As a COVID-19 vaccine appears closer to reality, this is the time for employers to weigh the options and make decisions about vaccination policies.

By: Andrea M. Kirshenbaum | November 9, 2020 For Human Resources Executive

As Pfizer moved closer to a COVID-19 vaccine with news this morning that its early trials are widely effective, employers and employees alike remain hungry for a return to “normal.” Yet, until a vaccine is widely available, many businesses continue to manage a largely remote workforce. The hope is that a potential COVID-19 vaccination will usher employees back to work.

But recent polls have shown continued skepticism surrounding a potential COVID-19 vaccination. A September poll by the Pew Research Center found that 49% of respondents “definitely or probably would not get vaccinated at this time.” Another study undertaken by the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet found that only 50%-59.9% of U.S. respondents agree that “vaccines are safe.”

For employers depending on widespread COVID-19 vaccination as a precursor to a return to pre-pandemic, on-site operations, the potential resistance to a vaccine presents significant challenges.

While only time (and data) will tell the safety and effectiveness of any potential COVID-19 vaccine, employers should be assessing whether they should mandate a COVID-19 vaccine (with exemptions for religion and disability) as part of a larger COVID-19 mitigation strategy.

Assuming that employers can get access to the vaccine, they have several options.

Assuming that a safe and effective vaccine will become available in the next few months, now is the time for employers to weigh the various options and decide which approach they would follow.

The Foundation of a Program

If employers mandate the vaccine for any category of employee, they need to create an exemption process for religion and disability. Since at this point, we do not know the components of any future FDA-approved vaccine or potential medical contraindications, the disability exemption protocol will need to take place after approval.

Employers can, however, develop their religious exemption process now and evaluate all requests in advance of FDA approval. That way, if the vaccine becomes available, employers will be poised to immunize their workforce following the disability exemption process.

Employers looking to put in place a COVID-19 vaccine program need look no further than to the case law and guidance developed in the influenza vaccination context to guide their path.

The Legal Framework

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination because of religion, among other protected categories, and requires employers to reasonably accommodate religious observance and practice, absent undue hardship. Under Supreme Court precedent, employers can establish “undue hardship” under Title VII if they can demonstrate that the accommodation would require “more than a de minimis cost.”

The Third Circuit’s seminal decision in Fallon v. Mercy Catholic Medical Center provides employers with a road map to implement a COVID-19 vaccination program.

The hospital at issue in Fallon mandated the influenza vaccination absent a religious or medical exemption. As part of the exemption process, Fallon was asked to explain his views so that the hospital could assess whether his refusal to receive the influenza vaccination was “because of … religion” and therefore protected under Title VII (and state law). In support of his exemption request, Fallon submitted a detailed essay describing his views. After reviewing his essay, the hospital concluded that Fallon’s views were not religious, and he was terminated because he refused to receive the influenza vaccination.

To evaluate Fallon’s claim, the Third Circuit set out a three-part test defining religion and ultimately ruled that Fallon failed on all three fronts: His beliefs did not address fundamental and ultimate questions having to do with deep and imponderable matters and were not comprehensive in nature. The Third Circuit also held that Fallon’s views were not manifested in formal services and rituals associated with traditional religions.

While the Third Circuit reasoned that “certain anti-vaccination beliefs are not religious,” it recognized that anti-vaccination beliefs can be protected if they are part of “a broader religious faith” and offered Christian Scientists as an example. In its opinion, the Third Circuit also made clear that employers cannot require a letter from a member of the clergy in order to consider an employee’s request for religious exemption. In addition, the Third Circuit affirmed that, consistent with Supreme Court precedent and EEOC guidance, non-theistic beliefs can satisfy Title VII’s requirements.

The EEOC also has offered guidance both generally and in the influenza vaccination context that employers should be aware of as they enact COVID-19 vaccination programs. The EEOC’s Compliance Manual states that “the Commission will define religious practices to include moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong, which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views.” However, in a 2012 Informal Discussion Letter regarding the influenza vaccination, the EEOC indicated that, “[i]t is unlikely that ‘religious’ beliefs would be held to incorporate secular philosophical opposition to vaccination.”

