In business, there's a speed difference: It's the difference between how important a firm's leaders say speed is to their competitive strategy and how fast the company actually moves. The difference is important regardless of industry and company size. Companies fearful of losing their competitive advantage spend much time and money looking for ways to pick up the speed.

In our study of 343 businesses, the companies that chose to go, go, go to try to gain an edge ended up with lower sales and operating incomes than those that paused at key moments to make sure they were on the right track. What's more, the firms that “slowed down to speed up” improved their top and bottom lines, averaging 40% higher sales and 52% higher operating incomes over a three-year period.

    How did they disobey the laws of business physics, taking more time than competitors yet performing better? They thought differently about what “slower” and “faster” mean. Firms sometimes fail to understand the difference between operational speed (moving quickly) and strategic speed (reducing the time it takes to deliver value). Simply increasing the speed of production, for example, may be one way to try to reduce the speed difference. But that often leads to reduced value over time, in the form of lower-quality products and services.

    In our study, higher-companies with strategic speed always made changes when necessary. They became more open to ideas and discussion. They encouraged new ways of thinking. And they allowed time to look back and learn. By contrast, performance suffered at firms that moved fast all the time, paid too much attention to improving efficiency, stuck to tested methods, didn't develop team spirit among their employees, and had little time thinking about changes.

    Strategic speed serves as a kind of leadership. Teams that regularly take time to get things right, rather than plough ahead full bore, are more successful in meeting their business goals. That kind of strategy must come from the top.

    As he applied sunscreen to his young daughter's face, Dara O'Rourke, a professor of environmental and labor policy at the University of California, Berkeley, found himself wondering if the lotion(霜) was safe. He realized there was no readily available answer. The result—two years, a team of chemists, lots of testing and venture capital(风险投资) later—is GoodGuide. com. Launched in 2008, this is a website with a smart phone app that rates 140, 000 consumer products (only in America) according to their safety, environmental sustainability and the ethics of the firms that make them. Now GoodGuide has created a new “purchase analyzer” app designed to inform consumers not just about the values attached to products, but also about whether they are the virtuous(有信誉的) shoppers they say they want to be.

    Using the new app requires selecting a series of characteristics, which range from whether the user favours organic products to buying only from firms with a good human-rights record. Consumers then scan the bar code on a product with the camera in their smart phones. The app identifies it and checks in a database to score it. Much therefore depends on the quality of the data, which GoodGuide gathers from various sources, including government reports, scientific studies, and research by its own staff. If the product scores badly, the app will recommend an alternative item which is rated more highly. The app also tracks a consumer's purchases to see how well he lives up to his selected values, giving a sort of personal virtue rating.

    So far, GoodGuide has mostly been used by shoppers who are keen to know about any issues connected with products they buy. They are mothers concerned about a child's health, older people facing a chronic(慢性的) illness or supporters of a cause, such as animal rights. The hope behind the app is that the idea of finding out about a product's background will become the mainstream.

    Consumers rarely change their buying habits, even when provided with scientific and other data, says Mr O'Rourke. So he has drawn on insights from behavioral economics, which show shoppers can be greatly influenced by peer pressure and by information passed on to them by people they know. The app tries to take advantage of these pressures. The virtue rating will inform consumers how well they are doing according to the values they espouse(拥护). That measurement encourages them to do better. Soon, the rating will be able to be shared with others on social media sites such as Facebook, which could inspire a shopper to consume more thoughtfully.

    I've recently published a book of letters from 32 amazing Australian women about their experiences of new motherhood. Perhaps the most common question I've been asked since publication is why more of the mothers didn't ask for help. If those early months were so hard and so exhausting as they were described, then why didn't more of these women simply ask for help?

Embedded (把……牢牢地嵌入) deep in this enquiry is the assumption that if you ask, you shall receive—and that you shall receive without judgment. And if there is any experience of new motherhood in the 21^st century it is the inescapability of judgment. By asking for help new mothers open themselves up to a wave of quiet—and not-so-quiet—disapproval of why on earth they need it.

    The earliest moments of motherhood are synonymous with sacrifice(等同于牺牲). A mother sacrifices her body for not nine but almost ten long months, sharing her shell with a new being. A mother sacrifices her control, and often her mental and physical health, during the painful process of childbirth. A mother, in the weeks and months that follow, puts the needs of another before her own, sacrificing her sense of self, her ambition and all too often, her happiness.

