All of this is happening in the wake of the Tiger Woods debacle, which happened to include an incriminating voicemail Tiger had left on his mistresses’ phone.

(A piece of advice: If you’re golfing legend Tiger Woods and you need to ask someone to change a voicemail message so your wife doesn’t find out about your affair, don’t leave that request in a voicemail. And definitely don’t start the message with “It’s me, Tiger.”)

Here are two different examples of wealthy, famous individuals who both have a lot to lose from the public knowing about their affairs. And what did they both do?

They handed someone they couldn’t trust a lever.

What’s a lever?
A lever “will lift, pry, or force an object to respond through the proper distribution of pressure,” according to the book, Games Criminals Play by Bud Allen and Diana Bosta. In the book, the authors outline how criminals manipulate people. For example, inmates create a setup against a corrections officer in order to gain leverage over that individual. It usually has to do with getting them to bend the rules slightly, like by sharing a cigarette with the inmate (which is against the rules within prison). They then threaten to report the guard for the infraction unless some other favor is done for the inmate. The situation can continue to escalate, leading to serious crimes like having the guard smuggle drugs or weapons into the prison.

If you’ve ever read a news story about a prison guard risking their job and their family by doing something serious like this and wondered why they would do it, this book outlines the process the probably led up to it.

Not Just For Corrections Officers
I’m assuming not too many readers of this blog work in a prison. But I share this book because I consider it recommended reading for everyone. It outlines some basic principles of human behavior and psychology, describing a sequence of events that can lead to people being manipulated and doing things they would have never imagined. And it usually starts by handing someone a “lever” that can be used against them.

And it’s not just celebrities that make these mistakes.

Obviously, whenever someone cheats on their partner, they are handing a great deal of power to the individual they cheat with. But it applies on a smaller level too. When you tell a co-worker you weren’t really sick when you called in the other day, you handed them a lever. When you engage in gossip about someone, you hand a lever to the person you’re sharing with. Most of the time the lever is never used. But by continually handing them out, you’re increasing the chances that it will be.

Don’t be manipulated.
Games Criminals Play describes various setups and how they are used to influence people’s behavior. A lot of colorful language is also used to describe the process, like lever, ducks, stings, and protectors (I won’t spoil it by explaining what each one means). There are also a few entertaining case studies that describe actual events and situations. It’s a great book and has a lot to share about making sure you aren’t being manipulated.

So the next time someone mentions the great work you’re doing and how it’s obvious your boss doesn’t appreciate you, ask yourself: Are they just looking for a lever?

This year’s figure, diligently compiled by outplacement firm Challenger Gray Christmas, puts the total assault on productivity at $1.8 billion. And that’s down from a record high of $3.8 billion in 2006.

So how can we tolerate such a loss each and every year? And what has changed to slash this financial havoc by more than half?

Calculating the “Damage”
First, a quick look at where this $1.8 billion number comes from. Challenger Gray Christmas first looked at an MSN survey from 2009 says 45% of Americans planned to enter at least one college basketball pool last year. Well then, according to them, that must apply to every single worker included in payroll employment (129,526,000) which means that 58.3 million workers will be participating in office pools.

Already this starts to fall apart. Almost half of the American workforce will participate in March Madness? Really? But let’s keep going.

So, take that 58.3 million people, and assume that each worker makes an average of $18.70/hour (according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics). That’s more than $6 bucks every 20 minutes. So if each worker (stay with me here) spends 20 minutes every workday of the first week of March Madness (5 days) on non-work related activity, then ta-da, $1.8 billion in damages.

Because, you know, every single minute you’re at the office, you’re working.

This assumes that March Madness will take away from actual work, as opposed to just reallocating some of the slack-off time already built into each workday. Or that the morale and team-boosting effects of participating in an office pool doesn’t have any sort of positive productivity result.

The Truth Behind the Decline
So why the huge decline from previous years? In 2006, Challenger Gray Christmas counted all 16 days of the tournament in their estimate. They used to assume each day was of equal weight. After getting called on it over the years by multiple keen observers, Challenger Gray Christmas now only counts the first week of the tournament, assuming that’s when people are most interested in researching teams and are following the early rounds, which consist of multiple day games. After the end of the first round, many casual observers lose interest (after sadly watching their bracket crumble). Plus, the majority of games are during non-work hours in later rounds.

Overall, these figures have huge, unrealistic assumptions built into them. About half of the workforce participates. Every one of those workers spends 20 minutes everyday for an entire week following the games instead of working. That every minute of every workday you are actually working. That there are no positive effects that come from co-workers being involved in a group exercise like this. And so on.

