These are the 4 times youre allowed to say no at work

These are the 4 times youre allowed to say no at workThese are the 4 times youre allowed to say no at workFOMO (Fear of Missing Out) is real, and it happens in both our work and partieal lives. Because of this fear of missing an opportunity, its easy to find yourself on the yes train, only to feel overexerted and spread too thin. While taking advantage of opportunities that can help your career is great, its important to realize when saying no is in your best interest.Here are four times youre allowed to say no at work.Follow Ladders on FlipboardFollow Ladders magazines on Flipboard covering Happiness, Productivity, Job Satisfaction, Neuroscience, and moreWhen your calendar is already crammedWhen your schedule is jam-packed, saying no is probably the way to go. While you may be able to fit in a quick meeting or take on one extra project, its important to assess the obligations youve already committed to before saying yes to something else. Would taking on this extra task take a lot o f time? How much would it cut into your current projects?If saying yes to a new opportunity would hinder your ability to complete tasks youve already committed to, just say no. This can be hard, especially if youre a people pleaser, but at the end of the day, taking on more is leid always better. Instead, focus on putting your best foot forward on your current commitments.If saying yes to a new opportunity would hinder your ability to complete tasks youve already committed to, just say no.When youd be covering for someone else whos always slacking Are you constantly covering for a coworker who cant seem to be bothered to lift a finger? When your boss recognizes you for your ability to pick up the pieces, it can be hard to put an end to things- but theres a point when its not worth it.If you continually cover for someone or finish the work that they were supposed to, youre showing that person that A) you dont mind that theyre slacking and B) they can continue to slack off because you will finish what they dont. In this case, youre doing yourself and the other person a disservice. Try talking to them directly, and if that doesnt work, discuss the situation with your boss. Point out that youre taking on someone elses role and its impeding on your ability to get your own work completed to your standards.Try approaching the subject like thisIve been doing x, y, and z to help Name, but its getting difficult to get everything done to my standards. Im happy to help, but it seems to be more of an ongoing issue than a one-off situation, and I dont want it to affect responsibilities Ive already committed to. Is there a better way we can delegate responsibilities or create more accountability as a team?When its a last-minute request and you already have other obligationsWeve all had that last-minute work request that makes our stomach sink, whether its an after-hours event or a last-minute meeting. Sometimes you just suck it up and deal with it (yes, its part of being an adult), but its okay to say no if it will impede on other obligations.If youve already made other commitments, explain the situation. Show that you would like to make it work but its not an option since its last-minute. You can say something like thisUnfortunately, Im not able to make that work because of the timing. Ive already made other commitments I cant cancel however, Im happy to work with you to figure out another time that works better.If your manager cant appreciate that that youve made commitments and you want to stick with them, you may not be in a work environment where you can thrive.If it makes you uncomfortable (morally or physically)This is simple If something makes you uncomfortable, morally or physically, just say no.If you feel like something isnt right, trust your gut. You can always say Im not comfortable doing that, or simply decline and say that youre working on another project. Assessing the situation, your needs (both mental and physical), and how the reques t will affect you is essential to figuring out if the project is in your best interest.If something makes you physically uncomfortable, get yourself out of that situation immediately and contact someone of authority. Whether its HR or legal authorities, if there is misconduct in the workplace, use your voice and be confident that no one should make you uncomfortable.This article originally appeared on Create Cultivate.You might also enjoyNew neuroscience reveals 4 rituals that will make you happyStrangers know your social class in the first seven words you say, study finds10 lessons from Benjamin Franklins daily schedule that will double your productivityThe worst mistakes you can make in an interview, according to 12 CEOs10 habits of mentally strong people

How Does Germany Do It

How Does Germany Do It How Does Germany Do It How Does Germany Do It?The 2008 financial crisis left most industrialized nations reeling. Yet Germany, especially its manufacturing sector, has done exceedingly well. Some argue that advanced economies are moving out of manufacturing, yet according to the Manufacturers Alliance for Productivity and Innovation, manufacturing accounts for nearly 21% of the German economy, compared with 13% for the United States and 12% for the United Kingdom. It generates many good jobs, even in such labor-intensive sectors as road vehicles, machinery, and electrical equipment. And Germanys manufacturing performance is getting steadily better. German exports, primarily manufactured goods, rose 11% in 2010, to mora than $1.3 trillion. While other industrialized nations have buckled under Asian competition, Germany has increased exports to China and the rest of Asia. How is Germany doing