Women’s portability comes from two sources: a greater emphasis on external relationships, and conducting better research about a company before joining it.

HBS professor Boris Groysberg started to notice something quite different about the career paths of successful analysts who were female. Star women, he found, maintained their shine even after switching companies. Unlike their male peers, they thrived in new work environments.

Why the difference? Female star analysts, it would seem, take their work environment more seriously yet rely on it less than male stars do. They look for a firm that will allow them to keep building their successful franchises their own way.

Women tend to do better after a move for two reasons. One is that they are more invested in external than in in-house relationships. There are four main reasons why star women maintain external focus: uneasy in-house relationships, poor mentorship, neglect by colleagues, and a vulnerable position in the labor market.

The other reason is that women do far more due diligence when they receive a job offer than men do, because women need to ensure that the company is good for women and that they won’t be treated as token females. In the process of due diligence, star women learn a lot of valuable information about the company that helps them make good strategic decisions. They scrutinize prospective employers on receptivity to women, managerial support, latitude and flexibility, and performance measurement.

A company that is willing to double your current salary, but will not invest in your long-term success, is not a good choice. Investigate a firm’s management, its culture, its resources, the commitment it is willing to make to you. Women in a male-dominated industry realize that they are vulnerable, but men are vulnerable to bad management and cultural mismatches more than they realize.

Recession has always been a factor raising divorce rates

University of Chicago Business School economist Gary Becker conducted a study on couples that experience any sudden significant and unexpected change in income (positive or negative) are at risk of divorce.

Jane Fahey, a financial and retirement planner in Michigan, where unemployment is highest in the country, reports that some of her middle-aged clients, both men and women, have had to move back in with their parents. A couple’s house is usually the biggest marital asset, and the lousy real estate market and soft economy are complicating the matter of dividing it equitably in a divorce.

In New York City, where Wall Street has been overrun by layoffs, divorces have also been affected, albeit somewhat differently. Lifestyle that’s been built up in over a decade is literally, within the span of one week, getting wiped out. One couple, for instance, that was preparing its divorce last summer based on $15 million in income, had to readjust the figures to under $1 million. Second homes in the Hamptons are being sold at lower selling prices, and broken up families are having to adjust to living in smaller apartments.

Perhaps it’s cheaper to seek counseling and give it another go.

People are overpaid because there are certain things consumers just don’t want screwed up.

Almost no one in America would admit to being overpaid, but many of us take home bloated paychecks far beyond what we deserve. Below is a list of the 10 most overpaid jobs in the U.S., in reverse order, drafted with input from compensation experts:

10.) Wedding photographers: Photographers earn a national average of $1,900 for a wedding, though many charge $2,500 to $5,000 for a one-day shoot. The overpaid ones are the many who admit they only do weddings for the income, while quietly complaining about the hassle of dealing with hysterical brides and drunken reception guests.

9.) Major airline pilots: While American and United pilots recently took pay cuts, senior captains earn as much as $250,000 a year at Delta, and their counterparts at other major airlines still earn about $150,000 to $215,000. The pilot’s unions are the most powerful in the industry. They demand premium pay as if still in the glory days of long-gone Pan Am and TWA, rather than the cutthroat, deregulated market of under-$200 coast-to-coast roundtrips.

8.) West Coast longshoremen: In early 2002, West Coast ports shut down as the longshoremen’s union fought to preserve generous health-care benefits that would make most Americans drool. Next year, West Coast dockworkers will earn an average of $112,000 for handling cargo. Office clerks who log shipping records into computers will earn $136,000. And unionized foremen who oversee the rank-and-file will pull down an average $177,000.

7.) Skycaps at major airports: Many of the uniformed baggage handlers who check in luggage at curbside at the busiest metro airports pull in $70,000 to $100,000 a year. On top of their salaries, peak earners can take in $300 or more a day in tips. That amounts to a $2 tip from 18 travelers an hour on average. Many tip more than that.

