since then, if you look at how our financial system has been shaped over the last several decades, you will see that private banks, such as the Federal Reserve, have created and supported a system which includes this illegal income tax. A sizable percentage or your income is taken before you even see it. It goes to pay the interest on the debt that is lent from the private Federal Reserve to the public United States. All of the money in circulation in our country, from every coin and paper bill to the numbers on screens at the bank down the street, is printed and loaned to us by banks, and the bank making most of the loans to us is the Federal Reserve.”

            Jansen: “Money, in general, is not a subject that is focused on in our education. How can it be that throughout all of our schooling, through primary school and high school, that we were never educated about our money system? To the people listening to this tape, how much do you know about how money works? Money is something that we use every single day of our lives, and yet we have not been fully informed as to its history, how it works, and why we use it today and have the system and the banks that we do today. We pay taxes, buy goods and services, sell ourselves on the marketplace to businesses and corporations, and basically live our lives under the umbrella of a financial system that has reached a global scale, but we don’t know very much about it. How can that be? How can we say that we live in a free society with that on the record?”

            Davis: “You can take courses in economics and finance at the post-secondary level at many institutions today. But obviously not everybody has the inclination, time or the money to do this. Thankfully, we have the Internet, libraries, and of course, each other.”

            Allen: “What about our debt? All of what you’ve told me so far is a lot to take in. You’re telling me pieces of history I am not familiar with and I’m going to have to spend some time doing research on that. Today, the apparent problem seems to be debt, a ‘credit crisis’, we’re told. I assume that this is tied into what you’ve been talking about.”

            Jansen: “Debt comes to us in so many forms that it seems complex. Credit cards, mortgages, government debt – all promises to repay. That’s all debt really is. It’s a promise. The big problem we face today is that our money is now backed by debt.”

            Allen: “Could you explain that?”

            Jansen: “Money today is created from debt. If you go to a bank for a mortgage, they will give you the money you need for the mortgage so you can live in your new house. The mortgage is not backed by gold. It’s not backed by anything but your promise to repay. Meanwhile, the person that sold you the house is out buying burgers and going to Hawaii. They are spending money that is backed by the bank’s piece of paper that says you owe them half a million dollars. It’s not backed by gold. It’s not backed by anything that you gave them except a promise. Your mortgage is a promise that is legally enforceable. In a nutshell, all money today is created, one way or another, by individuals signing on the dotted line a pledge to repay. Money is debt today. If there is no debt, there is no money. If there are no promises to repay, there are no pieces of paper or numbers in bank accounts that indicate the existence of money.”

            Davis: “The bank has legal authorization to administer this entire process. They collect interest on your debt, and the money that the seller got will eventually be placed into another bank who will then loan that money out again, creating more debt and more money at the same time.”

            Jansen: “A ten dollar bill that claims to hold value must, somehow, actually hold that value. In the past, the value was in gold. The bill could be holding the value of just about anything. We could back our money with carrots, if it was agreed that carrots held enough value to issue money from them. Today, the value is in promises. Debt. And debt is limitless. We can make as many promises as we like because banks will accept this and issue as much currency as they want, since they get to charge interest and be the profit-maximizers they are seeking to be. What’s with the look on your face? Don’t believe it? Go on the Internet. Go to your library. Go find it. Look for it, Mr. Allen. Ask questions. Ask lots of questions for yourself and ask your bank. Go ahead and ask your bank or your teachers or your professors or colleagues, and see what they have to say about this. Ask the people you voted for in government about your federal income tax and see what they tell you. You have to find your answers yourself, Mr. Allen, they will not be given to you. You came asking questions tonight. You can only educate yourself, nobody can do it for you.”

            Allen: “Fine, I will go ahead and do that when I have time. I want to ask you one more question and then I’m heading out. If what you’re telling me is true, and money is created from debt, and our federal income tax is a lie, and the media won’t touch this, and even our government won’t touch this, what can we possibly do to solve this problem?”