this? How is a highly regulated, high-wage country with a strong curren cy increasing its share of the global market in the face of low-cost Asian competition? While Germany has many large multinational companies like BMW, Volkswagen, and Siemens that turn in strong performance, its small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) are an impressive source of strength, both as suppliers to multinational corporations and as exporters in their own right. These SMEs generally avoid mass markets, but they dominate niche businesses. A 2007 study by the management consultant Bernd Venohr found that more than 1,130 German SMEs held either the number one or two ort in the world market for their products, or the number one position in the European market. They are rarely the cheapest producers, yet the superior quality and performance of their products enables them to command premium prices and still boost exports. In the United States, such small and medium firms were hurt most by Chinese competition and the recession.Major infrastructure capital expenditure and funding sources. 2007-2011. Source Fraunhofer Annual Report, 2011 An important factor in German SME manufacturing success is the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (Fraunhofer Society), an independent nongovernmental organization that provides high-quality, short-term, affordable applied research that small and medium-size firms could elend otherwise afford. Fraunhofer enables smaller manufacturers to continually upgrade their processes and products, and keep ahead of the competition. A key feature of Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft is its scale it is a $2.45-billion enterprise that operates more than 60 research institutes with more than 250 business focus areas and core competencies. The average institute employs between 300 and 400 people, though some are much larger. Overall, it has about 22,000 employees. The societys mission is to conduct applied research with practical industrial value. It sees itself as a bridge between the latest university insights and industry-specific product and process improvem ents. It also generates a great verstndigung im strafverfahren of knowledge in its own laboratories. Fraunhofer institutes undertake 6,000 to 8,000 projects annually. Most are small, short-term efforts. Projects rarely last longer than two years and focus on immediate, applicable results. Because Fraunhofers funding has steadily grown over the years, it has been able work with its industry partners to generate the incremental improvements that translate into sustained competitive advantages. While Fraunhofer is an independent nongovernmental entity, its distributed structure keeps it focused on practical results. Each Fraunhofer institute is linked with a German university. The institutes pick their own research fields, select their own projects, and decide how to handle project results. More important, institutes balance their own budgets. That means generating contract research, which accounts for up to two thirds of the Fraunhofer budget. In addition to its scale and distribution structure, there are several other factors that account for Fraunhofers success Together, Fraunhofers 60 institutes specialize in more than 250 research areas. Each institute is paired with a university with similar research interests. The institutes themselves are very well equipped. Most operate multiple pilot manufacturing lines and demonstration facilities. The German machine tool industry often provides equipment for testing and training, so the Fraunhofer tool set is current and the firms using it receive valuable feedback. Fraunhofers model is a classic government-industry partnership. The federal and state governments, private contract research, and publicly funded contract research each provide roughly one-third of its funding. The reality is more complex, since a substantial amount of industry research can be funded through government grants and incentives. Even if the private sector share is sometimes overstated, it is the stability of the funding that is important . German political parties usually consider betreuung of applied research, of direct relevance to their companies, to be a part of the national infrastructure, like water or electricity. A great advantage of the German innovation system is the emphasis on vocational education that combines academic studies with factory apprenticeships. This continues to yield a highly trained and technologically adept work force that is the envy of the world. Fraunhofer mirrors this dual system at the highest educational levels. It employs part-time post-docs and masters and Ph.D. candidates, who acquire practical experience while simultaneously pursuing their studies. Graduates typically spend from three to six years at Fraunhofer before moving on to positions in industry or academia. This ensures a ready supply of well-trained researchers with hands-on experience in critical industrial technologies. Fraunhofer holds the rights to thousands of patents and registrations. It ordinarily retains pa tent and other IP rights upon conclusion of a research project. SMEs are often called the Mittelstand, or middle class, but the two terms are not synonymous. The Mittelstand is a subset of German SMEs with certain distinct characteristics. They are typically family businesses located in small towns and rural areas. Their roots stretch back for many decades, often generations, and they plan for the very long term. As community leaders, their strong sense of social obligation makes them less likely to outsource or move offshore. Companies of the Mittelstand generally focus on niche products and markets, rather than go head to head with