6.) Real estate agents selling high-end homes:  Anyone who puts in a little effort can pass the test to get a real estate agent’s license, which makes the vast sums that luxury-home agents earn stupefying. While most agents hustle tail to earn $60,000 a year, those in affluent areas can pull down $200,000-plus for half the effort.

5.) Motivational speakers and ex-politicians on the lecture circuit:  Corporate trade groups pay astronomical sums to celebrity-types and political has-beens to address their convention audiences. The national convention circuit’s shame is that it blows trade-group members’ money on orators whose speeches often have been warmed over a dozen times.

 4.) Orthodontists:  For a 35-hour workweek, orthodontists earn a median $350,000 a year. General dentists, meanwhile, earn about half as much working 39 hours a week on average, in a much dirtier job. The difference in their training isn’t like that of a heart surgeon vs. a family-practice doctor. It’s a mere two years. U.S. dental schools have long been criticized for keeping orthodontists in artificially low supply to keep their income up.

3.) CEOs of poorly performing companies:  CEOs at chronically unprofitable companies and those forever lagging industry peers stand as the most grossly overpaid. Most know they should resign — in shareholders’ and employees’ interest — but they survive because corporate boards that oversee them remain stacked with friends and family members. The ultimate excess comes after they’re finally forced out, usually by insiders tired of seeing their own stock holdings plummet.

2.) Washed-up pro athletes in long-term contracts:  Those who sign whopping, long-term contracts after a few strong years, and then find their talents vanish, who reap unconscionable sums of money. They point to owners as the culprits, yet golf star Tiger Woods and tennis champ Serena Williams earn their keep based on their performance in each tournament.

1.) Mutual-fund managers:  They’ve been long overpaid. Stock-fund managers can easily earn $500,000 to $1 million a year including bonuses.  Now we discover an untold number enriched themselves and favored clients with illegally timed trades of fund shares. That’s a worse betrayal of trust than the corporate scandals of recent years, since they’re supposed to be on the little person’s side.

A handful of women have achieved C.F.O. status at major Wall Street firms. Yet none of them have moved to the top job at their firm or even to an obvious precursor position.

Lehman Brothers’ pugnacious C.E.O., Richard Fuld, chief operating officer, Joseph Gregory, and the company’s co-chief administrative officers, Scott Freidheim and Ian Lowitt are all men who oversee the army of traders and bankers who make up the capitalist heart of the company. This is not a place where you see many women, unless they’re part of the secretarial pool.

To visit the floor is to realize how remarkable the presence of Erin Callan is. Ensconced in the office next to Gregory’s, seated before twin blinking flat screens, Lehman’s new chief financial officer is the first woman ever to serve on the firm’s 15-member executive committee. A former tax attorney who started at Lehman in the fixed-income department and then rose to advise hedge fund kings like Ken Griffin and Steve Cohen, Callan led some of the most important initial public offerings in the financial world in recent years.

Yet the C.F.O.’s office may be as far as Callan gets. She begins her new job just as women’s advances in corporate America and banking in particular have entered a surprising state of limbo. No woman has ever been named the C.E.O. of a Wall Street firm, and the prospects of it ever happening seem even more remote now than they did a year or two ago.

There are plenty of signs of ageism in corporate America.

American culture relentlessly celebrates youth. But in the corporate world, 80 is the new 50. Advances in medicine make a retirement age of 65 seem like a relic. Until recently, aging big-shot executives were generally happy to play golf, become ambassadors, or just sail away on their yachts. Today, not so much.

Most Type-A M.B.A.s could outpace these old-timers in a 100-meter dash. (Self-proclaimed workout stud Sumner Redstone, the 85-year-old chairman of both Viacom and CBS, might give the youngsters a run for their money.) But these are marathon men, not the sprinters who thrive during bubbles. In recent months, fiftysomething CEOs of Wall Street firms and large banks have been decimated by the credit crunch, just as twentysomething tech stars were crushed in the 2001 NASDAQ crash. Unlike their younger counterparts, today’s headline-making grandparents have experience managing through the last serious oil shock and prolonged period of financial pain in the 1970s. Kirk Kerkorian began his career during the Great Depression. These ancient rock stars have also proved willing to learn a repertoire beyond their greatest hits. Rupert Murdoch, 77, beat younger moguls in the race for MySpace and is now busily remaking the Wall Street Journal.

