The past week or so has seen some interesting observations and cautions on trends shaping the evolving workplace. They cover the ground from what is perhaps a surprising expression of an old, forgotten idea, to efforts to understand a powerful new demographic trend, to cautions about one of the ways we transmit knowledge across the generations in the midst of all this change.
Women molding work. Earlier this year, we noted here that The Economist had coined the term “womenomics” to describe the growing presence of women in the workforce, and to argue for a rationalization of compensation and tax practices in order to encourage this welcome development.
Management-Issues has taken up the issue to describe how women are changing the way these workforces are run. The piece seems to use an unfortunately simplistic right brain, left brain metaphor to depict the differences between male and female approaches to work. But maybe not – view the piece yourself and see what you think.
Mentors molding managers. Mentoring seems to continue struggling along. It has an inherent sense to it, but can be devilishly difficult to actually make work in practice. This WSJ piece discusses some of those difficulties and ideas for surmounting them.
I would suggest that a particularly important reason for organizations to study this management development tool is the very demographic tumult that the world of work is undergoing presently, only hinted at by the previous item. From the role of men receding to parity to that of the baby boomers beginning to exit altogether, big changes are afoot. Mentoring can help transmit not only accumulated experience and wisdom to those stepping into the traces, but also their thinking and instincts to those still in charge, further informing that experience and wisdom.
Work molding workers. Many people have been interested in the idea of the workplace offering a laboratory for testing ideas that can improve society, generally. Some even see the workplace as potentially the perfect microcosm of society.
This BusinessWeek article describes how the Google approach to management harkens back to Peter Drucker‘s early thinking in this area. You will be reminded of the practices of other iconic companies, but the suggestion is fair enough that Google is preeminent in putting so many of them into effective practice.
Since humankind first developed the economic capacity to support specialists, the philosophers among them have thought about how to best organize society. Now, managers are being looked at as the pathfinders in that role. Not a bad tradition to take on – but, when you’re a pioneer, you’d best watch your step!
—
Today’s tip: Speaking of that, stop over to Inc.com for this piece offering some clues as to why pathfinders may be in front, but they’d better not be alone.
—
Have you noticed the blue “Sphere” icon, below? When you click on it, it will produce a window offering you content related to today’s item from other blogs and the regular media. Give it a try! (And, while you’re clicking around down there, don’t forget to subscribe, by email or RSS reader!)
—
Technorati Tags: workplace, knowledge, Economist, womenomics, men, workforce, Management-Issues, women, right brain, left brain, work, Mentoring, WSJ, organization, management, baby boomer, Mentor, experience, wisdom, society, BusinessWeek, Google, manager, pathfinder, pioneer, Inc.com, Peter Drucker
Sphere: Related Content



















4 Comments
Hi Jim,
These are really interesting topics to string together – the common thread being what managers will face on their path in the near future!
re: Mentoring. One of the issues companies face in executing a mentoring program is having enough mentors for the mentees.
Two things need to be in place for success: first, mentors need to have the mindset of being ‘net exporters of talent’ – people developers – or they won’t commit the time; second, not everyone should be a mentor. Just volunteering should not be enough. Do you want a toxic manager passing on their version of wisdom to the ‘next generation’? Of course not.
Ever forward!
Cheers, Joe
Hi, Jim,
I haven’t read the WSJ reference yet but intend to. Joe did a nice job of succinctly laying out key Mentoring issues.
Am working with a company right now whose hiring practice includes bringing in people with a predisposition for, and track record of, building up other people. It’s not hard to do. You just have to decide that you’ll be deliberate about it and not waiver at the last minute.
Hi Joe,
Thanks for your visit and kind comments!
Those are key points about mentoring, arent’ they? – especially the one about toxic managers. How do you discourage one from entering your mentoring program if you don’t want him or her passing along a toxic philosophy or approach? In fact, when a question like that comes up, it might be a good time to review why that person is even on staff.
Having enough mentors is in fact a big problem – and it suggests something (rather negative) about the quality of your management staff if they don’t volunteer. There are ways to make this an important part of a manager’s career path.
By the way, I’m looking forward to hearing how this month’s writing project works out! It sounds like a very intersting idea.
Thanks again for stopping by.
Hi Steve,
Bingo. If managers aren’t inherently primed to think and breathe management development, they aren’t quite there, yet, themselves. Incentives can be developed to encourage this, but it’s obviously best to find a method for identifying managers who have an instinct for it, and who identify it naturally as a core part of what being a manager is.
A hiring company that is, as you say, deliberate and unhesitating about doing this is making a terrific investment for its long-term future – but one that will undoubtedly pay nearer-term dividends, as well.
Thanks as always for your visit – am enjoying and benefiting greatly from your terrific change series, and will be visiting you there again soon!
Post a Comment