            Davis: “Ask questions, just as Mr. Jansen said. Look, to put it bluntly, Mr. Allen, I’d say that our money creation system is a prime and obvious example which shows that our society has to lie to itself to continue the way it is going now. What other solution is there? From the top-down, it’s a lie. The banking system and the legal process backing it is a crapshoot. I’m sorry to say that, and I know you and many of your colleagues have interests in various enterprises which rely on the credit system that’s operating, but the basic conclusion is that we live in a zero-sum game. No money, no debt, and really, the only institutions that can make, truly make, money, are banks. We like to say we make money when we go to work. We take money for our services. We don’t make money. We make whatever we were making, whether it’s farming, business, product, or service. We’re compensated, one way or another, by money, which could not be there if it weren’t for debt that belonged to somebody, or some company or city or country, somewhere else, and who owed it to some bank.”

Jansen: “Talk to people. Make more tapes. Record your conversations, spread the word.”

Davis: “It’s going to be difficult to solve the problems that face us in our day-to-day lives when bullshit like this is being handed down from levels well beyond our individual control. Point your aim to the source of the problem. Today, there are pieces of history that affect us lightly that are overemphasized in our education, and there are pieces of history that affect us heavily that are underemphasized in our education. Trying to understand the things that affect us greatly is not the least bit a simple task. But as Mr. Jansen often says, lies like these can only be unraveled when there are enough people shouting out.”

Whatever be it, every effective manager believes in the dictum: ‘None of us is as good as all of us’. This unswerving faith in the difference people make to an organization redefines the role and importance of managers. A manager with appropriate people-sense is not just a manager, he is a developer – developer of a vision that gives meaning and inspiration to work, developer of a shared responsibility within a team and a developer of people; he is a leader with whom people grow.

If you aspire to be one, pay more attention to ensure people-management as part of your job. You may be expected to bring in profits or maintain a certain level of productivity, but you will not be able to do any of these if you do not have good working relationship with your colleagues. Look to the human element of the business as a long-term investment. In short, human resources management has become a crucial ‘corporate trend’.

The writing on the wall is clear: "Cultivate listening skills." Of the four types of listening - discriminative, evaluative, appreciative and empathic, the only one we engage in solely to accommodate another person is, empathic listening. We listen empathetically when someone needs to talk, to get something out in the open, wants to be given advice or reassurance.

Objective or Indifferent?

Daniel was a happy person as well as a good worker. Lately, however, he was acting out of character. His grooming had deteriorated. He was listless and withdrawn and showed little interest in work. Damodar, his manager, was concerned. As Daniel always liked tackling new work, he assigned him to a new project, expecting it to perk him up. But a week later, when Damodar asked him about the job, Daniel sat glum and quietly admitted that he had not even started the work. Damodar began to wonder: ‘Should I talk to Daniel? After all, a manager is not a counselor or a therapist’.

He ultimately decided to steer clear of what he perceived as ‘role-switching’. But Daniel came to him in good faith. He poured out everything. He was on the verge of divorce. He shared his pain and sense of rejection. Damodar listened. Quietly. Passively. Twiddling his thumbs. Looking up at the ceiling. Making a few phone calls in-between. In the end, he told Daniel to go and meet a counselor. Daniel came out bitter and disappointed.

When you want to build a team, you must realize that every member has various facets to his/her personality. You cannot choose to see your team members in parts and expect total commitment. You must give each of them, as you give for your project, time to unfold.

• • Listen to the employee
• • Be patient and sincere, and non-judgmental.
• • Be convinced that this relief-seeking conversation is as important to the team as any ‘purposeful talk’.
• • Being neutral and being passive are entirely different.