As they’ve moved through life, the baby boomers have altered societal attitudes on everything from smoking marijuana to Botox. As boomers coast into their golden years, it’s likely the acceptance of older workers at every rung of the corporate ladder will grow. In the 1960s, the boomers’ mantra was: Don’t trust anyone over 30. In the 2010s, it’ll probably be: Don’t trust anyone under 70.

As if BlackBerry users needed one more excuse to be glued to their screens, E-Trade Financial Corp. is giving its account holders an application that will let them get real-time stock quotes and trade on their phones. The online firm is the first major U.S. brokerage to provide a mobile application with cash transfers and real-time quotes.

E-Trade went with the BlackBerry for its first application because it’s the most popular smart phone system used among the brokerage’s customers. The application may not work with older BlackBerries, but all current models, model numbers starting with 8, should work.

The bruised U.S. economy limped through the first quarter, growing at just a 0.6% pace as housing and credit problems forced people and businesses alike to hunker down. The statistic did not meet what economists consider the classic definition of a recession, which is a retraction of the economy. This means that although the economy is stuck in a rut, it is still managing to grow, even if modestly.

Consumers—whose spending is vital to the country’s economic health—turned much more cautious, also restraining overall economic growth in the first quarter. Their spending rose at just a 1% pace. To bolster the economy, the Federal Reserve is expected to lower a key interest rate by one-quarter percentage point to 2%.

Chinese intertwine business and personal affairs much more deeply. They do things for their partners even if they are personal affairs.

If you wander into any of China’s five floored bookstores, the first thing you notice right when you enter the store won’t be the newest hardcovered fictions. It’ll be management books written by successful American businessmen. On shelf after shelf, you could see copies of Jim Collins’s “Good to Great,” Jack Welch’s “Straight From the Gut,” Tom Peters’s “Re-Imagine!” and just about everything the late Peter Drucker ever wrote. One section you won’t find in Chinese bookstores is a section for management or human resources.

There’s a good reason for this. In the West (not to mention Japan and South Korea) management skills are a given. Graduate schools of management churn out M.B.A.’s, while instilling the basic processes and systems that virtually all multinational companies rely on. People who rise to the top of companies are the ones who have mastered the art of management. But there are also many first-rate managers who populate the middle ranks of companies. They are the lifeblood of most big companies.

That’s not the case in China. The shortage of managerial talent is huge. There just aren’t very many people here who have the range of skills you need in that position. Xiang Bing, dean of the Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business, said: “We Chinese are so willing to work hard for money. We are intelligent. We have the drive and the passion. But we put too much attention on technology and not enough on institution-building. And our soft skills are a real weakness.”

One issue with management is that most Chinese entrepreneurs hire friends and family because they don’t trust people they don’t know. And if they don’t get help fast, they are going to lose control of their rapidlygrowing businesses. Rapid growth, though, is only one of the issues these entrepreneurs are facing. Every bit as difficult are ingrained mind-sets and attitudes that can make it difficult for Chinese executives to adapt professional management techniques.

Many Chinese entrepreneurs (even those who have graduated from the executive M.B.A. program) don’t want to hire M.B.A.’s because they bridle at having to pay professional management salaries. Another problem is that many Chinese executives believe that because it is a Chinese business, professional managers won’t fit in the system.

When dealing with each other, the Chinese, quite simply, do business differently than Western companies do business. For one thing, there is a lot of petty corruption that is an ingrained part of business, especially among the state-run companies. Purchasing managers favor one vendor over another because they get a kickback. A sales rep buys customer loyalty with under-the-table payments. And so on. People also tend to put their own interests over the interests of their company — not a huge surprise, given that everyone worked for the state just a generation ago.

