This Saturday commemorates the day when, in 1776, the Continental Congress approved the Declaration of Independence, setting the 13 colonies on the road to freedom as a sovereign nation.

At the time, there were 2.5 million people living in the newly independent nation, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970. Today, the nation's population is nearly 307 million.

As always across the country, this most American of holidays will be marked by a Saturday spent with family and friends, flags and fireworks, and a heck of a lot of food.

According to the 2009 Independence Day Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey from the National Retail Federation (NRF), more Americans will celebrate the Fourth of July holiday this year than last year, probably due in no small part to the holiday falling on a Saturday.

Here are some other July 4th-related facts and figures we think are particularly interesting.

TRAVEL

37.1 Million
Number of travelers expected to take a trip of 50 or more miles away from home this holiday weekend — a 1.9 percent decrease from 2008
Source: American Automobile Association (AAA) / IHS Global Insight

$1,160
Fourth of July travelers expect to spend approximately this much per household this holiday weekend: Transportation and accommodations will account for about half of trip spending; food and beverage absorbs another 20 percent of the holiday budget; and shopping, entertainment and recreation will account for the remaining 30 percent of spending on average.
Source: AAA / IHS Global Insight

STARS AND STRIPES, HERE AND ELSEWHERE

58 Million
Number of Americans who own Independence Day decorations
Source: NRF's 2009 Independence Day Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey

14%
Percentage of consumers who planned to purchase patriotic merchandise last month
Source: NRF's 2009 Independence Day Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey

121 Million
Number of Americans who own an American flag
Source: NRF's 2009 Independence Day Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey

$3.4 Million
Value of U.S. imports of American flags in 2008, the vast majority of which ($3 million) was for U.S. flags made in China
Source: Foreign Trade Statistics

$569,400
Value of U.S. flags exported in 2008, with leading customer Belgium purchasing $186,400 worth
Source: Foreign Trade Statistics

$349.2 Million
Annual value of shipments of fabricated flags, banners and similar emblems by the nation's manufacturers, according to the latest published economic census data
Source: 2002 U.S. Economic Census

BRILLIANT COLORS, BOMBASTIC SOUNDS

42.7%
Percentage of people expected to attend local fireworks or community celebrations, compared with 40.2 percent last year
Source: NRF's 2009 Independence Day Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey

11.5%
Percentage of people expected to attend a parade
Source: NRF's 2009 Independence Day Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey

$17.3 Billion
Value of U.S. manufacturers' fireworks shipments in 2002
Source: 2002 U.S. Economic Census

$28.1 Million
Value of fireworks exported by the U.S. in 2008, with Australia purchasing more than any other country ($5.8 million)
Source: Foreign Trade Statistics

$193 Million
Value of fireworks imported from China in 2008 — down from $207 million in 2007 — representing the bulk of all U.S. fireworks imported ($202 million)
Source: Foreign Trade Statistics

7
Number of reported fireworks-related deaths in 2008 (down from 11 in 2007), with an estimated 7,000 total hospital emergency room-treated injuries last year
Source: U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

HEAT, MEAT AND HOTDOG SEASON

78 Million
Number of Americans who said they took part in a barbecue during the previous year, many of them likely having taken place on Independence Day
Source: 2009 Statistical Abstract of the U.S. (Table 1200)

144 Million
Number of Americans expected to host or attend a cookout, barbecue or picnic this weekend, or 62.6 of the country, compared to 139 million (61.2 percent) in 2008
Source: NRF's 2009 Independence Day Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey

150 Million
Number of hot dogs Americans will enjoy on Independence Day alone
Source: National Hot Dog and Sausage Council

7 Billion
Number of hot dogs Americans typically consume during "hot dog season" — Memorial Day to Labor Day — or 818 hot dogs per second
Source: National Hot Dog and Sausage Council

More Than 1 in 4
Odds that the hot dogs and pork sausages consumed this Saturday originated in Iowa, as the Hawkeye State was home to 19.3 million hogs and pigs on March 1, 2009, representing more than one-fourth of the nation's total; followed by North Carolina (9.4 million) and Minnesota (7.3 million)
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service

6.8 Billion Lbs.
Total production of cattle and calves in Texas in 2007 — so chances are good that the beef hot dogs, steaks and burgers on your backyard grill came from the Lone Star State, which accounted for about one-sixth of the nation's total production; followed by Nebraska (4.7 billion lbs.) and Kansas (4.1 billion lbs.)
Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service

About 4 in 10
The odds that your side dish of baked beans originated from North Dakota, which produced 39 percent of the nation's dry, edible beans in 2008. Another popular Fourth of July side dish is corn on the cob. Florida, California, Georgia and New York together accounted for 61 percent of the sweet corn produced nationally in 2008.
Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service

1/2
Proportion of U.S. spuds — which will be eaten as potato salad and potatoes chips at July 4th barbecues — produced in Idaho and Washington last year
Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service

861 Lbs.
Total production of watermelon produced last year in Florida, the leading producer of the popular fruit; followed by California, Texas and Georgia, each with more than 500 million lbs.
Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service

We'll be back next week with our regularly scheduled publications. Until then, from the entire IMT staff, we wish you and your loved ones a Safe and Happy July 4th.

In Deloitte LLP and The Manufacturing Institute's new Public Viewpoint on Manufacturing survey, released this month, 82 percent of respondents agree that America's manufacturing base is key to the country's economic prosperity. The majority of respondents (71 percent) also view manufacturing as a national priority and 59 percent believe that U.S. manufacturing competes effectively on a global scale.

This should come as little surprise to most, considering the manufacturing sector employs 13 million Americans and drives job growth in industries such as logistics, marketing, transportation and business services, the American Small Manufacturers Coalition (ASMC) said in an announcement of its own new findings. Moreover, manufactured goods represent two-thirds of U.S. exports and drive more net-wealth creation than any other industry.

However, the ASMC has found that more than a quarter of American manufacturers — about 90,000 firms — are at risk of not being able to compete on the global stage.

The ASMC asked manufacturers where they stood within the "next-generation manufacturing" framework of competitiveness strategies, which include: 1) customer-focused innovation, 2) systemic continuous improvement, 3) advanced talent management, 4) global engagement, 5) extended enterprise management and 6) having sustainable products and processes.

Based on the study's findings, a serious gap exists between the strategies U.S. manufacturers believe to be critical to success and their progress in implementing those strategies. Small and mid-sized manufacturers are especially at risk. One-third of respondents who had annual revenues less than $10 million are neither at nor near "world-class" in any strategy, according to the research. Of those with more than $100 million in revenue, merely 14 percent are under-performing.

"In a country where 282,000 small and mid-sized firms comprise the backbone of the industry, this is a significant threat to U.S. competitiveness and the viability of these companies," according to the study.

The results are "a wake-up call," ASMC Board Chair Michael Klonsinski said. "The consequences of inaction could trigger more job losses in manufacturing and ultimately a lower standard of living for all Americans."

Likewise, the public viewpoint survey found that 81 percent of respondents believe the manufacturing industry significantly impacts their standard of living and 74 percent say that the U.S. should further invest in manufacturing industries.

While the ASMC survey puts the responsibility to succeed in the hands of the manufacturers, it sees further improvements to the manufacturing base as the key to success as well.

Currently, the ASMC findings show that only 28 percent of respondents believe global engagement is highly important to success, "despite a near-term future in which markets, talent, competitors and partner opportunities are growing faster outside the U.S. than within its borders."

Furthermore, sustainability strategies rank low in manufacturers' priorities, with only 16 percent stating green as important to their success in the next five years. Other key "threats" include leadership loss, inadequately deployed measurement systems and ineffective partnerships among employees, suppliers and support organizations.

There is also "a wide perception gap" between "the public's highly positive views of manufacturing's contributions to America's economic success and their negative views about pursuing a career in manufacturing." In the Deloitte/Manufacturing Institute report, only 17 percent name manufacturing in the top two career choices while only 30 percent of parents say they would encourage their children to work in the manufacturing industry.

"The reality is that manufacturers offer high-paying jobs and rewarding careers for American working men and women," Emily DeRocco, president of The Manufacturing Institute, the research and education arm of the National Association of Manufacturers, said in a statement. "Our job is to close the gap between perception and reality, which will help fuel the industry's growth and prosperity."

Closing the gap between where manufacturers are today and where they need to be to succeed in the years to come is also a challenge — but "it's not too late," the ASMC made clear. American manufacturers still have an advantage in leadership, innovation and support infrastructure, among others.

"The solution is not to shift away from manufacturing, but to transform our manufacturing base into a faster, more flexible industry capable of capturing global market share," according to Klonsinski. "The good news is that many manufacturers are already adopting next-generation strategies and becoming stronger, more profitable firms as a result.

"The challenges we're facing are real but not insurmountable," Klonsinski said.

