Sunday, October 21, 2012

In The Dark Again……..Paycheck Fairness Act (S 3320 and H.R.1519)

Unfair pay practices make it harder for all families to flourish and particularly those that are dependent on the woman as the sole wage earner.  Women continue to be paid on average 77 cents to every dollar paid to a man.  Although the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act helps women and others to assert their rights for pay discrimination it does not encompass all the remedies and tools and employer incentives needed to reverse pay discrimination.
The Paycheck Fairness Act updates, closes loopholes and strengths the Equal Pay Act of 1963 by:  baring retaliation against workers who voluntarily discuss or disclose their wages with co-workers; allowing women to receive the same remedies for sex-based pay discrimination that are currently available to those subject to discrimination based on race and ethnicity; and providing training and technical assistance and outreach to help employers eliminate pay discrepancies.

This Act appears to be a no brainer for working women’s and men’s rights.  President Obama has come out strongly in favor of the Act…..But where does Romney stand on the issue?
Like other issues, Romney has lacked leadership and has remained silent on his position regarding the Paycheck Fairness Act. Why won’t Romney share his position on an issue that is significant to helping women and families flourish economically? 

 When asked by Rachel Maddow whether Romney supported the Paycheck Fairness Act, his campaign provided the following answer:

Of course Governor Romney supports pay equity for women. In order to have pay equity, women need to have jobs, and they have been getting crushed in this economy, losing far more jobs than men. As president, Mitt Romney will create a pro-jobs business climate that will put all Americans back to work.

Given the opportunity in last week’s presidential debate to give examples of how he would support women in advancing fair pay, Romney sidestepped the issue completely and instead talked about “Binders” (see my post earlier on The Binders Issue).
And this is what Leadership looks like to Mitt Romney! 

This is NOT leadership, its hedging a bet.  Maybe that’s a common practice for a CEO of a private equity firm, but it certainly is not what a prospective Commander and Chief ought to do.

“We Love You Women!”  Really?

Violence Against Women.....What's the Issue?

How prevalent is violence against women in the United States and what is its cost?

According to the Centers for Disease Control, sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence are major public health problems in the United States.  Physical injury and mental health issues can result from these forms of violence and may lead to hospitalization, disability or death.  Statistics from the Centers of Disease Control National Violence Against Women Survey, November 2011 report the following.
Nearly 1 in 5 women in the United States has been raped in her lifetime (18.3%) equaling almost 22 million U.S. women.  Nearly 1 in 2 women (44.6%) experienced sexual violence victimization other than rape at some point in their lives which is more than 53 million women in the United States.  About 1 in 8 women or more than 15 million women report experiencing sexual coercion in their lifetimes and more than 1 in 4 women (32 million women) have experienced some form of unwanted sexual contact in their lifetime.

Approximately 1 in 6 women (16.2%) in the United States has experienced stalking at some point in her lifetime where she was very fearful or believed that she or someone close to her would be harmed or killed as a result.
Statistics regarding sexual and physical violence experienced by an intimate partner are equally alarming.  One in 3 women (32.9%) has expe­rienced physical violence by an intimate partner and nearly 1 in 10 (9.4%) has been raped by an intimate partner in her lifetime.

The impact of intimate partner violence ranges from fear for safety to physical injury.  62.6% experienced at least one post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom, 41.6% were injured as a result of the violence, and 28.0% missed at least one day of work or school.  Research suggests that victims of intimate partner and sexual violence make more visits to health providers over their lifetime, have more hospital stays, have longer duration of hospital stays, and are at risk of a wide range of physical, mental, reproductive, and other health consequences over their lifetimes.

Violence Against Women Act
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is a federal law whose purpose is to end violence against women and remedy the laws and social practices that have fostered and justified the history of violence against women. The VAWA was introduced in Congress in 1994 by then Senator Joe Biden and received bipartisan support.  The VAWA was passed in 1994, as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, and was reauthorized in 2000 and 2005. The current authorization expired in 2011.  VAWA focuses on nine specific areas of intervention: enhancing judicial and law enforcement tools to combat violence against women (Title I); improving services for victims (Title II); services, protection, and justice for young victims of violence (Title III); strengthening America’s families by preventing violence (Title IV); strengthening the healthcare system’s response (Title V); housing opportunities and safety for battered women and children (Title VI); providing economic security for victims (Title VII); protection of battered and trafficked immigrants (Title VIII); and safety for Indian women (Title IX) (From the American Bar Association).