Finally, there is the gnarliest issue of all: the importance placed on the deep, intertwining set of relationships known as guanxi. Unlike the West, you don’t just have a business relationship in China; you have a relationship that interchangeably mixes the personal with the professional.

If there’s really a huge excess of supply, it would restrain demand

The Federal Reserve is considering contingency plans to bolster its lending power, in case measures it has taken to rescue the troubled credit markets fail. One option being considered is to have the Treasury borrow more money than it needs to fund the government and keep the proceeds on deposit at the Federal Reserve.

Other options include issuing debt under the Federal Reserve’s name instead of the Treasury’s, and asking Congress for immediate authority for the Fed to pay interest on commercial bank reserves rather than waiting until a law enacted earlier allows it to in 2011.

If the Fed were to issue debt, it would be following the Bank of England and this could involve issuing short-dated paper in the two-to-five-year Treasuries area. Secondly, the market would not like the Fed to issue long paper which would hang for many years. Should the Treasury decide with Congressional approval to issue more bonds to fund the Fed, there should be good demand for extra paper due to the backdrop of weakening global economic growth, although this would depend on the ultimate size of the issuance.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating the events leading up to the collapse of Bear Stearns, specifically a surge in options contracts betting that the investment bank’s share price would fall sharply. Citing people familiar with the matter, the paper reported the SEC probe focuses on a surge last week in “put” options that came days before the firm’s proposed sale to J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. for stock now valued at about $278.5 million, or $2.32 a share.

  Assets under management, in billions, as of Dec. 31.

1. Bridgewater Associates
2. Farallon Capital Mgmt.
3. Och-Ziff Capital Mgmt. Group
4. D.E. Shaw Group
5. Goldman Sachs Asset Mgmt.
6. Renaissance Technologies
7. Paulson & Co.
8. Highbridge Capital Mgmt.
9. Barclays Global Investors
10. Citadel Investment Group

Boiler Room: An unflattering term used to describe a fraud scheme in which salespeople are hired to call unsuspecting individuals and push investment opportunities.

“Boiler rooms” that use high-pressure tactics to lure investors to buy stocks have become a worldwide problem, with operations identified in areas as far-flung as southeast Asia and Africa. Trying to close these operations, which commonly cold call potential investors and use fraudulent methods to push overpriced stocks, is a challenge because they can set up shop virtually anywhere and are hard to track.

Boiler rooms, a term that refers to the kind of makeshift offices these operations often use as their base, have been a focus of U.S. authorities for years. They involve brokers who refuse to say anything negative about the stocks they push and make baseless predictions about how much the shares are likely to jump.

One problem in monitoring the schemes is that the deceptive brokerages may hold themselves out as legitimate firms that are set up in one place but in fact are operating out of another locale. Southeast Asia and Africa are two regions where such activities have been identified, as well as in parts of Europe such as the UK and Spain.

International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), an umbrella organization for the world’s securities regulators, whose group promotes international cooperation among securities regulators, is pressing roughly half of its more than 100 member countries that have not yet signed a 2002 memorandum of understanding on sharing information. Most countries in the larger financial markets, including the United States, the UK, France, Germany, Japan and Australia, have signed the memorandum.

Bosses who never need to work any more, but go to the office anyway

While many billionaires do enjoy a blessedly unhurried existence, some embrace a very different approach: They hit the office every day. The most prominent working rich? The world’s wealthiest chief executives. These are people who don’t have to work another day in their lives. And yet they choose to devote untold amounts of time and energy to the arduous task of running a company and answering to shareholders.

Who are they? By perusing the ranks of the Forbes 400 list of the richest Americans from September and our annual billionaires’ list from last March, Forbes found the 10 richest CEOs around, some of whom founded their own companies, others who benefited from large inheritances and still others who built their fortunes through other means.