Resources

Next Generation Manufacturing Study Overview and Findings
American Small Manufacturers Coalition, June 11, 2009

National Study Finds Critical Threats to U.S. Manufacturing...
American Small Manufacturers Coalition, June 11, 2009

Public Viewpoint on Manufacturing
Deloitte LLP and The Manufacturing Institute, June 9, 2009

Manufacturing Ranked No. 1 Industry for Economic Prosperity
Deloitte LLP, June 9, 2009

The number of people continuing to receive unemployment aid "rose more than expected," the Associated Press reports. The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending June 13 was 6,738,000, an increase of 29,000 from the preceding week's revised level of 6,709,000, according to the Labor Department.

Unemployment, which has already reached the highest level in a quarter-century — 9.4 percent — "won't peak until this time next year, and then it will remain very high through next year," Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Economy.com tells the Washington Post. "It won't get back to full employment until 2013 or 2014. This really speaks to the severity of the job losses that have been absorbed by the economy. They were massive."

According to new findings from consulting firm Watson Wyatt Worldwide Inc., 52 percent of 179 companies surveyed expect to employ fewer people in three to five years than they did before the recession began. Among employers that have cut salaries, 55 percent expect to restore the cuts in the next year while 20 percent expect the cuts to be permanent and 73 percent expect employees to shoulder more of the cost of health care than before the recession began.

The Watson Wyatt survey "offered a few hints of good news," the Wall Street Journal noted (subscription required). "About a quarter of respondents said they believe their companies' results had already 'bottomed out,' compared with 13 percent in a similar survey in April."

Last week, a report from the U.S. Department of Commerce showed gross domestic product shrank at a 5.5 percent annual pace in the first three months of the year.

"Recent data show some areas of the economy, such as housing and manufacturing, are seeing a smaller pace of decline, consistent with the Federal Reserve's projection that the slump is 'slowing,'" Bloomberg News says. "Even so, companies are unlikely to hire until there are sustained gains in demand, meaning a recovery remains dependent on the effectiveness of government stimulus efforts."

Durable Goods Orders Rise
New orders for manufactured durable goods increased 1.8 percent in May, the U.S. Census Bureau reported last week. This was the third increase in the last four months and followed a 1.8 percent April increase.

Excluding transportation, new orders increased 1.1 percent. Excluding defense, new orders also increased 1.4 percent. Machinery, up three of the last four months, had the largest increase, 7.7 percent to $22.5 billion.

"The May durable goods report adds a persuasive component to a growing body of evidence that U.S. economic activity is beginning to stabilize after a deep contraction," Cliff Waldman, Economist for the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI, said in analysis of the Census Bureau report. "Stripping out either transportation or defense, two volatile categories of demand, new orders were up over 1 percent. And 'manufacturing with unfilled orders' had a sharp increase for the second consecutive month, indicating that demand is beginning to make a positive contribution to future production. The industrial composition of orders was mixed in May, although soaring demand for machinery is a positive sign for a broad U.S. economic recovery.

"Nonetheless, the still sharp declines in year-over-year activity across all categories of demand is a reminder that the U.S. factory sector still has a long way to go and is facing the headwind of one of the deepest global contractions in a generation," Waldman added.

Dreamliner Delayed. Again
After years of delays, The Boeing Co. on Monday was readying its 787 Dreamliner for its first test flight. Then it wasn't.

On Tuesday, Boeing said it would have to delay the first flight of its 787 Dreamliner. Again.

A structural flaw detected during ground tests requires additional reinforcement on the aircraft, a problem that will delay the plane's first test flight, possibly for months. Boeing executives said they had found additional stress where the wings attach to the sides of the plane. Modifications to reinforce the structure should fix the problem, Boeing said in a statement.

The Dreamliner was the fastest-selling commercial airplane in Boeing history. The Dreamliner program is now two years behind schedule, the latest setback in a program considered crucial to the planemaker's future. "Already, the delays have cost Boeing millions of dollars in penalties and concessions to customers," the Wall Street Journal reports.

Additional delays could provide "more breathing room for rival Airbus, whose ultramodern A350 is years behind the 787 in development," the New York Times says. Although Airbus has some 500 orders, the first delivery is not expected until mid-2013.

Energy Dept. Announces Fuel-Efficiency Loans to Automakers
"Obama administration officials fanned out across Metro Detroit on Tuesday, offering $59 million in federal money, advice about jobs and a vision for the future in the wake of General Motors Corp.'s bankruptcy filing," the Detroit News reported last week.

The U.S. Department of Energy on Tuesday said it will loan $5.9 billion to Ford Motor Co. and $1.6 billion to Japanese automaker Nissan to invest in improving the fuel economy of their U.S.-built vehicles, officials said last week. Another $465 million will be loaned to electric sports-car maker Tesla Motors. The loans are the first awarded out of a $25 billion program to help the automakers meet new fuel-efficiency standards of at least 35 mpg by 2020, a 40 percent increase over current standards.

The loans to Ford will help the company upgrade factories in Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri and Ohio to produce 13 fuel-efficient vehicles. Ford had been seeking about $5 billion in loans by 2011 and a total of $11 billion from the program to invest $14 billion in advanced technologies over seven years.

Nissan will receive $1.6 billion to retool its plant in Smyrna, Tenn., to build advanced vehicles and build a battery manufacturing facility.

Tesla will use $365 million for production engineering and the assembly of an all-electric vehicle that is expected to travel up to 300 miles per charge and begin selling in 2011. It will use $100 million for a powertrain manufacturing plant expected to employ 650 workers.

A significant portion of the program will also help suppliers. "Dozens of auto companies, suppliers and battery makers have sought a total of $38 billion from the loan program, which was created last year to provide low-interest loans to car companies and suppliers to retool their facilities to develop green vehicles and components such as advanced batteries," according to the Associated Press.

Agence France-Presse reports: "Additional loans will be awarded to 'large and small automobile manufacturers and parts suppliers up and down the production chain' over the coming months, said [Energy Secretary Steven Chu], who vowed to release the funds as quickly as possible."

Meanwhile, the White House is creating a Council on Automotive Communities and Workers, an inter-agency council charged with working "to address the issues facing the automotive industry and protect the hardest-hit communities and workers." The panel will be headed by so-called "car czar" Ed Montgomery.

House Passes 'Historic' Cap-and-Trade Bill
In what is being called an historic vote, the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday approved a sweeping energy bill that would set tough new greenhouse-gas emissions standards for U.S. companies and mandate more use of renewable energy sources.

At the heart of the American Clean Energy and Security Act is a "cap-and-trade" system for limiting emissions in which companies would buy and sell permits to meet emissions limits.

The 219-212 vote marked "the first time that either house of Congress has approved a bill aimed at curbing the heat-trapping gases scientists have linked to climate change," the New York Times said. For better or worse, it "could lead to sweeping changes in many sectors of the American economy, including electric power generation, agriculture, manufacturing and construction."

"The Senate is expected to write its own version of the legislation before it can be passed to President Obama, who is actively promoting the policies to put the U.S. into a clean energy economy path," the International Business Times reports.

• Crowded Cinemas — Box-office sales increased in the last five recessions and, in the first quarter of 2009, jumped 9 percent from last year. Do fewer people in a movie theater equal better times or merely a season of bad flicks?
• Romance Novel Sales — Uplifting stories and low prices make these an inexpensive form of entertainment, and sales of these boom during tough times. Will Fabio's popularity fade when the economy starts looking up?
• Dry Cleaning Pick-ups — People visit dry cleaners less, and when they do, they delay picking up their clothes to avoid the bills. Will the International Drycleaning and Laundry Institute's 5,000 members start cleaning up again or will the recession leave them high and dry?

Do you notice things in the everyday that help you assess the economy? Share in the comments section. For more "quirky indicators," go HERE.

Honey, I Shrunk the... Quarter
Hackerbot labs built a device that uses electromagnetic forming to shrink quarters down to the size of a dime.

The folks at Hackerbot labs create a magnetic field by passing current through a coil of wire. The coin's magnetic field and the coil's magnetic field repel each other, creating a force powerful enough to overcome the strength of the metal. This causes the coil to expand out and explode and the coin pushed in and shrunk. The electromagnetic pulse shrinks the quarter in about 30 microseconds.

Intellectual Ventures captured the process with a high-speed camera:

Check out Intellectual Ventures' blog second video for the coin-shrinking process in slow motion.

Spot the Satellite
For those who live in North America and Europe, now through July is prime time for satellite spotting. There are several hundred man-made satellites that are large enough to be spotted by the unaided eye, Space.com says. Due to Earth's positioning in the summer, low-Earth-orbit satellites 100-400 miles above the Earth's surface can remain illuminated by the sun throughout the night, making them easier to see.

The International Space Station (ISS) is the largest and brightest of these satellites and can appear to move as fast as a jet airliner. It's so bright that astrophotographer Ralf Vandervergh was able to capture it using a digital camera (last item). The ISS circles the earth every 90 minutes so you can see it several times a night.

