Loss-making subsidiaries. Anyone who can effectively work the phrase “torpid portentiousness” into an essay is worth a read. Please see this Mark Steyn piece, from National Review Online, comparing GM to the relative titan, Bed, Bath and Beyond – and more. Many thanks to Michael Wade for the tip. Dull diligence. Would you have thought [...]
It has long been remarked that there is a converse correlation between economic cycles and enrolment in MBA programs. When business is down, the business schools start filling up with managers seeking to pad their credentials. And so as we enter the current global crisis we can probably expect a boom in MBAs within a year or two – just in time to hop the next economic train through town. But will they be driving the next boom, as so many imagine, or setting up the next bust?
When times are tough, we talk tough. We sound the call to arms, announce the equality of all before the greatness of the challenge we face, and declare our devotion to everyone who helps shoulder the burden. It’s can be a thrillingly satisfying display of our great-hearted spirit, our boundlessly magnanimous condescension. A classic example of this highly contrived concern and regard of “leaders” for their “followers” is effectively spotlighted by . . .
A discussion of the importance of values in the context of business and management can be conducted across a wide range of domains occupied by the individuals, formal and informal communities, organizations, societies, and cultures that are affected by them. Each has its own values, which influence and are influenced by all the others. As a result, an organization, to be effective, must comprehend this environment, achieve an understanding of its own place in it, and integrate that awareness consciously into its corporate goals. But there is another fundamentally related issue, here . . .
This year is shaping up to be a pointer to not only the direction the corporate governance debate takes, but the venue in which it is held. Thankfully, that direction seems to be toward more responsible assessments of the issues rather than denial of their existence, and that venue seems to be in the boardroom rather than in the bureaucracy. Let’s take a brief look at this. . .
The legal construct of the corporation presents interesting questions of collective and individual accountability. The subject has attracted new momentum with the egregious managerial excesses that led to passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act. Many commentators have argued that we don’t need additional laws like this, targeting people already burdened with exceptional responsibilities. But as new scandals emerge, that assertion is losing its force. . .
The makeup and behavior of corporate boards remains controversial. More and more dust is being thrown up around the misbehavior of directors – especially executive directors – and the general dysfunction surrounding the operation of so many of these really key institutions. While it can be difficult to penetrate through those dust clouds to the truths hidden within, we can be sure of one thing they confirm over and over again: the interests of managers and owners do not coincide. . .
Or:
Jim Stroup's Business card:
Come visit the Managing Leadership
Managing Leadership® is a registered trademark of the author
Bad Behavior has blocked 264 access attempts in the last 7 days.
