April 4, 2008
07:39 pm | 0 recommendations | Be the first to comment
I was watching Larry King last week and happened to catch the segment with guests Laura and Jenna Bush. They were there promoting their new children’s book, Read All About It. I haven’t really followed the Bush children. Except for the news stories over the years when they were doing their teenage acting out, there really hasn’t been much coverage. It’s restricted and that is as it should be.
So I was surprised at how disarmingly charming Jenna Bush was. She wasn’t smooth or slick. She didn’t even seem media-trained (and that’s something I know a lot about) though she certainly does have a good mentor in her mother in that regard. A giveaway was that during the interview, her eyes frequently darted to the goings on about the studio, while her head remained pointed toward Larry King. Yet, when it was her turn to speak she seemed comfortable. She was clearly passionate about her topic – the book is about a boy who hates to read – and her career. Following in her mother’s footsteps, Bush is a teacher. She was (mostly) poised and even initially used the honorific, “Sir,” when addressing Larry King.
That led me to thinking: what does this communicate, not only about this young woman, but also about her parents? To raise a child in this day and age is a huge challenge. To do it with the constant media scrutiny and klieg light glare that are continuously trained on the White House, seems nearly impossible. Yet, all the children that I have observed growing up in such challenging circumstances have turned out well. Lest anyone feel sorry for her, however, Ms. Bush was sure to note how extraordinarily advantaged she is.
Despite how I may feel about the job the President is doing, he has done well in this one, very important area. Of course, it seems safe to assume Mrs. Bush has done most of the heavy lifting. Still, there is a father in the house and it does say something quite positive about him. It's something he can use right about now.
Jenna Bush reflects well on her parents. While it would be crass to label the raising of a successful child as just another tool in the toolkit, you take these kinds of “compliments” where you can get them.
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates LLC • High-Stakes Communications • Greenwich, CT
01:41 pm | 1 recommendation | 2 comments
I have noticed that the lowly comma is making a return to written communication. I have missed it terribly over the past several years and so it is good to see it back.
I had always wondered why it got lost. In asking friends and colleagues about it, people would almost brag about not using them, saying they cluttered things up or were old-fashioned. I would disagree vociferously, taking the position that commas make reading easier.
The decline of the comma is due in large part to the absence of teaching of grammar and punctuation during the past 20 years (at least). My kids do not know the parts of speech – what an adverb or prepositional phrase is, not to mention a subordinate clause. And they have attended very good schools. I can clearly remember that by 5th grade, we 10-year-olds could diagram a sentence. (What is that, you ask? See here for an explanation.) Diagramming was a great way to learn to make sense of the complexities and logic of written language.
Another reason is the lowering of standards of written communication due to the reliance on email, IM, and text.
Anyway, in honor of its return and as a way to encourage the Fast Company community to keep the comma coming, following are some of my favorite rules for comma usage:
- To separate components in a series: “John wanted salad, chicken, and macaroni for dinner.” Note that I even included a comma before “and.” It has become optional but is actually useful if I were to say instead of “macaroni,” “macaroni and cheese.”
- In sentences beginning with because or although: “Because it was raining, Brad brought an umbrella.” “Although it was raining, Brad decided not to bring an umbrella.”
- Sentences starting with prepositional or adverb phrases: “When she tried to open the door (adverb phrase), she couldn’t.” “Before you leave (prepositional phrase), turn off the lights.”
- To avoid confusion: “Outside, the light was brighter than he expected.”
There is one more reason to be hopeful about the comeback of the comma: The SAT now tests grammar to some extent. They call it the “writing test,” but it’s really copy-editing with lots of questions about grammar, punctuation, and placement. And we all know that when the tests test, the schools teach.
By the way, I’m no grammar expert; I just like it when writing is easy to read and digest. Or maybe I’m just an old-fashioned girl.
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates LLC • High-Stakes Communications • Greenwich, CT
March 3, 2008
05:13 pm | 0 recommendations | 2 comments
I returned recently from a business trip to Dubai where I worked on a communications project with a private equity company. This is a fascinating country – city-state, really – with many contradictions. Since it is so widely featured in the news, I thought I’d give you my take on it.