In its Compliance Manual, the EEOC also has taken the position that an employee can have a valid exemption even though “no religious group espouses” the beliefs of the employee and even if the religious group to which the employee belongs does not accept that belief.

Applying the Framework

Armed with the Third Circuit’s three-part test and EEOC guidance, employers should evaluate the religious exemption requests of employees. If an employer finds that an employee’s exemption request was because of his or her religion, employers then need to consider potential reasonable accommodations. Employers should be guided by science and data in evaluating these requests while also keeping in mind the particular workplace and the role and work environment of the specific employee.

Bill Morris in Legal/Financial on November 5, 2020 For Habitat Magazine

Lenox Hill, Manhattan

Nov. 5, 2020

The seesaw battle for access to co-ops’ and condos’ books rages on. In the latest skirmish – a major victory for co-op boards – Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Nancy M. Bannon has ruled that a disgruntled shareholder’s request for access to corporate books and records was “overly broad” and was supported “only by speculation” of mismanagement by the white glove Park Avenue co-op’s board of directors.

In the lawsuit, Cayne v. 501 Park Ave. Corp., shareholder James Cayne, the former chief executive at Bear Stearns, claimed that the co-op board’s president had “personal animus” that led to the rejection of several prospective purchasers of Cayne’s 5-bedroom, 6-bathroom apartment between 2016 and 2019, and the denial of the ability to sublet the apartment while it was on the market. (The alleged animus dated back to 1999, when a dispute arose over Cayne’s desire to buy a maid’s room.)

Under Section 624 of the Business Corporation Law (BCL), co-op shareholders have the right to inspect board meeting minutes, a roster of shareholders, and financial statements. In July 2019, as a way of investigating “potential wrongdoing, mismanagement and breaches of fiduciary duty” by the board members, Cayne demanded to inspect eight categories of documents, only two of which fell within the scope of inspection authorized by the BCL – the shareholder roster and meeting minutes. The remaining categories included “all books and records” pertaining to the board’s consideration and rejection of the prospective purchasers of Cayne’s apartment; the board’s consideration, approval, or rejection of prospective purchasers of all other apartments in the building; the rental of any apartment in the building; the market value of the co-op corporation and each of its units; the recusal of any board member from any board deliberations; and any proposed or adopted modifications to the proprietary lease.

In her opinion, Justice Bannon wrote: “The fact that a cooperative board has denied a shareholder permission to sell their shares does not alone justify a shareholder’s attempt to litigate around the sound exercise of the board’s judgment. Consistent with the foregoing, the [co-op’s] governing documents, by which all shareholders are bound, expressly reserve the board’s ‘right to grant or withhold consent, for any or no reason, absent unlawful discrimination’ any purchase application. . . . As such, the petitioner has not established a proper purpose to support his petition to access the respondent’s books and records.”

Not all co-op and condo boards fare so well in the battle of the books. In 2011, Linda Pomerance brought a lawsuit against her condo board at 310 W. 52nd St., seeking extensive access to board documents. The appellate court reiterated that, under existing law, condo unit-owners have the right to see financial reports, invoices, minutes of board meetings and redacted legal invoices “so long as [it is] in good faith and for a valid purpose … at the managing agent’s office, during convenient weekday hours.” The court went a step further and granted Pomerance the right to see a roster of unit-owners and make electronic copies of the documents – while granting the board the right to demand that she sign a nondisclosure agreement.

In a similar case, Armand Musey, a shareholder in the co-op at 425 E. 86th St., sued for access to board documents after a dispute erupted over the rooftop terrace outside Musey’s apartment. The court ruled that co-op shareholders also are allowed to copy documents, which they could not do before, and that boards can require a confidentiality agreement. After the Musey ruling, attorney Jesse Schwartz of Kagan Lubic Lepper Finkelstein & Gold told Habitat: “I think the courts have been going in this direction for a while, allowing broader inspections, consistent with common law.”

And then came Justice Bannon’s decision in the Park Avenue case, which sent the seesaw battle of the books in the opposite direction. As Bannon wrote: “Even under the liberal discovery standard, a shareholder may not engage in ‘an intrusive probe into the confidential financial records’ of other shareholders, let alone attempt to delve into a prospective purchaser’s finances well beyond the contemplated scope of the BCL.”

