Take control, fight little hassles, get fair pay, receive feedback and more…
Executive Coaching Growth
Provide information on the growth and depth of executive coaching around the world
Curated by Ron McIntyre
I totally agree with Nicholas in this article from November, 2016. Why is it so hard to understand.
Many political observers have argued for years that the federal government, with its multitrillion-dollar budget, should be run more like a business with the president acting as a de facto CEO. Enter President-elect Donald Trump, a candidate with no background in politics or public administration but decades of experience as a captain of industry. His upcoming term renews interest in the whole question. Peter Conti-Brown, a Wharton professor of legal studies in business ethics, and Philip Joyce, professor of public policy at the University of Maryland, consider the merits of his business experience as he steps into the White House.
While I have believed this for a long time I also know there are a number of pitfalls in trying to do so. We will find out over the next 4 years.
Silicon Valley’s startup scene celebrates iconoclasts and rule breakers. But are entrepreneurs taking “fake it till you make it” too far?
Interesting discussion about exaggeration. What do you think?
During the 1970s, Chris Argyris, a business theorist at Harvard Business School (and now, at 89, a professor emeritus) began to research what happens to organizations and people, like Mr. Chang, when they find obstacles in their paths.
Professor Argyris called the most common response single loop learning — an insular mental process in which we consider possible external or technical reasons for obstacles.
Less common but vastly more effective is the cognitive approach that Professor Argyris called double-loop learning. In this mode we question every aspect of our approach, including our methodology, biases and deeply held assumptions. This more psychologically nuanced self-examination requires that we honestly challenge our beliefs and summon the courage to act on that information, which may lead to fresh ways of thinking about our lives and our goals.
In interviews we did with high achievers for a book, we expected to hear that talent, persistence, dedication and luck played crucial roles in their success. Surprisingly, however, self-awareness played an equally strong role.
The successful people we spoke with — in business, entertainment, sports and the arts — all had similar responses when faced with obstacles: they subjected themselves to fairly merciless self-examination that prompted reinvention of their goals and the methods by which they endeavored to achieve them.
If you ever run into me on an occasion where I happen to be wearing business attire, you might notice that I’m donning suspenders instead of a belt. Some people may think I’m wearing suspenders to look more corporate, or to embody a more sage “leadership adviser” persona – but the truth is, the suspenders are not my first choice. Several years ago, a life-changing event caused me to trade in my belts for suspenders. I have no complaints, however; I’m grateful for the suspenders. Not only do they provide much-needed assistance, they are also a constant reminder of the most harrowing experience of my life – an experience that affirmed for me two “uplifting” lessons about leadership.
An economist at Boston University has come to two surprising conclusions about the relationship between technology and occupations.
What do you think? While I agree there are jobs in jeopardy, I also believe each creates a replacement job that is not there today.
What do you think?
What do you think?
Most of us aren't futurists, and futurists aren't oracles. They simply try and make some sense of what's coming—not hard and fast predictions, just possibilities. The most accurate forecasts we're able to make are often necessarily broad. What's always clear is simply that technology will only burrow deeper into our world and organizations, disrupting the way we do things and throwing more threats and opportunities in our way. How it will is more of an open question by comparison.
Still, there are a few ways companies can get better at predicting not just what changes may be around the corner, but how they'll affect them once those disruptions arrive. Making everyone in your company more effective futurists all starts with asking the right questions. Here are a few of them.
Questions drive the ability of leaders to understand and empower people.
Most managers and business leaders aim to make their organizations flatter. They try to reduce middle management, to skim the amount of hierarchical layers, or they scrap internal bureaucracy in order to achieve more efficiency, more effectiveness, and more enterprise agility. The problem with this is simple, but important: Organizations should actually not be flat, but decentralized. Why? Because flat means continuing to bark up the wrong tree: In flat, the steering from the top remains.
Hierarchical steering in organizations once was a pretty good idea. That was during the industrial age. Since this era ended in the 1970s or so, the ability of markets to surprise us has increased significantly: Value creation in the knowledge age is more dynamic and more prone to surprise than it was in the industrial age. The importance of services, customization, individualized production, uncertainty and highly competitive markets has risen dramatically. That means: in every organization, the outside has to be in charge, top-down has turned into a trap.
What do you think? I am a fan of flatter organizations but it is not a one size fits all. Networks are part of either structure.
The 2017 Edelman Trust Barometer reveals trust is in crisis around the world. The general population’s trust in the four institutions all declined broadly.
I highly recommend every leader study this document. I have said leadership is in crisis for years but it is now documented.
Some interesting commentary, what do you think?
There is some interesting data in this article. Should be read by all businesses.
Sadly, even retail has become militant in many areas today and it not the retailer in the drivers seat, it's the consumer.
I am a strong advocate of a team charter, when done well, but too many companies claim it takes too much time and has limited return so they skip it. This is one of the reason for so many project failures.
Sadly there is a lot of truth in this article. Science, has for decades, sold out to business to obtain funding to continue work in the field because the public is not interested in funding pure science.
Food for thought. It is coming and those who don't head the message will find the alternative expensive.
What do you think?
If one of the main goals of the future of work is to increase productivity and collaboration, there’s a great place to start: digital transformation. Many companies are embarking on a digital transformation in an effort to connect employees and customers around the world digitally. The future of work and digital transformation are both vital to each other’s success, and they can work together to help organizations prepare for a new wave in the workforce. A digital transformation can provide employees the tools they need to create the best work environment for the future. [...]
Some great insights from Jacob. What do you think.
Personally, I think we are 3 - 5 years away.
What do you think?
Totally agree but it will not be solved my not listing a birthday in a record. This is about recognizing value and contribution.