For schedules of when particular satellites will be passing by your area, check out Chris Peat's Heavens Above, Science@NASA's J-Pass, NASA's SkyWatch and Spaceweather.com.

Robot Furniture Eats Pests
English designer James Auger created domestic robots that are powered by "eating" pests. Along with telling time or lighting a room, these robotic furniture process pests through their internal microbial fuel cell. The flesh-eating robotic furniture set includes:

• Flypaper robotic clock;
• Mouse-eating coffee table;
• Fly-stealing robot; and
• Carnivorous lampshade.

For now, the robots rely on mains power, but Auger believes they could become truly self-sufficient, New Scientist says. "If the system fails, the grid goes down and all humans die, these robots could go on living so long as the flies don't go with us," Auger muses. (Image credit: Auger-Loizeau via New Scientist)

Defy Gravity Like a "Smooth Criminal"
The late pop icon Michael Jackson was world-renowned for, among other things, his superb dance moves — most notably those that created optical illusions like the moonwalk and the gravity-defying forward lean exhibited in his "Smooth Criminal" music video.

While the moonwalk was executed strictly by the sometimes-controversial star's freakishly amazing dance skills, the forward lean needed the help of specially designed shoes.

Co-invented by Jackson, the heel of the shoe featured a V-shaped slot that hitched on to a peg on the floor. According to patent No. 5255452 documents, the shoes anchored dancers' feet on to the floor, allowing them to lean forward beyond their center of gravity and blow everyone's minds.

The shoes in action (See 7:16):

Toodles!

WTO rules generally prohibit a WTO member country from imposing restrictions on exports such as export quotas. Moreover, when China joined the WTO in December 2001, it specifically committed to not imposing duties or taxes on exports, except for limited duties on a small number of products specifically identified in an annex to China's WTO protocol of accession.

The export duties being challenged in the latest trade spat are not covered by those exceptions. The materials at issue — coke, bauxite, fluorspar, magnesium, manganese, silicon metal, silicon carbide, yellow phosphorus and zinc — are key inputs for many downstream products in the steel, aluminum and chemical sectors across the globe. China ranks as a top global producer of these materials.

The U.S. alleges that, "by limiting exports on those products through quotas, export duties, licensing and other restraints, China gives an unfair leg up to its manufacturers that use those materials," the Wall Street Journal reports (subscription required).

"For several years, China has applied export restrictions (quotas and export duties) to key raw materials of which China is the leading extractor and exporter," according to the European Commission. "These export restrictions distort competition and increase global prices, as some of these resources cannot be found elsewhere.

"Export quotas are made more restrictive every year, increasing the supply issue industry is facing," the European Commission continues. "Moreover, for many of the raw materials under export quotas, China also imposes export duties."

U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk on Tuesday called China's alleged export restraints on raw materials "a giant thumb on the scale in favor of Chinese producers." Kirk said that "China's measures appear to be part of a troubling industrial policy aimed at providing substantial competitive advantages for the Chinese industries using these inputs."

The measures could help ensure that China's economy continues to grow, "but at the risk of increasing global trade tensions at a sensitive time when more countries are resorting to administrative measures to restrict trade and the WTO has warned against protectionism," the New York Times notes. The policies also "fly in the face of China's own promises and incentives to build an economy based on domestic consumption as well as international exports." (See: Industry Leaders Address Protectionism at National Summit and U.S. Protectionist Clause Sparks Loud Protest)

Although the latest trade spat is the eighth time the U.S. has gone to the WTO over China's practices (China has filed four complaints against the U.S.), this week's trade action was the first against the Asian giant under the administration of President Barack Obama, who, leading up to his November 2008 election, campaigned for a robust trade policy against China.

"In his 2009 trade policy agenda, President Obama promised Americans that his administration, including USTR, would stand up for the rights of American workers and businesses in the rules based global trading system," Kirk said during Tuesday's press conference.

However, "after a surprise attack on China over its currency policy in the early days after Obama became president in January, his administration was seen by some groups to have become soft with Beijing on trade issues," Agence France-Presse says.

Immediately following Tuesday's formal filing, the United Steelworkers union, the American Iron and Steel Institute and three other steel industry organizations, whose workers and member companies represent all of America's steel-making capacity, commended the Obama administration's complaints against China, saying removal of current "barriers" would improve the ability of U.S. manufacturers to compete with Chinese producers on a more level "playing field."

Likewise, Frank Vargo, vice president for international economic affairs at the National Association of Manufacturers, expressed strong support of the administration's complaints against China over export restraints of raw materials. "China's export restriction of nine key raw materials has distorted trade and caused economic injury to NAM members," Vargo said in a statement. "In our view, this is a clear violation of commitments China made when joining the WTO."

For two years, U.S. officials tried to persuade China to abandon the export limits on the materials at issue, but "the decision to bring the protest to the WTO comes as manufacturers suffer from the recession," the Financial Times says (subscription required).

"It is regrettable that China did not resolve this issue during the extensive bilateral discussions that preceded this filing," Vargo commented.

Under WTO rules, Tuesday's coordinated complaints formally request WTO consultations. If this does not lead to a sudden settlement, the U.S. can ask the WTO in 60 days to convene a dispute panel. The WTO process, including a panel report and any Appellate Body ruling, takes approximately one year.

Recent/Related: China Accused of Steel Dumping

Resources

United States Files WTO Case Against China Over Export Restraints on Raw Materials
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, June 23, 2009

Ambassador Kirk Announces WTO Case Against China Over Export Restraints on Raw Materials
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative Blog, June 23, 2009

Factsheet: WTO Case Challenging China's Export Restraints on Raw Material Inputs
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, June 23, 2009

EU Requests WTO Consultations with China Over Export Restrictions on Raw Materials
European Commission, June 23, 2009

Factsheet: EU Requests WTO Consultations on Chinese Export Restrictions on Raw Materials
European Commission, June 23, 2009

U.S., Europe File Trade Complaint Against China (subscription required)
by Brian Blackstone
The Wall Street Journal, June 24, 2009

As China Stirs Economy, Some See Protectionism
by Keith Bradsher
The New York Times, Jun e 23, 2009

Obama Takes First Trade Action on China
by P. Parameswaran
Agence France-Presse, June 24, 2009

American Steel Industry Supports New WTO Case Against China
The American Steel Institute, the Committee on Pipe and Tube Imports, the Steel Manufacturers Association, the Specialty Steel Institute of North America and the United Steelworkers, June 23, 2009

NAM Supports Administration's WTO Case Against China
The National Association of Manufacturers, June 23, 2009

US Lodges WTO Case in China Dispute (subscription required)
by Tom Braithwaite, Joshua Chaffin and Kathrin Hille
Financial Times, June 24 2009

The new standards require an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 mpg in 2016, as noted in a statement issued by the White House. The new fuel efficiency policy is projected to save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the life of the program, with a fuel economy gain of more than 5 percent annually.

"A clear and uniform national policy is not only good news for consumers who will save money at the pump, but this policy is also good news for the auto industry which will no longer be subject to a costly patchwork of differing rules and regulations," Carol M. Browner, Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, said in a statement.

Although consumers will have to pay up to $1,300 more per vehicle by 2016, they could save about $2,800 over the life of the vehicle through better gas mileage, according to the Associated Press (via redOrbit).

The financial benefits for the former Big Three automakers are projected to be even higher.

The new University of Michigan report, titled Fixing Detroit: How Far, How Fast, How Fuel Efficient, posits that General Motors Corp., Chrysler LLC and Ford Motor Co. could gain a combined annual profit of $3 billion per year and increase sales equivalent to two large assembly plants by adding cars that achieve 35.5 mpg to 40.5 to their portfolios.

The new mandate forces them to pay closer attention to fuel efficiency when designing cars — something they failed to do in the past, it has been argued — giving consumers more options for fuel efficient vehicles, according to the study by the university's Transportation Research Institute.

"They confused people staying away from fuel-efficient, small cars as not liking fuel economy, instead of the fact that they made mediocre cars that no one wanted," Rob Kleinbaum, co-author of the study and managing director of RAK & Co., told the AP. "If GM had followed its own [consumer] research, it would likely not be in Chapter 11 (bankruptcy protection) today."

Walter McMahus, director of the automotive analysis division for the institute and co-author of the study, added that "people abandoned American-made vehicles in favor of fuel-efficient Japanese models, leading to the downturn of all three automakers."

With the new fuel efficiency policy, the Detroit automakers have a chance to catch up, the study says. By increasing their cars' fuel economies by 30 percent to 50 percent (35 mpg to 40.4 mpg), their combined annual profits would increase by approximately $3 billion. In comparison, Japanese automakers are projected to gain less due to different starting points, according to the report's models on the impact of fuel economy standard increases.