First and foremost, the people are wonderful. Dubai has promoted itself as a tourist mecca (pun intended) as well as international business center. Therefore, service is the name of the game. With the exception of some long queues for taxis in certain places (far worse, I’m afraid, than the lines at Grand Central Station in New York), service was excellent.
On the business end, the people were highly educated, worldly, courtly and polite as well as open to new ideas. No expense was spared to make the project a success. This is the type of environment consultants like me dream of and unfortunately rarely encounter. It’s the way I remember things being in the U.S. in the early to mid-90s. There is an advantage to not skimping on the details. Work can be delivered in a relaxed, professional way and everyone can focus on the outcome rather than nitpicking the cost of this or that. Of course, with oil well over $100 a barrel, Dubaians may be feeling just a little more relaxed about spending than we in the West.
The country itself is undergoing an unbelievable transformation from desert to metropolis and travel destination and as such, there is building and construction everywhere. I was amazed at the number of cranes. At night, they are lit up along with their buildings as if to take their rightful place in the Dubai skyline. There are downsides to all the construction: I could not go for a walk outside my hotel because there are no sidewalks as of yet amidst the construction. There is also dust in the air. One thing I missed was greenery. Not forgetting that this is a desert, there were no parks or trees. I assume this will be remedied once construction is complete. Of course, the big resorts had plenty of palms and other landscaping.
Dubai is home to some of the most interesting and beautiful architecture including the Burj Dubai, intended to be the tallest building in the world and nearly twice as high as the Empire State Building. But the piece de resistance is the Burj al Arab, the hotel on the Arabian Gulf that is always featured in press stories about Dubai. Built to look like a giant mainsail blowing in the warm Gulf wind, this is truly a breathtaking vision. On my last afternoon, I decided to visit this masterpiece, only to be turned away at the gate. Turns out they do not want sightseers and you must have a restaurant reservation to be allowed in. Oh well, next time.
No trip to Dubai would be complete without some shopping and it is a shopper’s paradise. The Mall of the Emirates hosts Ski Dubai – yup, that’s right – a ski slope including chair lift and all the accoutrements so desert denizens can suit up. I didn’t go inside, having just returned from Maine and outside skiing. I must say, though, that if you’ve seen one mall, you’ve seen them all and there is something vaguely depressing about seeing so many familiar stores in a land so foreign.
Then again, a trip to the souqs was just the antidote. There are three in Dubai that are must-sees – the gold souq, textile souq and spice souq. These bustling markets are where the local goods and handicrafts are sold. With the price of gold at around $1,000 an ounce, gold is expensive no matter what. But there were still some bargains and bargaining is de rigueur and it was fun.
Finally, the food was fabulous. Middle Eastern food is a favorite of mine and I ate a lot of small mezzeh, small plates of foods like hummous, tabouleh, yoghurt, all drizzled with olive oil and garnished with olives or pomegranate seeds. In the local supermarkets, there are endless crates of dried fruits and nuts. To me, this is snacking heaven.
At that market, I enjoyed an exchange I had with one of the sales people, the man measuring and bagging the fruits and pistachios. In limited English, he asked me where I was from and I told him I was American. “I like Americans,” he said enthusiastically. I then asked him where he was from and he said Iran. “Do you like Iranians?” “Of course,” I replied. “I like you and I love Iranian dates and pistachios.”
And at that moment, I felt hopeful about the world.
Ruth Sherman Ruth Sherman Associates LLC High-Stakes Communication Greenwich CT
February 2, 2008
09:22 pm | 0 recommendations | Be the first to comment
Most people who know me know I'm fascinated by political communication and in fact, it has become an area of expertise for me. Today, I was quoted in the Washingon Post on Barack Obama's speaking style and earlier this month I was quoted in the New York Times on Hillary Clinton's. [See Fast Company feature: The Brand Called Obama.]
Obama is clearly the winner (so far) in the communication wars and it's difficult and a little sad to watch Clinton and, to a lesser extent, McCain criticize Obama's speaking style. Their criticism reflects their frustration with this "upstart" who came from nowhere to upend the contest in ways neither of them expected. It's all empty rhetoric, they say, he's a great speaker, sure, but there is no substance to back up all the oratory.
This attitude doesn't surprise me because I hear the same types of complaints every day from my clients, many of whom are great at what they do (must-have skills for the job) and think that's all that should matter. The work should speak for itself. But work, while important, can't speak. People can and that's where style comes in.