Develop the sensitivity to draw the line between objectivity and indifference and recognize where one unobtrusively blends into the other. Exercise authority only when all alternatives fail. You undoubtedly ‘can’ pull rank to get things done. If you usually take this approach, you may be demonstrating a lack of personal assertiveness. It is better to keep your authority as a ‘backup position’. Instead, come across as positive and confident in communicating your ideas, opinions and directions. That, most likely, will get you the results.

Aggressive or Assertive?

When Henry took over the reins of the Production Unit, he envisaged several procedural changes. At the first meeting with the employees, he spelled out his decisions. The senior-most supervisors Gopal and Charan, tried in vain to make him consider alternatives. Henry refused to have any discussion whatsoever. Subsequently absenteeism, irregularities and internal wrangles raised their heads.

When Robert took over, he found Henry’s plans perfectly sound. He held a meeting. He spelled out the objectives and discussed the existing procedures. He pointed out that they had no alternative but to think of changes whatever the inconvenience. Suggestions came up. An action plan was drawn up. Later, everyone realized that the plans they had so eagerly made by consensus were very similar to the once resented dictates of Henry!

Winning the cooperation of others is leadership. To achieve this, emphasize on the following:

• • When you are ‘assertive’, you are standing up for what is in principle, correct.
• • When you are aggressive, you are violating the rights of the others.
• • It is not necessary to have a dominating and forceful manner in order to be assertive unless you have always been that and that has worked for you.
• • Quiet, soft-spoken people do/can have their way, sell ideas and get the co-operation they need.
• • Do not be assertive all the time.
• • What goals do you want to achieve by being assertive? Ask this question to yourself. The answer will guide you when to be assertive and how far to be
• • Recognize the fine line between assertiveness and aggressiveness. This line often becomes blurred.

Indecisiveness or Thoughtfulness?

Thoughtfulness is a virtue, but if taken too far it can be seen as a weakness. If you respond ineffectively to what people say, it could tell them that you are not listening, or that you do not grasp the situation. You are setting up a barrier to both task and process dynamics. It is very important that your team members perceive you as a person open to suggestion. They should know that you will consider every recommendation that will work. When anyone comes out with a proposal, and if you dillydally the discussion because you are weighing within yourself the pros-and-cons, you sound inadequate and indecisive. Share. Question. Probe. Think aloud. Be willing to find a solution. The interaction itself will satisfy the employee as much as the implementation probably would.

Whenever Smith took some urgent work to the general typing pool, they turned him down with their first-come-first-served policy. They refused to compromise even when emergencies cropped up. He had some suggestions to get work done on a priority basis. Smith went to his boss Pritam with a plan of action. With a cryptic assurance to look into the matter, Pritam dismissed him. Later Pritam began deliberating. He realized that the typing section would need to sort out the jobs as per the scheduled dates of mailing and they would resent this additional burden. When Smith did not get any feedback, he once again broached the topic. Pritam only said, “There will be resistance from the typing department”. Smith had even thought of a viable solution. But Pritam’s attitude was not encouraging. Smith was frustrated.

• To create an open environment in your team, remember the following:

• • Every suggestion need not be implemented, but should definitely be considered.
• • Discuss the possible fallouts with the employee
• • Verbalizing helps people to put issues into perspective
• • Develop a game plan to respond to any need to change
• • Learn what feelings to express and when to express them
• • Not expressing feelings make you seem cold and aloof

You have to make sure that your thoughtfulness is not misconstrued as indecision. If you want to enhance your leadership, you should send the right signals.

Resisting or Resolving?

Conflict management is very vital to team building. Conflict is inevitable. Whenever someone makes a proposal, very often resentment raises its lead. When a proposal is made, irrespective of whoever conceived it, it may be you yourself, consider its effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability. Look for any weaknesses and how important or negligible they are in the scheme of things. Make a list of everyone who might feel threatened by your proposal and why each one would feel so.

Think how you could not only counter the threat but, identify ways for the proposal to be beneficial to others.Then at a meeting, systematically elucidate the advantages of acting on the proposal. Never avoid arguments by not responding to disagreements. Disagreement does not necessarily mean hostility. It may just mean requests for more information or more clarifications. Encourage your team members to express these. The answers may eliminate further disagreements.