multinational giants. In many cases, continual incremental improvements in products and production methods have enabled them to dominate their chosen specialties. In 2008, roughly one-third of Fraunhofers RD projects involved firms with fewer than 250 employees, while 43% were with companies with fewer than 1,000 employees. Without Fraunhofer, it seem s that many of behauptung firms would not have remained as competitive in global markets. Fraunhofer also works with such large, vertically integrated corporations as Siemens, Daimler-Benz, and Volkswagen. Research projects with large companies tend to last longer, involve more institutes, and bring in more revenue than SME contracts. Select locations of Fraunhofer institutes throughout Germany. Limits and Lessons German manufacturers have realized many successes. Not only do their multinational companies thrive in an increasingly competitive global market, but their SMEs often dominate their market niches. Yet Germanys innovation system is not a perfect model. It has significant weaknesses, and its strengths may not translate easily to other cultures. Fraunhofers most glaring weakness arises from its greatest strength Its laser-like focus on established industries has kept it from pioneering new technologies. There are no German counterparts for Intel, Apple, Google, Facebook, or t he dozens of large bioscience companies spawned in the United States. While Fraunhofer spins off companies, most have remained small. Fraunhofer established seven institutes in the United States and research subsidiaries in Chile, Austria, Portugal, and Italy. In some cases the model adapts well to the local innovation system, while in other cases it does not. It is worth keeping in mind, however, that Fraunhofer also takes a strategic approach to establishing institutes, funding them partly to learn about technology development in other parts of the world. While Fraunhofers approach does not seem to encourage radical, paradigm-shattering change, it nonetheless demonstrates that a high-cost, high-wage country can compete effectively in global markets through the systematic and continuous application of knowledge. One source of German success is its concentrated efforts to support research relevant to small- and mediumsize enterprises that are less likely to move production offshore. Through Fraunhofer, Germany offers skills, equipment, and services that those companies could not afford on their own. As a result, Germany has strengthened its export-oriented manufacturing base and retained good manufacturing jobs, even though its workers wages are among the highest in the world. What are the implications for the United States? Perhaps the first lesson is that German firms are not home alone. They are supported by a dense network of institutes that help them make the incremental improvements that bring long-term commercial success. A second lesson is that this is seen as an important national mission, the way national defense is here in the United States. It requires a steady flow of resources, concentrated effort, well-funded, well-led institutions, and a sense that these are investments that are important for the countrys future There are certainly barriers to U.S. adoption of institutions to support a manufacturing ecosystem. Ever since the end of World War II , the United States has invested heavily in basic research in the belief that scientific advances would lead to new products and industries. For decades, U.S. research did just that. Yet today, many of those industries, such as wireless and microelectronics, have migrated overseas, taking jobs and innovators with them. The dominant post-war paradigm, namely that technologies invented here would naturally be produced here, has now eroded. Germanys government has long supported the application of technology to manufacturing. It launched the nations industrial revolution by investing in British machine tools, and closed the gap with the United Kingdom by encouraging applied research. Its ongoing support for large-scale practical industrial research for small and large companies has helped keep factories and jobs in Germany. Despite these advantages, few in the United States would want to adapt a system that would not support the creation of such breakthrough industries as biotechnology , nanotechnology, and the Internet. Yet if we are to exploit the opportunities in new manufacturing technologies, the United States might consider adapting some of Fraunhofers best practices to improve the flow of innovation to SMEs, which form the heart of Americas manufacturing infrastructure. One thing is clear. Countries that lose their manufacturing base risk losing their ability to innovate. Against the background of an economic environment which has seen the erosion and offshoring of traditional industries in the face of global competition, the German model, or some parts of it, warrants careful consideration. Above all, we have to pay attention to other countries policies and programs and learn from them, just as we have in the past. This is an abridged version of the original article published in the November 2013 issue of Mechanical Engineering magazine. Charles W. Wessner is a program director with the Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy at the National Res earch Council. Join industry experts at ASMEs Advanced Manufacturing Impact Forum to see how advanced manufacturing will affect the U.S. and global markets - and what this means for you and your business. For Further DiscussionFraunhofer enables smaller manufacturers to continually upgrade their processes and products, and keep ahead of the competition.

ASMEs Nominees Chosen for the 2016 New Faces of Engineering P...

