Success File - Fast Track To Promotion & Recognition

Ever wonder why some people get promotions and recognition and some don't? Or, have you considered how you might increase your chances for promotion and recognition as an excellent performer? Of course, there's no simple answer to these questions. People are promoted for a number of reasons, some fair and reasonable, and some not - that's life. Still, if you want to enhance your opportunities in your organization and want to move up the ladder and have increased responsibilities, there's one important strategy I can share with you. It's simple on the surface, but not quite as simple in practice. Here's the strategy:

Start Doing Your Boss's Job


Here's how it works. The person most helpful or harmful in terms of getting a promotion is your immediate supervisor. He or she is the person who can help or hinder. What determines which it will be? Well, certainly your performance is important. But it's all about perceptions. You can create positive and powerful perceptions on the part of your boss by making his or her life easier. It's that simple. If you can:
· reduce your boss's workload
· eliminate hassles the boss is concerned about
· prevent problems the boss is normally responsible for
you become more useful to the boss. That's a good thing and tends to get noticed.
Of course it isn't quite so simple. While you want to be useful to the boss, you don't want to usurp the boss's responsibilities. A great way to dead-end yourself is to take on some of the boss's job when your boss doesn't want that to happen. So, you have to know your particular boss well enough to know what you can do and what your boss doesn't want you to do. We call that knowing the limits to your authority and your action.

Here as some tips to help you out:
· Get to know your boss well enough to understand what drives him or her nuts about the "boss job". A good way of thinking about it is to ask yourself: "What kinds of problems nag at the boss?
· Examine whether you can do anything from your position in the organization to help address the boss's "drive me crazy" problem (often there will be).
· Decide whether you should do something to help or not. If you know the boss well enough, you will probably also know what the limits on your authority and actions might be. Still, it's always good to check it out, and offer the solution to the boss beforehand, and if necessary, request permission to get it done. That makes it less likely the boss will feel you are encroaching on his or her territory.
· Don't do any of this so that it appears you are trying to "score points", or manipulate the boss. Do it because you want to contribute to the best of your ability and with the attitude that if nobody notices, that's fine, provided it makes people's jobs easier. (This is a mindset to prevent your being seen as a selfish, manipulative employee.

There's never any guarantees in life, so I can't provide a guarantee here. But I will say that almost ALL of the people I have seen fast-tracked in organizations exhibit the ability to make their boss look good and make the boss's life easier.
And the great thing about this? Everybody wins. The organization becomes more effective. You do a good job. And your boss's life is just a wee bit easier.

The Impossible Colleague

This month marks the return of our On The Line Column, where we deal with difficult workplace situations in a question and answer format.
Problem
For the past few years I have had to work fairly extensively with a colleague who is just impossible. He is arrogant, stubborn, sometimes abusive, and acts like he is right about almost everything. At first I tried to ignore it, but it just gotten worse. It's so bad, I feel like every night when I go home, all I think about is how miserable this person is. It is also affecting people around us, since we all spend so much time talking about this person.
How do I deal with this situation?

