This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Business metaphors often return to McGregor’s theory x and theory y of manager’s perceptions of workers. When the organization feels under or over its capacity (weak IT systems, management problems, short-staffed, fallen behind in the market, disruption), I say it is like a weight lifter on steroids.
I believe that Steve Jobs was among the best CEOs of this generation because he created entirely new categories six times in a decade, and built the largest company market cap ever. Yet two recent and excellent books ( Inside Apple , by Adam Lashinsky and Steve Jobs by Walter Issacson) describe a management style that was disturbingly harsh.
GM’s bankruptcy and bailout four years ago earned it the nickname “Government Motors,” a reference to both the $80 billion lent by the US government (repaid in full in December, 2013) and to the bureaucratic, top-down management GM executives had used to try to reverse the company’s tailspin. They play well as a team.
The humanist strand of management thinking that celebrates teams and collaboration through respect for customers and workers as human beings has a long and distinguished history. Achieving humanistic management has thus turned out to be a much more intractable problem than most thought leaders expected it to be.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content