Up next....
Everyone Will Suffer in the Wake of Trump Administration’s Research Cuts
Source: Shutterstock
By Paul Friedman
This year, the Trump administration has fired many government researchers, canceled scientific and medical research grants, and targeted leading universities, including Harvard, with debilitating funding freezes. Fear of reprisal has caused many scientists, doctors, professors, and university administrators to opt for silence instead of speaking up to defend the research that is getting the ax.
Academy of Management (AOM) Scholar Peter Bamberger of Tel Aviv University says much of the research produced by him and his colleagues, including many AOM members, has a day-to-day impact on industry practitioners, including organizational leaders and managers. Cuts in federal funding for research will have a negative impact on industry, as well as researchers, colleges and universities, and other research institutions.
“What we publish in our primary journals have to be both theoretically important and have practical relevance,” Bamberger said. “It’s got to be interesting from a theoretical perspective and intellectual perspective, and it’s got to have some sort of surprising element—going against conventional wisdom—but it also has to translate that surprising finding into something that managers can do something about.
“And there are thousands of organizational consultants who read the findings published in our journals and then translate that into actual practice in organizations,” he said.
Bamberger points out that a great deal of research is specifically aimed at examining current practices by managers and their efficacy. Recently, he published a study of the managerial approach called design thinking, which focuses on understanding clients’ needs and designing innovative solutions.
“Design thinking has been around for about 10 years,” Bamberger said. “It’s an approach to create more innovative ways of boosting learning and finding innovative solutions to common problems or sometimes even really wicked problems.
“It became a fad and a lot of organizations adopted it, but no one ever bothered to actually assess whether or not it has an impact and whether this impact is any greater than other types of learning-oriented interventions, like team building,” he said.
Bamberger and research colleagues designed a field experiment to test the impact of design thinking as a team learning intervention. They compared over time what happens in terms of the efficiency and productivity of teams using different interventions.
“Is design thinking more efficacious than an alternative?” Bamberger said. “And we found out that in fact it is, and we actually demonstrate the mechanism by which it operates and why it’s more effective than other mechanisms.
“So these types of practical implications are useful to managers and to the extent that we don’t have funding necessary to do this type of research, everybody suffers,” he said.
-
Paul Friedman is a journalist who worked for 45 years at the three major news networks. He began as a writer and reporter and then became a producer of major news broadcasts, including Nightly News and the Today show at NBC, and World News Tonight with Peter Jennings at ABC. He also served as Executive VicePresident of News at ABC and CBS. Later, he taught journalism as a professor at Columbia University, New York University, and Quinnipiac University. Friedman is now semi-retired and lives with his wife in Florida.
View all posts
Up next....
Trump Administration Policies Have Chilling Effects on Academia
Harvard Yard in the winter. Source: Shutterstock
By Paul Friedman
Tighter enforcement of immigration regulations and cuts in research grants under the Trump administration are having negative impacts on academic work in general and on not-for-profit professional associations, including the Academy of Management, in particular.
Academy of Management (AOM) Scholar Peter Bamberger of Tel Aviv University, the president of AOM, says you can see it clearly in the run-up to the AOM’s annual meeting in Copenhagen. Among other issues, there is concern about how the visas of foreign students are being treated by authorities such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
“A good number of the research papers that have been accepted for presentation come from doctoral students from the United States; many of the doctoral students in the United States are foreign doctoral students; and some of the foreign doctoral students in management in the U.S. are considering the potential costs of leaving the U.S. to present their paper,” Bamberger said.
“We are concerned that some of these foreign Ph.D. students, rather than taking that risk, may opt to stay at their offices in the USA and not present their research, which would obviously be deleterious to our science,” he said.
“It would be very unfortunate if innovative papers and important findings are not presented at the 2025 conference because foreign U.S.-based scholars are concerned about the validity of their visas.”
Bamberger said he doesn’t know any AOM members whose students have been deported, but he does know that some AOM scholars are among those being hit by cuts in federal funding for research.
“Those individuals who had grant money to study diversity, equity, and inclusion—that’s all gone,” Bamberger said. “Those individuals don’t have the grants anymore and as a result, the research stops.
