March 24, 2010
October 8, 2009
October 2, 2009
September 3, 2009
March 10, 2009
January 28, 2009
How Web 2.0 and Generation Y are changing the way management work is done
The second wave of the Internet revolution, often called Web 2.0, has had an enormous impact on the way we interact with each other online and the ways we access and use information. This is particularly so for Generation Y, the generation born after 1980, who were born into a high-tech, digital world, and who are now entering the workforce in large numbers. Generation Y employees communicate differently than their baby boomer or Generation X bosses, and they have different expectations about what constitutes an exciting and worthwhile work environment.
Half Moon Bay, California, USA
MLab’s inaugural conference on management innovation will bring together a group of radical thinkers and doers to define the “Grand Challenges” for 21st century management, and imagine possible solutions to them.
What would happen if you asked 30 of the world’s most progressive business thinkers to reinvent management for the 21st century?
What would happen if you encouraged them to throw out one hundred years’ worth of assumptions about how to organize human effort and start with a clean sheet of paper?
What would happen if you dared them to radically re-imagine the ways in which companies create strategies, make key decisions, allocate resources, mobilize talent, and coordinate activities?
Representatives from the Management Lab will be hosting a workshop on Management Innovation.
This conference will focus on the opportunities and conditions for management innovation in Central Europe and features speakers from leading companies. MLab visiting researcher Michael Mol will chair the conference and hold a keynote speech.
For more information, visit: www.managementinnovation.cz
I’ll bet you know a natural leader. Maybe you are one.
Maybe you’re a mom who started a support group for the parents of children with special needs.
Maybe you’re a concerned citizen who mobilized a group of preservation-minded neighbors to halt the destruction of a venerable old building.
Maybe you’re a churchgoer who convinced some of your fellow parishioners to help mentor at-risk kids.
Or maybe you simply organized your company’s first softball league.
In business, we talk a lot about leadership, and often take pains to differentiate between “leaders” and “managers.” Usually, this dichotomy hinges on the “vision thing.” Leaders imagine a future state and a chart a course to get there—they’re change agents. Managers simply preside over the status quo—they’re administrators.
At one time or another, most of us have probably worked for a boss who was self-absorbed, vindictive, or just plain inept — a real-life equivalent to Dunder Mifflin’s Michael Scott. One of my first jobs was for an HR manager who thought the best way to humble a cocky new MBA was to have him spend hours sorting files into alphabetical order. Needless to say, he didn’t get the best out of me or anyone else that worked for him.
As we burrow deeper into the recession, companies around the world are cutting costs in all the usual ways—by reducing headcount, slashing capital budgets, and trimming overheads. All these measures are vital. But in their quest to root out inefficiencies, companies should also be focusing on the hidden but substantial costs of supercilious and overbearing bosses.
To see the stark origins of the world’s economic crisis, you have to flick away these exculpatory fig leaves. Doing that reveals . . .
. . . the unsophisticated free-market ideology of Bush-appointed regulators.
In many federal agencies there seems to have been a naïve belief that private sector institutions could be trusted to police themselves. At the Fed and SEC, policy makers apparently believed a “free” market was one unconstrained by oversight and regulation, rather than one free of manipulation and un-tempered self-interest.
I’m shocked. I’m outraged. I’m going to throw a rock.
As I’m writing this, thousands of protestors in London are venting their anger at the world’s financiers, hanging effigies of besuited bankers and smashing bank windows. While the Metropolitan Police will undoubtedly do their best to quell the violence, no one is expecting any G-20 leader to offer up a defense of the world’s bankers.
Indeed, last week U.S. legislators seemed positively eager to stoke the fires of populist rage, as they strained to out-do each other in expressing anger over AIG’s $165 million bonus pool. Given AIG’s starring role in the current crisis, the proposed payouts were gross and unwarranted. The feeble defense offered by AIG’s chief, Edward Liddy—that the bonuses were necessary to retain employees who “knew the contracts”—seems tantamount to blackmail.