Reauthorizations in 2000 and 2005 that included improvements and more programs in the legislation also received bipartisan support.  Until this year reauthorization of the Bill had not been an issue.   However, reauthorization is languishing in Congress.
The Senate version of reauthorization (S 1925) was passed by the Senate on April 26, 2012, by a 68-31 vote and included new provisions to protect Native Americans, undocumented immigrants, college women and LGBT members. 

The House version of reauthorization, H.R. 4970, a more restrictive version of reauthorization passed by a vote of 225-205, with 216 Republicans and 6 Democrats supporting.  H.R. 4970 excludes the additional provisions the Senate reauthorization included  such as protections to Native American women and also seeks to limit the number of U Visas that are granted to women who were abused, giving them temporary legal status and work eligibility.   The American Bar Association, among others, opposes H.R. 4970, considering it a retreat in the battle against domestic and sexual violence.
Mitt Romney has NOT publically stated his position on the Violence to Women Act.  In April 2012 a spokeswoman for the Romney campaign stated that he "supports it" and "hopes it can be reauthorized without turning it into a political football."   What Romney supports is anybody’s guess.  Romney still has not declared his support for either the Senate or the House reauthorization bill.  We do know, however, how Romney’s running mate Paul Ryan stands on the issue.  He voted in support of the restrictive House bill.

Unlike President Obama and Vice-President Biden, Romney has consistently evaded taking a meaningful stand on many women’s issues……in this case by leaving voters in the dark about where he stands on the Violence Against Women reauthorization. 

“We Love You Women!”  Really?

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Fact Checking "The Binders" and Romney

I absolutely cringe when women are not given the credit that they are due.  This was the case when Mitt Romney left the impression in the Presidential debate on Tuesday evening that HE was the driving force in initiating a drive to find qualified women to appoint to his cabinet.  NOT True.  Furthermore, his track record on increasing women’s representation in his cabinet did NOT hold during his tenure as governor.  Here are the facts:

1.      Romney gave the impression during Tuesday night’s debate that HE was the driving impetus behind collecting the binders of resumes in search for qualified women to hold cabinet positions.   This is NOT TRUE.  The Massachusetts Government Appointments Project (MassGAP),   a bipartisan coalition of over 40 women’s groups whose purpose is to increase the number of women appointed by the governor to senior level cabinet positions, put together the resumes PRIOR to the gubernatorial election . Prior to the election MassGAP asked both the Democratic and Republican(Romney) candidates at that time to sign a pledge that if elected they would increase the number of females in the senior level positions.   So Romney didn’t even give women credit, where credit is due, in initiating the campaign to increase women’s representation in government---instead he took it for himself.   

2.       An independent study by the University of Massachusetts, commissioned by MassGAP provides the results of THEIR effort to increase women’s representation in government.  And guess what?   Romney’s track record on women appointed to senior level positions DOESN’T hold.  Here are the results . During the initial response to the MassGAP initiative (2002-2004) 14 of Romney’s first 33 appointments (42 percent) to senior level positions were women.  From 2004-2006, however, at the end of Romney's term, women made up just 25 percent of the 64 new appointments.

3.       The report’s conclusions state that  “MassGAP’s early impact---with then-Governor Romney selecting women as 42% of his new appointments---was promising.  However, the analysis in this report suggest that subsequent appointments did not reflect in a continued commitment to the selection of women for high-level posts.  The net result over the four points in time suggest that women’s gains between 2002 and 2006 were elusive:  women at the end of the Romney administration did not hold a higher percentage of senior-level positions than when he took office. “  The principal reason for this, according to the report, is that Romney placed  men in positions previously held by women more often than he placed women in positions previously held by men.    
Romney’s attribution that he was the driving force in increasing women’s representation in appointed government positions, and not  MassGAP,  is as self-serving as one can get.  Leaving the impression that he had a stellar record in maintaining women’s advancement in senior level positions throughout his tenure as governor is simply a misrepresentation of his record.

“We love you women!”  You be the judge.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Fair Pay......What's the Issue?