Expert speaking style enables a leader -- or an ordinary person -- to accomplish a critical goal: to get his or her message out. Style gives words meaning and makes the speaker believable. For example, the vast majority of Obama's supporters don't know him personally and have no idea how he'd be as president. He could be wonderful or he could be awful. (We don't know how Clinton or McCain would be either.) Still, because of his oratorical prowess, supporters believe in his ability to do the job (there is hard evidence of his intelligence, as there is for the others). But his speech makes them feel as if they know him. He comes across as trustworthy, funny, comfortable. And, oh, that voice! It’s deep and expressive.
Obama’s speech also has an excellent rhythm, the pauses and cadences that allow his audiences to absorb his meaning and participate with echoes, answers and chants. This often overlooked aspect of motivational speech accomplishes a couple of things: It gives the speaker much needed breaks and by encouraging audience response, enables them to feel joined with the candidate, active participants in his success. A more subtle benefit is that it bespeaks sensitivity and generosity to his supporters; instead of doing all the speaking himself, he allows them to give voice to their own excitement and enthusiasm. He reads the room.
It has been years and years since we've been treated to someone with this type of oratorical mastery. If anything, Obama’s eloquence starkly demonstrates just how far we have fallen in settling for poor speaking (in politics and business). We have somehow convinced ourselves that the only thing that matters is the work. It's the steak, not the sizzle, just the facts, Jack, style should never trump substance, and everything else is fluff. This is not and never has been true. People may not know how Barack Obama would do as president, but his ability to inspire forces us to consider the possibility.
Obama may be a “new” kind of candidate, but in fact, he epitomizes an old paradigm. Style does not trump substance; style is substance. We feel it, we thirst for it and we drink it up.
A big part of a leader's job is to motivate, inspire and persuade. We are all in the business of persuasion and thus, this presidential election season is an excellent time to observe and to learn about the amazing and transformational power of speech. No longer can it relegated to the category of “soft” skills. The fact is that if a person can speak very, very well, anything is possible.
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates LLC • High-Stakes Communications • Greenwich, CT •
08:18 pm | 1 recommendation | 1 comment
I've noticed a funny phenomenon when I type: My fingers sometimes type out words that are spelled similarly or may even be derived from the word I intended, but are not. I notice other people also do this. It seems to happen automatically, such as when I want to type the word real and end up with really. Or just now, when I typed the word "type" in the last sentence, my fingers automatically put in the word "of" to follow. I had to go back and delete it. I don't know if it happens for some reason like I've got a million things going on in my head and I just automatically type the words and phrases that are most common, regardless of whether I intend them or not.
I have to be very careful about this because I've found I can get into some trouble. For example, I've typed the following sentences in emails:
Here's what we accomplished at the eternal meeting. (I meant external.)
That depends on his pubic speaking skills. (I meant public.)
In that case, Barack Obama would bean Hillary Clinton. (I meant beat -- hmmm, maybe not.)
She has a bit part in the presentation. (I meant big.)
And my favorite,
This technique will help to jog your member. (I meant memory -- ahem.)
Then, of course, there are the many, many words for which my fingers just seem to want to transpose or rearrange letters:
from becomes form
new becomes knew
favorite becomes favority (for some strange reason)
community becomes communicty
not to mention the numerous grammatical errors, especially:
your for you're
to for too
Sometimes I feel like I'm in third grade.
Does anyone know what this phenomenon is called? Has it happened to you? If so, please share some examples.
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates LLC • High Stakes Communications • Greenwich, CT • www.ruthsherman.com
January 1, 2008
01:11 pm | 0 recommendations | Be the first to comment
Last weekend I purchased a Panasonic DVD recorder. It came with the usual manual and quick-start setup guide. I’m not a techie, but I’m no slouch; I know how to follow directions. Well after 2 hours of following the instructions to the letter, I couldn’t make it work. There was a help-line phone number so I called and got instructions from the rep and within 15 minutes had the machine fully integrated with my other devices and working perfectly. So why weren’t the written and graphic instructions any good and why did they not reflect the setup sequence and connections the phone rep had in her hands?