Additionally, whereas GM, Chrysler and Ford stand to gain the most profits by pursuing more aggressive fuel economy, Japanese automakers are forecast to have the smallest gains by pursuing a 50 percent increase in fuel efficiency. "At 50 percent increase, the Japanese industry loses sales while the domestics continue to gain," the report continues.

The report also includes a sensitivity analysis on the models' results. Assessing the 11 factors used to predict the models' outcomes, McMahus and Kleinbaun, both former GM employees, found that only three factors could generate a drop in Detroit Three profits: low consumer response to fuel costs relative to vehicle prices; gasoline prices at $1.50 per gallon; and direct manufacturing costs that are 2.2 times the cost estimates used.

However, the chances for losses rather than gains in profits are low, the report authors say. There is a 7 percent chance the profits would be less than zero if the fuel standards were increased 30 percent and a 15 percent chance if it were upped 50 percent.

While it's apparent that higher fuel efficiencies also increase the risk for losses, the opportunity for gains also becomes greater. The chance that increased profits could exceed $6 billion is 18 percent for a 50 percent increase in fuel economy, but only 6 percent for a 30 percent increase, the report adds.

For automakers to see improvements, they must make deep cultural changes within the organization. "They need to change the fundamental belief and values of the company that led them into this mess in the first place," Klienbaum told the AP.

The Univ. of Michigan Transportation Research Institute report offers the following suggestions for Ford, GM and Chrysler:

• Implement broad, deep, fast change;
• Replace the management team;
• Change company culture; and
• Build a range of excellent products.

This new report builds on the findings the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute published in 2005, predicting that the Detroit Three stood to lose billions in the event of an oil spike, an announcement of the new report adds. The earlier findings predicted that gas prices at more than $3 per gallon could lead to combined profit losses of $7 billion to $11 billion.

By the time gas prices soared to more than $4 per gallon last summer, Ford and GM had combined losses of more than $57.2 billion. Through the first quarter of 2009, their cumulative operations losses since 2004 totaled $83.6 billion and lost 14.2 points of market share.

What do you think? Does this report hold weight?

Resources

Fixing Detroit: How Far, How Fast, How Fuel Efficient
by Walter McManus and Dr. Rob Kleinbaum
University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, June 2009

Report: US Automakers to Gain on New Gas Mandates
The Associated Press, June 22, 2009

Update: Fixing Detroit: How Far, How Fast, How Fuel Efficient?
PR Newswire, June 22, 2009

President Obama Announces National Fuel Efficiency Policy
The White House, May 19, 2009

Obama Mandate Requires Higher Auto Fuel Efficiency
redOrbit, May 20, 2009

A positive corporate culture may express itself through happy and secure employees in a friendly environment, while a negative one may be characterized by overworked employees or ill-defined team roles. Regardless of the specifics, culture can usually be found in a company's overall philosophy and how it reflects on workplace dynamics.

On a day-to-day level, corporate culture dictates the dress code, hours worked, employee training, on-site perks, interactions among workers and management, the arrangement of the work space and the general impression of being in a hostile or welcoming environment.

But the final impact of organizational culture is on more than just employee satisfaction; it can also be seen in the bottom-line. According to a study by McKinsey & Co., cultural factors accounted for more than 70 percent of the obstacles that prevent a business from reaching its performance improvement goals. Thirty-three percent of barriers involved management behavior that does not support change and 39 percent were due to a culture of employee reluctance to accept innovation.

"Competitors can quickly mimic a successful strategy. What they cannot reproduce quickly is a superior performance culture," the study asserts.

There is a reason the same set of companies regularly appears among Fortune's 100 Best Companies to Work For, as well as ranking among the best providers of customer service and topping profitability standings — a positive corporate culture elevates standards across the board.

As James Heskett and Earl Sasser, authors of The Ownership Quotient, told Harvard Business School, an organization with a clearly codified corporate culture can expect the following labor benefits:

• Become better places to work;
• Become well known among prospective employees.
• High level of ownership (e.g., referral rates and ideas for improving the business from existing employees);
• Simplified screening process, as employees tend to refer similar-minded acquaintances;
• Larger pool of prospective employees; and
• Effective hiring process with fewer mismatches.

So how can a business figure out its corporate culture?

Evaluate Your Corporate Culture
Corporate culture depends on many factors outside a mission statement or business model.

"Too many organizations assume they know what their culture is. Often they think that it can be summed up in a slogan, like: 'We have a culture of innovation' or 'We're an action-based culture.' Others assume their values statement adequately represents their unique culture," Ethikos, a corporate ethics and compliance journal, states.

In fact, it's better to favor opinions from personnel at each level of the organization's infrastructure over mission statements or preconceived branding notions.

Ethikos explains: "Your existing corporate culture is largely conveyed from one generation of employees to the next through corporate stories and the informal systems that convey values over time. You need to explore these stories and informal systems."

A culture assessment typically involves formal and informal interviews, focus groups, surveys and observational analysis. About.com: Human Resources guide Susan Heathfield also recommends taking a "culture walk" around the building to see how space is allocated, how common areas are used and the way people interact.

In interviews, focus groups or surveys, Heathfield suggests focusing on the following questions:

• What would you tell a friend about your organization if he or she was about to start working here?
• What is the one thing you would most like to change about this organization?
• Who is a hero around here? Why?
• What is your favorite characteristic that is present in your company?
• What kinds of people fail in your organization?
• What is your favorite question to ask a candidate for a job in your company?

Communication between members of a group when answering these questions can reveal a lot about workplace dynamics. Similar details can also be found in the way people eat lunch (i.e. does management dine with employees?), in the protocol for meetings, the way people dress or even how office parties are thrown.

If It's Broken, Fix It
The effects of a negative corporate culture extend far beyond a bad meeting. They can result in pervasive communication problems among coworkers and management, a disheartening work environment and an overall lack of commitment to work objectives. This degrades a company's ability to address problems, ultimately hurting customer loyalty and sales.

Companies with cultures that have proven successful, such as Southwest Airlines with its upbeat approach to flying or Google with its reputation for openness and creativity, can serve as examples of the power of positive culture. But these approaches shouldn't serve as templates. Each company has a unique culture, and careful assessment can help you identify the areas that need improvement as well as the particular strategy that would work for your firm.

Inc.com offers the following suggestions for improving corporate culture:

• Be committed for the long term;
• Take an interest in your employees;
• Have open communication between the company and employees;
• Create a team spirit; and
• Create a livable work environment that balances work and life.

Perseverance is the central tenet of corporate cultural improvement. Temporary measures can't produce the generational effect needed for a new workplace culture, which depends on organizational memory and the ongoing transmission of ideas.

An optimistic and productive corporate culture can allow a company to reap major benefits, and perhaps most important, it perpetuates itself by attracting the best talent. Given the option between coming to an open and engaging workplace every day or merely showing up for a job, which would you choose?

Resources

How Do I Create a Distinctive Performance Culture?
McKinsey & Company

100 Best Companies to Work For
Fortune, Feb. 2, 2009

How Corporate Culture Makes Shareholders Rich
by Selena Maranjian
The Motley Fool, May 19, 2009

10 Reasons to Design a Better Corporate Culture
James L. Heskett, W. Earl Sasser and Joe Wheeler
Harvard Business School Working Knowledge, Dec. 22, 2008

Assessing Corporate Culture
by Ed Petry
Ethikos, March/April 2005

How to Understand Your Current Culture
by Susan M. Heathfield
About.com: Human Resources

We Weren't Just Airborne Yesterday
Southwest Airlines, 2009

The Google Culture
Google, 2009

Mid-2009 Check-in: How's Your Company Doing?
by Nancy Mobley
Inc.com, June 5, 2009

However, less than one-third of workers are willing to go without benefits, and the rest expect at least some employer funding for benefits like health insurance, the report notes. Not only does this challenge employers to come up with a suitable benefits plan, but it could also be the difference in attracting and retaining top talent.

So what are business owners doing to create a desirable benefits package for employees without compromising their bottom lines?

Some are turning to voluntary benefits to make up for the limits in their benefits programs. "For many, adding voluntary benefits to compensate for cutbacks elsewhere in a benefits package or to enrich an existing core benefits plan — particularly one with a high deductible — makes more sense than making cuts in critical areas of a business, laying off key employees or losing them to a competitor with a richer benefits package," Entrepreneur Magazine explains.

Instead of including disability insurance, life insurance, dental insurance and other benefits in their core benefits programs, employers — particularly small-business owners — have begun offering them on a voluntary basis. Employees can then pick and choose which benefits they can afford and which they can do without.

"Not only does offering voluntary benefits cost small employers virtually nothing and help level the benefits playing field with large companies, it also affords employees access to various types of insurance coverage," Entrepreneur Magazine adds.