1. Warren Buffett Net worth: $52 billion

   Chairman and chief executive, Berkshire Hathaway

2. Lakshmi Mittal Net worth: $32 billion

   Chairman and chief executive, ArcelorMittal

3. Sheldon Adelson Net worth: $28 billion

   Chairman and chief executive, Las Vegas Sands

4. Bernard Arnault Net worth: $26 billion

   Chairman and chief executive of LVMH Group

5. Lawrence Ellison Net worth: $26 billion

   Chief executive of Oracle

6. Mukesh Ambani Net worth: $20.1 billion

   Chairman and managing director of Reliance Industries

7. Anil Ambani Net worth: $18.2 billion

   Chairman of Reliance ADA

8. Michael Dell Net worth: $17.2 billion

   Chairman and chief executive, Dell

9. Azim Premji Net worth: $17.1 billion

   Chairman, Wipro

10. Charles Koch Net worth: $17 billion

    Chairman and chief executive, Koch Industries

Warning To The Bulls

Managers of Government-run Chinese mutual funds keep coming up with the same can’t-miss moneymaking opportunity for Lin Rongshi–and for themselves. The messenger might be a low-level functionary or a trusted middleman. Lin, a private fund manager, said the message sometimes would be delivered in his high-rise office overlooking Shanghai’s financial district or, more discreetly, by mobile phone. “They notify us first, and they would buy a few days later [for the fund], then they would come back to us to split the profit I make from buying at a lower price,” says Lin.

This front-running scheme would net an almost guaranteed haul for Lin and for the state-sector employees. Some others, –insiders all, would profit, too. The only outsiders in the transaction would be the mutual funds’ customers, average Chinese investors who have little idea how routinely their money is abused on the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges. They come to this man to cheat a fortune from the stock market because he was once an expert at it.

Lin says he made his first $100,000 from a trade made on inside information ten years ago, at age 23. He clocked close to a million dollars by the time he was 25, on insider trading, front-running and stock manipulation in the last Chinese bull market, before losing it all and more in 2001 on his last and biggest play.

Rich shareholders, fund managers, even the top management of listed companies–all have approached Lin in the last year, he says. Chinese investors often suspect manipulation behind the sudden, sharp rises in share prices, but their typical reaction is not outrage. Few stock cheaters get caught, and those who do are rarely jailed. The regulator, the CSRC, China Securities Regulatory Commision, is lacking in staff to hunt down cheats, lacking in legal power to punish them severely and sometimes lacking in political clout to take on some of the well-connected state-owned companies it is supposed to watch. Lawsuits are even less effective. The Communist Party, wary of any organized group of malcontents, essentially does not permit class actions.

So, how do you short Chinese stocks when shorting the Chinese mainland market is not allowed? There are several work-arounds, but none are perfect:

• Go through one of China’s Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors. QFII’s—including Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Merrill Lynch, HSBC, UBS and several dozen others—are allowed to buy A shares on the Shanghai and Shenzhen exchanges, the playground of domestic Chinese investors. A QFII can offer investors short positions through derivatives. The downside: More middlemen means more transaction costs.
• Short-sell exchange-traded funds that are comprised of Shanghai and Shenzhen A shares. The WISE CSI 300 China Tracker and the iShares FTSE/Xinhua A50 China Tracker are both listed in Hong Kong. The downside: You can’t bet against individual stocks.
• Short-sell a QFII’s closed-end A share fund, like Morgan Stanley’s China A Share Fund. The downside: Even if the value of the fund’s assets falls, that doesn’t mean the fund’s share price also has to fall.
• Bet against Chinese companies listed in Hong Kong. Direxion offers a China Bear 2X Fund and ProFunds Group offers ProShares UltraShort FTSE Xinhua China 25, both betting against the same 25 Hong Kong-traded stocks. If you’re betting on an all-China slump, these funds will rise 2% for every 1% that the 25-company index falls. The downside: Valuations on the Hong Kong “H share” market are not as sky high as on the A share market.
• Wait until China opens its own futures market, which has been expected for some time. The downside: You might miss your chance while you’re waiting. China might not want people betting against their stocks until at least after the Beijing Olympics.