Back in December, there was a fascinating article in the New York Times that discussed the issue of expertise and how the more expert we become, the harder it is to imagine not knowing what we do and the less we can imagine others not having the knowledge we have. I struggle with it constantly when I speak to or train new groups of people. I’ve been doing what I do so long and my knowledge is so deep, it’s hard for me to imagine they don’t already know it.
This kind of thinking is dangerous. When I have this mindset, I am at risk for leaving out important points, glossing over them or making them with less passion than I used to earlier in my career when the knowledge was newer and fresher. Fighting it requires a lot of discipline and self-coaching.
When such thinking dominates in the business world, we end up with an abundant use of jargon that no one understands but those who are saying it and the inability to explain complex concepts because the people doing the explaining are so close to their subjects. At its worst, such “ignorant expertise” chokes off innovation because those with the expert knowledge don’t allow others into their exclusive club.
And it goes much further. According to Chip Heath, co-author of “Made to Stick,” “People who design products are experts cursed by their knowledge, and they can’t imagine what it’s like to be as ignorant as the rest of us.” Heath goes on to explain how a gadget as common as a remote control became so complex:
“I HAVE a DVD remote control with 52 buttons on it, and every one of them is there because some engineer along the line knew how to use that button and believed I would want to use it, too.”
The NYT article describes an experiment that was done in 1990 where people were asked to tap out the rhythm of a familiar song and listeners were asked to name the song. The “tappers” were asked to predict what percentage of the time the listeners would get it right. They vastly overestimated the success rates and couldn’t understand why something that was so clear in their minds could not be heard by others.
There are solutions. One, mentioned above, is to be very disciplined. That, however, may not be enough as it is difficult to see ourselves as others see us. So, sometimes we need someone who is brought in specifically to look in from the outside, to act as an observer, a see-er. When I’m with my clients and they explain a concept to me, if I can’t understand it, it’s unlikely others will either. I’m the sounding board. They simplify and are more successful as a result.
Perhaps if the folks responsible for writing the manual and set-up guides for Panasonic had had someone looking in from the outside, someone whom they took through the steps they had written out, they would’ve discovered those instructions didn’t work and saved me and countless other customers hours of time and frustration.
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates LLC • High-Stakes Communications • Greenwich, CT • www.ruthsherman.com
10:30 am | 0 recommendations | Be the first to comment
Just before Christmas, my Canon mini-dv camcorder broke. Not great timing, obviously, but what could I do but try to get it fixed? I knew I wouldn’t have it on the holiday itself and I was under no illusions that I would be able to have it repaired (if it was even fixable) during the 10-day period the family was relaxing and having fun together.
I needn’t have worried. I quickly found Canon online and was able to navigate easily on their superb support pages. At one point, I needed to call them. They were busy but instead of making me hold, the recording asked if I wanted someone to call me back as soon as the next available representative was free. I said yes and 10 minutes later, the phone rang.
The agent was very helpful, gave me my options very clearly and told me how and where to send the broken camcorder. I received a repair number, packed up the camera and overnighted it to the repair center.
The day after Christmas, I received an email from Canon describing the problem and providing an estimate. Online, I checked the appropriate boxes and OK’d the repair. 3 days later, the camera was back in my hands. Total time from first call to repaired camera: 1 week. We still had a few days left of family fun, so Christmas 2008 was not a total video loss.
I couldn’t help but contrast my Canon experience with some recent, unsatisfactory customer service experiences from two other behemoths, American Express and AT&T. The ease and pleasure of being serviced by Canon and their integrated approach to communication where it felt as if they thought of everything, was breathtaking in comparison. Because of my experience, I will buy Canon again. It makes sense to me because since electronics break down or get damaged easily, I want to be able to repair them just as easily. As I sigh with pleasure over Canon, I am plotting my escape from the other companies.
When it comes to customer service, why don’t businesses get it? It’s not difficult to make the business case for it: treat customers well and make communication easy and they become repeat customers, recommend them to friends and family, write about it in Fast Company…
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates LLC • High Stakes Communications • Greenwich, CT • www.ruthsherman.com
09:13 am | 0 recommendations | 5 comments
A couple of months ago, I was a visitor at the New York headquarters of a big international law firm. When I walked into the firm’s beautiful offices, I was greeted by an impressive woman of years. I handed her my pass, which had my name on it and she smiled and welcomed me by name. She then offered to take my coat and showed me to a comfortable chair in the reception area. She asked if I wanted to visit the rest room. I did and when I returned, she welcomed me back.