I established a company that helps women develop their leadership and economic potential and I work with women every day who are attempting to make the world a better place through senior and executive leadership .  The fact is this, however:  The glass ceiling still exists and it not only directly hurts women, but also hurts their families and children, and the general economy and well-being of our country.
Supporting equal pay for equal work by providing practical avenues to achieve justice and fairness and to hold those accountable for discrimination should be a sufficient and compelling enough ethical argument in and of itself to support fair-pay legislation. 

However, the business case is equally compelling for gender diversity and fair pay.  Studies consistently conclude that inclusion of women in the top ranks of company leadership has a direct and positive impact on a company’s bottom line and risk management and that companies that have the best records for promoting women outstrip their competition on every measure of profitability.   Yet women disproportionately are failing to attain senior level positions and the substantial pay gap between males and females with the same qualifications doing the same work is unfortunately still a reality.   
The first law that President Obama signed after becoming president was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009.  This act is an amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and states that the 180-day statute of limitations for filing an equal-pay lawsuit regarding pay discrimination resets with each new paycheck affected by that discriminatory action.  The law directly addressed Ledbetter v Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co, a 2007 Supreme Court Decision that interpreted the statute of limitations for presenting an equal-pay lawsuit begins on the date that the employer makes the initial discriminatory wage decision.  Protecting the rights and interests of women over business practices that discriminate (and in Ledbetter’s case discriminated for 19 years) should be a no-brainer. 

When Mitt Romney’s campaign was asked if he would have signed the Act had he been President, their response was “We’ll get back to you on that”.  Some hours later the Romney campaign came out with a general statement that Romney supported equal pay.  However when pushed to say whether he supported the Act or not in a later interview , Romney would not provide a definitive answer.  Saying that you support equal pay for women is NOT the same as saying you that you support the Act.   Romney says he wouldn’t repeal the Act.  But Presidents don’t repeal Congressional Acts; only Congress can repeal legislation.
And when Romney had the opportunity to clarify his position on the Fair Pay Act at Tuesday’s Presidential debate, he side stepped the question posed to him by an audience member.

If Congress repealed the Fair Pay Act, would Romney sign or veto the bill?  What does Romney actually support with regard to fair pay for women?  It’s hard to tell because he refuses to give his position. 
However, we do know where Romney’s running mate Paul Ryan’s stands on the Fair Pay Act.  He voted against it.

Women's Issues and the Presidential Campaign

There’s a lot at stake in this Presidential election.  The results will touch women both directly and indirectly and have a cascading effect onto the lives of their children and immediate and extended families.  As the founder and director of a Center for Women’s Leadership Development I feel that I have a responsibility to offer opinions on how I believe the candidates stand on women’s issues.
 I could easily duck this responsibility by stating that stepping into the political debate may possibly alienate current or potential clients, pose a threat to my business or diminish my standing in some way.  However, that would not be leadership.

My life’s purpose is to inform, inspire, motivate and help others fulfill their potential.  If I choose to “hide” behind a rock and keep my beliefs and opinions to myself then I have failed miserably as a role model for others and in fulfilling my purpose. My hope is that my blogs will move people to conduct their own research and fact checking, and critically analyze their own positions and motivations as well as those of the candidates.
My blog posts over the next two weeks will focus on topics that directly and indirectly affect women.  In my search for the presidential candidates’ positions, I first examined their official websites.  

In an era when women and women’s issues are critically important to our country and economy and our actions a source of influence for the world, I was amazed that Mitt Romney, unlike Obama, has no category for “women” on the Issues page of his website. 
As I continued my research, however, I could only conclude that the reason for this omission is because Mitt Romney doesn’t have much to say on women’s issues other than offering generalities and platitudes. 

More often than not, Romney has evaded taking a position on several  major issues and legislation of the day affecting women.   As examples, he is silent on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, The Violence to Women Act re-authorization, and the Paycheck Fairness Act.   The absence of a definitive position on these and other issues leaves voters uninformed about how he will govern when it comes to issues affecting women and is a failure of leadership.  Women voters, their families and the country deserve to be treated better. 