“Now, it’s the right of a government to determine how it wants to allocate funding for research, so I can’t necessarily say that this is something that’s undemocratic or unfair,” he said. “That was the result of the election, but it is having a problematic effect.”
Bamberger said he sees an ironic example of how cuts in research can have unexpected results.
“A lot of that research on DEI is not necessarily pro-DEI,” he said. “For example, my own research on gender and racial pay equity suggests that contemporary policies oriented towards enhancing the equity have significant unintended negative consequences, including compensation compression.
“So when you cut off the funding for all research that mentions certain keywords assumed to be related to DEI, you’re cutting off the funding of people doing research that indicates problems with DEI policy, as well as perhaps supporting policies that may be favored by certain politicians.”
-
Paul Friedman is a journalist who worked for 45 years at the three major news networks. He began as a writer and reporter and then became a producer of major news broadcasts, including Nightly News and the Today show at NBC, and World News Tonight with Peter Jennings at ABC. He also served as Executive VicePresident of News at ABC and CBS. Later, he taught journalism as a professor at Columbia University, New York University, and Quinnipiac University. Friedman is now semi-retired and lives with his wife in Florida.
View all posts
Up next....
How Looming Stagflation May Affect Pay
Source: Shutterstock
By Paul Friedman
At a time when some forecasts predict continuing or worsening inflation or stagflation and possibly a recession, pay transparency adds to the pressure on organizations’ decision-makers.
Peter Bamberger of Tel Aviv University, an Academy of Management scholar who published a book based on his research on pay transparency, said managers will need to build systems of compensation that are more justifiable and understandable to employees.
“The first step with pay transparency is not necessarily to disclose pay levels of one employee or another employee, but rather to disclose how pay is determined in the organization,” Bamberger said. “Most employees have no understanding whatsoever how their pay is determined in the organization and how other people’s pay is determined in the organization.
“Simply understanding pay processes and procedures, all the evidence suggests, has beneficial effects for both employees and employers with very few, if any, side effects—except that employers have to work harder to build these equitable and fair systems.”
Bamberger said pay transparency is always problematic for decision-makers.
“No one wants their decisions to be transparent to other people—transparency is great when we are the observers, but when we’re the observed, it’s a terrible thing,” Bamberger said. “It comes with potentially unintended negative consequences, especially when you have to think about what happens when people see that they are paid less than other people.
“It becomes problematic for the ones making the decisions, and it can be problematic for the organization,” he said. “So there are complications with pay transparency; there’s no question about it.”
Still, Bamberger said he believes that “sunshine is the best antiseptic,” and pay transparency can produce surprising positive results.
“What the evidence shows is that most employees underestimate how much their superiors are making, and when you think about that, it generates a tendency of individuals to think that they’ll do better by leaving their current organization,”
Bamberger said. “The grass is always greener; if I want a pay increase, I have to go outside, and that movement has costs to the current employer.
“So there’s merit, potentially, in letting people see what the potential income might be for moving up within the organization,” he said.
“I think organizations that are forced to be more accountable and hence build more effective pay systems—more explainable and justifiable pay systems—ultimately enhance the quality of the human capital they can bring in and hold to enhance their competitiveness, which becomes really important in a period of stagflation.”
-
Paul Friedman is a journalist who worked for 45 years at the three major news networks. He began as a writer and reporter and then became a producer of major news broadcasts, including Nightly News and the Today show at NBC, and World News Tonight with Peter Jennings at ABC. He also served as Executive VicePresident of News at ABC and CBS. Later, he taught journalism as a professor at Columbia University, New York University, and Quinnipiac University. Friedman is now semi-retired and lives with his wife in Florida.
View all posts
Up next....
“Just Add a Woman and Stir” Is Not Enough for Board Success
By Daniel Butcher
Even at organizations that have made strides in adding women and people of color to their governing boards, tokenism is all too common. Diverse board members can’t make a difference if their longer-tenured colleagues routinely disregard their suggestions.
Academy of Management Scholar Kris Byron of Georgia State University said that female board members and those representing an ethnic or racial minority are often sidelined, technically part of the board but to whom the other directors or trustees don’t really listen.