According to Eastbridge Consulting Group, voluntary benefits are becoming more popular as employers look for ways to scale back costs. By 2008, voluntary benefits was a $4.4 billion-a-year market with significant potential for growth, Health Plan Week reports. More than half of employers now offer at least one voluntary benefit, and in companies with more than 100 employees, that figure jumps to 70 percent. In businesses with at least 10 employees, 65 percent of the workforce is covered by at least one voluntary benefit "product."

Voluntary benefits range from low-premium medical benefits to non-health-related policies, such as life, accident, home, auto and pet insurance. These can also include non-traditional benefits such as shopping discounts, identity-theft protection and legal services.

Although employees pay for at least half, or more typically all, of these benefits out of their own pockets, a voluntary benefits program gives them access to benefits they would normally be unable to afford, the Wall Street Journal notes.

"These programs are attractive to employees because they typically can get institutional pricing when they buy these products through their employer, and, in the case of insurance policies, group underwriting rules that provide some level of guaranteed issuance," William Mullaney, president of institutional business for MetLife Inc., told the Journal. "Plus, they can pay for it through the convenience of payroll deductions, which employees like a lot."

According to Entrepreneur Magazine, the most popular and cost-effective voluntary policies are:

• Short- and long-term disability insurance;
• Life insurance;
• Dental insurance;
• Supplemental limited-benefits plans;
• Gap insurance policies; and
• Supplemental accident and critical illness insurance.

Employers like voluntary benefits because they allow them to increase benefits offerings to employees without spending any or much money, Michael Carter, vice president of the Hay Group's benefits practice, told HR Wire (via Jim Mooradian and Associates, Inc.). And the payback for a small monetary investment has been great. Prudential Financial's 2008 study on employee benefits found that two in five companies offering voluntary benefits claimed to have had a positive impact on their employees' overall benefits satisfaction, HR Wire says.

Still, there are drawbacks to implementing a voluntary benefits program. It requires additional time and investment and can damage how employees see the company if the program is rolled out without their input. "If you have low participation, it hurts more than it helps," according to Carter. "Employees perceive what was given as not having a lot of value if no one uses it." Thus, employers should first find out which benefits are in demand through employee focus groups or surveys.

Once the employer knows which benefits they should offer, they have to select a provider from a range of widely different vendors. "Be aware of these differences and make sure that the insurance company has strong financial ratings, has a good history of working with employers of your size and industry, and provides support to your [human resources], benefits and payroll departments after the initial sale," Employee Benefit News (EBN) cautions. While the vetting process can be done in-house, there are firms that can do this process for companies.

After the vendors and benefits are chosen, employers must also devote resources to communicate how the voluntary benefits work, HR Wire notes. "All employees should understand what is actually covered," EBN says. "A good employee communication plan, with real-world examples and case studies, is critical for employee understanding."

Lastly, gather feedback from participants and nonparticipants to gauge any weaknesses in the program so that it can be improved for the benefit of the entire company.

While they are a good way to expand benefits offerings, voluntary benefits should not be used as a replacement for core medical, life or disability programs, EBN warns.

Resources

The Value of Voluntary Benefits
by David Port
Entrepreneur Magazine, April 22, 2009

Voluntary Benefits 101
by Elizabeth Wilson
Entrepreneur Magazine, March 31, 2009

Voluntary Benefits Become More Popular as Employers Scale Back on Health Benefits
Health Plan Week, September 2008

New Thinking in Employee Health Care (page 4 or A14)
by Randy Myers
The Wall Street Journal, April 22, 2008

Study of Employee Benefits: 2008 & Beyond
Prudential Financial, Inc., Sept. 24, 2008

10 Tips for Success with Voluntary Benefits
by Patrick J. Haraden
Employee Benefit News, June 15, 2009

We all have our pet peeves. Do you see yourself in any of these?

(Disclosure: The author of this post is guilty of at least two three of the following workplace transgressions.)

The Forgetful Borrower
This person borrows staplers, highlighters, tape and other things from others' desks and forgets to return them. Worse, he or she may not even ask to borrow them.

The Slacker
There always seems to be one team member who is content to let everyone else do the work, but is always there to take the credit. Nothing motivates a team more than seeing someone loudly and publicly praised for a halfhearted effort. Part of the joy of teamwork.

The Martyr
"Doesn't anyone else work around here?" "If I don't complain, no one will know how much I'm doing!" "No one understands me anyway, so why bother?" These are just a few common "martyr-isms" as explained by career expert Nicole Williams. Don't be that coworker.

The Passive-Aggressor
Though not openly complaining that someone else isn't working as much, The Passive-Aggressor still can't resist mentioning how late he or she stayed last night or commenting on his or her "insane" amount of work. The Passive-Aggressor may also leave vaguely threatening notes on the office fridge or in the bathroom.

The Drama Queen/King
"The term 'drama queen,' or less frequently, 'drama king' is usually applied to someone with a demanding or overbearing personality who tends to overreact to seemingly minor incidents," WiseGeek explains. "Psychologists might describe a drama queen or king as a neurotic personality with histrionic tendencies, meaning they tend to become needlessly dramatic whenever order is disrupted." Needless to say: not fun to work with.

The Indiscriminate E-mailer
Whether it's a document relevant only to a few people in the department or yet another "hilariously cute photo" of his or her cat sticking its head out of a box, The Indiscriminate E-mailer doesn't consider how necessary the message is before CC-ing everyone in the company or forwarding it to coworkers.

The Suck-up
The Suck-up can't wait to find a new way to be recognized by the boss. This coworker is always there to remind the boss just how wonderful he or she is, even if it's at the expense of others. There is a fine line between "playing the game" and brown-nosing.

The Know-It-All
There are at least two variations of this workplace character, according to Lynne Eisaguirre's book Stop Pissing Me Off!: The Detail-Oriented Know-it-All, who relishes pointing out minutiae while missing the whole point; and The Fixer Know-it-All, who "insists on solving your problems for you, even if you don't want them solved, or, in fact, don't think you have a problem at all."

The Gossiper
The Gossiper always seems to have the dirt on colleagues in the never-ending shuffle of staff — and thrives on sharing this information. In a Randstad USA survey of nearly 2,500 workers, gossip was listed as the No. 1 biggest pet peeve in the office for 60 percent of respondents.

The Noisemaker
This coworker is oblivious to how he or she is interrupting officemates' focus with various sounds: whistling, singing, humming, knuckle cracking, cell phones not set to vibrate, speakerphone conversations, music without headphones. . . and then there's the food crunching and lip smackage of chips, carrots, apples, granola bars and gum, etc.

The Nose Offender
Under-deodorized or over-perfumed, this coworker doesn't make it easy to approach. In the aforementioned Randstad survey, 42 percent of staffers reported they were sick of inhaling their coworkers' perfumes, colognes, stinky foods and tobacco stench (Top Pet Peeve No. 4).

The Buzzwordsmith
Robert Half International/Yahoo! Hotjobs puts it best: "Whether speaking or writing, this person sacrifices clarity in favor of showcasing an expansive vocabulary of clichéd and often meaningless business terms. This ineffective communicator loves to 'utilize' — never just 'use' — industry-specific jargon and obscure acronyms that muddle messages." Though it does make for fun during meetings.

The Complainer
No matter how good things are, there is bound to be something to complain about in this coworker's mind. This disgruntled employee — justified or not — is a drag to work with. Worse, chronic complaining is a contagious habit, which can result in a highly negative working environment.

Noticeably absent from this list are the workplace jerk and bully, who are more than simply irritating — their behavior sucks the energy out of a group, creating a toxic vacuum of hostile or empty effort.

For more on coworkers who exhibit these behaviors and how to deal with them, check out CareerBuilder (1 and 2), Small Business Online Community, Chiff.com, BusinessWeek and LifeScript.

Your turn: What office behaviors do you find irritating?

Related

Traits of a Bad Boss

Desk Rage On the Rise

From the Playground to the Boardroom: Workplace Bullies

How to Make the Workplace Insufferable

Office Politics: Playing the Game with Dignity

The Civilized Workplace: No Jerks Allowed

Top 10 Workplace Stresses and Irritations

Instead, many companies are turning to employee redeployment to decrease costs and minimize layoffs. By shuffling employees and redefining their roles, companies also have had the benefit of sustaining a somewhat higher company morale than if they laid more people off, the Boston Globe reports. Additionally, redeployment has enabled some companies to fill key positions that can't be left vacant despite the downturn, as well as jobs that became available because of changes in demand.

According to the Boston Globe, human resources executives say there's not enough data to determine if redeployment is a growing trend, but John Challenger, CEO of outsourcing consulting firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc., said more clients are talking about shifting workers' jobs.

Suzanne M. Bump, Massachusetts' Secretary of Labor and Workforce Development, also told the Boston Globe that she expects worker redeployment to rise because of the increasing cost of recruiting and training new employees. This process usually costs 20 percent to 40 percent of a new employee's salary, the Boston Globe notes.