    We don't normally use the word sacrifice to describe the newborn period. It's supposed to be sweet and milky and warm but a sacrifice is exactly what it is. And when we sacrifice we should be entitled (使享有权利) to mourn—a privilege new mothers are expressly prevented from.

    We have reached the point where being a mother who admits she needs help is like saying your child isn't worth the sacrifice. The suffering has become a badge(徽章) of honor, worn in service to your family.

    The role of mothering is not an easy one, nor will it ever be. But it could be made more manageable if we were all to offer help or support.

    A California family drives a car that could help protect the environment. When Jon and Sandy go to the store or to their daughters' soccer games, they drive in high-tech style. They drive a $1 million, fuel-cell-powered car. It may be the world's most expensive car and one of the most environmentally friendly cars. The FCX is the first fuel-cell-powered car to be used by a family anywhere in the world. The FCX uses hydrogen and oxygen for fuel. Car makers have been working to develop vehicles that are better for the environment. They are developing cars that use fuel other than gasoline.

    And then what is fuel cell technology? Fuel cell technology works by changing the chemicals hydrogen and oxygen into water. This process produces electricity, and water vapor which comes out of the exhaust pipe. Most cars release dangerous gases such as carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Many scientists say these gases are major contributors to global warming. “The FCX is driven just like any other vehicle on the road, but without the gases which pollute the environment,” scientists say. Fuel cell technology has been around since the 1800s, but scientists have yet been to perfect it. They say it may take years before the technology is ready for widespread use. Another earth-friendly car is already on the market. Hybrid cars use both gasoline and an electric motor. They are becoming more popular with customers because they cut pollution and improve fuel efficiency.

    In today's society, almost half of all marriages in America end in divorce, which means many children have divorced parents, and I am by no means a rare case. There are plenty of other people understanding the difficulty of having separated parents and living in two households. Despite this, people who haven't personally experienced divorce really have no idea what it's like.

    My parents have handled divorce and joint custody（监护）well, at least better than expected. Occasionally my parents put up the curtain to block my brother and I from the reality and I will get a glimpse of the not-so-bright-and-sunny reality, the fact that my parents simply don't like each other, let along get along. They try to make sure my brother and I don't overhear the argument and do their best to keep my brother and I out of their issues.

    Last Mother's Day I woke up at my dad's house with a text message from my mom saying," Call me when u can." I rolled out of bed and dated her number. On other end of the phone I could hear my mom's trembling voice." Your dad isn't letting me have you until 7 tonight." I knew Mother's Day was important to her and me. I began to get angry with my dad, but I told myself that getting mad and fueling my mom's anger towards my dad wouldn't help. Later my father told me that he had planned to spend time with my grandma and step-mom for Mother's Day, which I understood and accepted but I also understood why my mom wouldn't accept it.

    While having divorced parents is difficult, I have learned a lot about how to deal with conflict from an early age and I've been blessed with an extremely large family, which is an amazing network of support.

    Kaitlin Woolley and Ayelet Fishbach report in Psychological Science that a meal taken "family-style" from a central plate can greatly improve the outcome of later negotiations.

    Having conducted previous research in 2017 revealing that eating similar foods led to people feeling emotionally closer to one another, Dr Woolley and Dr Fishbach wondered whether the way in which food was served also had a psychological effect. They theorized that, on the one hand, sharing food with other people might indicate food scarcity（短缺）and increase a feeling of competition. However, they also reasoned that it could instead lead people to become more aware of others' needs and drive cooperative behavior as a result. Curious to find out, they did a series of experiments.

    For the first test they recruited 100 pairs of participants from a local cafe, none of whom knew each other. The participants were seated at a table and fed tortilla chips with salsa. Half the pairs were given their own basket of 20 grams of chips and a bowl of 25 grams of salsa, and half were given 40 grams of chips and 50 grams of salsa to share. As a cover for the experiment, all participants were told this snack was to be consumed before the game began.

    The game asked the participants to negotiate an hourly wage rate during a fictional strike. Each person was randomly assigned to represent the union or management and follow a set of rules.

    The researchers measured cooperation by noting the number of rounds it took to reach an agreement, and found that those who shared food resolved the strike significantly faster（in 8. 7rounds）than those who did not（13.2 rounds）. A similar experiment was conducted with 104

participants and Goldfish crackers（饼干）, this time negotiating an airline's route prices. The results were much the same, with the food-sharers negotiating successfully 63. 3%of the time and those who did not share doing so 42. 9%of the time.