Friday, September 7, 2012

Deja Vu

I experienced Deja Vu as I listened to one of the addresses the other night on the televised Democratic Convention.  The story of a woman “hitting the glass ceiling” when she could not be promoted to a job position but yet she was responsible for training the men who were promoted to this position hit me like a ton of bricks, resurfacing memories of frustration and humiliation.
Back in 1971 I had just gotten my bachelor’s degree and had found it difficult to get any employment except for low-paying clerical work.  I took a job as a receptionist in the district office of a large, national manufacturing company. In less than two weeks I was given additional job responsibilities (but no extra pay) when I became the assistant to the order desk manager.
About a year after starting my job, an opening in the same company became available in a sub-office of the company District in another state.  The job reported to the district order desk manager (just as I did) and the functions were what I was currently performing in the district office, but the job had a fancier title and a salary of $300 more per month.  Wow! Was I ever psyched.  I knew the job functions, my husband was finishing his degree,  we could relocate and it seemed like a no-brainer that I should apply and ultimately get the job.  Wrong assumption! 
Yes I applied for the job, but got turned down.  The reason I was given was that “this job is not for a woman.”  No matter what arguments  I made….knowing the product line, the company, and performing the job functions competently for a year …..could change management’s view.   The next humiliation was when the new hire, a male who had no job experience with the company, no experience with the product line or supply chain management, appeared at my office to be trained by me for his new job.   Any illusions that I may have held about gender and pay equity quickly vanished. 
So it was deja vu for me when I heard a similar story given at the Democratic Convention the other evening.  And what does that story and my story have to do with today?  Plenty!
You might think that my story is 40 years old and that gender and pay inequity was wiped out a long time ago.   Guess again….not so.  At every educational level women continue to earn less than similarly educated men.  In a study conducted by the American Association University Women, the data showed that ten years after graduation the pay gap widens.  For example, in engineering and architecture there is parity in wages one year after graduation, but after ten years women earned only 93 percent of their male counterparts.  And in business and management the pay gap was even wider with women earning 69 percent of men’s wages compared to 81 percent one year after graduation (see Invest in Women Invest in America at ).
The issue of pay inequality is complex and requires action on several fronts.  Federal and state governments, employers, and women themselves are essential players in breaking down barriers that are holding women back.
One of government’s significant roles in breaking barriers is establishing policy and passing legislation that dismantles discriminatory practices.  The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, signed by President Obama in January 2009, is an example of this kind of action.
The law is named for Lily Ledbetter who faced pay discrimination and as a result championed women’s rights.  It wasn’t until near her retirement that Ledbetter discovered that she was a victim of pay discrimination for almost 20 years, making significantly less than her male counterparts. 
Upon discovering the pay inequity, Ledbetter decided to sue and initially won her case at the Federal level.  However the Goodyear Company appealed the case and it went to the Supreme Court and the company won.  The Supreme Court, in a 5 to 4 decision, interpreted the 1964 Civil Rights Law 180 day statute of limitations as beginning on the date the employer makes the initial discriminatory wage decision, not the date of the most recent paycheck.
So Lilly Ledbetter pressed on to get the law changed.  Her perseverance resulted in an amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act that superseded the Supreme Court’s decision.  That amendment guarantees individuals the right to file an equal-pay lawsuit, expanding the 180 day statute of limitations for filing, by resetting the statute with each new paycheck affected by the discriminatory action
Pay inequity not only hurts women immediately, but it also adversely impacts them throughout their lives. It dogs a woman through to her senior years because there is a trickle effect over her lifetime.   Lower pay impacts a woman’s retirement savings, 401K, and her social security benefits.  Women seniors depend on social security benefits more than men because many times they have no other retirement income and, because women on average live longer than men, they depend on social security benefits longer than men.  However, on average, women’s social security benefits are significantly lower than men’s due to lower lifetime earnings.  The result is that many senior women live below or near the poverty level. (See Invest in Women Invest in America – Report by the Majority Staff of the Joint Economic Committee at ).
The point of my story is this.  The Lilly Ledbetter Act is a huge win for women and others who face pay discrimination.  What happened to me in 1971 was that I was young, unaware, and didn’t know where to turn for help.  When you don’t know your rights, you can’t exercise them.   Women need to understand, stand up for their rights and advocate for themselves and others. 
And part of advocating for ourselves is also knowing who is advocating for us.  For more information on the Lilly Ledbetter Act, what it is, its history and who advocated for women see:
To hear Lilly’s story see:

Monday, May 14, 2012

Policy for Families Matter

I usually don’t go all political in my blog, but a recent report on public policy vis-à-vis  the needs of working families (and this is a woman’s leadership issue) threw me into high gear.   In a politically charged year when there is so much rhetoric given to “family values,” (and women’s issues) we need a closer look at what kind of values we’re talking about.  I’m tired of politicians giving lip-service to “family values” and then when it comes to doing the heavy lifting they are as scarce as an Easter egg in July.