Answer

Most people use the term personality conflict to describe this situation. I don't like that term because it implies that the problem is largely unfixable since it is unlikely that either you or the other person is going to change their personalities. To get anything constructive out of this you are going to have to get down to specific behaviours, not personalities.
Some background things to consider. These situations tend to occur over time. Small annoying behaviours left unattended move to bigger more annoying behaviours. You indicate that you tried to ignore these things at the beginning, and that probably contributed to the problem. Consider these basic principles:
In any relationship, both people influence the other's behaviour. In almost every conflict situation, both parties bear some responsibility for where "things are at".
Focusing on blame will just drive you crazy. The key to these situations is to focus on what YOU can do to make things better. It doesn't matter who is at fault, if your concern is to make things better.
You have little control over the personality, and even behaviour of another person. Your best bet is to focus on your own behaviour change. Ask yourself: What am I doing that contributes to this unpleasant situation, and What can I do to change what I am doing. It sounds like what you are doing now isn't working so you have to look for another approach.
Here are some ideas:
1. At a time when both you and the other person or calm, ask if you can talk to them (do it privately-this is between the two of you). Approach the situation in a non-accusatory manner (not easy if you are frustrated). Try something like this:
John, I've noticed that you and I seem to have our differences. I have some ideas about how we might be able to work more effectively together, but I would like to know from you what I can do to help. Can you think of anything I could be doing so we could get along better?
Follow his up with proper listening, so John knows you are truly concerned and interested.
When possible find things to agree on, and offer something. If the conversation is going well, you might want to make a request (one is good). Like the following:
John, what would help me is that when we are at meetings and I am talking, that you wait until I am finished to make your comments, since it really distracts me if you talk before I am finished, and I can't listen properly to you when I am distracted.
2. Since you are clearly frustrated, it is likely that you are doing things that convey your frustration to the other person. You shouldn't have to take abuse and smile, but neither should you be attacking or reacting in kind. It is important that you deal with things firmly, but nicely, and without dramatics. No eye-rolling, no heavy sighing, no guerilla activities. If the other person is rude or nasty to you, you can respond with quiet dignity and set limits regarding the specific behaviours, but if you react angrily, you will almost always make the situation worse.
3. Immediately stop making the situation one for public discussion or discussion with other staff members. This is disruptive to the organization, but worse, it will make it more difficult to fix the situation. When you gossip about someone else, you tend to focus on the worst parts, and paint that person in a negative way. That affects your thinking and actually shortens your patience, particularly when you get covert support from others. Do you want to win or do you want to fix the problem (Note: you usually can't "win".
4. The time to have dealt with this situation was early on, with a combination of politeness, firmness, and limit setting. In some situations, the conflict has become so polarized that you may need help in dealing with it, both practically, and personally, to change your way of looking at it. One possibility is to talk to your manager and explain the situation as objectively as possible. That means saying something like: John and I seem to be having some trouble getting along, and it seems to be affecting everyone". Please don't go in trying to convince the "boss" how bad the other person is...it just makes you look like the problem.
Request help or suggestions, and focus on fixing the problem, and taking some responsibility for it. The outcome may be that the manager may bring you both together to talk about the situation and work out a plan, or even that you and the other person might get involved in mediation, or some other form of intervention.
5. Please keep in mind that you have both rights and responsibilities in these situations.
Your responsibilities include:
· approaching the other person in a polite, problem-solving way to work things out.
· avoiding actions (like gossip) that make the situation worse.
· a willingness to recognize that you have probably contributed to the problem.
· listening to the other person rather than trying to convince or bully them.
· seeking help from others in a dignified, open and constructive way.
Your rights include:
· setting behavioral limits and consequences when nasty, abusive behaviour is directed at you.
· the expectation that the other person will work in an open problem solving and courteous way.
· an expectation that management will help, but may not be able to solve the problem without your cooperation and that of the other person.

Downsizing -- The Long Term Effects

Few government departments or branches have escaped the necessity of downsizing. The last three or four years have brought almost constant cuts in staffing, and some departments have been "hit" several times. For many downsizing has become an annual process.

When managers are faced with downsizing, they tend to focus on the immediate and practical needs that emerge at the time when staff are being let go. After all, employees need to be selected and notified, one of the most difficult tasks for any manager. Jobs responsibilities need to be shuffled, and generally the period where downsizing is occurring is very busy and emotionally taxing.

Unfortunately, there is a tendency for managers to focus on those that are leaving rather than those that remain. This also holds true for central training and consulting agencies who are asked to support the laid off employees with career development help, counselling, and other supports. There is no question that laid off employees deserve and need these kinds of supports and services. Unfortunately, there is a tendency to forget that after the laid-off workers are gone, the "survivors" must soldier on, and the manager must deal with the long-term effects on the remaining organization.

We are now seeing the effects of downsizing on those that remain. One of the most telling comments is often put forth by employees a year or two after downsizing, and it goes like this: "Sometimes I think that the ones who were laid off are the lucky ones". They usually go on to describe a workplace where employees feel:
. a lack of executive commitment to their functions
. confusion about the priorities of their organization
. increased workloads
. confusion about their mandate
. a sense of being betrayed by executives and managers
. a profound sense of distrust
. a sense of futility with respect to long-term planning
. undervalued and unappreciated
In operational terms, this translates into a number of problems.
. the organization moves towards less risk-taking and innovation
. destructive conflict tends to increase
. internal competition for resources increases
. individual staff members devote less effort to working together and more attention to doing things that will protect themselves.
. general listlessness and lethargy
. decreases service levels and increased public hostility
It is easy to understand these effects when they occur close to the time when down-sizing occurs, and remaining staff "grieve" the loss of friends and colleagues. But, these effects are now being seen as long as one or two years AFTER the downsizing period. There are indeed long term effects of downsizing that need to be addressed.