Typically, unless there are specific pre-agreed-upon roles or if the employees are part of a union with a collective bargaining agreement, employers can change their workers' responsibilities as they see appropriate, the Boston Globe's JobDoc explains.

Despite having a grasp on company culture, redeployed employees must adjust to their new roles and perhaps new coworkers. If you've recently been moved to a new post within your organization, here are a few recommendations for how to adjust to your somewhat new surroundings.

Clarify New Responsibilities
Discuss with your new manager your responsibilities and how they fit into the grand scheme of things, Advertising & Marketing Review (AMR) advises. Check back with him or her three to four weeks into your new position to ensure you're on the right track. It's important that you and your supervisor be on the same page about your objectives and the expectations that come with your new role.

Create the Working Environment You Want
Along with having clear expectations about your role, you should also ensure you have the boss/worker relationship you want. "Get specific about the working relationship you'd like to create, defining a vision statement for your work environment," the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune says. "Use this to keep yourself on track with your new boss. ... Be ready to tell her more about yourself so that she'll be able to work effectively with you, too."

In the same regard, find out his or her management style. See if he or she prefers e-mail or instant message, how reports should be provided and how day-to-day issues should be handled. "Enter your new working relationship with a spirit of partnership," the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune notes. "It'll help your new boss and get you off on the right foot."

Be Observant and Open
Spend a couple weeks studying how the new people you work with perform. "Notice whether your colleagues or manager accept calls or respond to e-mail from home," AMR says. "[D]o people leave for lunch or do they eat at their desks? When do colleagues arrive at work and when do they depart? Adopt these unwritten company rules as your own."

Pay attention to how people act during meetings to get a feel for how the group functions. For example, if you moved from a team that was loud to a team that is more reserved, shouting out ideas during meetings may result in negative attention.

Another way to figure out how things work in your new department is to get to know the people on your team, especially those you'll need to rely on heavily, AMR adds. "[B]e friendly with your colleagues. Take time to chat in the copy room. ... Ask senior colleagues for input ... get to know people, and let them know you," Reassigned Time blog says.

This will allow you to develop relationships with people whose support you'll eventually need and who will need your support as well.

Don't Forget Your Old Department
Don't forget about the coworkers you leave behind, public relations specialist Robert Peek writes of his intra-office move. Offer those you are leaving behind some tips and tricks if they have to assume some or all of your duties, but don't continually go back to your old department to check up on how they're coping without you. Instead, avail yourself if they need your help.

Additionally, transferred employees should introduce key coworkers from their old department to the new one to facilitate relationships, share best practices and mistakes to avoid, the Atlanta-Journal Constitution says. "Relationships are a person's best asset," the Atlanta-Journal Constitution continues. "They transcend across time, geography and functions and roles. They are enormous enablers to getting things done."

Don't Be a Doormat
This goes for both your old and new department. It may be that you want to say "yes" to everything your new role is thrown, but being a good colleague does not equal being a doormat, Reassigned Time blog insists. "Always first think about the request and then give a response after a 24-hour thinking period — you will thank yourself later." The same goes for your old department requesting your help.

Change is not usually an easy thing, especially if it was thrust upon you. However, with open communication and an open mind, transitioning and adapting to a new environment should be easier.

Resources

New Job, Same Company
by Nicole C. Wong
The Boston Globe, March 20, 2009

Changing Jobs at Company's Request
Posted by Pattie Hunt Sinacole
The Boston Globe's JobDoc, Feb. 2, 2009

Culture Clash: Fitting In at a New Job
by Eric Kimble
Advertising & Marketing Review

Seamless Transitions
by Laura Raines
Atlanta-Journal Constitution

Same Old Job, But a New Boss: How Can You Adjust?
by Liz Reyer
Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, May 24, 2009

Same Company; New Job? How to Do it Right.
by Robert Peek
Robert Peek's Blog, July 11, 2008

So You're about to Start a Job with a 4-4 Load
Reassigned Time blog, May 29, 2009

But working from home also has its share of pitfalls. One of the oft-overlooked benefits of working in cubicle land is that it provides structure. You come in for a certain number of hours, get your work done and go home.

You lose that structure when you work at home. You can easily get distracted by personal issues during work time or your "work life" bleeds into your "home life." As with a typical office job, people need to balance work time and personal time and not let work invade their home and vice versa.

Here are some tips to keep "home life" and "work life" separate, even when they exist in the same place.

Make Boundaries
Set physical and mental boundaries. "Confine your business activities to a certain area of the house, preferably a room that is exclusively used by you as your place of work," advises A Home-Based Business Online (AHBBO). "The advantage of a room as opposed to an unused corner of the living room is that when work is done for the day you can literally and symbolically shut the door on it."

Dress for work and set working hours. These don't have to be normal working hours, nor do they need to be the same every day, but having office hours will let your family know when you're working and it allows you to schedule in family time as well, Lynn Truong, author and managing editor at WiseBread.com, writes at entrepreneurship blog JonathanFields.com.

Create a daily schedule that takes into consideration other obligations you may have, Buzzle.com recommends. Set parameters for personal tasks and don't do chores during work hours as you'll just as easily take home time to do work stuff, Truong notes. Plan a start time, a lunch time and a time to end your day.

Finally, remember to schedule personal days and vacations, and make sure you take them, AHBBO adds.

Have a Separate Communications System
Life coach Lucy Beal offered the following suggestions in an interview with KSEE 24 News:

• Install separate phone lines;
• Use separate voicemail;
• Forward calls to your cell phone if you're not home;
• Install a separate fax line;
• Consider using a P.O. Box for business post;
• Create a business e-mail and instant messenger account; and
• Consider making a separate business profile on your computer.

Having a separate communications system in place helps prevent your kids (or other people you live with) from picking up business calls, and has the added benefit of keeping you organized.

Stay Organized
Unlike the office where there may be plenty of room for filing and possibly administrative assistants to do the filing for you, you'll have to file all your business materials yourself or, if you can afford one, hire an assistant. If not, you may be able to get help from friends and family who are willing to volunteer their time, Buzzle.com says.

Either way, filing needs to get done during office hours. "It's amazing how much paperwork and stuff can pile up in your office," Truong muses. "If it gets out of hand, you'll be tempted to use off office hours (because you're too busy during) to tidy up."

Minimize Distractions
If you have school-age children, consider scheduling work time to coincide with their school time, AHBBO advises. And if the kids get home before your work day is done, instill in them that your work time is your time and that they'll have to wait until you "get home" before they can get your undivided attention.

For younger children, consider setting up childcare outside the house a few days a week, writes Alyssa Gregory, home-based business owner of virtual assistant firm avertura, LLC, at SitePoint's Web Pro Business blog. Having the kids outside the house lets you have dedicated time to work without worrying about the children.

"[W]orking from home does not have to mean turning your home to a place of work," AHBBO notes. "By practising these simple disciplines day-in and day-out you can be sure that even though you are taking care of business, you are also taking care of something even more important. Life."

Related: Is Telecommuting Right for You?

Resources

Working from Home: 10 Unconscious Cues to Create a Work-Life Balance
by Lynn Truong
Jonathan Fields Blog, May 18, 2009

How I Mastered the Challenges of Working from Home
by Alyssa Gregory
SitePoint's Web Pro Business blog, May 16, 2009

The Home Office - Separating Work from Pleasure
by Jennifer McLynch
Buzzle.com, June 24, 2007

Separating Work and Home (video)
Interview with Lucy Beal
KSEE 24 News

Flipping the Switch ... How to Turn Off Your Business and Turn on Your Life
by Elena Fawkner
A Home-Based Business Online, 2006

At the 10th annual Congress on the Future of Engineering Software (COFES) conference, recently hosted by Cyon Research Corporation, "Slipstreaming Innovation into the Mainstream" was this year's conference theme. As it turns out, the pace of change for new, more efficient workflows is accelerating.

Earlier this year, Microsoft presented its vision of what the future of computing and collaboration might be in 2019. "[A]nd when you apply it to 3D CAD, PLM [product lifecycle management] and all those amazing things you design, engineer and manufacture each day, the future is looking pretty dang cool," according to SolidWorks-centric online community SolidSmack.com.

Among the ideas for design/engineering highlighted in Microsoft's "Future Vision Montage" and, in particular, "Manufacturing Future Vision" videos:

• Real-time language translation;
• Multi-touch surfaces;
• Remote collaboration;
• Cross-device content sharing;
• Cultural translation;
• Animated drawings;
• Natural user interfaces;
• Canvas technologies;
• Ambient displays;
• Dynamic data visualizations;
• Rich graphics platforms;
• Machine learning;
• Sensor networks; and
• Biometric security.