Byron and research colleague Corinne Post of Villanova published an article on this topic in Academy of Management Journal.
“There’s this idea that you just add women and stir and that’s enough, but that’s not enough,” Byron said. “If we’re saying that the ways in which a woman might add value is that she might have different perspectives or a different lens through which to look at an issue, or she might have information or knowledge or experience that maybe some of her male colleagues don’t have.
“That knowledge, experience, and perspectives mean nothing—they’re not going to have any effect—if people aren’t willing to acknowledge the usefulness of that perspective or knowledge or experience,” she said. “There’s probably lots of other things that are important to whether or not the woman on the board is a token, or whether or not there’s some kind of critical mass of female directors on the board.
“Do people think, ‘Oh, she’s just there on the board because we had to fill this quota—she wasn’t the best person to serve in this role; she’s just here for window dressing to make us look good.’”
Diversity is hollow if it isn’t accompanied by equity, inclusion, and fostering a sense of belonging among members of marginalized and minority groups. Actually listening to female board members’ ideas and suggestions and enacting the best of them are crucial for them to have a chance to improve an organization’s leadership.
“There has to be this real belief among the other board directors that these women, that all of the directors, have some value-add, and that isn’t a given,” Byron said. “So that’s what it means that you can’t just add women and stir.
“There has to be some other things that are in place in order for women to have a positive impact on an organization, especially on something that’s so distal or downstream like firm performance,” she said. “Board directors largely have an indirect effect on organizational performance.”
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
What Are the Effects of Adding Women to Boards? It’s Complicated.
By Daniel Butcher
Research shows that companies with more female directors can have better firm performance—and this is especially the case in countries that have stronger shareholder protections or that have greater gender equality. In addition, organizations whose boards have more female directors tend to be more engaged in activities that are central to boards’ responsibilities: monitoring and strategy involvement.
Academy of Management Scholar Kris Byron of Georgia State University said that board monitoring refers to the extent to which boards engage in activities that entail oversight of the firm and seek to control managers. Board strategy involvement refers to the extent to which boards engage in activities related to their advising role and decide how firms should compete in the marketplace.
Byron and research colleague Corinne Post of Villanova published an article on this topic in Academy of Management Journal.
“What we found was that there was a positive effect of adding women to the board on strategic involvement and a positive impact on board monitoring, but that board diversity is neither wholly detrimental nor wholly beneficial to firm financial performance,” Byron said. “There is some research showing that when you have more women on your board, they’re more likely to influence fellow directors’ or trustees’ behavior and that the norms of the board changes, for example, attendance gets better.
“There’s this spillover effect that women might have; maybe they come onto the board and they’re more diligent,” she said. “In some ways, that makes sense, because there aren’t tons of women who are in those kinds of senior positions, and so, if she got to that position, then she is probably quite exceptional and especially conscientious.
“Those behaviors may spill over to her male counterparts on the board, and there is research suggesting that that’s something that probably occurs.”
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
What It Takes to Be a Powerful Leader
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
To climb the ladder in your profession and achieve success, hard work is table stakes, not a differentiator. And to progress from rank-and-file employee to manager to respected, powerful leader might require a fundamental mindset shift of letting go of a need to be seen as likeable and authentic while cultivating professional relationships.
Academy of Management Scholar Jeffrey Pfeffer of Stanford University, one of today’s most influential management professors and researchers, offers some takeaways on that subject from his book7 Rules of Power, which isa manual for increasing the ability to get things done and benefitting from job performance.
“Good performance by itself is not necessarily going to bring you the level of career success that you need,” Pfeffer said. “In addition, you need technical and political skills to have your boss recognize your good contributions.
“If you think about management, and leadership is managing through other people, you need to learn how to interact with other people across your organization in ways that build your influence and permit you to get the things done that you want to get done,” he said.
Pfeffer’s seven rules power are:
1. Get out of your own way: “Lose the self-descriptions and inhibitions that hold you back, for example, the idea that you have to be liked, because, as an executive, you’re hired to get things done, not necessarily to win a popularity contest. Lose this currently popular idea that you need to be quote-unquote authentic, which is, of course, incorrect.”