A new report, Expecting Better: A State-by-State Analysis of Laws That Help New Parents, issued by the National Partnership for Women and Families concludes that there have been too few advances in federal and state employment laws in bringing public policy in line with the needs of the 21st century family in the United States. The United States is in striking contrast to 178 nations that guarantee paid work leave for new mothers and 54 nations that guarantee paid work leave for new fathers.

So what is the big deal? The big deal is how, as a society, we should walk our talk about family values and ensure that our public policy gives a hand-up to families.  The big deal is that by giving families a “hand up,” research shows that there are tremendous benefits for both families and businesses…..families gain economic security and better health and businesses boost their bottom lines. 

With women, as the report states, being the primary or co-breadwinners in nearly two-thirds of families, loss of income during pregnancy or parental leave has significant consequences for the family.  The report cites that only “38 percent of workers have access to employer-provided short-term disability insurance, and only about one-tenth of the workforce has access to employer-provided paid family leave to care for a new child.”  And those families at the margins are hit the hardest.  “Workers in low-paying jobs who have the greatest need for both job protection and wage replacement during leave from work are far less likely to have access to either of these employer-provided benefits.”

And this is a women’s leadership issue.  Another recent report, Invest in America—Invest in Woman, a Report of the Majority Staff of the Joint Economic Committee of the United State Senate, cites  out-of-date social supports for working families, inflexible work arrangements and undervalued early care as major reasons for holding women back in reaching middle and senior management positions.

So what is wrong with this picture in a society that supposedly holds that the family is the essential ethical and moral unit of society,?  Where politicians can't stop gushing that they support women and families?   Where, in this latest report, over 60% of the States were given a grade of  “D” or “F” for supporting working families?  Perhaps a “hand-up” to help real children, mothers, and fathers living in 21st century families isn’t our vision of  “family values”  and, in the end,  it’s all rhetoric after all.

Expecting Better: A State-by-State Analysis of Laws That Help New Parents available at

Saturday, March 3, 2012

Women's History Month: Unspoken Heroines

One of my passions is reading women’s diaries and journals, particularly those of the westward movement.  My personal library includes upwards of over fifty of these journals.   In reflecting on women’s history and contributions the following quote from the book “More than Petticoats……Remarkable Montana Women” by Gayle Shirley  is applicable to begin Women’s History Month:

“There are unwritten chapters in the history of every new settlement, which no pen will ever write, but could they be written, they would tell of the many heroines as well as heroes, women as brave and deserving of credit as those who landed from the Mayflower.  They have had much to do in the ‘winning of the west,’ and a higher civilization has always followed closely in the footsteps of the woman pioneer.”
                                    ……Lucia Darling Park, 1839-1905, Pioneering Teacher, Montana.

Gayle Shirley has a series of More Than Petticoats books detailing women’s remarkable lives from various states.  See

Thursday, March 1, 2012

Is Your Career at a Standstill? Than Change the Picture.

Join The Women’s Leadership Journey, an 18-week dynamic teleworkshop that puts you in the driver’s seat for leadership advancement.  Three months post-workshop leadership coaching is included to  help you steer your career and develop your leadership potential.

Dream Big.......

When you eat an elephant, eat it one bite at a time!  This may seem like an unusual expression for beginning a blog post, but it’s one that I’ve used many times in my teaching, consulting and coaching capacities. Fundamentally the message is “don’t bite off more than you can chew.”  Usually the phrase serves a useful set point with my clients when they are tempted to be over zealous and try to accomplish too much at one time.

Often I find people struggling to achieve their vision, be it a personal or business vision.  Generally it’s not that the vision is unrealistic or unobtainable.  Rather, people are thwarted by attempting to do too much at one time.  This inevitably results in frustration, loss of confidence, feelings of failure and inability to reach a rewarding goal. 
A vision may not be achieved in a day, a week or even, perhaps, in several years.  What we must realize is that incremental steps are necessary to attain transformational change; the journey to the vision can be as satisfying as accomplishing the vision itself.  Achieving each step presents new insights, builds confidence, gives a sense of accomplishment, energizes and motivates us and lays the foundation for the next step to continue the quest.