<a href="http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-GB&playlist=videoByUuids:uuids:5bea2f16-b173-41ee-ba2e-5ab3484b4cbb&showPlaylist=true&from=msnvideo" target="_new" title="Manufacturing Future Vision">Video: Manufacturing Future Vision</a>

Around the same time this year, during SolidWorks World 2009 in February, SolidWorks co-founder Jon Hirschtick (the company's first CEO) discussed his vision for the future of CAD. His four key points:

• Touch-screen interfaces — The process of using our hands rather than a mouse or keyboard to interact with an application is already here (think the iPhone or Wii). Expect to see design engineers using a touch-motion interface in the future. This technology may drive the CAD industry to become a hardware business as more users look for hardware designed specifically for CAD.
• Online applications — We're already using e-mail and checking our bank accounts from a browser. Although 3-D CAD probably won't become an online application any time soon, Hirschtick points out that small CAD applications, such as BluePrint Now, are already starting to come online. Before, if you were travelling and sent a DWG file to review, you would require a computer with some kind of DWG viewer/editor. BluePrint Now relaxes this requirement, giving you the ability to load and proof from anywhere.
• Video game graphics — Video games have "the very best standard-mode graphics," the quality and speed of which, it can be argued, are superior to what's found in CAD. The CAD industry has to take advantage of this technology even more in the future. Already, SolidWorks software has a feature borrowed from video game technology called "Ambient Occlusion," which enables designers to make models appear more realistic. "In the future, I think we're gonna reach a day where the things ... that pace our computing world are Internet bandwidth and gaming hardware," Hirschtick says.
• 3-D printing — 3-D printing is not a new concept, but Hirschtick's view is "if you haven't seen 3-D printing lately, you haven't seen it." Recent years have wrought great advancements in color, materials selection, speed, model quality and lower model costs. In many cases, it is possible to produce high-quality 3-D prints that are almost as good as the finished product. These improvements and falling price points for printers will help make 3-D printers even more integral in the future for CAD users' work. At the conference in Florida, attendees heard how SolidWorks customers New Balance and Sony Ericsson use 3-D printing throughout the design process. Both companies are in industries where time-to-market is essential, so technologies such as CAD and 3-D printing are crucial to their ability to introduce new designs quickly.

Technological advances not only affect the tools engineers use but also their required skills, their projects and the overall outlook of the engineering profession.

"Today, the moment you walk into a work environment, you're part of a team," Sujeet Chand, chief technology officer of Rockwell Automation, told Machine Design. "An engineer must be able to collaborate and design virtually with a team distributed all over the world. And that involves communication, which means writing reports, giving presentations, talking to others, and attending meetings.

"The burden on engineers to communicate effectively continues to grow," Chand continued. "Working with global teams presents language and culture barriers, how you talk to others, and even how you ask them to get something done."

According to Pro/E Community (registration required):

Right now, the ground is shifting around collaboration and virtual communities, according to COFES keynote presenter Chuck House of Media X at Stanford University. Companies that can take advantage of new channels of communication will be able to learn from each other, House says. This is going to become critical as companies increasingly work with each other across time zones and geographies.

"A critical reality of the CAD community is that the expertise in many fields resides in an increasingly aging population," Pro/E Community says. Fewer students pursuing the hard sciences in recent generations has resulted in "a lopsided workforce" in the United States. While companies are embracing globalization, many are examining how to keep the expertise they have at home and build on it.

"Going forward, we must view our profession as one that it is not just about the products we make today, but about the skills engineers can access around the world, and how we can best leverage that know-how to solve customer problems," Tom Stimson, vice president of business process advancement at The Timken Co., told Machine Design.

Resources

Changes in the Engineering Profession Over 80 Years
by editorial staff
Machine Design, April 7, 2009
First appeared in print as "80 Years of Engineering"

COFES 2009: Slipstreaming Innovation into the Mainstream
Congress on the Future of Engineering Software, 2009

CAD in Crisis - COFES
by Kathleen Maher, Jon Peddie Research
Pro/E Community, June 1, 009

Future Vision Montage
Microsoft Office Labs, 2009

Microsoft Office Labs Vision 2019 (montage + video)
by Long Zheng
istartedsomething.com, Feb. 28, 2009

The Fruit Bowl Future of Design and Engineering in 2019
by Josh Mings
SolidSmack, March 4, 2009

Future Vision Montage
Microsoft Office Labs / MSN Video, 2009

Manufacturing Future Vision
Microsoft Office Labs / MSN Video, 2009

SolidWorks World 2009 - Tuesday General Session with Jon Hirschtick
by Matthew West
SolidWorks Blog, Feb. 13, 2009

The Future of CAD
by Jeff Ray
TCT Magazine, June 2009

The Future of 3D CAD Interoperability
by John Alpine
The Spatial Blend, Spring 2009

CAD - The Future of Collaborative Modeling
by Oleg Shilovitsky
Daily PLM Think Tank, June 8, 2009

Additionally, "couples are not on the same page and in some cases they are not even reading the same book," said Kathleen Murphy, president of personal investing at Fidelity Investments, recently told reporters.

According to the study, couples disagreed on critical retirement decisions like where they plan to get their retirement income from. Forty-four percent disagreed on whether they would sell real estate, 42 percent didn't meet eye-to-eye on whether they would use brokerage or mutual funds, 39 percent disagreed on relying on annuity, 30 percent disagreed on whether they had company pensions and 26 percent did not agree on whether they had an individual retirement account (IRA).

Furthermore couples were also split on other key decisions: 60 percent didn't agree on retirement age; 44 percent disagreed whether they would work during retirement; and 42 percent disagreed on their expected lifestyles.

"At the very least, both need to agree on basic assumptions that impact financial planning — when they plan to retire, whether they will continue to work part time and what lifestyle they hope to maintain," Murphy said in a MarketWatch report.

One of the reasons couples disagreed so much was because they rarely discussed retirement planning. The study notes that less than half (45 percent) of the couples made decisions jointly regarding day-to-day financial decisions and even fewer (38 percent) talked about investment decisions.

"Many couples told us that they have fewer assets, will need to delay retirement and work longer, and are worried about the impact of inflation and rising healthcare costs on their retirement savings, yet they aren't talking, planning or managing their finances jointly to address these very important issues," Murphy said in a statement.

What the couples did agree on were the issues that would affect their retirement. More than half (57 percent) cited health-care expenses as the issue that concerned them most, followed by inflation's impact on savings (41 percent) and Social Security reductions (19 percent).

To alleviate these concerns, Fidelity suggests couples jointly research their health-care options, understand the Medicare application process and evaluate their need for supplemental insurance. Additionally, they should jointly review their Social Security strategy to determine when they will start taking payments.

While the average age of the couples surveyed is 55 for husbands and 54 for wives, newlyweds in their 20s and 30s should be even more conscious of how Social Security benefits (or lack thereof) will affect their retirement. According to U.S. News & World Report, the trust fund will be depleted by 2037 and beneficiaries will be able to receive only what current workers are paying in — about 75 percent of the scheduled benefits, unless changes are made.

Although there are other ways to fund retirement, the study showed that many of the couples were confused about the products and how these products worked.

For example, 39 percent of the couples didn't agree on whether they owned annuity, and less than 25 percent knew how much money their annuity will generate for them in retirement. Fifty-nine percent of couples knew they owned IRAs, but in 11 percent of these couples, one spouse did not know when the couple could begin withdrawing funds.

When it came to life insurance, 80 percent agreed that at least one of them was covered, however, 95 percent did not know how much insurance coverage they should have (seven times annual income). Once they knew, nearly half agreed they did not have enough coverage based on this rule.

And while the couples agreed that these are important issues to address, they have not developed better planning habits. Ironically, these same couples' best financial advice for the newly married is to "make all financial decisions together." Perhaps it's time they heeded their own advice.

So how can couples figure out how to save for retirement?

A separate U.S. News & World Report article lays out a simple guide for retirement planning.

1. Figure out what you're going to spend in retirement. Consider the lifestyle you want and what your risk tolerance will be now and in retirement. Factor in sources of income — pensions, Social Security, a second job and other assets.
2. Estimate how long you think you'll live and plan for longer than you think you'll be alive.
3. Aim to save 10 percent of your income while you still have kids at school. Once they're out of the house, bump that savings up to 20 percent to 25 percent.
4. Decide whether you want to retire soon or retire well. Depending on where you live, a $1 million retirement fund may not allow you to live in the comfort that you want and you'll have to work longer. Or you can decide to retire and downsize a bit.

About.com: Marriage also offers a host of financial advice for couples.

The bottom line is that couples need to be on the same page when it comes to retirement. "We recognize that every couple's situation is different ... others assessing whether they are able to retire, and some simply juggling the competing financial demands of raising a family," Murphy said. "Each of these life events has clear financial implications that couples need to jointly discuss and then agree upon a plan of action."