2. Break the rules: “In strategy and organizational leadership, if you do what everybody else does, you will probably not succeed—you need to differentiate yourself.”
3. Show up in powerful fashion: “Body language and how we communicate is obviously important.”
4. Create a powerful brand: “If you’re perceived as a powerful, effective, efficacious leader, then that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy—good people want to work with you, invest with you, and buy from your company.”
5. Network relentlessly: “That’s something that people often don’t want to do, so they underinvest in networking because they feel dirty about it and don’t see it as the value-adding activity that it is.”
6. Use your power: “Not all use of power will be met with unalloyed approval, so leaders need to be willing to incur some level of social disapproval. But because most people are usually averse to conflict, it is surprising how much one can accomplish by seizing the initiative.”
7. Understand that once you have acquired power, what you did to get it will be forgiven, forgotten, or both: “Once you have power and status and success, no one will care how you got it, and people will people will accommodate themselves, because people like to be close to power.”
Upon reading or hearing about those precepts and their implications for workplace power dynamics, many people have an adverse reaction. That’s natural and understandable, Pfeffer said.
“Every person should understand and come to terms with the seven rules of power, and most will go through stages: first, denial—‘This doesn’t work in my organization’s culture’—then they will have anger, which will mostly be directed at me, which is fine,” he said. “Then they will have sadness—‘I’m depressed by it’—and finally, they often come to acceptance that this is not only the way the world works, but they can build agency around this.
“My biggest contribution is causing them to see their own agency and encouraging them to be more ambitious and more agentic around navigating their own career and getting their boss to recognize their talents, instead of sitting back and waiting for the human resources department to offer promotions and raises.”
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
How Organizations Undermine Managers’ Effectiveness
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
Many organizations are guilty of some common missteps when it comes to how they’re handling their managers.
Academy of Management Scholar Carol Kulik of the University of South Australia said that part of the problem is that managers don’t have the chance to practice leadership skills or management strategies and tactics before they have to actually put them into practice leading a team.
“Many line managers don’t get proper training before taking on their role, and as a result, their first thought is the impact of employees’ career-development decisions on themselves; this is a very natural reaction,” Kulik said. “So when an employee comes to you and says, ‘I have this other job opportunity, and I’m going to be leaving,’ it’s hard for line managers in the moment to say, ‘Oh, that does sound like a good opportunity; I’m happy for you,’ because what they’re thinking in their head is, ‘Oh, this really sucks for me, because I’ve made this big investment in onboarding and developing you and now I’m going to have to replace you.’
“Leadership has to train line managers to find the right words at the right time,” she said. “And most organizations don’t make that investment in their line managers. “I know it sounds contradictory, but line managers need to have these scripts available, to be prepared for the unexpected.”
Kulik said that she encourages organizations to look carefully at their line managers.
“I often call them the unsung heroes,” she said. “Organizations have so much hanging on the line managers doing the right thing at the right time in individual interactions with their team members, and I think they’re chronically underappreciated in organizations today.”
A sample of Kulik’s AOM research findings:
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
The Gender Pay Gap Gets Worse Over Employees’ Careers
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
The gender pay gap between the earnings of male and female business professionals starts small on average but tends to grow over time.
“It’s so interesting that when we look at pay gaps among male and female MBA graduates coming out of the same program in the same year, the gap is so small; it’s really little initially,” said Academy of Management Scholar Carol Kulik of the University of South Australia. “But the problem is, it gets bigger every year, because the way we usually get people pay raises is we make it a percentage of their past salary, and so any sort of pay gap that you have in the first year after graduation gets a little wider, year after year.
“And women are still primarily responsible for caring for children and elderly family members,” she said. “And so they have these career gaps, where they step off the career ladder for a bit, and when they come back, they never quite catch up on the pay raises that the men in their cohort have gotten.
“By the time they get into executive roles, this gap can actually be really wide.”
Taking a step back, Kulik said that it’s important for leaders to recognize that there are gender pay gaps, even at the highest levels of organizations.
