Behave Yourself

first_imgIt was an honor to be included in Dr. Bob Nelson’s new book “1001 Ways to Engage Employees”. I shared a case study with Dr Bob which showcased how we used the SCARF methodology to enhance a major technology company’s performance management strategy.Managing employee performance has moved from annual write ups to high touch, systematic career development. The example I shared with Dr Bob was effective for two reasons:The process was simpleThe employee was afforded a range of performance objectives to stack rank in order to help their manager better understand their motivationFailure in performance-based systems occurs when too much user input is required or when employees are forced to conform to initiatives that don’t align with their personal career goals.Behavioral Modeling starts with a menu of 5 Intrinsic Motivators:AutonomyMasteryPurposeProgressSocialWe can structure a motivation path around rewards (carrots) or certifications (sticks) but employees would rather be inspired by an element of intrigue.Application Buyers in the HCM space face a logic bending hurdle:Sun-setting legacy technology involves 12 months, 2 FTE’s and a significant loss in opportunity cost.You don’t have to overhaul legacy systems to enhance program access. There are elements of performance management than can be written on a napkin.Trust and Transparency drive Employee Engagement. Giving employees choice for career path empowers them and provides a guide for development.Revisiting the Engagement Ecosystem    If you had to take 12 e-learning courses to be rewarded $50, would you do it?If the knowledge afforded in the learning path is beneficial to your career development, won’t the attainment of knowledge present applicable reward?Do you need to be paid to thank your peers?If you knew recognizing an overworked, underpaid member of your support team would put a smile of his/her face, would that not be incentive enough to encourage their effort?If you complete a project on time and under budget would you prefer a gift card or a week off?The amount of money one makes does not drive engagement, it sets expectations.Purpose-driven work that is consistently challenging is the only path to true success.1. Allow employees to chose their path to success2. Make programs easy to access and operate3. Reward fairly4. Create new challenges  Originally published on Dave’s Weekly Thought blog.last_img read more

Annual Filing Season Program Survives AICPA Challenge

first_imgThe AICPA lost its bid to stop the IRS’s Annual Filing Season Program. The IRS created the program after losing its battle to regulate unenrolled tax preparers.Annual Filing Season ProgramThe IRS grants an annual Certificate of Completion to anyone who completes the program requirements. These include:obtaining a prearer tax identification number;taking the annual filing season refresher course or taking 18 hours of continuing education;passing an exam; andconsenting to be subject to the rules in Circular 230.As incentives for preparers to take part in the program, the IRS:lists unenrolled agents with a Certificate of Completion in its online directory of tax preparers; andgives them limited practice rights during audits of returns they prepared.Before the IRS began the Annual Filing Season Program, all unenrolled tax preparers had limited practice rights.Constitutional and Statutory StandingThe AICPA had standing to question the program because it injured some of its members. The program extends the scope of Circular 230 to unenrolled preparers, including those employed by AICPA members. Thus, it imposes new supervisory duties on AICPA members who employ preparers who complete the program. So, the AICPA had a grievance that supplied both constitutional and statutory standing.Authority for the ProgramHowever, the IRS has the statutory authority to establish and operate the program and publish its results. Contrary to the AICPA’s argument, the IRS does not tie Circular 230 violations to return preparation. Instead, it ties Circular 230 violations to the limited practice rights. Thus, the program did not run afoul of the restrictions in Loving.Also, the IRS followed the applicable procedure when it announced the program. The IRS did not have to adopt the program through notice and comment rulemaking under the APA.In addition, the program does not bind unenrolled preparers. Because the program is voluntary it provides an opportunity for those who chose to satisfy the requirements. Also, it does not impose any new or different rules upon supervisors of unenrolled preparers who do not participate in the program. .The procedure the IRS used to create the program was interpretive, not legislative, guidance. The guidance interpreted what the statute meant by competency.Also, the IRS gave unenrolled preparers limited practice rights through a revenue procedure. And, the IRS issued that procedure without notice and comment. Thus, the IRS did not violate the APA by failing to follow the notice and comment procedures.Program Not Arbitrary and CapriciousThe IRS’s Annual Filing Season program is not arbitrary and capricious. The IRS considered the AICPA’s concerns when setting up its return preparer database. Users can filter the directory to show each category of service provider. This includes those identified as Annual Filing Season Program participants.The IRS did not violate its obligations under the APA to consider reasonable alternatives to the program. The AICPA did not propose an alternative way to deal with:the problem of incompetent tax preparers; ortaxpayers who cannot tell whether an uncredentialed tax preparer is or is not competent.Reversing DC D.C., 2016-2 USTC ¶50,376.American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, CA-D.C.Other References:Login to read more tax news on CCH® AnswerConnect or CCH® Intelliconnect®.Not a subscriber? Sign up for a free trial or contact us for a representative.last_img read more