Kamlesh Mehta has a bright young staff of nine reporting to him. His current headache is Purnima Sharma. She is a very good worker. She is intelligent, hardworking and committed. There was no complaint with her output. It was her effect on the team that bothered him. She cut down everyone at meetings. No one could make a suggestion without her jumping in with some blistering remark as to why it won’t work, why it was not worth trying, or that it had been tried earlier. As a result, no one spoke up at the meetings. The team morale was badly hurt. Kamlesh Mehta decided to act. He talked to her about her interests and goals and linked his feedback to her goals. He showed her that her present behavior stood between her and her goal and she would rise in the organization only if she listened more and found the strong points in other’s proposals.

Remember there are four basic approaches to conflict resolution:

1. •Win-lose approach: You achieve your goals at the expense of others. This approach is to be adopted when long-term interests will be protected or when you feel strongly about the proposal.
2. •Lose-win approach: You can go in for this when you need the support of others and when harmony is more important than winning
3. •Lose-lose approach: This involves concessions, arbitration and tradeoffs. There is no gain for anyone in this approach
4. •Win-win approach: All the sides feel they have won because they are able to treat the proposal as their own. This involves consensus negotiation and achieves commitment from all parties. Win-win approach is the most effective, but the other approaches may be useful at times. Resolve conflicts. Never resist them.

Living With Change or Adopting Change?

Developing a team culture is as important as setting up a task force, choosing the members, outlining goals, setting guidelines and arranging meetings. The team’s values may be and ought to be, the same as the company’s. That still does not mean that corporate culture is enough. For the long-term goals, yes. But for day-to-day operations, a sense of cohesion is required. This will come from your managerial style.

Reena, an Operations Manager, allowed some of her senior employees to sign certain documents related to their work. This she did, to train her officers to accept responsibilities for their work. One day when Reena was out, John, a senior billing processor refused to OK a shipment ordered by a client whose account was in arrears. When Reena returned, she realized that they cannot afford to lose this client. She wondered about her earlier decision. When Allan, a new employee .joined, all his colleagues told him that Reena believed in an open culture. But Allan’s experience was different. Several times a day, Reena interrupted him to give him instructions or to see how he was progressing in matters which were quite mundane. Everyone in the team smelled a rat and people became extra-cautious. The team lost its sense of identity.

The key-point is that the team needs a culture to define itself and provide a sense of direction. If the team-culture is open, there will be free flow of ideas. This can also mean disharmony, confusion and competition. The group can become deadlocked or sidetracked.

Remember that there is no universal and eternal approach that can fit all team dynamics:

• An authoritarian approach creates rigidity. The team may move towards its stated goals and stick to business but it may have no bonding.Members may feel stifled.
• A happy medium has to be struck.
• While fine tuning according to the need of the hour is desirable, shifting back from one culture to another should be avoided at all costs.

The work scenario today is in a flux. Embracing change gracefully is an art as well as science. It is not enough if you learn to live with it, but you have to advocate it and adopt it in your organization.

Regardless of the reason for the discussion, you need to approach your employee in a way that doesn’t make them feel threatened or intimidated. Here are 9 guidelines for having a productive conversation with your staff.

Be clear about why you are having the conversation.

When you approach your staff member, let him or her know why. If it’s based on something that you’ve personally witnessed, make sure that he or she knows that (and have the conversation as soon as possible after the incident). If you need to address a concern that has been brought to you by a customer or another staff member, be diplomatic. You shouldn’t bring the other person into the conversation by name, but you do need to indicate that someone else has brought the matter to your attention.

Keep in mind that it is unfair to blind-side your employee. If you are talking to them because there is an issue to address, let that be known right away. Don’t begin the conversation by asking them about last night’s baseball game as a way to break the ice. Many people will be more defensive and less understanding if you appear to be trapping them with the conversation.