ASMEs Nominees Chosen for the 2016 New Faces of Engineering P... ASMEs Nominees Chosen for the 2016 New Faces of Engineering P... ASMEs Nominees Chosen for the 2016 New Faces of Engineering ProgramDiscoverE has selected six ASME members and student members as finalists in the 2016 New Faces of Engineering program, which annually highlights the important contributions early career engineers and engineering students are making to the profession and to society. Society members Bryony DuPont, Ph.D., Dylon Rockwell and Yi Zheng, Ph.D., were named as ASMEs nominees in the New Faces of Engineering-Professional category, which recognizes the accomplishments of practicing engineers up to the age of 30. ASME student members Drew Haxton, Nicholas Russell and Jacob Steinmetz were selected as the Societys nominees in the New Faces-College Edition program, which highlights the achievements of third-, fourth- and fifth-year engineering students. Bryony DuPontThe finalists from ASME and the other societies participating in this years DiscoverE New Faces of Engineering program were announced brde week during Engineers Week. The official winners in each category will be announced in the April 8 issue of ASME News.ASMEs first New Faces-Professional nominee, Bryony DuPont, is an assistant professor of mechanical engineering at Oregon State University. Dr. DuPont conducts research in artificial intelligence and sustainability science, using simulation, optimization, and advanced computation to make sustainable solutions more realistically feasible. She is the co-lead of the ASME Early Career Engineering Committees Design and Advanced Manufacturing Market Segment Team and has served as a reviewer, review coordinator and workshop organizer for the Societys International Design Engineering Technical Conferences (IDETC). DuPont received a bachelors degree in mechanical engineering from Case wildwestfilm Reserve University in 2008. She earned a both a masters degree and a Ph.D. in me chanical engineering from Carnegie Mellon University in 2010 and 2013, respectively. Dylon Rockwell Dylon Rockwell, ASMEs second New Faces-Professional finalist, is an airframe design and integration engineer at the Boeing Company in Ridley, Pa., where he serves as a principal investigator for manufacturing technologies. A Boeing employee since 2011, Dylon was assigned to the companys V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft program and later went on to perform analysis for Boeings Crew Space Transportation (CST-100) Starliner, Space Launch System and Sikorsky Boeing SB1 Defiant programs to quantify and mitigate assembly risk. A member of ASME since 2013, Dylon is a new member of the Societys Y14.46 Committee Support Group. He received a bachelors degree in aeronautics and astronautics engineering from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2011, and a masters degree in systems engineering from Georgia Institute of Technology in 2015. Yi ZhengThe Societys third nominee in the profession al category, Yi Zheng, is an assistant professor at the University of Rhode Island, where he leads the Micro and Nanoscale Energy Laboratory. Dr. Zhengs research interests include nanoscale thermal transport phenomena, Casimir interactions, thermal and mechanical properties of nanostructured materials, and their applications in green energy conversion and harvesting. He serves as a reviewer for a number of peer-reviewed journals, including the ASME Journal of Heat Transfer and the ASME Journal of Thermal Science and Engineering Applications, and as a reviewer, topic chair, and session chair or co-chair for various conferences including the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and the ASME Micro/Nanoscale Heat Mass Transfer International Conference. He received a bachelors degree in mechanical engineering from Tsinghua University in Beijing, China, in 2009. He received a masters degree and a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Columbia University in 2011 and 2014, res pectively. Drew HaxtonOne of the Societys three New Faces-College Edition finalists, Drew Haxton, is a second-time nominee in the category. Haxton, who was also a nominee last year, is a student at Daniel Webster College in Nashua, N.H., where he is majoring in both mechanical engineering and aeronautical engineering. A former vice president and chair of his schools ASME student chapter, Haxton is now serving as president of the chapter. Participating in ASME events as a freshman helped me blossom into the aspiring engineer I am today, he said in his application. Now as a senior and president of the ASME chapter, I make sure to put on a wide variety of events to help students embrace engineering the same way I did. Haxton is also active in a number of clubs at his school, including the student humanitarian group Kenya Connection and the schools music and outdoor activities clubs. Nicholas RussellNicholas Russell, ASMEs second nominee in the New Faces-College Edition category, i s a mechanical engineering major at Tennessee Technological University in Cookeville, Tenn. Russell, who currently serves as vice president of the universitys Student Government Association, is involved in a number of student activities at Tennessee Tech. His current posts include student regent on the Tennessee Board of Regents, College of Engineering Student Ambassador, and member of the schools academic affairs and student affairs councils, among others. A student member of ASME since 2013, described ASME as a great asset in his application. ASME has been an amazing source of rckendeckung and friends, he wrote. Young engineers need the guidance of juniors and seniors in their programs to help them decide what major to choose, what classes to take, and what professors are the best. ASME provided me with all of this, as well as a training ground to learn skills like 3D modeling and simulation which proved to be very valuable in my two jobs. Jacob SteinmetzASMEs third College Edit ion finalist, Jacob Steinmetz, is majoring in mechanical engineering at Iowa State University. Steinmetz is a member of Iowa States renewable energy vehicle club and a member of the schools peer tutoring program, assisting other students on subjects including Statics, Mechanics of Materials, and Introduction to Materials Engineering. Like his two fellow College Edition nominees, Steinmetz also credits his participation as an ASME student member with being beneficial to his college experience and future employment prospects. Not only have I been able to meet peers in my field, but I have also had the opportunity to network with employers and staff members, he said in his New Faces application. Meeting these new students has allowed me to find new study partners, people to gather advice from, and other students that I am able to pass some of my knowledge onto. The networking opportunities helped me meet local employers, and schedule multiple interviews for internship opportunities.To learn more about the New Faces of Engineering finalists from each participating organization, visit http//discovere.org/our-programs/awards-and-recognition.