CAMICB recognizes that during the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person education opportunities have halted with the worldwide shift to social distancing. To assist in this transition, CAMICB offers a number of online continuing education opportunities.

We have a helpful list of On-Demand webinars available here for managers to view that are free or low-cost, and CAI Headquarters has an entire library dedicated to webinars available for continuing education credit available here. All of CAMICB’s continuing education opportunities can be found here. 

CAMICB also offers the option for managers to seek out online opportunities that work best for them, and unapproved online options can be e-mailed to info@camicb.org for approval consideration.

For any questions, please reach out to CAMICB at info@camicb.org. 

Posted on October 29, 2020 by Karin Hurt David Dye 

One of the most frequent concerns we hear from leaders and teams (where remote-work is the foreseeable norm) is the lack of a virtual watercooler. That metaphorical place where people exchange ideas, build connections, and spontaneous innovation thrives.

The informal exchange of ideas is critical for innovation and building relationships.

Fortunately, you can create spaces and interactions that simulate or improve upon the accidental connections that happen when you’re in the same building.

But it does require different ways of thinking and interacting.

As you’re thinking about how to re-create these interactions, it may be helpful to reflect on why watercoolers have become shorthand for these dynamics. The prosaic watercooler wasn’t designed as a place for team members to build relationships and share ideas.

But it works. Well.

Why? One reason is that it feels easy … no pressure … just chatting.

It’s the same reason people tell us the best conversations that happen at conferences happen during the coffee breaks.

So, how can you bring people together to cultivate spontaneous connections and new ideas?

3 Ways to Create that Virtual Watercooler

1. Create a standing “watercooler room.”

One of the most straightforward ways to re-create that gathering space is to build an online version. A Zoom or Teams video meeting that stays open, where people can drop in to say hi, take breaks, and talk about whatever they want.

To get people used to its availability, it may help to have a natural reason people would want to stop by. Perhaps a different daily resource, fun prompt, or shared activity or whiteboard.

Standing “break room” Slack or Teams channels can also play this role. We’ve seen organizations create dedicated spaces for work-related free-form discussions as well as personal topics like exchanging recipes, following sports, and many more.

2. Use quick parallel conversations

We’ve been inspired by teams around the world who come together quickly to solve problems, get creative, riff on ideas, and chart strategic action–in minutes, not days.

The secret to this rapid creativity and strategic problem-solving?

Breakout rooms.

There are so many ways to use the power of breakout rooms for fast parallel thinking.

You can seed the conversation with one meaningful, specific “How can we?” question and have each room address it – or give each room a different question or aspect of the challenge ahead. Or hold a quick standup meeting where people address one current challenge, then design a rapid-breakout session to address solutions for the three most common issues.

Create groups of 4-6 people, create a time limit that feels slightly too short, and get out of the way to let people engage with one another. The secret is to make these conversations relevant and fast. The best result is if one group says, “let’s keep talking” and then does.

3. Get personal with meaningful prompts.

It is possible to build and nurture human relationships remotely. We know because we’ve done it with clients and friends around the world. Whether you’re starting a business meeting with human connection or facilitating a virtual social hour, how can you be intentional and increase everyone’s understanding of one another?

The key is to use meaningful prompts. You might introduce the process with easier topics like hobbies, but over time, move to more meaningful conversations.

One of our favorites is “What are you most proud of?”–either in life, work, or any other aspect of life. This gives everyone quick insight into a person in a way that’s safe and not too vulnerable.

We’ve also worked with teams who have used questions like “What has been your source of strength or inspiration over the past months?” “Can you show us a picture or object associated with your source of strength and inspiration?”

Your Turn

It takes intentional effort to rebuild these informal exchanges, but the rewards are worth it. Your virtual watercooler will help to build connected teams and facilitate better ideas.

We’d love to hear from you. What are the most effective ways you’ve seen remote teams rebuild informal gatherings?

The director of Ethical Imperatives contends that ethical leaders possess six traits that command, not demand, loyalty.

10-27-2020 Leadership Now

BY YONASON GOLDSO

Unlike the purely ceremonial royals of today, kings of old were absolute sovereigns. They answered to no one. Their word was law. And they held unchecked power over life and death in their hands.