Good PR. Bad Math.
You have to hand it to them. Every year, Challenger Gray Christmas gets their name in media all over the globe with these stats. But as soon as you dive into their methodology, it doesn’t hold up.

So if you’re a sports fan, don’t feel guilty spending a bit of your workday following the action. It’s not going to create billions in damages.

Hopefully you’re not reading this blog post while you’re at work, otherwise you are hurting the already distressed American economy. Maybe I should issue an annual press release titled “Websterism Costs American Employers About $36 in Lost Wages Each Year.” The newspapers would eat it up, year after year, and I would continually get my name in print.

Actually, I might be onto something.

There are various excuses as to why people haven’t included a photo. The most common seems to be that it could become a point of discrimination for a recruiter, as it reveals your ethnicity and approximate age. Since these would all be obviously revealed when they meet you in person, it shouldn’t be much of a concern.

There are many reasons to make sure you include an appropriate headshot with your profile. This could be a long list, so I’ll focus on just three reasons.

1. You will instantly stand out from the crowd.
LinkedIn includes the profile photo in all searches, messages, and job inquiries. About 40% of LinkedIn profiles don’t have a photo on their profile. So by adding one, your profile would already stand out above nearly half of all other users.

2. It adds personality and authenticity to your profile.
Giving users too much creative control over profiles can lead to disaster (MySpace, anyone?), so most popular social networking sites use a standardized look and feel for all user profiles. This means that your photo is the only opportunity you have to visually differentiate your profile from others. A photo-less profile looks cold and sterile. And though it sounds obvious, a photo shows that your profile represents a real person.

3. It creates a sense of visual recognition.
People react more openly to familiar faces than unknown ones. It is hardwired in our brains, a remnant from a time when recognizing faces was an important part of survival. When a recruiter, potential employer, or professional contact sees your photo on LinkedIn, their brain will consider you “familiar” when they meet you in person, causing them to drop their guard a bit.

LinkedIn considers adding a photo a requirement for your profile to be considered 100% complete. There is a reason for this: It makes your profile more effective.

If you don’t have one, go find a professional-looking headshot of yourself and update your profile now.

Many years ago I worked for the National Basketball Association, and a remark made about our players stuck with me, as it applies to all of us.

“When someone is really good at something, they make it look easy.”

When you watch LeBron or Kobe make a shot, it looks easy. It doesn’t show the years of the practice, the hours of training, and the natural ability the goes into making that game-winning basket. The same holds true in the corporate world.

When you know what you’re doing, you shouldn’t be stressed out all the time. You shouldn’t be yelling at others. And you shouldn’t have to be the last one in the office everyday. When you’re good at what you do, whether it’s designing websites, writing legal briefs, or closing sales, there should be a certain grace and ease that comes along with practicing your craft. You should also be enjoying yourself, because after all, who doesn’t enjoy the feeling of being good at something.

The insecurity of being unable to perform amid expectations can lead to bad behavior. I’m sure we’ve all known a boss or executive who was always in a foul mood AND was known to be bad at his job.

So the next time it looks like someone isn’t working hard, maybe they’re just a master of their craft. And the next time someone seems to be working hard, burning the midnight oil, maybe they just don’t know what they’re doing.

It’s important to be able to spot the difference.

Some people want a new job. Others want a new website. Still others want better employees.

But not enough people ask WHY they want these things. When you ask why it is you think you want something, you might find out that it still wouldn’t get you what you’re really looking for.

“I want a new job.”
Why? Do you feel you’re not valued where you are? Do you think you aren’t paid enough? Are the hours too long? If the answer to WHY is that you want to feel valued, make more money, and have more control over when and where you work, maybe doing the same thing for a different company isn’t the answer.

“I want a new website.”
Why? Is nobody visiting your current site? Does it constantly crash? Is it full of out-of-date information? Maybe you need a marketing strategy to drive traffic to your site. Or to make sure someone in your organization is responsible for keeping it up and running, and frequently updated. Spending the money to give your site a facelift might not solve any of your problems.

“I want to hire better employees.”
Why? Do your current employees have a bad attitude? Do they produce poor-quality work? Do they lack motivation? Maybe the problem is the culture within your company. Perhaps people feel mistreated or taken advantage of. Maybe they aren’t properly trained. Or maybe your hiring process selects the wrong candidates to begin with. Perhaps changing the approach your company takes towards hiring and managing people is a better option.

We all think we know what we want, but until we dive into the reasons WHY we want these things, we still be stuck in a vicious cycle, doomed to repeat our mistakes and never fixing the problems we already have.