I took my seat and picked up something to read. The receptionist came out from behind the large reception desk and walked over to me. Speaking softly, she told me my appointment was running about 15 minutes late and would I like something to drink while I waited? Did I have enough reading material? I felt very relaxed and content sitting and waiting for my appointment. My impression of the law firm? A classy place with, I was sure, classy people. On the way out, I told the receptionist that I thought she was the best I had ever seen.
A few weeks later, I had an appointment at an international financial services giant also in New York. Upon my arrival, the receptionist smiled warmly and asked me if I wanted to hang up my coat. She also asked if I would like to visit the rest room. She directed me to both and when I returned, she let me know she had alerted the client I was there to visit and that the client’s assistant would be out to escort me shortly. We made some pleasant small talk and I took out my Wall Street Journal and started reading. As I waited, I observed something remarkable: This woman greeted by name every person who came through the doors or who walked by her desk. Her exchanges were uniformly warm, kind and cheerful.
How are you today, Janet? Oh, Steve, I wanted to thank you again for Friday. Samantha, how did it go last weekend...I know you had some concerns?
Greeting after greeting, she seemed to gain more energy with each one. The truly great thing, however, was that everyone she conversed with seemed to have their day brightened, as well.
We often take these positions for granted and regard them as unimportant, easy and easily replaceable. They are, however, extraordinarily important for many reasons, not least of which is delivering that all-important first impression. They require a unique skill set. I can imagine because these two women immediately set the tone and lift moods, any business that transpires afterward has a better chance of success.
It’s a reminder that everyone is in sales – everyone.
What is your experience with “Directors of First Impressions?”
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates LLC • High Stakes Communications • Greenwich, CT • www.ruthsherman.com
10:11 am | 0 recommendations | 4 comments
The results of the Iowa caucuses are in and, no surprise to me, the best communicators won.
Both Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee may have thin resumes, but their ability to inspire, motivate and persuade are unparalleled among the entire field of candidates, Republican and Democratic alike.
This type of oratorical skill is routinely dismissed by officeholder wannabes and their campaigns as not meriting much attention. (It’s also dismissed in the business world.) The only thing that should count, they think, is intellectual skill, political achievements and, perhaps, experience. As we see with the rest of the candidates, especially Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, they ignore communication skill and style at their peril.
Looking back forty years, my analysis has shown that in each presidential race, the better communicator has won. The winner, by the way, does not have to be a great communicator, just better than his opponent; witness George H.W. Bush v. Michael Dukakis, neither one possessing good communication skills.
Today, such skill is even more important. Candidates are covered and scrutinized relentlessly, their every utterance captured for dissemination to voters. We are persuaded by a candidate’s “likeability,” the elements of which are delivered almost entirely nonverbally, i.e., by the way they look and sound.
Obama, for his part, is untested and has served in the Senate for only a couple of years. His oratory is light on detail and issues, preferring to rely mostly on broad, inspirational and aspirational topics such as hope and change. I have often said about Obama that were it not for his tremendous speaking skill, he would not be on anyone’s radar. Despite his deficiencies, however, voters believe he can be a great president because his speeches are brilliant and soaring, lifting people’s spirits and lifting him into the role of frontrunner for the most important job in the world. He also speaks beautifully, his voice and expression the type we long to hear and see in the leader of the free world and that have, unfortunately, been lacking for the past 8 years. Obama’s skill as a speaker and communicator has changed his life and may change ours.
Huckabee has a vastly different style, but is equally effective. An affable and quick-witted communicator, Huckabee’s brilliance is in his ability to persuade voters that he’s one of them, a regular guy, sensitive to the average American’s needs and plight. He’s also very funny and seems like he'd be fun to be with. We like Mike a lot, and because of this, voters are willing to ignore some of his positions that may not be so much to their liking such as his lack of foreign policy experience and very socially conservative positions. We feel a connection, as we do with Obama, and this connection supercedes any doubts we may have.