If so, what distinguishes kings from despots? Only this: the way they appear in the eyes of their people.

A despot is merely a tyrant, whose decrees and edicts may be irrational and capricious, without regard for individual rights or the common good. Subjects serve a despot out of fear alone, secretly wishing and waiting for their demise.

In contrast, kings—despite the absolute power they hold—can be benevolent dictators, ruling with enlightened wisdom, guiding their kingdom with a balance of justice and compassion. Kings may not need their subjects’ approval, but a vote among the governed would nevertheless return such a ruler to power by near-unanimous consent.

In the workplace, bosses and managers may hold absolute power. But how they wield that power will determine the loyalty and, by natural consequence, the productivity of their employees.

If you want to be respected as a king and not reviled as a despot, you need to command, not demand, loyalty. And the way your employees see you will depend on whether you conduct yourself according to the principles of ethics.

In these complicated times, acting ethically is not as simple as it once was. Social norms change seemingly every day. Often, even the right choice produces collateral damage to real or perceived inequity.

What is a leader to do?

Loyalty is not acquired by merely making ethical decisions. More fundamentally, it comes from being recognized as an ethical person. The qualities that describe an ethical leader can be enumerated using a convenient acronym: E.T.H.I.C.S. An ethical leader asks the following questions to determine if they exhibit these qualities.

EMPATHY: WHAT IMPACT WILL MY WORDS AND ACTIONS HAVE ON THOSE AROUND ME?

The first step toward acting ethically is to see actions and situations through the eyes of others. As an ethical leader, you need to discern the individual circumstances and challenges of your people, feel their joy and pain, recognize their hopes and fears, be sensitive to their wants and dreams. Empathy requires knowing others. With that knowledge, you can anticipate how your decisions will affect them and ensuring that they feel understood, valued, and appreciated.

TRUSTWORTHINESS: DO I TRUST OTHERS, AND HAVE I EARNED THEIR TRUST?

Only by demonstrating integrity in every aspect of your personal conduct will you earn the trust of those around you. What’s more, you need to show trust by allowing your people to do their jobs without micromanaging them, to shoulder responsibility, and to occasionally make mistakes. Only with trust will relationships flourish. Only with trustworthy leadership will any community thrive.

HUMILITY: AM I INTERESTED IN WHAT BENEFITS MY COMMUNITY OR IN WHAT BENEFITS MY PRESTIGE AND MY EGO?

Leadership is a gift and a privilege, one that carries with it a responsibility to your followers. The best leaders, recognizing that they are not infallible, encourage constructive disagreement. This produces deeper insight, greater clarity, and a culture of partnership. Admitting when you’re wrong, or when you don’t know, builds your credibility for the future when you assert that you are right.

INQUISITIVENESS: DO I WANT TO KNOW AS MUCH AS I CAN, OR DO I WANT TO LOOK LIKE I KNOW IT ALL?

Never indulge the illusion that you know enough, that you understand enough, that you are wise enough. Seeking knowledge and insight requires a mindset of curiosity and constant improvement. Promoting intellectual diversity is the key to understanding. Displaying intellectual arrogance is a certain formula for disaster.

COURAGE: AM I MORE AFRAID OF LOOKING WRONG OR OF BEING WRONG?

It’s hard to ask for help. It’s hard to admit when you’re wrong. It’s hard to do the right thing when there will be hell to pay for doing so. Courage is not the absence of fear; it’s doing battle with fear. When you calculate the potential cost of taking what appears to be the safer course, you will often find that doing what’s right is not just the better choice, it’s the only choice.

SELF-DISCIPLINE: WHAT DO I NEED TO IMPROVE TODAY SO I CAN DO MY JOB BETTER TOMORROW?

How much time, effort, and energy do you put into your work? How much have you put into yourself? Building your character is foundational to building your business. Nothing worthwhile comes without a determined effort. Only by setting rigorous standards of personal conduct for yourself can you expect those around you to set the bar higher for themselves.

