My Photo

Sign Up for My Free Newsletter

  • Enter Your Email:

February 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29      

« Why Can’t Obama Be More Open? | Main | The Origin (and Strange Longevity) of Dilbert-Style Management »

July 29, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Imelda McGrattan

I guess the reason why HBR became so emotional has to do with where monetary deposits come from :-)

We live in a society not run by government but government / institutions run by corporations

At a time in the past this was possibly necessary when scarcity was the reality. That is no longer a fact. We live in a world of plenty and it is the inequality of the division of the plenty that needs to be addressed.

People’s thinking has evolved so much. We are now better critical, analytic and emotionally intelligent. Every topic is scrutinized and subjective to individual interpretation.

The reality is we are moving faster and faster into a technological future where many jobs will be replaced by automation. The old systems and thinking will become redundant. We now can see endless flaws and corruptions that these were built upon. People are beginning to lose confidence in many areas of life and it is time for a critical change to happen and for it to be handled effectively or we could end up in a dictator state.

We need to look at evaluating our natural resources and research to discover new ones. These are common heritage and belong to all people. There has never been a more important time for people to work collectively and to collaborate and share knowledge instead of coveting it in order to remain competitive for their own rewards.

All these elements will be challenging for government and industry to adapt to.
We need to look at the bigger picture, a sustainable greener holistic future for all, where the vulnerable in society do not always become the casualty in order to maintain profit margins

Gerry Lantz

Get 'em Steve
From the time I entered into business in 1976 (!), it was axiomatic that "Leaders lead people; managers manage things." It smelled like horse-dookey then and it is worse now as you have so eloquently pointed out.
Thanks for your brilliant commentary.


Steve Denning has a crack at the same old same old management BS

Kolb Learning

There's no reason not train your managers how to lead. The potential benefits include increased moral, and hopefully better decisions. The only downside I can think of is the cost of giving managers some additional leadership training.

Health News

I can't believe how much of this I just wasn't aware of. Thank you for bringing more information to this topic for me. I'm truly grateful and really impressed.

The comments to this entry are closed.