Resources
Fidelity Research Finds Couples Make No Progress in Joint Planning and Management of Retirement Finances...
Fidelity Investments, June 10, 2009

Honey, We Need to Talk
by Andrea Coombes
MarketWatch, June 10, 2009

Is $1 Million Enough to Retire?
by Emily Brandon
U.S. News & World Report, June 16, 2009

How to Prepare for the End of Social Security
by Kimberly Palmer
U.S. News & World Report, June 16, 2009

Financial Advice Married Couples May Not Want to Hear
by Sheir Stritof and Bob Stritof
About.com: Marriage

What do the visionary leaders, engineers, scientists and, of course, astronauts at NASA have in store?

In early 2004, President George W. Bush announced a new plan for NASA's future. The plan, dubbed the Vision for Space Exploration, proposes to return humans to the moon by 2018 and set up outposts as a potential resource for future missions.

The Space Shuttle will be retired next year and Orion will replace it by 2015; this vessel is capable of both docking with the International Space Station (ISS) and leaving Earth's orbit. The Vision for Space Exploration program proposes a permanent presence on the moon and using it as a stepping-off point for further space exploration, with Mars as the initial destination. Although the plan initially met with skepticism from Congress, in late 2004 Congress agreed to provide start-up funds for the first year's worth of the new space vision.

In December 2006, NASA outlined plans for a permanent base on the moon as part of preparation for a voyage to Mars. Construction of the base is scheduled to take about five years, with astronauts sent to the moon no later than 2020.

"We're going to provide NASA with what is needed to get human beings back to the moon and to stay there for an extended duration," Craig Tooley, project manager for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, told the Los Angeles Times last week, days before the scheduled launch of a robotic mission aimed at finding the best site for Earth's first off-world colony.

Nearly four decades after Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, the Orbiter is expected to help identify safe landing sites for future human explorers, locate potential resources, characterize the radiation environment and test new technology. Using a second spacecraft, the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite, NASA is planning to punch holes in perpetually shadowed craters — where scientists hope to find cachés of frozen water that have been hidden for billions of years — to see what comes out.

President Barack Obama's fiscal-year 2010 budget reflects the current administration's commitment to a vigorous space program. According to the budget, NASA will receive $18.7 billion combined with $1 billion provided to the agency in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. In total, this represents an increase of more than $2.4 billion from the 2008 level.

Last week, the first public meeting of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee was held at the Carnegie Institute. The NASA committee, established at the request of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), will conduct an independent review of ongoing U.S. human space flight plans and programs, as well as alternatives, to ensure the nation is pursuing the best trajectory for the future of human space flight.

The review aims to identify and characterize a range of options that spans the reasonable possibilities for continuation of U.S. human space flight activities beyond retirement of the Space Shuttle. According to the committee's statement of task, the identification and characterization of options will address: 1) expediting a new U.S. capability to support utilization of the International Space Station (ISS), 2) supporting missions to the moon and other destinations beyond low Earth orbit and 3) stimulating commercial space flight capabilities — all fitting within the current budget profile for NASA exploration activities.

Moreover, the review will consider the appropriate amounts of research and development and complementary robotic activity necessary to support various human space flight activities, as well as appropriate opportunities for international collaboration. It will also explore options for extending ISS operations beyond 2016.

In a letter asking Acting NASA Administrator Christopher Scolese to undertake the review, OSTP Director John Holdren noted that it is prudent for the Obama administration to obtain a fresh assessment of America's human space flight program given its scale and scope — especially given its importance for scientific discovery and technological innovation.

NASA's 2010 budget request, released last month, was for $18.686 billion, a five percent increase from the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act, according to the budget overview. The budget supports the goal of returning Americans to the moon and exploring other destinations. Currently the request calls for $3.963 billion for exploration compared to $3.505 in the 2009 request.

As part of the effort to develop systems to return humans to the moon, NASA will stimulate private-sector development and demonstration of vehicles that will support the agency's space flight requirements.

Hoping to spur innovation from the private sector, in 2004 NASA established a series of Centennial Challenges, technology prizes for non-government teams. The Challenges include tasks that will be useful for implementing the Vision for Space Exploration, such as building more efficient astronaut gloves.

The pursuit of discovery half a century ago fueled our prosperity and our success as a nation in the half century that followed . . . "For the benefit of all."

Earlier

Things to Do on the Moon

The Right Stuff

Sweepstakes Science: Prizes for Breakthroughs

Resources

50 years, 50 Giant Leaps: How NASA Rocked our World
The Independent, July 29, 2008

The Vision for Space Exploration
NASA, February 2005

NASA Unveils Global Exploration Strategy and Lunar Architecture
NASA, Dec. 4, 2006

NASA's Mission: Can We Live on the Moon?
by John Johnson Jr.
L.A. Times, June 13, 2009

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration 2010 Budget
White House Office of Management and Budget

Letter from OSTP Requesting Review
Office of Science and Technology Policy, May 7, 2009

U.S. Announces Review of Human Space Flight Plans
Office of Science and Technology Policy, May 7, 2009

Human Space Flight Review Statement of Task
NASA, 2009

FY 2010 Budget Request
NASA, May 7, 2009

Message from the NASA Administrator
by Michael D. Griffin
50th Magazine (NASA), Feb. 22, 2008

Future of Spaceflight
National Geographic

Hardcover, 336pp
Broadway Books, May 2009
ISBN-13: 9780385521338

Online price: $20
Buy at B&N now.







SYNOPSIS
Disregard the myth of the lone professional "superman" and the rest of our culture's go-it alone mentality. The real path to success in your work and in your life is through creating an inner circle of "lifeline relationships" — deep, close relationships with a few key trusted individuals who will offer the encouragement, feedback, and generous mutual support every one of us needs to reach our full potential. Whether your dream is to lead a company, be a top producer in your field, overcome the self-destructive habits that hold you back, lose weight or make a difference in the larger world, Who's Got Your Back will give you the roadmap you've been looking for to achieve the success you deserve.

Keith Ferrazzi, the renowned consultant and bestselling author of Never Eat Alone, shows us that becoming a winner in any field of endeavor requires a trusted team of advisers who can offer guidance and help to hold us accountable to achieving our goals. It is the reason Ph.D. candidates have adviser teams, top executives have boards, world-class athletes have fitness coaches and presidents have cabinets.

In this step-by-step guide to the powerful principles behind personal growth and change, you'll learn how to:

• Master the mindsets that will help you to build deeper, more trusting "lifeline relationships"
• Overcome the career-crippling habits that hold you back, once and for all
• Get further, faster by setting goals in a dramatically more powerful way
• Use "sparring" as a productive tool to make the decisions that will fuel personal success
• Replace the yes men in your life with those who get it and care — and will hold you accountable to achieving your goals
• Lower your guard and let others help!

None of us can do it alone. We need the perspective and advice of a trusted team. And in Who's Got Your Back, Keith Ferrazzi shows us how to put our own "dream team" together.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Keith Ferrazzi, CEO of Ferrazzi Greenlight, has counseled the world's top enterprises on how to dramatically accelerate the development of business relationships to drive sales, spark innovation, and create team cohesion. As a thought leader and advocate for corporate citizenship, he has rallied executives around initiatives to improve health care and education nationwide. Ferrazzi has been published in The Wall Street Journal, Harvard Business Review, Inc. and Fast Company, and has appeared on "Today" and other national TV programs. His previous book, Never Eat Alone, is a national bestseller. He lives in Los Angeles, Calif.

WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING

"Ferrazzi points out that a seismic shift is underway, we are moving from isolation and corporate silos to community and collaboration. This book is a roadmap for success in the new world, conveyed with emotion and wit." -Devin Wenig, CEO, Thomson Reuters Markets

"I am not a big reader of self help books, but this is refreshingly simple. Not the simple found in clichés but the elegant simplicity and useful voice of experience." -Seth Waugh, CEO of Deutsche Bank Americas

"After reading Keith Ferrazzi's Who's Got Your Back, you will not only be inspired to make change happen in your life, but you will be able to make it stick!" -Bill Novelli, CEO of AARP

"Who's Got Your Back is more than a 'self-help' book. It's the first 'let others help' book. If you're serious about your success, listen to Ferrazzi and build your support circle today." -Daniel H. Pink, author of A Whole New Mind

"Get ready to read a book that will strengthen every one of your closest relationships. If you haven't read Who's Got Your Back, you're at a competitive disadvantage" -Tom Rath, author of StrengthsFinder 2.0

"Keith Ferrazzi does for relationships what Tom Peters did for management . . . he's opened our eyes to a new reality that relationships are the key to success in business. Who's Got Your Back will teach anyone, from job seekers to CEOs, how to quickly build the kinds of relationships that really make a difference in business." -Jack Canfield, co-author of The Success Principles

"If I'd had this book at the start of my career, I would have saved myself 30 years of trial and error. If you are serious about your success, I strongly recommend that you read this book and build your support circle today." -Marshall Goldsmith, author of What Got You Here Won't Get You There