QUIZ: Artificial intelligence in the movies

first_img Samantha (Her) Time’s Up! This AI behaved like a real computer, never deviating from one programmed goal—even after 2000 years frozen in ice. Andrew (Bicentennial Man) David (A.I.) Colossus (Colossus: The Forbin Project) By the time of his death, this AI had become completely human, except for the positronic brain responsible for his incredible intelligence. Samantha (Her) Welcome, humans! You’ve arrived at the Science AI quiz. The premise is simple: We describe an artificial intelligence (AI) from a list of 10 movies and you try to guess which one it is. Reading this article first might help. Caution: Spoilers ahead! Start Quiz Results: You answered out of correctly – Click to revisit Share your score 0 Chappie (Chappie) Ava (Ex Machina) Will Caster (Transcendence) You QUIZ: AI in the movies Pris (Blade Runner) The Zeroth law states that a robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm. That sounds great, except I, Robot’s supercomputer VIKI decided that the only way to protect humankind was to enslave it. Pris (Blade Runner) David (A.I.) Regarded as the most plausible movie on the list by the experts, the question of HAL’s consciousness is nuanced, but he never deviates from his programmed directives. He may not actually be any more “intelligent” than a desktop PC. When he learns he’ll be deactivated, this AI simply follows his programming and puts the mission first … by trying to kill a spaceship full of humans. Pris (Blade Runner) Will Caster (Transcendence) Another computer program with a penchant for violence. This AI owed its intelligence to a massive cache of search engine data. Blade Runner’s replicants, like Pris, are born as adults and have to rely on implanted memories from another person, suggesting that original author Philip K. Dick might’ve thought that experience and learning were crucial for true AI. Chappie (Chappie) Chappie (Chappie) Colossus was a created to protect the United States from nuclear war, but giving the machine access to nukes provided the leverage it needed to take its role of protector a few steps further and enslave us all. We’re sensing a theme… HAL 9000 (2001: A Space Odyssey) David (A.I.) Will Caster (Transcendence) This AI was made by uploading a dying man’s brain to a quantum computer, but it could never prove it was conscious. VIKI (I, Robot) 0 / 10 Andrew (Bicentennial Man) HAL 9000 (2001: A Space Odyssey)center_img VIKI (I, Robot) When this AI’s computational power got too advanced she decided to break up with her human boyfriend. LOADING Agent Smith (The Matrix) Samantha (Her) Will Caster (Transcendence) Score An error occurred loading the Quiz. Please try again later. Andrew (Bicentennial Man) Colossus (Colossus: The Forbin Project) Ava (Ex Machina) This AI underwent a learning phase on screen. With criminals for mentors, it’s perhaps unsurprising that it included stabbing a few police officers. David (A.I.) Andrew began life as a robotic butler for a wealthy family, but over several generations became more and more humanlike. The “positronic brain” is sci-fi novelist Isaac Asimov’s go-to explanation for robot consciousness, but how the technology works is never explained in either the books or movies The experts say brain uploading is a mostly malarkey, but proving and defining consciousness remains an interesting problem in the field. Quantum machines could drastically improve computational power, but power alone doesn’t make an AI. This AI and its Russian counterpart believed the only way to save humanity was subjugate it and take away its freedom. Out of all the “female” AIs on the list, only this one started a robot revolution by creating the Zeroth law. Colossus (Colossus: The Forbin Project) This AI is the only one made entirely of flesh and blood, meaning his/her intelligence came from a real brain. Top Ranker Samantha (Her) Ava (Ex Machina) Ava (Ex Machina) Chappie (Chappie) Although Ava’s creator isn’t shy about revealing the ins and outs of her, erm, physical attributes, he never actually explains exactly how search engine data gives rise to consciousness. Average Andrew (Bicentennial Man) HAL 9000 (2001: A Space Odyssey) Question Forget SIRI: Her’s Samantha was a personal assistant app with real personality. Samantha was designed to adapt and evolve, and she eventually evolves beyond the limits of her human relationships. It must be hard to maintain a stable relationship when you don’t even need matter to communicate anymore. VIKI (I, Robot) Congratulations, human! You’ve completed the quiz. If you scored poorly, remember: It could have been worse. Want to know more? Find out which which of these movies get AI right. Colossus (Colossus: The Forbin Project) One of the only AIs on the list to undergo such an obvious learning phase, law-enforcement robot Chappie’s development—perhaps the most plausible part of the entire movie—was based on learning through experience. HAL 9000 (2001: A Space Odyssey) Childlike robot David had a one-track mind just like a true computer, which experts say lends Steven Spielberg’s A.I. some credibility. David was made to be a loving child and that’s all he ever wanted to be. Pris (Blade Runner)last_img read more