Be specific, even if the topic makes you uncomfortable.

There are things that make people uncomfortable when they talk with employees. You may be approaching a staff member who has made racist comments about a customer or you may need to discuss your fear that the staff member has been dishonest.

No matter how uncomfortable you are with the conversation, you need to use specific examples to communicate your point. If you are unable to address the specific concerns, how do you expect the employee to understand what you’re trying to say?

Likewise, if you are approaching a staff member who just doesn’t seem to be working out, bring up the specific things that make you question them. Maybe it’s that they spend more time talking to other staff than customers, or maybe there’s just one part of the job that they just don’t seem to grasp. Regardless of the why, it’s important for you to be specific so that the employee can respond to your concerns.

Describe what you know.

Again, this will need to be as specific as possible. If someone has come to you with a complaint, let the staff person know what’s been said. Share what you need to of what’s been said.

For example, if it’s been brought to your attention that there was an issue with customer service, don’t just indicate that you think the staff member doesn’t interact well with customers. Instead, describe the situation: “Here’s what I understand has happened” and go on to explain what you know.

Ask for the other side of the story.

Don’t assume that you have all of the information about the situation, even if you were there when it happened. You may have missed a comment that provoked your staff or there may be an underlying issue between members of your staff that you’re unaware of.

Make sure that after you’ve talked about the incident you give the employee a chance to let you know what happened from his or her perspective.

Explain the way that you feel about the situation.

More than you are able to make an impact by saying “what you did was wrong,” you will be able to communicate with your employee by letting him or her know how you feel about what happened. If it makes you uncomfortable, say so and then explain why. The same holds true if the situation makes you angry, sad or concerned.

Provide a course of action for the employee to meet your expectations.

It’s important, especially if this is the first time that you are approaching an employee with a specific concern, for you to give the staff member a chance to improve.

Don’t just tell him or her “your attitude needs to improve.” Again, be specific. Give a roadmap for the employee’s improvement. Tell him or her that you expect a better outlook or that they should always try to help the customer. Find out from the staff member what extra help they might need to meet your expectations; you may find that having another staff member mentor the person might help, or that it’s a matter of needing more training.

The important thing about this step is that you are clear about what you’re expecting from the staff member so that they can improve.

Describe the consequences that will arise if the behaviors are not changed.

Just because you want all of the members of your staff to succeed at your business, you need to be clear that their chances to turn themselves around are not unlimited. If you will reduce the employee’s hours during busy times if they can’t match the pace, let him or her know this. If you expect him or her to apologize to a customer or another staff member for something that has happened, explain what will happen if that apology isn’t made.

Provide a timeline in which the changes must be made.

Just as you need to express to the employee that there are consequences for their actions, you need to give them a clear sense of the timeframe you are giving them to make the change.

If you ask the staff member to improve his or her attitude and have explained that he or she will not have a job if there aren’t changes, you also need to limit the amount of time the employee has to change. Let them know that they have 30 days if that’s the time you’re giving them.

Schedule a follow-up conversation to evaluate progress.

Once you’ve told your employee that they have a limited time to make a change, scheduling a follow-up conversation is a valuable tool to help them achieve that goal. If you’ve given the staff member 30 days to make a change, set a meeting 2 weeks away to go over the progress that’s been made. That way, you can be sure that you are giving the employee every possible opportunity to make progress.

By clearly indicating why the conversation is taking place and making sure that you are not just giving the staff member a lecture, you’ll be able to form a better relationship with your employee.

Communication is imperative for a good supervisor-employee relationship. By being specific about what’s wrong and what can be done to fix it, you’ll be able to monitor progress. By limiting the amount of time your employee has to change a behavior, you will be able to gauge his or her commitment to change. And ultimately, if the behavior cannot be repaired, you will be able to know that you did all that you could before terminating the relationship with that staff member.