As an ethical leader, you see your choices through a different lens and recognize that the culture you create will determine your bottom line. Most of all, you naturally command the loyalty that inspires others to join you in your purpose, to share your passion, and to commit themselves to your vision. By promoting a culture of success all around you, the rewards of that success will inevitably follow.

Are you an ethical leader?

Yonason Goldson is director of Ethical Imperatives, LLC. His most recent book is, “Grappling with the Gray: An ethical handbook for personal success and business prosperity.”

William D. McCracken in COVID-19 on October 20, 2020 For Habitat Magazine

We have all seen clips on social media and news outlets of people ostentatiously refusing to wear a mask in public spaces, including the South Lawn at the White House. What happens when one of these so-called “anti-maskers” lives in your co-op or condominium? Although the vast majority of co-op and condo residents have dutifully complied with COVID-19 safety requirements, some residents adamantly refuse to follow the rules. These situations can be a tough test of a building’s culture and governing documents – and a board’s fortitude.

When the coronavirus ravaged New York City back in March, co-op and condo boards instituted new house rules to comply with the flurry of executive orders and other public health guidance being issued on a near-daily basis. These rules included not just mask requirements, but also restrictions on visitors and use of building amenities, among many other things. These protocols were (and are) essential to protecting a building’s residents and staff, and board members understandably want to come down hard on anyone who refuses to abide by those rules. This can be more difficult than it might seem.

First, if they’re going to be effective, COVID-19 house rules need to have been validly enacted. Generally speaking, house rules can be instituted by a majority of board members. However, if a house rule is inconsistent with an express provision in one of the building’s governing documents, it may not be enforceable. The analysis can be complicated when a building’s governing documents give residents the right to use common space – for example, a gym – but the COVID-19 house rules, in compliance with current law, restrict that right by keeping the gym closed.

When a shareholder or unit-owner (or a subletter) violates a house rule, the most common enforcement mechanism is a monetary fine. But there are pitfalls for the unwary: it is not unusual for boards to belatedly learn that their governing documents do not give them the authority to levy fines. Even if the authority is there, boards have to be careful that such fines would not look unreasonably excessive in the eyes of a judge.

Of course, if residents are willing to put their own health and the safety of others at risk by refusing to do simple things like wearing a mask or observing social distancing, levying fines may not be enough. If a resident refuses to pay, boards can pursue action against them in court, although that can be time-consuming and expensive. Boards may wish to consider imposing other, more immediate, consequences for failure to follow the rules. For example: restricting the use of amenities.

The availability of remedies may depend on whether a building is a co-op or a condo. In co-ops, boards have the power to terminate a shareholder’s proprietary lease for objectionable conduct. Even the most ardent “anti-maskers” might think twice about defying COVID-19 house rules if it could result in the loss of their homes.

Condo boards cannot evict unit-owners, but they do have the power to seek an injunction against violations of building rules. The Condominium Act also expressly authorizes boards to require a “sufficient surety” to ensure future compliance if a unit-owner has engaged in “flagrant or repeated” violations of building rules. Although this provision of the Condominium Act has rarely been invoked, condo boards should be prepared to use every tool at their disposal to ensure compliance with COVID-19 house rules. As difficult as these individual cases may be, boards must act to protect the well-being of all of their residents and staff. It could be a matter of life or death.

William D. McCracken is a partner at the law firm Ganfer Shore Leeds & Zauderer.  

This is the beginning of the end of an office design workers love to hate.

October 19, 2020

By Nate Berg for Fast Company

It’s been embraced for saving money, hated for its lack of sound privacy, blasted for reinforcing sexist behavior, and even cited as a reason people considered leaving their jobs, which have led many to call, repeatedly, for the end of the open-plan office.

The pandemic may finally make that happen. According to a new survey of tech companies, fewer than half of offices with fully open plans expect to keep that layout in the post-pandemic era. For some offices, the open plan is already on its way out.

Conducted by the commercial real estate firm Savills in August and September, the survey asked 250 tech companies mostly in North America about how the pandemic had affected their plans for office space and workforce growth in the near term.

Before the onset of the pandemic, 46% of respondents said their offices were entirely open plan, with either bench seating or cubicles. Looking to their plans going forward, fewer than half of them—only 22% of respondents—said they would continue to keep their open office plan. Even those respondents with a mix of mostly open plans plus some private offices said they’d be likely to change things going forward; about a quarter of respondents said they’d change things in the near future.