Understanding The Organizational Downcycle
To counter-act the long term effects of downsizing, managers need to understand how organizations slip into "downcycles".

An organizational downcycle can be characterized as a long-term process where the organization becomes progressively more depressed, insular, protective and confused. The important thing to note is that this process occurs slowly, sometimes imperceptibly, and that if the process is allowed to continue unchecked, it gets worse. The downcycling organization loses its positive momentum and enthusiasm. A vicious circle is formed. It snowballs. Bad feelings and depression become the norm rather than occasional, until, in extreme cases, the organization becomes unable to move effectively, and the work climate can become intolerable for everyone.

Because the process tends to be gradual, managers tend to assume that the problems that occur early in the downcycling will solve themselves without attention. It is easy to assume that staff will "get over" the effects of downsizing over time. This may be the fatal mistake, because if the process is left unmanaged, there is a good chance that staff will become more demoralized.
One final point on the downcycle is in order. When an organization is close to the bottom of a downcycle, it is extremely difficult to turn the organization around. This is because levels of trust, hope and enthusiasm are so low that
staff will have little faith in the effectiveness of any approach that promises to be helpful.

Some Prescriptions
1. Proactive management activities are always required when downsizing occurs. Managers must realize that they "can pay now or pay later", and that delaying actions designed to revitalize the organization will result in a huge cost down the road.
Managers should consider that the period immediately after downsizing is critical. Action or inaction during this period will determine whether the organization moves into a depressed downcycle, or makes the commitment to move forward. Downsizing time should also be a time when the organization's mandate and vision are revisited. It should be a time when the manager dedicates him/herself to the long-term health of the organization by clarifying, supporting and building trust. Above all, this is the time where the manager's prime responsibility is to communicate, both with staff, and with executives. One focus of communication should be clarifying mandate, vision, priorities
and commitment levels.
2. Proactive long-term approaches should also be applied by any central agencies charged with "helping" downsizing organizations. Support should be offered to those that are displaced, but, in the long term, help offered to "survivors" will be much more important in determining organizational health. As a manager, ask, or demand that these services be made available by central agencies, or procure them from private vendors, if the central agency won't do the job.
3. If you are in the unfortunate position of managing an organization that is "downcycling", you need to be aware of two things. First, it will get worse if neglected. Second, interventions to turn the cycle around must be considered as long-term projects. One shot consulting or training isn't going to do much, and it may be damaging. Remember that your organization may have been moving downward for a year or two, and that it is going to take a substantial period of time to reverse the process. Positive change will require a consistent effort on your part, and may require consulting help over a period as long as a year.

Conclusion
We are seeing more of the long-term effects of downsizing on organizational health. When downsizing is undermanaged, there is the danger that an organizational downcycle will be created, and left to continue unchecked over several years. The results can be destructive to the organization and the individuals that work there.
It is far easier to avoid or correct this cycle at the time when downsizing occurs, and far less costly. It is important that downsizing trigger organizational renewal strategies immediately.
If proactive action is missing, or is ineffective, corrective actions down the road will require a long term commitment. Once an organization reaches the bottom of a downcycle, it will take considerable time to reverse the process.

The Effects of Change On The Manager

One of the least mentioned effects of change relates to how it affects the manager leading that change, and his or her ability to undertake the leadership role. We have already talked about the effects of change on the individual employee, and of course managers are subject to the same reactions, resistances and strains. Some types of change, such as restructuring, or downsizing can put considerable strain on the leaders of an organization.
Stress, Stress & More Stress

One primary concern regarding change is the stress it imposes on those undergoing the change. Managers, because they have obligations to their staff, not only have to deal with change as employees but also need to carry some of the concerns of their staffs. In the case of downsizing, the stress levels can be extremely high, because the manager is charged with conveying very upsetting information.

Stress is part of the job, but in times of change, it is critical that you recognize that it may cause you to act in ways that are less effective than usual. As with anything connected with change, the major concern is not short term but long term. If your stress levels result in marked loss of effectiveness, the risk is that a vicious cycle will be set up, where ineffective leadership results in creating more long term problems, which increases your stress, which reduces your effectiveness even more.