My clients and I always get into a discussion of the immense power of nonverbal communication. They are almost universally frustrated that their physical presence has so much influence; they argue with me that it shouldn’t be so, it’s not fair – the only thing that should count is the ability to do the work. My response is always the same: The words they speak are important, but the way they look and sound is equally important. It’s one thing to have a message and another entirely to deliver it with the degree of passion and conviction necessary for it to hit its target.
This is a painful reality for Hillary and Mitt, who must be feeling pretty low right about now. Of course, Iowa is just a blip on the political radar and the New Hampshire results remain to be seen. But if Iowa means anything, it is the continuing and increasing significance of having solid speaking and communication skills. They elevate. They anoint. They're fair. They matter a great deal.
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates LLC • High Stakes Communications • Greenwich, CT • www.ruthsherman.com
10:20 am | 0 recommendations | 3 comments
Happy New Year!
I had a chance to catch up on some reading over the holidays and one thing I had set aside was an article in the New York Times about Professor Walter H.G. Lewin, a physics professor at MIT who has become known for his lively and engaging lectures. Professor Lewin is quite the performer, apparently, rigging cans of water to demonstrate how to make a simple battery, beating a student with cat fur to build up a static electricity charge powerful enough for the student to light a neon light tube just by touching it, and swinging on stage to demonstrate the physics of a pendulum. (You can check out his lectures, available for free at http://ocw.mit.edu/. You can also find a few clips on YouTube.)
As with all great teachers, Professor Lewin knows the best way to engage students is to show them how complex concepts work, not just tell them. This requires some planning including building demos, acquiring props and preparing remarks. Professor Lewin is a spry 71 and owns the stage he occupies. He looks like he’s really enjoying himself and his students are rapt. Lewin says it takes him about 25 hours to prepare one lecture. Assuming the lecture is about an hour and a half or less, that’s about a 20:1 ratio, which is about right. Professor Lewin is the epitome of “show, don’t tell.”
“Show, don’t tell” is a tried and true communication tool that helps audiences and listeners more easily grasp what a person is saying. It engages the senses, encouraging learning. It can be exemplified by doing demonstrations, as professor Lewin does, by creating exercises whereby stakeholders learn by doing, by telling stories and giving examples, using props that people can touch and feel. “Show, don’t tell” makes concepts come alive.
With the Iowa Caucuses occurring today (and, blessedly, finishing), it is remarkable to watch the candidates who tend to “tell, not show” and, thus, present a striking contrast to Professor Lewin. Almost all of them stand on a platform, microphone in hand and tell about what they would do if elected. Sometimes they move. Now you could ask how can they show? After all, the issues they’re talking about by their very nature are esoteric and difficult to demonstrate. I say that’s all the more reason to find a way to show, instead of just tell.
For example, a candidate who wants to be seen as “regular folks” needs to dress and act like regular folks. Mitt Romney finally took off his suit and tie, but he still doesn’t fit in, what with his starched and pressed khakis, button-down oxford shirt and sweater. Barack looks completely non-Iowa in his suit-with-no-tie and Hillary Clinton needs a new stylist in the worst way. I’m not saying they should dress in overalls and work boots, but if they want people to relate to them more readily, they need to show, not just tell.
They all do try to show their values by getting their families involved. This can be both a blessing and a curse. For example, Rudolph Giuliani has issues in that department, so if he wants to be seen as a “family values” type of person, he’s limited in whom he can trot out. He tried having his current wife, Judi, call him during a speech to the NRA, but that was a staged, phony and ultimately failed attempt to show instead of tell. Bill Clinton has been stumping for his wife, but he can only do that so much before it starts to have diminishing returns. Bill may be a rock star, but it’s Hillary who wants to be president. One thing no one can do is “show” for someone else.
And speaking of Hillary, if she wants to show her softer side by enlisting her daughter and her mother, she ought to do something other than have them stand idly by as she “tells” about what they mean to her. A hug or a gentle touch would speak volumes about their relationships with each other and work wonders for her campaign.
In today’s busy workplace, with so many distractions, we are challenged to engage others quickly and creatively. We only need ask ourselves, as the candidates should be, do we want to win? If the answer is yes, “show, don’t tell” is the way to go.
It's one of my New Year's resolutions.
Ruth Sherman • Ruth Sherman Associates, LLC • Greenwich, CT • www.ruthsherman.com