Doctors and Lawyers, Make Way For The Hedge Funds and Private Equity Firms

As of 2006, nearly 60% of doctors polled by the American College of Physician Executives said they had considered getting out of medicine because of low morale, and nearly 70% knew someone who already had. Make no mistake, law and medicine (the most elite of the traditional professions) have always been demanding. But they were also unquestionably prestigious. Sure, bankers made big money and professors held impressive degrees. But in the days when a successful career was built on a number of tacitly recognized pillars (outsize pay, long-term security, impressive schooling and authority over grave matters) doctors and lawyers were perched atop them all. Now, those pillars have started to wobble.

“The older professions are great, they’re wonderful,” says author Richard Florida.  “But they’ve lost their allure, their status. And it isn’t about money.” The pay is still good and the in-laws aren’t exactly complaining. Still, something is missing, say many doctors, lawyers and career experts: the old sense of purpose, of respect, of living at the center of American society and embodying its definition of “success.”

In a culture that prizes risk and outsize reward (where professional heroes are college dropouts with billion-dollar Web sites) some doctors and lawyers feel they have slipped a notch in social status, drifting toward the safe-and-staid realm of dentists and accountants. It’s not just because the professions have changed, but also because the standards of what makes a prestigious career have changed.

This decline is rooted in a broader shift in definitions of success, essentially, a realignment of the pillars. Especially among young people, professional status is now inextricably linked to ideas of flexibility and creativity, concepts alien to seemingly everyone but art students even a generation ago. Indeed, applications to law schools and medical schools have declined from recent highs. Nationally, the number of law school applicants dropped a 6.7% between 2006 and 2005.  44% of lawyers recently surveyed by the American Bar Association said they would not recommend the profession to a young person.)

Unquestionably, many doctors and lawyers still find the higher calling of their profession — helping people — as well as the prestige and money, worth the hard work. And the stars in either field are still that: commanding the handsome compensation and social cachet. But to others, the daily trudge serves as a constant reminder that the entrepreneur’s autonomy simply can’t be found in law or medicine.

Life for attornies is less like “Ally McBeal” and more like “The Practice,” where lawyers work like dogs in a thoroughly unglamorous setting. Doctors face similar pressure. Complaints about managed care crimping doctors’ income and authority over medical decisions are nothing new, but the problems are only getting worse, several doctors said. Increasing workloads and paperwork might be tolerable if the old feeling of authority were still the same, doctors said. But patients who once might have revered them for their knowledge and skill often arrive at the office armed with a sense of personal expertise, gleaned from a few hours on the internet, doctors said, not to mention a disdain for the medical system in general. And then there’s the money issue. Or rather, money envy. Associates at major New York firms often start at $150,000 to $180,000. Partners at the country’s biggest 100 firms took home an average of $1.2 million in 2006. Hardly small sums, but for many senior investment bankers, bonuses and salaries this year will average $2.25 million to $2.75 million. Doctors rarely approach such heights. While income varies widely, a typical physician might earn $150,00 to $300,000. A surgeon might make $250,000 to $400,000; hot-shot surgeons can earn $750,000 a year, and superstars over a million dollars.

Careers in more entrepreneurial industries like hedge funds and private equity firms follow the ’sky is the limit’ model of the entertainment industry, the Web or professional sports. Kevin J. Delaney, a sociology professor who has studied the culture of hedge funds and private equity firms, said executives there “love the idea of being responsible for their own fate.” They’re going to make a million or lose a million based on the trades they make.

This star-system mentality is particularly attractive to college students, many of whom were reared with the ’80s philosophy that every child was a potential superstar. And they want immediate rewards — not exactly the mentality that will fuel a student through years of medical school, a residency and additional training for a specialty.