A common response to unpleasant change is to ignore the situation. Avoidance can take many forms. Most commonly, the avoiding manager plays only a minimal role in moving the organization through the swamp. After announcing the change and doing the minimum required, the manager "hides" from the change, through delegation, or attending to other work. This tactic involves treating things as "business as usual".

The outcomes of this tactic can be devastating. By avoiding situations, the manager abdicates any leadership role, when staff needs it most, during and after significant change. In addition, the avoidance results in the manager becoming out of touch with the people and realities of the organization.

While avoidance serves a need for the manager in the short run, it destroys the manager's credibility, and results in poor decisions. The long term consequence of such action is that the organization tends to deteriorate in terms of morale, effectiveness and productivity. Sometimes this deterioration is irreversable.
Another Ineffective Tactic

Sometimes the manager deals with change by denying its impact. Usually, the denying manager takes a very logical approach to change. Decisions get made, systems are put in place, or new procedures are developed. Unfortunately, this "logical" approach denies the impact of change on the people in the organization. The denying manager tends to refuse to understand "what the big deal is", and shows little empathy with employees in the organization.
As with avoidance the denying tactic tends to drop the manager's credibility and destroy any personal loyalty on the part of employees.
Key Points

1) Managers are put under stress by change, and that stress, if mishandled can result in loss of managerial effectiveness. Managers need to be alert to the signs of stress upon their performance.

2) A common management tactic is to avoid involvement in change when that involvement is unpleasant. The affects of this withdrawal can be lethal to the organization and to the manager.

3) Another common tactic is denial of the effects of change. Managers who do this tend to under- estimate the impact of the change, and demonstrate an inability to respond to employees' emotional reactions to change.

Riding the Economic Roller Coaster

By: Jill Andresky Fraser

You can't control the crazy, fluctuating world economic markets, but you can (and should) tighten your seat belt

Ask Frederick Roberts when he first began to get anxious about economic matters, and he doesn't even hesitate before replying. "It was when the news began to surface about all those problems in Asia," confides the president and chief operating officer of Certified Diabetic Services (CDS), a mail-order diabetic-supplies company based in Naples, Fla.

No, that isn't because his three-year-old company brings in any of its $9 million in sales from diabetics in the Far East. But when Asian companies started taking a nosedive, Roberts began worrying about a trickle-down effect that could possibly wind up affecting his company's credit picture. He explains, "When those companies were strong, they bought so much U.S. debt. Once it was clear that they were in trouble, I started asking myself what consequences that could have on our interest rates."

To Roberts, a former chief financial officer with years of experience in international finance, ignoring those early warning signs would have been foolhardy. "These days, you can't run a growth company without thinking globally," he emphasizes, adding, "That means continually trying to figure out which new factors or variables will likely affect your financial model--and adjusting your strategies accordingly." (It also requires the flexibility to keep readjusting in these unpredictable times, as Roberts needed to do when U.S. interest rates started falling rather than rising as he had originally expected.)

For some business owners, warning bells might have sounded when the bottom started dropping out of the U.S. stock market. Or maybe it was the collapse of the Russian economy, or Brazil's economic troubles, that created anxieties. Or maybe it was all those headlines about the $3.6-billion bailout of a hedge fund for the superrich (an especially painful reminder that rescue funds for small entrepreneurial companies are, shall we say, few and far between).
Business owners can't control the problems that have cropped up, and that may continue to develop, at various hot spots across the global economy. But they can--and should--take proactive steps now to shelter their companies from unwanted consequences of a worldwide downturn. After all, if a company's underlying financials are strong, it should be able to capitalize on competitors' weaknesses, prosper, and continue to grow, even in adverse economic times.

Protect your cash flow

To Seth Godin, president of Yoyodyne, a $5-million on-line direct-marketing company based in Irvington, N.Y., happiness for a business owner boils down to one simple thing: positive cash flow. At his three-and-a-half-year-old company, he confides, "we think about this every day. But there are a lot of people who forget, when times are as good as they've been during the past few years, that the business world is cyclical and that you need money to make money."

Sound cash-flow management is essential for any growing business. But here's the flip side of that reality: the stronger the economy is--and the faster a company is growing--the easier it can be to overlook cash-flow controls, sometimes without even suffering negative consequences...at least for a while. "The best thing about volatile economic conditions is that they remind managers to refocus their attention on the basics," notes Jeffrey Levine, a certified public accountant based in Newton, Mass., who warns his clients that it could take as long as 12 to 24 months for the full ramifications of today's economic problems to hit their businesses.
Granted, some companies' cash flow will take it on the chin much sooner than others', especially if they sell directly to countries or industries that are already experiencing difficulties. But there's only one way to begin, and the time to do it is now: evaluate your cash-flow controls, and tighten them promptly wherever it seems necessary.