“From the public’s perspective, they say, ‘These are women at the top of their game, and companies are under so much pressure to hire women and have women represented in senior roles; surely, they can just negotiate a higher wage,’” Kulik said. “But you’re talking gaps of 20%—that’s a big ask when you’re going into one of these senior roles.
“I want to emphasize that the gap is big, and it’s really important to talk about it, especially because in executive roles, a lot of times the biggest part of your salary is not in the base salary; rather, it’s in all the discretionary bonuses that you get for good performance,” she said.
“The higher you get in an organization, the more subjective performance evaluations are, so it’s harder to tell when you’re a high-performer, and so we tend to see very big gender pay gaps among senior executives.”
A sample of Kulik’s AOM research findings:
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
Pay Gaps Undermine Diversity and Inclusion
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
Lack of pay equity can undermine an organization’s efforts to improve diversity and hurt the effectiveness of the leadership team.
Academy of Management Scholar Carol Kulik of the University of South Australia said that her research has found that in organizations that had pay gaps within their executive teams, as organizations added more women to executive teams, the companies’ financial performance actually went down.
“In other words, the firms are shooting themselves in the foot, as they’re trying to have more gender diversity in the senior team, but they simultaneously have this gender inequality in pay,” Kulik said. “They are sending a signal to the leadership team: ‘We’re putting women on the team, but we don’t value them as much,’ so as a result, the team doesn’t operate as effectively as it should.
“The leadership team isn’t able to take advantage of the gender diversity that it has,” she said. “I’m really proud of that research, because we often think about gender pay gaps as being a problem for women, but our research shows that gender pay gaps are a problem for women’s employers, that when they have gender pay gaps at the top, they’re actually making their whole executive team function less effectively.”
Women tend to be paid less than their male counterparts in the same leadership group, regardless of the quality of their respective performance. Kulik and fellow researchers suggest that the voices of these underpaid women exert less influence on the leadership team’s decisions and activities. Unheard and discounted, the women become demotivated and less engaged in the leadership team.
“It’s actually an interaction effect, so it’s not the gap itself that lowers performance; rather, it’s the exacerbating effects of the gap as you add more women to the team,” Kulik said. “So if you have one woman on the team, you’re probably not going to see that drop quite as strongly.
“But the more women you have on the team, the clearer it becomes that this is a function of gender, and not one person having less skills or less experience, the more it becomes clearly a gender gap,” she said. “And so that’s when it becomes a problem for the organization.”
A sample of Kulik’s AOM research findings:
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
Up next....
A Downside of Human Resource Management Devolution
Source: Shutterstock
By Daniel Butcher
Human resource management (HRM) devolution—leadership transferring HRM responsibilities from specialist executives to managers—is becoming more common worldwide. However, there’s debate over whether it helps employees and organizations or adds too much to managers’ already-full plates.
Academy of Management Scholar Carol Kulik of the University of South Australia noted that HRM devolution is controversial.
“We’ve taken all these activities that used to be the responsibility of HR managers and units and put them in the hands of line managers,” Kulik said. “There’s some research that shows that individual employees have on average two important people-management conversations every week.
“They aren’t having those conversations with HR but rather with their line managers,” she said. “You can have the best people-management practices in the world, but it really comes down to how your individual line manager enacts them on a day-to-day basis.”
Kulik emphasized that managers’ jobs have gotten so much harder. Often, they get insufficient training before being promoted. Further, many are now responsible for managing more employees with smaller budgets.
“Even when they have budgets that look large, because they’re spreading it across more employees, they don’t have as many dollars for training or for rewarding top performers,” Kulik said. “And they’re now managing people on hybrid schedules or in remote environments that they never worked in themselves, so the job itself is getting much, much harder.
“There’s evidence right now that people don’t even want to become line managers—they’re saying, ‘I just want to spend my whole career being an individual contributor,’” she said. “So here’s this incredibly important job, and we have line managers who have never received formal training in people management, because they didn’t see that as part of their the primary part of their role.
“And yet, they’re this critical linchpin in an organization.”
A sample of Kulik’s AOM research findings:
-
Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.
View all posts
