26. August 2009
Aus Gary Hamel’s Blog im WSJ:
Freitag, 21. August 2009, 21:28:48 | Gary Hamel
“What’s wrong with organized religion?” That’s the question I addressed at a recent conference organized by Willow Creek Community Church in Barrington, Illinois. For nearly 30 years, Willow Creek has been one of America’s most progressive churches, and since 1999 it’s been running an annual a seminar for church leaders from around the world. The “Leadership Summit” features innovative pastors as well as non-church speakers. This year’s roster included Carly Fiorina, Bono, Tony Blair, Jessica Jackley, co-founder of Kiva, and a slightly nerdish business school professor.
So there I was, in front of 7,000 preachers and laymen, with another 60,000 or so by satellite. I’m used to flashing my PowerPoints in front people who are richer, smarter and more powerful than me. But this was the first time I had to face a stadium’s worth of folks who were probably more virtuous than me. It wasn’t so much a case of Daniel in the lion’s den as Gary in the Christians’ den. (By the way, I donated my small honorarium to charity).
Obviously, no one dragged me on stage in chains. I went for two reasons. First, I believe that religious institutions, like other sorts of organizations, need a management reboot, and I know a little bit about how to make this happen. My hypothesis: the problem with organized religion isn’t that it’s too religious, but that it’s too organized. And second, I believe that the “church” (in the broadest, ecumenical sense of the word) plays an essential role in constructing the moral foundations of a democratic society—a view advanced 147 years ago by that famous French tourist, Alexis de Tocqueville: Read the rest of this entry »
24. July 2009
So yes, I believe that corporate failure is usually a bad thing; but I also believe that every organization must continually re-earn its right to exist—whether that’s the local high school, the US Army or General Motors. Longevity should be the reward for resilience, not the product of politically-mediated protection.
Eine Zusammenfassung zweier Eintragungen in Gary Hamel’s Blog im Wall Street Journal. Hamel Should we save dying companies
13. July 2009
We agree that exciting new business opportunities are rare. Given this fact, companies can choose to cast the net wide in search for such opportunities, but at signifi cant cost – both in terms of actual expense incurred as well as the opportunity cost of not focusing properly on the existing core business. Alternatively, companies can take a much more selective approach, as Andrew proposes, but with a risk that exciting opportunities get screened out early. Would Dixons have launched Freeserve using Andrew’s traffi c light approach? Would Carphone Warehouse have launched Talktalk? It is impossible to draw defi nitive conclusions here; we have to accept that there are risks with whichever approach is followed. (Andrew responds: “Both Freeserve and Talktalk were the result of ‘good old fashioned strategic planning’ rather than ‘net casting’. Freeserve would have passed the Traffi c Lights (Dixons was one of the companies in my research), but Talktalk would probably not. So having a tough screen does sometimes cut out opportunities that subsequently prove successful.”) Read the rest of this entry »
13. July 2009
from the “Financial Times”
Where some see only gloom right now, entrepreneurs see opportunity. As the risk averse withdraw, braver business leaders will step forward. An enthusiastic special report in The Economist in March 2009 anticipates a new golden age for entrepreneurship, declaring it an idea whose time has come. Its “triumph” is already assured. But when chief executives and other senior managers look within their organisations, do they see a lot of (frustrated) entrepreneurs waiting eagerly to put ideas forward? Somehow I doubt it. Even if they do, how comfortable are business leaders with the idea of encouraging, still less investing in, new ventures at a time like this? Read the rest of this entry »
1. June 2009
Aus Gary Hamel’s Blog beim WSJ:
The need to empower natural leaders isn’t an HR pipedream, it’s a competitive imperative. But before you can empower them, you have to find them.
In most companies, the formal hierarchy is a matter of public record—it’s easy to discover who’s in charge of what. By contrast, natural leaders don’t appear on any organization chart. To hunt them down, you need to know . . . Read the rest of this entry »
4. May 2009
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.
Last year, a global survey of 90,000 employees by Towers Perrin revealed that only 21% of employees are highly engaged in their work. The other 79% may be physically on the job, but they’ve left their enthusiasm and ingenuity at home. This is a scandalous waste of human capability. It’s also a virtually bottomless reservoir of creative potential that has yet to be tapped.
Ob das miteinander zu tun hat?
Aus Gary Hamel’s Management 2.0 Blog beim Wall street Journal
7. April 2009
Aus Gary Hamel’s Blog Management 2.0.
Eine Abrechnung mit den Bankern, die offensichtlich in ihrer Moral seit 1933 nichts gelernt haben.
Hamel: Famers’ Values vs. Bankers’ Values