If there is one single point of vulnerability in most companies, it's accounts receivable. That's because entrepreneurial companies almost invariably make the mistake--especially in their early or fast-growth stages--of paying much more attention to making sales than to collecting receivables.

That's never a great idea, but when the economy slows down and more customers start taking longer and longer to pay their bills, the result is a cash crunch. Factor into that the growing number of corporate bankruptcies that have dotted the U.S. business scene since 1997, and all those uncollectable bills could well turn the crunch into a cash-flow crisis for far too many companies.

Riding the Economic Roller Coaster

You can't control the crazy, fluctuating world economic markets, but you can (and should) tighten your seat belt

Ask Frederick Roberts when he first began to get anxious about economic matters, and he doesn't even hesitate before replying. "It was when the news began to surface about all those problems in Asia," confides the president and chief operating officer of Certified Diabetic Services (CDS), a mail-order diabetic-supplies company based in Naples, Fla.

No, that isn't because his three-year-old company brings in any of its $9 million in sales from diabetics in the Far East. But when Asian companies started taking a nosedive, Roberts began worrying about a trickle-down effect that could possibly wind up affecting his company's credit picture. He explains, "When those companies were strong, they bought so much U.S. debt. Once it was clear that they were in trouble, I started asking myself what consequences that could have on our interest rates."

To Roberts, a former chief financial officer with years of experience in international finance, ignoring those early warning signs would have been foolhardy. "These days, you can't run a growth company without thinking globally," he emphasizes, adding, "That means continually trying to figure out which new factors or variables will likely affect your financial model--and adjusting your strategies accordingly." (It also requires the flexibility to keep readjusting in these unpredictable times, as Roberts needed to do when U.S. interest rates started falling rather than rising as he had originally expected.)

For some business owners, warning bells might have sounded when the bottom started dropping out of the U.S. stock market. Or maybe it was the collapse of the Russian economy, or Brazil's economic troubles, that created anxieties. Or maybe it was all those headlines about the $3.6-billion bailout of a hedge fund for the superrich (an especially painful reminder that rescue funds for small entrepreneurial companies are, shall we say, few and far between).

Business owners can't control the problems that have cropped up, and that may continue to develop, at various hot spots across the global economy. But they can--and should--take proactive steps now to shelter their companies from unwanted consequences of a worldwide downturn. After all, if a company's underlying financials are strong, it should be able to capitalize on competitors' weaknesses, prosper, and continue to grow, even in adverse economic times.

Protect your cash flow

To Seth Godin, president of Yoyodyne, a $5-million on-line direct-marketing company based in Irvington, N.Y., happiness for a business owner boils down to one simple thing: positive cash flow. At his three-and-a-half-year-old company, he confides, "we think about this every day. But there are a lot of people who forget, when times are as good as they've been during the past few years, that the business world is cyclical and that you need money to make money."

Sound cash-flow management is essential for any growing business. But here's the flip side of that reality: the stronger the economy is--and the faster a company is growing--the easier it can be to overlook cash-flow controls, sometimes without even suffering negative consequences...at least for a while. "The best thing about volatile economic conditions is that they remind managers to refocus their attention on the basics," notes Jeffrey Levine, a certified public accountant based in Newton, Mass., who warns his clients that it could take as long as 12 to 24 months for the full ramifications of today's economic problems to hit their businesses.
Granted, some companies' cash flow will take it on the chin much sooner than others', especially if they sell directly to countries or industries that are already experiencing difficulties. But there's only one way to begin, and the time to do it is now: evaluate your cash-flow controls, and tighten them promptly wherever it seems necessary.

If there is one single point of vulnerability in most companies, it's accounts receivable. That's because entrepreneurial companies almost invariably make the mistake--especially in their early or fast-growth stages--of paying much more attention to making sales than to collecting receivables.