The move away from open office plans may be just the start of big changes coming to tech workplaces. According to the survey, offices may also be getting smaller, with more than 80% of respondents saying they expect to need less office space in the next 12 to 18 months. More than half of respondents said they’d even be getting rid of at least some, if not most, of their office space within the next year and a half.

But that doesn’t mean the office itself is dead. In fact, only about a tenth of respondents said they expected to have more than 60% of their workforce working remotely full time in a post-vaccine environment.

So if the open-plan office is out but offices themselves are still a part of most companies’ futures, what will they look like? For most respondents, this is an open question. Almost a third of respondents said they were still considering their workplace planning going forward, and 40% said they had not yet decided on the density of their prospective new office layouts.

The pandemic has had a significant impact on the shape and practice of work, and its implications are still evolving. If open-plan opponents are lucky, this may be the beginning of the end of the office design that they love to hate.

By Jim Haudan on October 14, 2020 For Root Digital Experiences

Sounds pretty profound, doesn’t it? When you read the words, and look closely at their meaning, they’re so true. Think about it… if you have a strategy and you don’t execute on it, who cares that you even had a strategy to begin with? And if you try to execute but your people are not on board, do you even have a hope of making anything happen?

Exactly.

So, how can you tell if your company is actually executing your strategy through people? Ask yourself these 10 questions and see how well you do.

1. Do leaders share a consistent view and interpretation of the strategy?

Does your plan mean the same thing to everyone? Are you guys at the top on the same page about what you want to do with the organization?

2. Are your people ready, willing, and able to execute your strategy?

Do you have employees who are on board with what you’re tying to accomplish? Are they capable of helping you get where you need to go?

3. Do the behaviors of the leadership team support the strategy?

The way the top tier acts is going to set the pace and tone for how everyone else follows. Leaders have to model the behavior they want the rest of the company to emulate.

4. Do leaders put the good of the company ahead of their functions?

This is where we talk of ‘owning the whole’ before any individual piece. Are the people at the helm looking out for the big picture before their individual departments or functions?

5. Do managers communicate the strategy clearly and consistently? 

Are people the next level down getting the message of the strategy and their role in helping to achieve it getting the right message?

6. Do managers review progress on goals with their people?

You’ve got to check in along the way, otherwise there is no way for employees to see how they’re doing and if they’re contributing to the company’s ability to execute on the strategy.

7. Does your front line understand the marketplace and the strategy?

The people closest to your customers really need a firm grasp on what the playing field looks like and how you’re intending to win.

8. Can the front line connect their contributions to company goals?

Once they understand it, that’s a great first step, but can they see how what they do each day in each customer interaction impacts the bigger picture?

9. Are opportunities to learn relevant skills available to everyone?

When asking people to do new things, take on different responsibilities, or participate in a way they aren’t used to, you’ve also got to make sure they have the tools and skills training available to beef up what they bring to the table. Without the right resources and training, they won’t be able to deliver, but the blame will be on you.

10. Do your people know what winning looks like to you?

If you have the strategy, and the execution, and the people on board, how will the end of your story go? What does it look like when you win? And have you shown that picture to your people so they can visualize what it is they’re working to help achieve?

If you answered ‘yes’ to most or all of these questions (and their sub-questions), then you’re in pretty good shape – your people must get it when it comes to your strategy. More often, however, leaders are answering ‘no’ to most of these. It’s a true challenge that so many companies struggle with year after year. But if you look at these questions and answer honestly, you’re likely to get on the right track to executing your strategy through your people.

By Steve Keating for LEAD TODAY Helping the Next Generation of Leaders Develop Themselves

The first two steps in our planning process were foundational in nature. Use any GPS you want and you’ll discover that without both a starting point and destination GPS is worthless. So is a plan!

Now that you understand the “As is,” or your starting point, and you have a clear picture of your “should be” or destination, you can begin the heavy lifting of developing a plan to reach that destination.

