WHY did I vote against the 2010 budget?  The main reason is that it violates economic wisdom. You don’t cut capital outlays when the economy is going down the tubes. You engage in countercyclical spending, that is, increase government expenditures to counteract the contraction of the private sector.

One of your company’s most powerful competitive weapons may at this very moment be cleaning out her desk—or contemplating doing so. Can you afford to let her go?

Women are falling victim to two types of attrition: They’re being disproportionately let go and they’re disproportionately quitting. Yet whether they’re jumping or being pushed, figures show that a female exodus is bad for business.

Research conducted by both Catalyst and McKinsey & Company demonstrates that companies with significant numbers of women in management have a much higher return on investment. While a recent study from London Business School shows that when work teams are split evenly between men and women, productivity goes up. Gender balance counters groupthink.

The facts couldn’t be clearer: smart women equal stronger companies.

As we begin to emerge from the global recession, firms with a view to the future are building bench strength through programs that provide traction for both their high-performing and high-potential women.

To be truly great, entrepreneurs need to be a little...out there. After all, fearless creativity, maverick thinking and risk taking seldom show up in the middle of the bell curve. As venture capitalists, we see our fair share of aspiring and veteran entrepreneurs, and we have often wondered whether the man or woman standing before us was brilliant, deluded, or a combination of the two. The goal is to find the optimal balance between your strengths and weaknesses.

Perhaps one of the most important and delicate balances that great entrepreneurs must finesse is the one between risk taking and vulnerability. If a risk taker is generally perceived as bold, driven and extroverted, a vulnerable person is usually seen as gentle, weak and introverted. Yet here’s the paradox: Vulnerability is among the defining characteristics of the greatest entrepreneurs I know. Inside these people lies a highly nuanced vulnerability that buttresses their externally directed strength.

This nuance has to do with the vital difference between what I call passive and active vulnerability. Passive vulnerability refers to the condition of being vulnerable without choosing to be. Active vulnerability is about engaging in a considered risk while hoping that the payoff, financial or otherwise, will ultimately be worth it. Active vulnerability is in essence proactive and informed risk-taking. Passive vulnerability describes reactive and submissive exposure.