That's never a great idea, but when the economy slows down and more customers start taking longer and longer to pay their bills, the result is a cash crunch. Factor into that the growing number of corporate bankruptcies that have dotted the U.S. business scene since 1997, and all those uncollectable bills could well turn the crunch into a cash-flow crisis for far too many companies.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Death Tax

By: Nadine Heintz

Roger Peugeot jokes that a fitting way for him to die would be while hugging the toilet in his basement during a tornado -- preferably in 2010. Peugeot, better known in Overland Park, Kansas, as "Roger the Plumber," owns the company that his father, Arley, founded in 1950. At age 7, Peugeot was his father's apprentice, eventually joining him full-time after graduating from high school. Ten years later, Arley died during a house call, but luckily, he had hashed out a succession plan a year and a half earlier: He gave his truck and tools to his son and helped him train two new employees. As soon as he died, Roger would inherit the business.

Things are a lot more complicated for Peugeot today. His father's once-humble plumbing concern now boasts 25 employees, 15 trucks, and more than $5 million in annual sales. Peugeot, 60, says estate taxes have become a big worry. While there is scant statistical evidence that many small businesses are affected by the levy, the so-called "death tax" is nonetheless considered by opponents to be a kind of bogeyman preying on entrepreneurs and family farms. Politics hasn't helped matters, either. In 2001, Congress enacted an eventual phaseout of the levy; in 2010, it will be repealed altogether. The problem is, the tax is set to return in 2011 unless Congress votes to make the repeal permanent -- something unlikely to happen in an election year and even less likely should Republicans lose the White House or Congress. In other words, there's no telling what will happen. "We don't know what the prospect for repeal is," notes Steve Aikers, managing director of wealth-management firm Bessemer Trust's Dallas office. As a result, he adds, the onus is on business owners to "do enough planning so they won't have a problem."

Peugeot, for one, has done precisely that. Rather than driving himself crazy with what-ifs (or praying for a timely demise in 2010), he's taken matters into his own hands. This election season, as politicians and pundits debate the issue, the master plumber will rest a little easier thanks to smart, and legal, estate-planning strategies.
Make the Most of Your Marital Status

There's at least one nice thing to say about the estate tax: You're entitled to an exemption. In 2004 and 2005, the exemption is $1.5 million. (The amount jumps to $2 million between 2006 and 2008 and hits $3.5 million in 2009 before the tax is repealed for one year in 2010.) Any amount exceeding $1.5 million is subject to a federal estate tax as high as 48%. Fortunately for married couples, the tax only kicks in upon the death of the spouse. With some planning, couples can qualify for two $1.5 million exemptions instead of just one.
To that end, in 1997, Peugeot and his wife, Diane, 55, each set up living trusts funded by personal assets like the plumbing business, bank accounts, and real estate. (There's no limit to how much they can contribute to the trusts.) Things get a little macabre here, so bear with us. Let's say Roger were to pass away this year. In that case, his trust is designed to split into two subtrusts: a bypass trust and a marital trust. Diane would be the primary beneficiary of the bypass trust, which she could use for health, education, maintenance, and support needs. She'd also be the sole beneficiary of the marital trust.

Now, let's say Diane's revocable trust is worth $1 million and Roger's $2 million. Upon Roger's death, $1.5 million of his trust would go to his bypass trust (and remain free from estate taxes), while the remaining $500,000 would go to his marital trust. Upon Diane's death, the $500,000 in the marital trust would become part of her estate value, bringing it to the $1.5 million exemption. Meanwhile, Roger's $1.5 million bypass trust would go to the couple's four children, free of federal estate taxes. It's a somewhat complicated way to get to a simple end: The Peugeot estate will have fully utilized the $3 million combined exemption available, and the children may not have to pay any

estate tax.

Create an Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust

With the help of his estate-planning attorney, Kyle Krull, Peugeot created another safety net just in case his estate exceeds the estate-tax exemption. He established an irrevocable trust that's separate from his estate and exempt from estate tax. (As with the bypass trust, this irrevocable trust cannot be altered once it's established.) The trust is funded by a survivorship life insurance policy that will deliver to the beneficiaries -- Peugeot's children -- upon the death of both Peugeot and his wife, providing their four children with liquid funds to help pay off any potential estate tax owed. Because the children are the trust's beneficiaries, Roger and Diane can each put $11,000 a year per child into the insurance policy tax-free, thanks to the gift-tax exemption. That translates into a maximum of $88,000 total per year. Since 1997, Peugeot has stashed away some $200,000 into the life insurance trust. He figures his kids can't lose: Even if his estate winds up being exempt, he says, they'll just be a lot richer.