I call step three of the planning process the “will be.” This is where you set goals. For your plan to be viable you’ll need short-term goals, medium-term and long-term goals. Others may disagree but I don’t think there is any perfect answer to what “short term” actually means. For some it might be 6 months and for others it might be 6 minutes. Remember this is YOUR plan. While I encourage you to share it with people you trust for honest feedback, do not be dissuaded from going after something you feel strongly about. 

Keep in mind that while we’re planning for a better 2021 next year is only a stepping stone to future years. Your long-term goals may stretch out 5 or 10 years or even longer. 

Whether something should be classified as a short-term goal or a long-term goal matters far less than your commitment to achieve it. So, while we’re on the commitment subject….

Never set a goal you’re not committed to work towards. If your goal isn’t something you are willing to make sacrifices in order to achieve then it’s not a worthwhile goal. You will develop the actual plan to achieve the goals later in the planning process but if you’re not 100% committed to working for a goal then don’t waste time setting it. 

Which brings us to what goals you should set. Have I mentioned that this is YOUR plan…it’s no one’s business what YOUR goals are. I’d recommend setting goals in many areas of your life. Personal goals, professional, financial, health, spiritual, growth/learning and wherever else YOU want.

Whatever your goals are you will be far more likely to achieve them if they are based on the foundation of your core values. And that’s what makes planning such a challenge for so many people.

Asked to articulate their core values very few people can actually do it. Core Values are those deeply held beliefs that make you who you are. The sad reality is that many people float through life never understanding what makes them who they are. It takes considerable self-reflection to know yourself. It takes a sizable investment of time to understand what your deeply held beliefs are and how you came to hold them so dear. 

And most people simply will not make that investment of time. In fact research shows the average person will invest 400% more time to plan a one week vacation than they will invest to plan the rest of their lives. Goals are actually the plan for the rest of your life. 

This my friends is where the rubber meets the road. If you are unwilling to invest the time to know and understand your core values then you might as well skip the rest of this planning series. It will only be an exercise in frustration. 

If however you are willing to turn off the TV, put down your phone, block out distractions to focus on the life you have then this series can help you. If you’re willing to consider the life you want along with the values that will guide you in your pursuit of that life then this planning process could change your life. 

This is the step of the process where you decide the “will be.” Not what you would like things to be, what they really “will be.” Imagine being able to simply choose the life you want… then skip the imagining part and set goals to choose it. 

The three-step training and certification program introduces young professionals to the growing field of community association management.

Millions of 2020 college graduates continue to face economic and financial uncertainty as they attempt to enter a workforce that’s been dramatically impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. While many sectors of the global economy have been hard hit, community association management continues to be a profession in high demand. 

Community Associations Institute (CAI) recently launched a program designed to train and certify the next generation of community association managers and bring awareness to the growing profession. 

The Community Management Training and Certification Program, is a self-paced curriculum that provides candidates a hands-on approach that explores the responsibilities of property maintenance; best practices for developing, managing, and balancing association budgets; preparing contractor proposals; and understanding a community association reserve study.

For candidates enrolling in the program, the first step is to register for and successfully pass CAI’s M-100 course, The Essentials of Community Association Management. After completing the course, students are encouraged to earn the Certified Manager of Community Associations (CMCA®) credential administered by the Community Association Managers International Certification Board (CAMICB). A student membership also is included in the program’s cost—offering candidates continued education, mentorship, and networking opportunities.

Community association management has experienced tremendous growth since its beginning just over 40 years ago. According to U.S. government housing statistics, community associations are the fastest-growing segment of residential home construction, a rapid growth that is expected to continue. Today, there are more than 55,000 community managers in the U.S. In April, CAI surveyed community association managers in a COVID-19 & Community Association Employment Survey. Of more than 1,000 community association managers surveyed during the COVID-19 pandemic, 91.1% say their level of employment has not been impacted.

“We believe that today’s college graduates possess the skills essential to community association management—excellent people skills, strong communication skills, and the ability to collaborate and solve problems,” says Thomas M. Skiba, CAE, CAI’s chief executive officer. “For more than 40 years, CAI has been the trusted source for community association managers. Our education and certification program will further provide new professionals with the training needed to build a resume and start a successful career in community association management.”

Learn more about CAI’s Community Management Training and Certification Program.