Dream big!  But make it a practice to savor the dream one step at a time.

View "Dream Big:  A Monarch Minute" Inspriational Thoughts for Women Leaders at: 
Check out how to develop SMART goals.  These will help you develop discrete, manageable steps to achieve your dream.  See

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Lead Yourself Before Leading Others

Over the course of my career I’ve seen a lot of people in leadership roles.  Interestingly, there haven’t been very many who have lived up to the leadership title.  I’m sure you’ve seen this too. 
Whether in the workforce, politics, or community or professional organizations people assume the reins of leadership but fail miserably in creating, articulating and achieving a vision.  The leadership literature is replete with rationales, but there is a convergence of thinking that before one can successfully lead others, she must be able to lead herself.  Translated:  Know Yourself!
In helping people with career choices, one of my first questions is “what is your passion?” Surprisingly, a very small percentage of people can answer that question. How does someone make a career choice without understanding her passion, values or strengths?  The answer is, “Well, probably not very well!”  
How does a “Leader” lead without knowing her passion, values or strengths?  The answer is, “Well, probably not very well!”  Plato said over two thousand years ago “I must first know myself………. to be curious about that which is not my concern, while I am still in ignorance of my own self would be ridiculous.”  It is safe to say that we have a large number of leaders who look pretty ridiculous.
 Knowing yourself has been purported to be the most difficult lesson in the world (Cervantes).  But, while difficult, it is a rewarding and fulfilling journey.  The journey begins with a step….so don’t be afraid, take the first step and enjoy the journey!
Tools that you may find helpful for beginning your journey:
VIA Survey of Character Strengths:
TypeFocus Personality Type:

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

A New Year’s Resolution: Accept The Gift of the Present

A colleague of mine and I met for lunch a couple of weeks before Christmas.  Our conversation turned to focusing on my friend’s continuing anxiety over a business decision that she had made over six months ago.  She was chastising herself about the income she had lost; about how she had not been assertive enough, and rebuked herself for making the same types of mistakes over and over again. 
I know my colleague very well.  She is creative and resourceful and I knew that replaying this business decision over and over again was depriving her of pleasures of the moment, especially during this holiday time. 
When she paused and looked at me for a response, I offered her a  powerful quote by Babatunde Olatunii.  Yesterday is history,” I said.  “Tomorrow is a mystery,” I continued, “and Today is a gift.  That is why we call it the present.”  I asked her to reflect on the quote and then invited her to explain what lessons this business decision had provided.   The conversation from that point shifted dramatically.  From worrying about the past my colleague jumped into identifying choices she could immediately make that would incorporate the lessons from that event six months earlier.
Worrying about the past and fretting over the future, robs the woman leader from the time, energy and enjoyment of concentrating on the choices today that will make a difference for tomorrow.   

This is not to say that the woman leader should not reflect about yesterday, set goals or think futuristically.  Not at all! 

The key, however, is establishing a healthy balance between yesterday, today, and tomorrow.   Yesterday is past , but action in the present provides input (not control) for tomorrow.   Apply yesterday’s lessons to your actions today, and tomorrow will be a breadth of opportunities to learn much more.

Inspirational quotes, like the one I shared with my colleague, energize us.  Such quotes make us feel good and they usually wake us to the moment.   How can we capture the vitality of the moment and be attentive to the lesson each holds?

One strategy I have found particularly useful is to journal my lessons. 

As you live each day in the present, be aware of the lesson each moment is offering.  Think for a split second about the lesson.  Perhaps the lesson is:
·         Listening attentively to my colleague’s opinions helps me see matters with more clarity
·         Anger is decreasing my ability to be productive
·         Worrying is inhibiting me from making an important decision
·         Thinking positively makes me feel good
·         Hurrying caused me to overlook important details
·         Speaking up for my needs gave me confidence

Get a special, notebook and label it “The Gift of Lessons” or “Lessons Learned” or whatever title is meaningful to you.  Each evening, take the gift of the Present, and write down and reflect (journal) on three to five lessons of the day.  The history can’t be changed, but with the gift of the Present you can absorb the meaning of each lesson and celebrate the opportunity it has given you to build a better tomorrow.

To see a video of this Monarch Minute visit:

To learn more about differences between how men and women worry see:

For the benefits of journaling  in leadership development see: