# data[].attributes.body
I felt like this interview with author, Jill Geisler was very informative on the topic of the differences between leadership and management.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I recently spoke to Jill Geisler, who is the author of Work Happy: What Great Bosses Know. Her companion "Great Bosses" podcasts on iTunesU have been downloaded 8 million times - and counting. Jill heads the leadership and management faculty of the Poynter Institute. She teaches, writes and consults on critical issues for leaders and counts among her clients The Boston Globe, CNN, and the Washington Post. In recognition of her lifetime contributions to journalism, the University of Wisconsin honored her with its "Distinguished Service to Journalism" award, the Wisconsin Broadcasters Association named her to its Broadcast Hall of Fame, and the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences inducted her into its prestigious Silver Circle.

In this interview, Jill talks about what it takes to be a happy manager despite the poor economy, how social media can create a happier work environment, and more.
What does it take be a happy manager in a bad economy?
It takes three things: strategic thinking, emotional intelligence and a passion for helping people do their best work, even in the face of diminished resources.

When managers think strategically, they are able to look at bigger picture goals and determine what of the many demands on their time they will make a priority.

With emotional intelligence, they can help their teams recover from setbacks and frustration while using targeted feedback to encourage their progress. (Remember, feedback is a renewable resource that costs managers nothing and pays great dividends.)

And that passion? It transforms them from yesterday's parental-type supervisors into what I believe today's best bosses must be: agents. Employees want to work for someone who approaches them as an agent would: "Sign on with me and I'll help you get to where you want to go. I'll be honest about your strengths and weaknesses. I'll guide you so you'll build a track record that serves you well here or wherever life takes you."
How can social media help build a happier work environment?
Social media is a game changer for internal relationships among colleagues and external relationships with customers. Some organizations view social media, first and foremost, as risk that must be managed. But it's wiser to think of social media as an invitation to creative communication. To instant feedback and problem solving. To putting a human face on people who once were only titles and offices. To building collaboration and relationships. The biggest risk is regulating it so tightly that people can't or won't engage.
What do you recommend for younger leaders as they develop their skills?
Don't worry about your age. Too many of the new managers I coach fear that have a neon sign over their heads that flashes "Untested-Green-Inexperienced."

But the word "new" has other meanings, including "Fresh-Innovative-Improved."

That's the focus they should have, because they bring new gifts to the world of work, including digital savvy, a healthy appreciation of diversity, and an expectation that learning is a lifelong endeavor. And then there's the oh-so-practical advice I always give young managers: When your staff invites you to an important party, by all means, accept. But drink less and leave earlier than everyone else. That way you'll remember everything you said - and you'll give them space to make jokes about and do impressions of all those bozos in management - just like you once did!
How do you think the remote workplace will impact leadership development?
I've worked remotely since 1998, so I know a bit about this. (I live in Wisconsin and commute to Florida to teach leadership seminars at our institute.) Start with the assumption that the greater the distance between people, the more important communication becomes. When I work with leaders whose teams are dispersed geographically, I emphasize the need for intentional communication to ensure that people don't fill in the empty spaces with misinformation. I underscore the need for user-friendly metrics that objectively demonstrate productivity and progress. I advocate for coaches and mentors across the miles so emerging leaders are "on the radar" even when they're not in the traditional "headquarters."
What three tips would you offer future managers?

1. As I say in Work Happy: What Great Bosses Know, "Change is the new normal," so assume you will always be managing change. Learn to become an expert at it.

2. Know what you want to be known for. What skills? What values?

3. Remember: life's too short to work with jerks. Build a jerk-free culture of excellence in your workplace. And have fun.

Dan Schawbel is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Promote Yourself: The New Rules For Career Success (St. Martin's Press).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How To Be A Great Manager That Employees Want To Work With

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jill Geisler I recently spoke to Jill Geisler, who is the author of Work Happy: What Great Bosses Know. Her companion "Great Bosses" podcasts on iTunesU have been downloaded 8 million times - and counting. Jill heads the leadership and management faculty of the Poynter Institute.

# data[].attributes.body
A slightly different/more in-depth version of the Vroom-Yetton-Jago model from Module 6.

# data[].attributes.body
An article about how a company called Espresa is trying out different ways to reward and recognize employees along with the usual monetary gain they would receive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Espresa, the company that powers great workplaces, announced the addition of a modern reward and recognition module to its employee programs automation platform.

The new module will allow human resources (HR) and benefits teams to easily introduce a new recognition program or enhance an existing program that needs a fresh look. Employees today are searching for personalized experiences and meaningful recognition from both managers and colleagues--Espresa supports that philosophy by empowering clients with the tools to collect employee feedback, and make updates real-time regardless of their monetary value - such as destinations, "Employee of the Month" parking spots, dinner with the CEO, and access to company products and swag.

"Paperwork and tedious processes shouldn't be a roadblock to employee recognition," said Espresa CEO Alex Shubat. "We wanted to create a modern, intuitive user interface that would make it easier for organizations to recognize and reward their employees in meaningful ways. Trinkets and gift cards are nice, but they can also be impersonal. With our new rewards and recognition module, more meaningful rewards options are only two clicks away."
Making Employee Rewards Easier and More Meaningful
Espresa's rewards and recognition module was built to make recognition of employee performance easy and intuitive:

Set up or enhance an existing program in just a couple of hours

Maintenance and program updates can be done in real time

Approval workflows and timing are fully customizable

Reward budgets can be controlled by HR and distributed downstream to departments, managers, and teams

Achievements can be clearly recorded and used for future performance reviews and employee retention efforts

A Technology Built to Keep Employees Happy
The rewards and recognition module is just the latest addition to an employee programs automation platform built from the ground up to keep employees aware of all the great benefits being offered by their employer and provide a consistently amazing employee experience regardless of the employee's physical work location. Using the Espresa platform, employees can easily discover what is happening across all campuses, how and when to sign up, and where to provide feedback - all from one platform with a modern, consumer-grade UI experience. Any program can be run through the Espresa platform:

Yoga, meditation, massages, flu shots and other wellness offerings

Employee-run clubs and resource groups

Company events, seminars, picnics, and holiday parties

Reimbursement and allowance management

The platform also eases the burden on corporate benefits teams by making it easy to scale workplace programs, track budget allocation vs. employee morale, and monitor how many of their total employees are taking advantages of the benefits and at what level. Administrators can see how their programs relate to employee satisfaction and retention, ensure that third-party vendors meet the compliance needs of the organization, and manage employee resource groups and clubs - a feature that no other software offers.

"Recognizing employee performance with some level of consistency is paramount to keeping a highly productive and energetic workforce engaged," said Luis Doffo, VP of Sales at Espresa. "Traditional rewards systems built from catalogs of "chachkies" are not relevant in today's millennial centric workforce. These same rewards create a negative gap between the company's cost of the reward vs. the value an employee places on the reward; Espresa helps eliminate the gap and establish a 1:1 value in the eyes of the employee."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Espresa Announces the Addition of Reward and Recognition Module to Its Employee Programs Automation Platform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Espresa, the company that powers great workplaces, announced the addition of a modern reward and recognition module to its employee programs automation platform. The new module will allow human resources (HR) and benefits teams to easily introduce a new recognition program or enhance an existing program that needs a fresh look.

# data[].attributes.body
A more in depth version of the Continuum of Leadership that I learned about in Module 6.

# data[].attributes.body
The case study that I referenced multiple times in my final project. It was super helpful in answering all of the questions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Introduction - Recruitment and selection at Enterprise Rent-A-Car - Enterprise Rent-A-Car | Enterprise Rent-A-Car case studies, videos, social media and information | Business Case Studies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The car rental market is increasingly competitive. Enterprise continues to expand its range of services to meet customers' needs. In addition to business rentals at airport and city locations, it also provides replacement cars for accident repairs, courtesy cars for garages and short-term holiday rentals for breaks or special occasions.

# data[].attributes.body
The About Us section of Enterprise's website. It had lots of useful information about the strategic management process of their organization.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Enterprise Rent-A-Car is an internationally recognized brand with more than 7,600 neighborhood and airport car rental locations worldwide. Learn more.

# data[].attributes.body
An important quote from the founder of Enterprise Rent-A-Car that I used in my final project. It is on the second page of the slideshow.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"What do you need to start a business? Three simple things: know your product better than anyone. Know your customer, and have a burning desire to succeed." -- Dave Thomas

# data[].attributes.body
This was an interesting article about the recent Amazon headquarters announcement and what it means for finding talented employees in the near future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When tech giants like Amazon expand, other companies don't just worry about losing business. They also fret about hanging on to their employees.

Some of the industries that have defined New York City and the Washington, D.C., area will face increased competition for talent when Amazon sets up shop in their territory, with plans to hire 50,000 new workers amid the tightest job market in decades.

The expansion comes at time of fierce demand for computer programmers, mobile app developers, data scientists and cybersecurity experts. Salaries keep rising as companies from banks to retailers seek new technology professionals to expand their online presence and automate operations. Particularly in demand are software developers, with many switching jobs each year. Even some banks have eased up on their dress codes to project a hipper image.

"It's a very competitive market in New York," said William Lynch, president of the New York-based fitness tech company Peloton. "It really requires you to be smart about how you are reaching the new hiring pipeline."

Tech employment in the U.S. has grown by an average of 200,000 new jobs each year since 2010, a trend that is expected to continue for at least the next decade, according to an industry report from Computing Technology Industry Association, or CompTIA, which analyzes data from the Labor Department and other sources. The figure includes all people employed by tech companies, as well as tech professionals in other industries.

In New York, big banks are among the biggest employers of computer technology professionals. J.P. Morgan Chase employs 50,000 people in technology and hired its first artificial intelligence research chief in May. Goldman Sachs has said one-quarter of its employees work in engineering-related roles. Amazon's traditional retail rivals are striving to expand their online business and develop new technologies to improve operational efficiency.

But young professionals are flocking to tech companies, lured by the idea of changing the way people do everything from buying homes to exercising.

"In the past, the traditional career path has been to go into financial services, investment banking and consulting. What we see now is a surge of interest in tech companies," said Dan Wang, a professor of Business and Sociology at Columbia University.

Amazon will begin recruiting in a few months for its two new headquarters in New York's Long Island City and the Washington suburb of Arlington, seeking talent to support an empire that has expanded to include cloud computing services, advertising and, video streaming and TV production. The company expects to hire about 25,000 people over several years for each location. The average salary will be about $150,000 a year.

Amazon's move is only the most dramatic example of technology companies expanding their presence in the East Coast. Instagram opened a new office in New York over the summer and plans to hire hundreds of engineers. Google is reportedly looking to add 12,000 more employees in New York City.

Amazon, now 24 years old, will have to contend with New York's thriving startup scene, where companies flush with venture capital offer young people big roles and the chance to upend new industries.

That's the kind of pitch prospective employees hear from Peloton, which announced plans Monday to move into bigger headquarters in midtown Manhattan in 2020. The fitness tech company, which received $550 million in new investment in August, will be hiring thousands of people across locations in the next years, especially in technology, marketing and sales, said Lynch, the company president. It currently has nearly 100 positions open in New York City.

"We are aware of Amazon and it's amazing for New York City. But Google has been here. We've been recruiting against Google for a long time," Lynch said.

The scramble for talent goes beyond tech workers. Technology companies employ more than 3.7 million people in supporting roles like marketing and financing, according to CompTIA.

That panorama is top of mind for people like Dimple Bansal, a business graduate student at Columbia University who is focusing her studies on technology strategy. Last spring, she took an internship at Airbnb and over the summer she interned at Google.

"Tech is a growing landscape. I think it's exciting to bridge the divide between pure technology skills, and to bring the business mindset to these companies that are touching so many lives," said Bansal, 27.

Financial institutions have stepped up their recruiting strategies, trying to present their companies as innovation hubs for products from mobile apps to AI solutions for fraud reduction.

J.P. Morgan announced plans earlier this year to open a financial technology campus in California's Bay Area. Goldman holds online coding challenges as part of its recruitment efforts and launched an in-house incubator to allow employees to develop ideas.

Wang, the Columbia professor, said startup fashion brands could benefit from partnerships if Amazon leverages its New York location to venture into the luxury market. But Wang said that could mean a competition for workers from rivals like Walmart-owned Jet.com, which currently has job openings for dozens of engineers in its New Jersey headquarters, across the Hudson River from New York.

"If I were working at Jet.com, I would be very tempted by Amazon," Wang said.

As technology firms spread out, young professionals can be choosy about where they live, another incentive for companies like Amazon to set up shop in in trendy urban centers.

Based on an analysis of the revisions in job listings made on its online professional network, LinkedIn calculated 13 percent of the workers specializing in software leave their employers for another job each year.

Mathew Calkins, a 25-year-old machine learning engineer who works in Washington, D.C., for the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton, is moving to New York to work at Google later this year. He saw New York City as a thriving technical hub with more diversity than many of its West Coast counterparts.

"I didn't want to move to San Francisco and have everyone I hang out with be other engineers making six figures," Calkins said.

Calkins said recruiters who reach out to him nearly every day on LinkedIn rarely focus on "what's important to me and a growing number of folks in the tech market" -- the chance to make an impact. Instead, employers tout compensation and perks.

"They all sound the same," Calkins said.

Even if they can retain their employees, some of the smaller companies might struggle attract new talent needed to expand, said Carrie Duarte, a Partner and Workforce of the Future Leader at PwC. Their best bet is to tout the chance to be a big fish in a small pond, she said.

Kestrel Linder, CEO of the Washington, D.C., startup GiveCampus, said has learned that he can lure prospective employees to his online educational fundraiser by offering comparable salaries and more autonomy.

"Working at a startup while it is still growing is a perishable opportunity," Linder said. "The giant companies aren't going anywhere."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Amazon's HQ Expansion Means a Tough Fight for Talent Is Ahead

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When tech giants like Amazon expand, other companies don't just worry about losing business. They also fret about hanging on to their employees. Some of the industries that have defined New York City and the Washington, D.C., area will face increased competition for talent when Amazon sets up shop in their territory, with plans to hire 50,000 new workers amid the tightest job market in decades.

# data[].attributes.body
This was a MindTools article on how to avoid groupthink in the workplace. I thought it related well to content found in Chapter 15.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Avoiding Fatal Flaws in Group Decision Making

Have you ever thought about speaking up in a meeting and then decided against it because you did not want to appear unsupportive of the group's efforts?

Or led a team in which the team members were reluctant to express their own opinions?

If so, you have probably been a victim of "Groupthink".

Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when the desire for group consensus overrides people's common sense desire to present alternatives, critique a position, or express an unpopular opinion. Here, the desire for group cohesion effectively drives out good decision-making and problem solving.

Two well-known examples of Groupthink in action are the Challenger Space Shuttle disaster and the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Engineers of the space shuttle knew about some faulty parts months before takeoff, but they did not want negative press so they pushed ahead with the launch anyway.

With the Bay of Pigs invasion, President Kennedy made a decision and the people around him supported it despite their own concerns.

Irving L. Janis coined the term "Groupthink," and published his research in the 1972 book, " Groupthink." His findings came from research into why a team reaches an excellent decision one time, and a disastrous one the next. What he found was that a lack of conflict or opposing viewpoints led to poor decisions, because alternatives were not fully analyzed, and because groups did not gather enough information to make an informed decision.

How to Spot Groupthink

Janis suggested that Groupthink happens when there is:

A strong, persuasive group leader.

A high level of group cohesion.

Intense pressure from the outside to make a good decision.

In fact, it is now widely recognized that Groupthink-like behavior is found in many situations and across many types of groups and team settings. So it's important to look out for the key symptoms.

Symptoms of Groupthink

Information that is gathered is censored so that it also conforms to, or supports the chosen decision or alternative.
"Don't listen to that nonsense, they don't have a clue about what is really going on."

How to Avoid Groupthink

The challenge for any team or group leader is to create a working environment in which Groupthink is unlikely to happen. It is important also to understand the risks of Groupthink - if the stakes are high, you need to make a real effort to ensure that you're making good decisions.

To avoid Groupthink, it is important to have a process in place for checking the fundamental assumptions behind important decisions, for validating the decision-making process, and for evaluating the risks involved. For significant decisions, make sure your team does the following in their decision-making process:

Explores objectives.

Explores alternatives.

Encourages ideas to be challenged without reprisal.

Examines the risks if the preferred choice is chosen.

Tests assumptions.

If necessary, goes back and re-examines initial alternatives that were rejected.

Gathers relevant information from outside sources.

Processes this information objectively.

Has at least one contingency plan.

There are many group techniques that can help with this, including the "Mind Tools" listed below. By using one or more of these techniques to accomplish aspects of the group's work, you will vary the group's ways of working, and so guard against Groupthink and help make better decisions.

Tools That Help You Avoid Groupthink

Decision Support Tools: The Ladder of
Inference
Helps people check and validate the individual steps of a decision-making process.

How to Overcome Groupthink

However, if Groupthink does set in, it's important that you recognize and acknowledge it quickly, so that you can overcome it and quickly get back to functioning effectively.

Follow these steps to do this:

1. Even with good group decision-making processes in place, be on the look out for signs of Groupthink, so you can deal with them swiftly.

2. If there are signs of Groupthink, discuss these in the group. Once acknowledged, the group as a whole can consciously free up its decision making.

3. Assess the immediate risks of any decision, and the consequences for the group and its customers. If risks are high (for example risk of personal safety), make sure you take steps to fully validate any decision before it is ratified.

4. If appropriate, seek external validation, get more information from outside, and test assumptions. Use the bullets above as a starting point in diagnosing things that needs to change.

5. Introduce formal group techniques and decision-making tools, such as the ones listed above, to avoid Groupthink in the future.

Key Points

Groupthink can severely undermine the value of a group's work and, at its worst, it can cost people their lives.

On a lesser scale, it can stifle teamwork, and leave all but the most vocal team members disillusioned and dissatisfied. If you're on a team that makes a decision you don't really support but you feel you can't say or do anything about it, your enthusiasm will quickly fade.

Teams are capable of being much more effective than individuals but, when Groupthink sets in, the opposite can be true. By creating a healthy group-working environment, you can help ensure that the group makes good decisions, and manages any associated risks appropriately.

Group techniques such as Brainstorming, the Modified Borda Count and Six Thinking Hats can help with this, as can other decision making and thinking tools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Avoiding Groupthink: Avoiding Sometimes-Fatal Flaws in Group Decision Making

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Avoiding Fatal Flaws in Group Decision Making Have you ever thought about speaking up in a meeting and then decided against it because you did not want to appear unsupportive of the group's efforts? Or led a team in which the team members were reluctant to express their own opinions?

# data[].attributes.body
This Fast Company article was about what makes certain companies like Apple, Netflix, and Google more productiv

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Companies like Apple, Netflix, Google, and Dell are 40% more productive than the average company, according to research from the leadership consulting firm Bain & Company. You might think that it's because these companies attract top-tier employees-high performers who are naturally gifted at productivity-but that's not the case, says Bain & Company partner Michael Mankins.

"Our research found that these companies have 16% star players, while other companies have 15%," he says. "They start with about the same mix of star players, but they are able to produce dramatically more output."

It's what they do with these high performers. Executives from large companies across 12 industry sectors worldwide said three components of human capital impact productivity more than anything else: time, talent, and energy. And the top quartile organized its business processes in a way that they're 40% more productive than the rest and consequently have profit margins that are 30%-50% higher than industry averages.

"They get more done by 10 a.m. Thursday morning than the others do in a week, but they don't stop working," says Mankins. "This difference compounds every year; over a decade, they can produce 30 times more than the rest, with the same number of employees."

Mankins explores their methods and mindsets in his new book TIME | TALENT | ENERGY: Overcome Organizational Drag and Unleash Your Team's Productive Power. Here's what he found:

The average company follows a method of unintentional egalitarianism, spreading star talent across all of the roles, says Mankins. Companies like Google and Apple, however, follow an intentionally nonegalitarian method. "They select a handful of roles that are business critical, affecting the success of the company's strategy and execution, and they fill 95% of these roles with A-level quality," says Mankins. "The rest of the roles have fewer star players."

An example of how this can play out is Apple and Microsoft in early 2000s, says Mankins. "It took 600 Apple engineers fewer than two years to develop, debug, and deploy iOS 10," he says. "Contrast that with 10,000 engineers at Microsoft that took more than five years to develop, debut, and ultimately retract Vista. The difference is in the way these companies chose to construct their teams."

Apple used all-star teams because iOS 10 was a mission critical initiative. In addition, rewards were applied to team performance; no one person on the team could receive an exceptional performance appraisal unless the entire team did. On the other hand, Microsoft used a stacked ranking where 20% of every team got an exceptional review, and compensation was entirely based on individual performance. Microsoft eventually abolished stacked ranking, says Mankins.

"For every member of the team that is not a star player, productivity declines," he says. "If 100% of the team is star players, productivity is extremely high."

The average company loses more than 25% of its productive power to organizational drag, processes that waste time and prevent people from getting things done, says Mankins. This often happens as a company grows, as the tendency is to put processes in place to replace judgment. Research published in Harvard Business Review found that organizational drag costs the economy more than $3 trillion each year in lost output.

The most common processes relate to expense management, says Mankins. "At most companies, there are spending limits and audits, and employees are tracked," he says. "At Netflix, however, there is no expense policy. The only policy is, 'Act in the best interest of Netflix.' The company is telling employees, 'We assume you are not here to rip off the company, and we're not going to put in place processes that consume human capital, waste time, and zap energy.' They tell employees to assume their best judgment, and they can be more productive if they're not held back."

An engaged employee is 44% more productive than a satisfied worker, but an employee who feels inspired at work is nearly 125% more productive than a satisfied one, says Mankins. The companies that inspire more employees perform better than the rest.

"We've been taught that you're either a General Patton and can inspire others or you're not, but this is not true," he says. "Inspirational leadership can be taught. Companies that recognize that and invest in making it happen create meaningful impact on the productivity of their company."

Dell Technologies recognized the productivity difference between inspired and average teams, says Mankins. "Sales teams led by an inspiring leader are 6% more productive than those that have an average leader. If you extrapolate that 6% it accounts for an extra $1 billion in annual revenue. Consider what [poor leadership] is costing your company."

Individual talent is great, but it can't turn companies into stars, Mankins says. "We could try everything we want to emulate the habits of highly effective individuals, but it doesn't matter what we do individually if it runs counter to how an organization gets work done," says Mankins. "Top-performing companies focus on collective instead of individual."

The final deadline for Fast Company's Brands That Matter Awards is Friday, May 15, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Employees At Apple And Google Are More Productive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's a mix of organization, priorities, trust, and leadership.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the model for the Plan-Do-Check-Act, or PDCA cycle. It's a continuous cycle designed to improve quality and efficiency.

# data[].attributes.body
Another Forbes article I found about things to consider during strategic planning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As September begins, most large, public companies will be in the thick of planning for the next fiscal year. Planning teams will exchange ideas and goals at the corporate and business unit level, as well as across regional teams. Finance and strategy teams can use this planning period to drive their companies forward and build a competitive stance in what is an increasingly fierce market.

Here are five questions they should consider in order creating ambitious yet realistic plans:
Where do you want to be in the next three years?
While some might balk at long term plans, they help people to frame a future vision. When teams don't articulate long range goals, they get trapped into incrementalism. Each year a little more growth is expected, a few changes are made and revenue and profit targets are increased. The result is a business that probably inches forward. The problem is that there is no milestone or strategic vision. Incrementalism, while good for small improvements, rarely works when a big shift is needed. Management teams need to lay out a clear vision for the business far ahead into the future. This vision then helps teams to reverse engineer goals for each of the preceding years.
What market trends or client demands support the vision?
It's important for companies to be in touch with the market and their customers. Signals, feedback and trends provide layers of intelligence about new products, competitors, changing customer needs and economic realities. These trends should form the foundation of a strategic vision. If the company's vision is not aligned with market trends and client demands, chances are the strategy will fail.
What strategic goals do you have for the coming year?
Once a long term vision is in place, it is easier to project what needs to happen in the following year. Strategic goals and priorities allow companies to break apart a vision into sequential steps and sub goals. The key is to not have too many in a single year. Strategic goals and priorities should number no more three yearly and at maximum, five. Fewer priorities allow companies to dedicate their best resources and focus. They also signal the importance of each priority. Having too many priorities is the same as not having any, as observers will place less weight on each one.
What is the tactical plan for delivering on these goals?
A tactical plan is where the rubber meets the road. Tactical plans involve things like hiring, investments in infrastructure, technology and research and marketing campaigns. Tactics are the actions, expenses, messaging which bring a strategy to life. During planning sessions, teams should create tactical plans that lay out the necessary capex, expense budgets, sales quotas, revenue forecasts, project plans, deadlines and accountability. Without a tactical plan, the strategy remains an academic exercise with a low chance of being executed.
What are the known risks?
Risk is an ugly topic, but an important one. Every plan will face risks and potential derailments. Some of these risks can be foreseen while others cannot. Management teams should outline the known risks, along with financial impacts and articulate the mitigation plans to prevent or curtail them. For common and known risks, teams should plan on prevention measures and budget for this outright.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Five Questions To Consider During Strategic Planning Sessions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Photo SAEED KHAN/AFP/Getty Images As September begins, most large, public companies will be in the thick of planning for the next fiscal year. Planning teams will exchange ideas and goals at the corporate and business unit level, as well as across regional teams. Finance and strategy teams can use this planning [...]

# data[].attributes.body
I have been enjoying reading Forbes articles this semester, so I found another one about topics in Module 3. This one was about formulating strategic business plans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Guess what? Most strategic plans - those labor of love documents that the C-suite spends hours upon hours debating - are actually not strategic plans. So, if what we think of as a strategic plan actually isn't one, then what is it?

The short answer: It's probably an implementation plan.

Before you fret too much, don't throw away any plans that you do have. Know that both strategic plans and implementation plans are integral to a company's success. Both types of plans complement each other to achieve internal and external goals. In short, strategic plans guide the company's overall strategy, while implementation plans provide the road map for how to get there.

Before sitting down in your next strategy planning session, plan for a productive meeting by considering the following.

Strategic plans don't solve problems.

Leaders are natural problem solvers and tend to subconsciously shift to tactical plans in order to solve issues. There's a certain level of comfort in trying to solve problems versus determining what types of risk your company needs to take to achieve the next level of financial performance. Instead of focusing on solutions during strategic planning, focus on increasing the company's odds of success.

Ensure the strategic plan is outward-focused.

Strategic plans should determine how the organization wants to play in the marketplace based on what the target customers desire. The plan should address concerns of customers, clients and audiences outside of the organization itself.

Determine where your company exists.

Who is your target customer or market? Once that's figured out, strategize ways to precisely acquire and retain those customers. Include conversations on how to roll with an evolving marketplace, how to fill unmet needs of key stakeholders, which market dynamics will impact the company, and identify opportunities in the market for the company's products/services.

Establish achievement goals.

Create a compelling value proposition for the target audience. This is the stage when leaders must not create tactics, but goals that a later developed implementation plan will achieve. So, consider the drivers and barriers of acquiring new business, determine customer perspectives on the company versus its competitors, establish a positional stance and decide which best practices can be implemented.

Stay straightforward.

Strategic plans are not dissertations. Keep it to one page and focus only on the key choices that will influence the company's revenue drivers -- i.e., the customers.

Use clear logic.

Write down what the organization must change to achieve the strategic goal. Determine what is known about the customers, the industry's evolution, the competition and your company's capabilities.

Now that the strategic plan is in place, develop an implementation plan through tactics such as determining growth opportunities, improvements, or enhancements to the team, infrastructure and other internal functions. The implementation plan should answer the following questions (note that this is the stage when leaders can finally create action plans and find solutions to the problems and direction outlined in the strategic plan!).

* What do we hope to accomplish and why?

* How will we plan to accomplish this task?

* How can we incorporate measurement tools to ensure the goal is achieved?

These questions should be answered for each of the four business cornerstones, which are sales and marketing, finance and legal, management and human resources, as well as operations and production.

Bottom Line

Strategy is a strict focus on the company's customers to ultimately increase the company's revenue. A strategic plan will only be as good as the people, systems and culture allow it to be. Be clear about how strategic goals will be achieved, and involve the right people in the process. Strategic plans support the company's growth by understanding its customers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Everything You Need To Know About Building A Strategic Plan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guess what? Most strategic plans - those labor of love documents that the C-suite spends hours upon hours debating - are actually not strategic plans. So, if what we think of as a strategic plan actually isn't one, then what is it? The short answer: It's probably an implementation plan.

# data[].attributes.body
The flow chart from the Course Content section of Module 5. I thought it was a good summarization of the Module 5 content and displayed a lot of information all at once.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a diagram that shows examples of what falls under each part of a SWOT analysis.

# data[].attributes.body
Even more references on how to properly cite papers in APA format. This is a necessity for this class.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
In-Text Citations: The Basics - Purdue OWL® - Purdue University

# data[].attributes.body
I included this graphic because I thought it was a little more detailed than the version I'd seen in the book.

# data[].attributes.body
This was the article I chose form the New York Times to do one of the discussion board posts. It was a good read and it helped me by showing a real life example of workers having to choose between making good societal choices and good organizational choices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Laura Nolan, a software engineer in Ireland, left Google in June over the company's involvement in Project Maven, an effort to build artificial intelligence for the Department of Defense. Credit Credit Paulo Nunes dos Santos for The New York Times

SAN FRANCISCO - Jack Poulson, a Google research scientist, recently became alarmed by reports that the company was developing a search engine for China that would censor content on behalf of the government.

While Dr. Poulson works on search technologies, he had no knowledge of the product, which was code-named Dragonfly. So in a meeting last month with Jeff Dean, the company's head of artificial intelligence, Dr. Poulson asked if Google planned to move ahead with the product and if his work would contribute to censorship and surveillance in China.

According to Dr. Poulson, Mr. Dean said that Google complied with surveillance requests from the federal government and asked rhetorically if the company should leave the United States market in protest. Mr. Dean also shared a draft of a company email that read, "We won't and shouldn't provide 100 percent transparency to every Googler, to respect our commitments to customer confidentiality and giving our product teams the freedom to innovate."

The next day, Dr. Poulson quit the company. Mr. Dean did not respond to a request for comment, and Google declined to comment.

Across the technology industry, rank-and-file employees are demanding greater insight into how their companies are deploying the technology that they built. At Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Salesforce, as well as at tech start-ups, engineers and technologists are increasingly asking whether the products they are working on are being used for surveillance in places like China or for military projects in the United States or elsewhere.

That's a change from the past, when Silicon Valley workers typically developed products with little questioning about the social costs. It is also a sign of how some tech companies, which grew by serving consumers and businesses, are expanding more into government work. And the shift coincides with concerns in Silicon Valley about the Trump administration's policies and the larger role of technology in government.

"You can think you're building technology for one purpose, and then you find out it's really twisted," said Laura Nolan, 38, a senior software engineer who resigned from Google in June over the company's involvement in Project Maven, an effort to build artificial intelligence for the Department of Defense that could be used to target drone strikes.

All of this has led to growing tensions between tech employees and managers. In recent months, workers at Google, Microsoft and Amazon have signed petitions and protested to executives over how some of the technology they helped create is being used. At smaller companies, engineers have begun asking more questions about ethics.

Image

Jack Poulson, a Google research scientist, quit the company when he found out his work would contribute to censorship and surveillance in China. Credit Mark Sommerfeld for The New York Times

And the change is likely to last: Some engineering students have said they are demanding more answers and are asking similar questions, even before they move into the work force.

"What people are looking for - not just employees - they are looking for some clarity," said Frank Shaw, a Microsoft spokesman. "Are there principles that get applied? Even if you don't agree with the decision that gets made, if you understand the thinking behind it, it helps a lot."

Amazon did not respond to a request for comment.

The lack of information about what tech employees are working on was recently evident at Clarifai, an artificial intelligence start-up in New York City.

Last year, a small team of Clarifai engineers began working on a project inside a private room at its downtown New York office, said three people with knowledge of the matter, who spoke on the condition that they not be identified for fear of retaliation. Paper covered the windows, and employees called the room "The Chamber of Secrets," in a sly reference to the second Harry Potter novel. Even the eight engineers and researchers working inside the room did not entirely realize the nature of the project, the people said.

When employees asked about the project in meetings, Clarifai's chief executive, Matt Zeiler, said it was a government project related to "analytics" or "surveillance" and would "save lives," according to the people.

After employees read documents posted to Clarifai's internal systems, it became clear that the company had won a contract for Project Maven and that workers were creating something for the Defense Department, the people said. One engineer quit the project immediately after a meeting with the Defense Department where killing was discussed in frank terms, they said.

A Clarifai spokesman said that at the very beginning of the project, the company sat down with those chosen for it to brief them on the nature of the work, and one employee quit the project then. "Every member of Clarifai's Project Maven team agreed to work on the project, and the two people who chose not to participate were assigned to different efforts across the company," the spokesman said.

Dr. Poulson, whose work involved incorporating a variety of languages into Google search, said he did not initially think his research could be involved in Dragonfly - until he noticed Chinese had been added to a list of languages for his project.

"Most people don't know the holistic scope of what they're building," said Dr. Poulson, 32, who worked at Google for over two years. "You don't have knowledge of where it's going unless you're sufficiently senior."

"You can think you're building technology for one purpose, and then you find out it's really twisted," Ms. Nolan said. Credit Paulo Nunes dos Santos for The New York Times

The difficulties of knowing what companies are doing with technologies is compounded because engineers at large tech companies often build infrastructure - like algorithms, databases and even hardware - that underpins almost every product a company offers. At Google, for example, a storage system called Colossus is used by Google search, Google Maps and Gmail.

"It would be very difficult for most engineers in Google to be sure that their work wouldn't contribute to these projects in some way," said Ms. Nolan, who helped to keep Google's systems running online smoothly. "My personal feeling was that if the organization is doing something I find ethically unacceptable, then I was contributing to it."

Yet executives at tech companies have claimed that complete transparency is not possible.

"We've always had confidential projects as a company. I think what happened when the company was smaller, you had a higher chance of knowing about it," Sundar Pichai, Google's chief executive, said at a staff meeting in August, according to a transcript provided to The New York Times. "I think there are a lot of times when people are in exploratory stages where teams are debating and doing things, so sometimes being fully transparent at that stage can cause issues."

Such policies have rippled beyond tech companies. In June, more than 100 students at Stanford, M.I.T. and other top colleges signed a pledge saying they would turn down job interviews with Google unless the company dropped its Project Maven contract. (Google said that month that it would not renew the contract once it expired.)

"We are students opposed to the weaponization of technology by companies like Google and Microsoft," the pledge stated. "Our dream is to be a positive force in the world. We refuse to be complicit in this gross misuse of power."

Alex Ahmed, a doctoral candidate in computer science at Northeastern University in Boston, said she organized a student discussion on campus this month to debate whether they should work for tech companies that made decisions they believed to be unethical.

"We're not given an ethics course. We're not given a political education," Ms. Ahmed, 29, said. "It's impossible for us to do this unless we create the conversations for ourselves."

Over the summer, she said, students at Northeastern also protested the school's multimillion-dollar research contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, under which it would provide research on technology exports to the agency. A Northeastern spokeswoman did not respond to a request for comment.

Bridget Frey, the chief technology officer at the online real estate company Redfin, said job candidates had increasingly raised ethical questions in interviews. This summer, interns questioned Redfin's chief executive, Glenn Kelman, about whether the way the site displays school information and test scores could contribute to socio-economic divides in neighborhoods. In response, the company said it planned to add more context about the test score information early next year.

Employees are now frequently asking, "If you don't share the information with me, how can I make sure this isn't happening here?" Ms. Frey said.

Correction:

An earlier version of this article misstated the timing of the real estate company Redfin's addition of context to school test score information it publishes online. It plans to add that context early next year; it has not already added it.

Follow Kate Conger and Cade Metz on Twitter: @kateconger and @CadeMetz.
Interested in All Things Tech? Get the Bits newsletter delivered to your inbox weekly for the latest from Silicon Valley and the technology industry.

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: Tech Workers Take a Stand Over the Uses Of Their Work. Order Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tech employees concerned their products are being deployed for government surveillance or censorship are increasingly asking their employers how the technology is being used.

# data[].attributes.body
This gave me a better idea of the differences between line and staff authority, in comparison with line-staff authority.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Line-and-Staff Organizations - examples, advantages, manager, type, company, disadvantages, business

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. Line-and-Staff Organizations: Int-Loc

# data[].attributes.body
This taught me more about how a PERT chart presents a graphic illustration of a project as a network diagram.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A PERT chart is a project management tool used to schedule, organize, and coordinate tasks within a project. PERT stands for Program Evaluation Review Technique, a methodology developed by the U.S. Navy in the 1950s to manage the Polaris submarine missile program. A similar methodology, the Critical Path Method (CPM) was developed for project management in the private sector at about the same time.

A PERT chart presents a graphic illustration of a project as a network diagram consisting of numbered nodes (either circles or rectangles) representing events, or milestones in the project linked by labelled vectors (directional lines) representing tasks in the project. The direction of the arrows on the lines indicates the sequence of tasks. In the diagram, for example, the tasks between nodes 1, 2, 4, 8, and 10 must be completed in sequence. These are called dependent or serial tasks. The tasks between nodes 1 and 2, and nodes 1 and 3 are not dependent on the completion of one to start the other and can be undertaken simultaneously. These tasks are called parallel or concurrent tasks. Tasks that must be completed in sequence but that don't require resources or completion time are considered to have event dependency. These are represented by dotted lines with arrows and are called dummy activities. For example, the dashed arrow linking nodes 6 and 9 indicates that the system files must be converted before the user test can take place, but that the resources and time required to prepare for the user test (writing the user manual and user training) are on another path. Numbers on the opposite sides of the vectors indicate the time allotted for the task.

The PERT chart is sometimes preferred over the Gantt chart, another popular project management charting method, because it clearly illustrates task dependencies. On the other hand, the PERT chart can be much more difficult to interpret, especially on complex projects. Frequently, project managers use both techniques.

Getting started with PERT charts

Here are some additional resources for learning about how PERT charts and other project management tools are used in the enterprise:

Project management tools and strategies: The Gantt chart and the PERT chart are probably the two best known charts in project management. Each of these can be used for scheduling, but because Gantt charts don't illustrate task dependencies and PERT charts can be confusing, PMs often use both.

Project management charts: Beyond Gantt: Gantt charts are good for certain purposes, explains project management expert David Christiansen, but there are other charts PMs have at their disposal.

Continue Reading About PERT chart (Program Evaluation Review Technique)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is PERT chart (Program Evaluation Review Technique) ? - Definition from WhatIs.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A PERT chart is a project management tool used to schedule, organize, and coordinate tasks within a project. PERT stands for Program Evaluation Review Technique, a methodology developed by the U.S. Navy in the 1950s to manage the Polaris submarine missile.

# data[].attributes.body
An interesting Forbes article on the progression of women in powertful positions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Growing up we are taught all about the glass ceiling. I distinctly remember sitting in a class my senior year of college that was actually called 'women in leadership.' We studied the progress women had already made in the workplace, the ways women were expected to adapt to a "man's world," and quite honestly how to join the elusive old boys club.

The glass ceiling is a decades-old term, first used in 1984 when Xennials (1977-1985) and older Millennials were still babies themselves. As young girls growing up in the 80s and 90s, we were bombarded by images of professional women donning power suits with shoulder pads as they forged a path to success. It was an arguably dire time for both fashion and women's careers. What we saw were professional women appropriating masculinity to look the part and be taken seriously in traditionally male-dominated environments, only to be thwarted as they reached the pinnacle.

We carried these images into our education, surpassing men in college graduation rates in 2014, and entering our professional lives believing we would be the generation to break down the glass ceiling, once and for all. Our determination to focus on the progress at the top is often what ignites and fuels our careers and also for many of us, delayed our desires to start having children. But as we ascend to the heights of our childhood dreams, many women, including myself, find themselves blindsided by the giant wall that rises in the middle of their career, the maternal wall.

The maternal wall not only comes out of nowhere but it impedes our ability to get anywhere near the glass ceiling. Joan C. Williams, Professor of Law and the Author who conceived the phrase, maternal wall, cautions that "women who have been very successful may suddenly find their proficiency questioned once they become pregnant, take maternity leave, or adopt flexible work schedules. Their performance evaluations may plummet, and their political support evaporates."

This bias that working mothers encounter undermines the advancement of their careers, and unfortunately, isn't limited to the office. In fact, Pew Research Center's Social and Demographic Trends reports that 60% of Americans believe that children are better off with at least one parent at home. Among those, nearly half feel a child fares better having the mom stay home. Clearly, this sentiment is a widely-held cultural belief. And one that can quickly derail careers, even with the best of intentions. Managers, believing they are respecting the time they feel a mother needs with their children, can deny mothers opportunities to take on new projects, to attend influential career-building networking events or to meet with new clients. Recently, a client shared that during her company's re-organization her manager was excited to share that he had secured her a new position with more flexibility and that was less demanding. However, this new role would mean she would be layered underneath an addition level of leadership. She was devastated and took this role as a demotion. When she expressed her concern, her manager was shocked she wasn't thrilled. This is an example of the downshift that often occurs for women in their careers. And as a new report from Goldman Sachs on the gender pay gap highlights, while women may choose to 'downshift' their careers, but we also need to recognize that many times women are being steered into positions with lower profiles, pay and promotion prospects.

If we don't address this obstacle smack-dab in the middle of women's careers, we'll continue to see minimal progress and rampant gender inequality. According to the World Economic Forum, at the rate we're going now, it will take another 217 years to achieve gender parity. We must face the maternal wall head-on and scale it inch by inch. Here are four steps to expedite the process:

1. Equal leave for new parents - If working fathers take parental leave, we can challenge the notion that males are the breadwinners and females are caretakers. It's the perhaps the surest way to even the playing field at both home and the office. By supporting working fathers and encouraging them to take their entire parental leave, it normalizes the paradigm that both men and women will be out of the office for periods of time to raise their children. It decreases hiring and promotion bias that is tied to the concerns that a woman of a certain age will not be as committed to their career and will be more unavailable.

2. Support for Childcare - Women are still disproportionately tasked with childcare duties. According to Pew Research Center: "One reason mothers are more likely than fathers to say it's harder to get ahead in the workplace may be that women are much more likely than men to experience a variety of family-related career interruptions. About four-in-ten working mothers (42%) say that at some point in their working life, they had reduced their hours in order to care for a child or other family member, while just 28% of working fathers say they had done the same..."

3. Address Maternal Bias - Companies must be willing to address implicit bias in the workplace and train managers to not only identify it but learn about ways to navigate it. If we confront the underlying bias and bring it to the surface, we give women a chance to realize their fullest potential without bearing the load of prejudice and discrimination that can hold a working mother back.

4. Flexibility vs. face-time culture - Working mothers need one thing from their employers to successfully integrate work and family: flexibility. By no means is flexibility code for opting out or off-ramping, instead, it allows all working parents, especially new mothers a chance to bond with their baby during a critical time while also acclimating back to office life. It's a crucial step and perhaps the most important in retaining female employees. If a company strikes the right balance between offering a flex schedule while incorporating key moments for face-time (i.e., networking events, exposure to high-level executives and mentors), the leadership pipeline remains open, and women have the opportunity to advance.

For working mothers zipping along their career paths, having a baby and hitting the maternal wall is quite the shocker. While it's still possible to shatter the glass ceiling, the maternal wall brings a new set of unexpected challenges that hinder progression. There are ways to climb the wall, but it takes more than just the determination of career-driven mothers. Managers in the office and partners at home must engage and explore the steps necessary to accelerate a working mother's career while helping her integrate family life. And if we can get women to the top of the maternal wall, it just might be the perfect launching point to propel them through the glass ceiling.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Before Breaking The Glass Ceiling, Women Must Climb The Maternal Wall

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Growing up we are taught all about the glass ceiling. I distinctly remember sitting in a class my senior year of college that was actually called 'women in leadership.' We studied the progress women had already made in the workplace, the ways women were expected to adapt to a "man's world," and quite honestly how to join the elusive old boys club.

# data[].attributes.body
This gave me more information about Weber's Bureaucratic Model and it taught me that Max Weber was the first person to use and describe the term bureaucracy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article explains the bureaucratic theory of the management principles by in a practical way. After reading you will understand the basics of bureaucratic management and you can use this as a powerful management tool.

Bureaucratic theory

At the end of the 19th century, it was German sociologist and author of The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905), Max Weber who was the first to use and describe the term bureaucracy. This is also known as the bureaucratic theory of management, bureaucratic management theory or the Max Weber theory. He believed bureaucracy was the most efficient way to set up an organisation, administration and organizations. Max Weber believed that Bureaucracy was a better than traditional structures. In a bureaucratic organisation, everyone is treated equal and the division of labour is clearly described for each employee.

Bureaucracy definition: what is bureaucracy?

Bureaucracy definition: "Bureaucracy is an organisational structure that is characterised by many rules, standardised processes, procedures and requirements, number of desks, meticulous division of labour and responsibility, clear hierarchies and professional, almost impersonal interactions between employees".

According to the bureaucratic theory of Max Weber, such a structure was indispensable in large organizations in structurally performing all tasks by a great number of employees. In addition, in a bureaucratic organisation, selection and promotion only occur on the basis of technical qualifications.

Legal responsibility

According to the bureaucratic theory of Max Weber, three types of power can be found in organizations; traditional power, charismatic power and legal power. He refers in his bureaucratic theory to the latter as a bureaucracy. All aspects of a democracy are organised on the basis of rules and laws, making the principle of established jurisdiction prevail.

The following three elements support bureaucratic management:

1. All regular activities within a bureaucracy can be regarded as official duties;

2. Management has the authority to impose rules;

3. Rules can easily be respected on the basis of established methods.

What is a bureaucratic organization?

According to the bureaucratic theory of Max Weber, bureaucracy is the basis for the systematic formation of any organisation and is designed to ensure efficiency and economic effectiveness. It is an ideal model for management and its administration to bring an organisation's power structure into focus. With these observations, he lays down the basic principles of bureaucracy and emphasises the division of labour, hierarchy, rules and impersonal relationship.

Max Weber's bureaucratic management principles

Below is a more detailed explanation of the 6 bureaucratic management principles:

1. Task specialisation

Tasks are divided into simple, routine categories on the basis of competencies and functional specialisations. Every employee is responsible for what he/she does best and knows exactly what is expected of him/her. By dividing work on the basis of specialisation, the organisation directly benefits. Each department has specific powers. As a result, there is a delineation of tasks and managers can approach their employees more easily when they do not stick to their tasks. Every employee knows exactly what is expected of him/ her and what his/ her powers are within the organisation. Every employee has a specific place within the organisation and is expected to solely focus on his/ her area of expertise. Going beyond your responsibilities and taking on tasks of colleagues is not permitted within a bureaucracy.

2. Hierarchical of authority

Managers are organised into hierarchical layers, where each layer of management is responsible for its staff and overall performance. In bureaucratic organizational structures, there are many hierarchical positions. This is essentially the trademark and foundation of a bureaucracy. The hierarchy of authority is a system in which different positions are related in order of precedence and in which the highest rung on the ladder has the greatest power. The bottom layers of bureaucratic organizational structures are always subject to supervision and control of higher layers. This hierarchy reflects lines of bureaucratic communication and the degree of delegation and clearly lays out how powers and responsibilities are divided.

3. Formal selection

All employees are selected on the basis of technical skills and competences, which have been acquired through training, education and experience. One of the basic principles is that employees are paid for their services and that level of their salary is dependent on their position. Their contract terms are determined by organisational rules and requirements and the employee has no ownership interest in the company.

4. Rules and requirements

Formal rules and requirements are required to ensure uniformity, so that employees know exactly what is expected of them. In this sense, the rules and requirements can be considered predictable. All administrative processes are defined in the official rules. By enforcing strict rules, the organisation can more easily achieve uniformity and all employee efforts can be better coordinated. The rules and requirements are more or less stable and always formalised in so-called official reports. Should new rules and requirements be introduced, then senior management or directors are responsible for this.

5. Impersonal

Regulations and clear requirements create distant and impersonal relationships between employees, with the additional advantage of preventing nepotism or involvement from outsiders or politics. These impersonal relationship are a prominent feature of bureaucracies. Interpersonal relationships are solely characterised by a system of public law and rules and requirements. Official views are free from any personal involvement, emotions and feelings. Decisions are solely made on the basis of rational factors, rather than personal factors.

6. Career orientation

Employees of a bureaucratic organisation are selected on the basis of their expertise. This helps in the deployment of the right people in the right positions and thereby optimally utilising human capital. In a bureaucracy, it is possible to build a career on the basis of experience and expertise. As a result, it offers lifetime employment. The right division of labour within a bureaucratic organisation also allows employees to specialise themselves further, so that they may become experts in their own field and significantly improve their performance.

Advantages and disadvantages of the Bureaucratic Theory

Advantages

Generally speaking, the term bureaucracy has a negative connotation and is often linked to government agencies and large organisations. Nevertheless, the great benefit of a bureacracy is that large organisations with many hierarchical layers can become structured and work effectively. It is precisely the established rules and procedures that allows for high efficiency and consistent execution of work by all employees.

All this makes it easier for management to maintain control and make adjustments when necessary. Bureaucracy is especially inevitable in organisations where legislation plays an important role in delivering a consistent output.

Disadvantages

Bureaucracy is characterised by a large amount of red tape, paperwork, many desks, certain office culture and slow bureaucratic communication due to its many hierarchical layers. This is the system's biggest disadvantage of a bureaucratic organization. It is also unfortunate that employees remain fairly distanced from each other and the organisation, making them less loyal.

Bureaucracy is also extremely dependent on regulatory and policy compliance. This restricts employees to come up with innovative ideas, making them feel like just a number instead of an individual. Later research (the human relations theory) demonstrated that employees appreciate attention and want to have a voice in decision making.

Problems

Because employees of an bureaucratic organization have no opportunity to voice their opinion or influence decision making, a bureaucracy may demotivate employees in the long run.

Moreover, over the course of time, employees may start to get annoyed at the various rules and requirements, with the risk that they may start boycotting and/ or abusing these rules and standing up to the established order. It is therefore very important that bureaucratic organisations properly inform employees well in advance about their approach to work and requires them to accept this. Only employees who agree to this approach are suitable to work within a bureaucratic organisation.

It's Your Turn

What do you think? Is the bureaucratic theory of Max Weber still applicable in today's modern organizations? Do these management principles and business ethics work in every organisation or are there exceptions? And if so, what are the exceptions and what can we learn from them?

If you liked this article, then please subscribe to our Free Newsletter for the latest posts on Management models and methods. You can also find us on Facebook and Google+.
More information

1. Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. Wiley.

2. Udy Jr, S. H. (1959). Bureaucracy and Rationality in Weber's Organization Theory: An Empirical Study. American Sociological Review, 791-795.

3. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Univ of California Press.

4. Weber, M. (1905). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Courier Corporation.

How to cite this article:
Mulder, P. (2017). Bureaucratic Theory by Max Weber. Retrieved [insert date] from ToolsHero: https://www.toolshero.com/management/bureaucratic-theory-weber/

Add a link to this page on your website:
<a href="https://www.toolshero.com/management/bureaucratic-theory-weber/">ToolsHero.com: Bureaucratic Theory by Max Weber</a>

Did you find this article interesting?
Your rating is more than welcome or share this article via Social media!

You need to enable JavaScript to vote

Patty Mulder is an Dutch expert on Management Skills, Time Management, Personal Effectiveness and Business Communication. She is also a Content writer, Business Coach and Company Trainer and lives in the Netherlands (Europe). Note: all her articles are written in Dutch and we translated her articles in English.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bureaucratic Theory definition by Max Weber | ToolsHero

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article explains the bureaucratic theory of the management principles by in a practical way. After reading you will understand the basics of bureaucratic management and you can use this as a powerful management tool.

# data[].attributes.body
Definitely had a rough week trying to adjust to writing in APA style, since I have spent more than a few semesters writing in only MLA. This website actually helped a lot, as it provided an example of how to cite online manuals and I needed to know that for the Corporate Governance Assignment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you have additional questions, contact your Campus Librarians . Thank you for using ASK US.

# data[].attributes.body
Also an article related to a Module 2 discussion. It was about the large merger between Marriott and Starwood, two hotel chains.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Marriott International, Inc. and Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. are planning to merge, creating the largest hotel company in the world. During separate stockholder meetings in 2016, shareholders of both Marriott International and Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide proposals which outlined plans for Marriott to acquire Starwood. At the close of the deal, Starwood shareholders received 0.8 shares of Marriott including $21 per Starwood common stock. The deal was in September of 2016, which began the journey towards total integration of Starwood into Marriott.

The merger is not simply a benefit for shareholders or a step closer to building the world's largest hotel empire. Additionally, the merger of the loyalty programs specific to Starwood and Marriott will secure the foundation for the largest loyalty program of its kind. By offering to prospective customers a choice between over 5,500 hotels in over 100 countries, their expanded portfolio caters to a commitment to customer experience and satisfaction that is shared by both companies.

In the beginning, Marriott chose to keep loyalty programs for the two hotel brands completely separate; that is, customers could book Marriott hotels with Marriott Rewards Points and Starwood hotels with SPG Starpoints. Additionally, members had the opportunity to link both accounts in order to enjoy elite status in both programs and switch between point currencies at an exchange rate of one SPG Starpoint for every three Marriott Rewards Points. This pleased Starwood account holders, as it respected the value of SPG Starpoints and made sure that the merger would work for both parties.

Upon closing, the plan was to eventually build a newer, stronger loyalty program that played to the strengths of each one. "Marriott will draw upon the very best each program offers and we can't wait to show the loyal members of these programs the power and benefits of Marriott and Starwood coming together," explains Executive Vice President and Global Chief Commercial Officer Stephanie Linnartz.
Recent News on the Starwood and Marriott Merger
The final version of the new loyalty program (with many, but not all of the details) was announced on Monday April 16, and although it will not go into effect until August, Marriott has revealed some of the things to expect when it does. First, the overall loyalty program merges benefits across Marriott Rewards, Starwood Preferred Guest, and Ritz-Carlton Rewards. Moving forward, all three loyalty programs will become one comprehensive loyalty program, where all points will be converted into Marriott Rewards Points. The original 3:1 SPG Starpoints to Marriott Rewards Points ratio will still apply, so all SPG Starpoints will be converted to Marriott Rewards Points using that conversion factor later in 2018.

However, the new loyalty program is still unnamed and will remain that way until 2019. Because of this, members will still be earning points under the old program names until then, even though the merge will begin in August. Non-elite members will enjoy an upgrade from the old Starwood system, earning 10 points per dollar spent at each brand apart from Residence Inn, TownPlace Suites, and Element which will earn 5 points per dollar spent.

Instead of maintaining elite status with each program, elite members will now enjoy one consolidated elite rewards system. When the merge is complete, the elite earning structure will contain five categories: Silver, Gold, Platinum, Platinum Premier, and Platinum Premier with Ambassador. The highest level is achieved after 100 booked nights; Platinum Premier with Ambassador members will earn 17.5 points per dollar spent. However, this will be the only elite tier with a spending requirement of $20,000 per year; an average of $200 per night. Additionally, the new elite benefit structure encourages members to earn Platinum status, since this unlocks all of the benefits apart from access to an Additional Choice Benefit, 48-hour Guarantee, Ambassador Service, or Your24 service.

Keep in mind that under the new points redemption structure, customers will enjoy the privilege of having no blackout dates. However, the new loyalty program will introduce a way for hotel brands to price-gouge (or, points-gouge) during peak seasons. For example, if a property is worth 25,000 points per night during "standard" season, it will be worth 20,000 points per night during the "off" season and 30,000 points per night during the "peak" season. Members should keep this in mind when deciding when and how to redeem points under this structure; however, this change will not take effect until February 1, 2019. Additionally, the category status of each hotel brand has not yet been announced, so this change may end up being beneficial to members rather than a devaluation. Marriott has announced that it will start categorizing brands beginning this June.

Marriott has also announced that the SPG airline transfer points program will remain in effect, and with the 3:1 points ratio discussed above, the transfer value of SPG Starpoints will not be affected. Additionally, ten more airlines are due to join the partnership and the efficiency of the program is projected to increase, decreasing processing time and encouraging customers to take advantage of transfer opportunities.

The merger will also expand Marriott's credit card reach, including new cards coming from Chase and American Express. American Express, which was originally partnered with SPG, will offer a brand new Starwood Preferred Guest American Express Luxury Credit Card which will be accompanied by a myriad of great benefits. Also, new benefits are coming for SPG and SPG Business cardholders through American Express. Through Chase, the all-new Marriott Rewards Premier Plus Credit Card is set to launch on May 3rd, accompanied by an impressive 100,000 point sign-up bonus. Marriott Rewards Business and Ritz-Carlton Rewards cards will still exist under the new system, but the original Marriott Rewards Premier card will be phased out once the new one launches.

All things considered, the merger is turning out to be beneficial for both brands, upholding the value of Starwood rewards and remaining true to Marriott's successful business model. Keep looking out for more updates as the merger continues towards completion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Details Surrounding the Marriott and Starwood Merger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Marriott International, Inc. and Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. are planning to merge, creating the largest hotel company in the world. During separate stockholder meetings in 2016, shareholders of both Marriott International and Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide proposals which outlined plans for Marriott to acquire Starwood.

# data[].attributes.body
An article related to a Module 2 discussion post about Marriott Hotels founder, J.W. Marriott Jr.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I recently had the pleasure of speaking to J. W. Marriott Jr., who is the Chairman of Marriott International, Inc., one of the world's largest lodging companies. His leadership spans more than 50 years, and he has taken Marriott from a family restaurant business to a global lodging company with more than 3,700 properties in over 73 countries and territories. Known throughout the industry for his hands-on management style, Mr. Marriott has built a highly regarded culture that emphasizes the importance of Marriott's people and recognizes the value they bring to the organization. Today, approximately 300,000 people wearing Marriott International name badges are serving guests in Marriott managed and franchised properties throughout the world.

His new book is called Without Reservations: How a Family Root Beer Stand Grew Into a Global Hotel Company. In this interview, he talks about how he grew his family business, the obstacles he encountered, the five rules that led to his success, his best career advice and more.
Why did you decide to write this book right now? What do you think makes your story relevant in today's world?
After working for Marriott for over 50 years, I decided to step down from the CEO position and hand the reigns over to Arne Sorenson. With such a significant change in our leadership taking place, now seemed like the appropriate time to write. I am so very proud of the company that my parents started as a root beer stand in 1927, which grew over the past 85 years into a global success comprised of over 3,700 hotels in 74 countries.

Companies are under an ever-sharp magnifying glass. The values that have served as Marriott's guiding principles over the past eight decades transcend the hotel business. I think they are valuable for other companies to consider.
As you grew your business, what obstacles did you encounter, how did you overcome them and what were the major milestones?
One of the largest obstacles was when we had to deal with the aftermath of September 11, 2001 and the unknown effects it would have on the travel industry. Not to mention the changes it would impose on our global expansion and the recovery of all the Marriott associates and guests impacted that day.

More recently, the global economic downturn that began in 2008 and the previous similar experience of the early 1990s were also significant obstacles to overcome. We drew upon the previous 1990s layoffs to handle the human side of the equation again in 2008. Some were inevitable, but we were able to temper the pain by keeping many people on board at reduced hours but with full health benefits.

Some of the largest milestones were when we expanded globally. Our first hotel built outside the United States was in Mexico in 1969. The first Marriott located in Europe was built in Amsterdam. The first in the Middle East was the Riyadh Marriott Hotel in Saudi Arabia in 1980. In Africa, our first hotel was the Cairo Marriott in 1981. In Asia, it was Hong Kong in 1989.
In your book, you mention five rules that led to Marriott's success. What are they and how did you originally come up with them?
First and foremost, we put people first. Then we pursue excellence, act with integrity, embrace change, and serve our world.

The first item of the five has been our company credo since my parents' era. "Take care of your employees, and they'll take care of your customers" was the daily mantra that my brother, Dick, and I heard from our father while we were growing up.

The other four values stretch back in time to the earliest days of the company, 30 years before we ever thought about building our first hotel, to our popular Hot Shoppes restaurants. Customers could count on spotless dishes and shiny floors ("Pursue excellence"), an ever-growing menu ("Embrace change"), honest value for their money ("Act with integrity") and a true sense of community second to none ("Serve our world").

Marriott has come a long, long way from the days of being known as a regional family restaurant chain, but our values haven't budged an inch. In fact, they've deepened over time into a commitment to do what great companies should do: make a lasting, positive difference in the world.
What do you think led to the success of Marriott when other chains have failed?
Well my father used to say take good care of the employees, and they will in turn take good care of the customers who will return again and again. That's putting people first! And of course it leads to profit and market share gains and ultimately a successful business.

I believe you succeed in business by being true to purpose beyond profits. From the very beginning of Marriott we believed in opening the doors to a world of opportunities for our associates.
What are your top three pieces of career advice?
1. I believe that you have to challenge yourself personally - constantly strive to improve and we believe at Marriott that success is never final.

2. We need to continue to reinvent ourselves and embrace change because our environment is constantly changing and our customers are always looking for the new big thing.

3. We need to build stronger communities and serve our world. As we do so, we create the conditions for business and personal success as well as a successful future. When the 7.0 earthquake hit Haiti in January 2010, we did not have any properties in the country. Like many other companies and communities in the days immediately following the quake, we answered the call for supplies and contributions. But it didn't feel like enough - particularly considering how incredibly loyal our Haitian associates are. So we started thinking about what else we could do that would make a difference - a tangible long-term difference - to the island's recovery. Our answer? Help development a Marriott hotel to provide jobs and signal to the world that Haiti is "open for business." Our hotel project will have a multiplier effect as we attract investors to Haiti to do business.
Dan Schawbel is the author of the upcoming book, Promote Yourself: The New Art of Getting Ahead (St. Martin's Press, Sept 3rd). Listen to his Promote Yourself Podcast on iTunes for more interviews and career advice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
J. W. Marriott Jr: From Root Beer Stand to Global Hotel Company

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
J. W. Marriott Jr. I recently had the pleasure of speaking to J. W. Marriott Jr., who is the Chairman of Marriott International, Inc., one of the world's largest lodging companies. His leadership spans more than 50 years, and he has taken Marriott from a family restaurant business to a global lodging company [...]

# data[].attributes.body
This is related to the Challenge Case assignment of the week about Zappos, a shoe company with a unique organization culture that has shown to be very prosperous for them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Zappos is known for shoes and a very liberal return policy, but I think every type of business can learn something from its unique corporate culture.

The company was founded in 1999 and was bought by Amazon in 2009. Though it is hard to find current sales data because Amazon does not report Zappos separately in its financial statements, Zappos' sales were more than $1.2 billion when it was purchased.

Without question, Zappos is a successful company, but what I believe makes it so unique is the company's zany culture (e.g., anyone showing up at the office in a tie gets it cut off). The business was founded with this culture, and there is a strong commitment to ensuring it continues to flourish.

At the heart of the Zappos company culture are 10 core values:

1. Deliver Wow through Service

2. Embrace and Drive Change

3. Create Fun and a Little Weirdness

4. Be Adventurous, Creative and Open-Minded

5. Pursue Growth and Learning

6. Build Open and Honest Relationships with Communication

7. Build a Positive Team and Family Spirit

8. Do More with Less

9. Be Passionate and Determined

10. Be Humble

This corporate culture plays a role in all important company functions, including hiring. Every potential employee must complete two sets of interviews. During the first series of interviews, the hiring team or manager verifies the candidate's skills and experience. Candidates who make it through this round meet with the HR department, whose object is to see if there is a culture fit.

Once hired, every new employee must go through a four-week training program that stresses both the firm's culture and customer service. At the end of the first week, Zappos offers each trainee $2,000 and reimbursement for the time spent in training to walk away if they do not think it is a good fit. Zappos knows this is far less costly than having an employee who does not fit in or is only after the money.

Last year Zappos had 176 job openings and 46,000 individuals applied for these positions. Obviously, people want to be a part of this company culture, and others go to great lengths to replicate it.

Zappos has established a program it calls Zappos Insights Live, where executives from "normal" companies pay $5,000 to participate in a two-day culture immersion. Participants learn how to create a culture like Zappos' so they can bring these principles back to their firms.

Zappos is definitely unique, and though not all of its methods will work for every business, every company can - and should - work to make its culture more vibrant and exciting. If you have any doubt that Zappos provides a model worth emulating, check out the culture book at http://www.zapposinsights.com/culture-book. This book is compiled annually with unedited submissions from employees about what the Zappos culture means to them.

Now go out and make sure your company has a culture you are committed to nourishing and maintaining.

You can do this!
Columnist Jerry Osteryoung is a consultant and Jim Moran Professor of Entrepreneurship and Finance, Emeritus, at Florida State University. Contact him at jerry.osteryoung@gmail.com.
Read or Share this story: http://on.tdo.com/1sckwgW

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zappos' business model reflects a unique corporate culture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zappos is known for shoes and a very liberal return policy, but I think every type of business can learn something from its unique corporate culture. The company was founded in 1999 and was bought by Amazon in 2009.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses Google's shift in organizational structure since 2015 and I found it to be a good example of some of the concepts in Module 4.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Google is well known for its cross-functional, or team-based, organizational structure. The traditional corporate structure is to have employees at the bottom, supervisors above them, middle managers above supervisors and top management above all. This is the vertical approach to management. Decisions are made at the top and orders are sent down to the employees at the bottom. The cross-functional organizational structure used by Google is more of a team approach to management. By allowing all employees to be a part of decision-making, Google maintains a small-company feel and promotes the notion that all employees play an equally important part in Google's success. This type of structure places more importance on intelligence and ideas than on titles.

Google's Reorganized Structure

In 2015, Google's CEO, Larry Page, announced a major reconfiguration of Google's organizational structure. The company formed a conglomerate called Alphabet, a new holding company composed of independent operating units, including Google. The Google search engine and related businesses, including Android, Gmail, and YouTube, to name a few, would be just one of these units. Alphabet would also be home to nine other companies.

In 2017, another shift was announced. Google was changed from a corporation to an LLC or limited liability corporation, which Alphabet believes better suits an affiliate company owned by a parent. In addition, Alphabet created a holding company called XXVI Holdings, Inc. that acts as an umbrella over Alphabet and all its businesses.

Company Focus

The revised structure of Google allows the company to focus on new ideas and projects without detracting from its core successes. Some important projects include Waymo, Google's self-driving car and a growing crop of hardware businesses from smart home products to mobile phones.

A New Motto

Founded in 1998, the company's motto originally was Don't Be Evil. When Google restructured in 2015 under Alphabet, the old motto was dropped and changed to Do the Right Thing. This more positive leaning - yet less humorous - motto puts the company's focus on doing right, instead of avoiding wrong. The company's revised structure is an attempt to stave off possible future problems while it emphasizes continued growth. Google's new motto, combined with its corporate structure, is putting the company on a different path in an attempt to avoid the pitfalls of getting too big and too hyperfocused on its core products.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Google uses a cross-functional organizational structure, which is more of a team approach to management. By allowing all employees to be a part of decision-making, Google maintains a small-company feel and promotes the notion that all employees play an equally important part in Google's success.

# data[].attributes.body
This Virgin Pulse article further expanded on the concept of organization culture and how businesses are shifting their current cultures.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's clear that the increase and adoption of employee wellbeing programs in 2017 and beyond is certain. For those who have been in the industry for years, the pace of advancement and innovation has been exciting and inspiring. Businesses are quickly seeing the well-documented linkage between healthier employees and critical business outcomes, such as productivity, engagement and retention. As the line is drawn between employee health and business performance, we've begun to see the undeniable connection to organizational culture, also referred to as corporate culture or company culture.
In our State of the Industry report, 95% of survey respondents said culture drives business results and 80% plan to improve their corporate culture in 2017.
What is corporate culture?

Corporate culture is a relatively new term in the industry, and has yet to be fully defined. Organizational culture embodies the workplace atmosphere, attitudes and values. Successful companies instill values into the organization to engage employees and recruit and attract new talent. In the process, a culture of wellbeing and productivity is born.

Company culture and employee engagement

Employees are engaged when they are truly a part of their company's future and culture. Their jobs give them a sense of purpose, and they enjoy great relationships with their coworkers. Organizations that make improving employee wellbeing the foundation of their employee engagement strategy are most likely to be successful in changing the culture in the workplace. The resulting employee engagement will ultimately drive critical business results for these organizations.

When it comes to strengthening business performance, organizations look to culture to improve the bottom line. Ninety-five percent of respondents in the State of Industry survey believe organizational culture is important in driving business outcomes, and the majority of organizations have cultural outcomes specifically in mind when designing employee engagement programs. The focus on organizational culture leads to an emphasis on showcasing the organizational mission and values to acquire and retain talent.

How are Businesses Changing Culture in the Workplace?

Google workplace culture
Businesses like Google revolutionized the workplace by creating a corporate culture that was not only fun, but encouraged creativity, flexibility and camaraderie among colleagues. Often known to have endless perks on-site, Google campuses include play areas, coffee bars, outdoor terraces, free meals, and dog-friendly work environments across the world. Google established their corporate culture definition to focus on having happy employees and creating a productive workplace. The long-term success of Google is indisputably and consistently tied directly back to their company culture.

Netflix corporate culture
Another business that largely credits its success to its employees and company culture is Netflix. Employees are given unlimited vacation from the start because Netflix created a workplace culture founded on trusting employees and treating them like adults. To promote work-life balance, Netflix promotes working regular hours and producing great work over long hours and subpar results. By defining "What is corporate culture?" within their organization, Netflix was able to deeply root these values throughout their business.

RELEVANT: Culture As a Revenue Driver

Changing Corporate Culture

Conduct a self-assessment of your current company culture. Ask yourself: How do we achieve cultural diversity in the workplace? What is our corporate culture definition internally? How do we begin to influence the workplace culture? What potential barriers do we have?
What is preventing organizations from ultimately increasing employee engagement? For many, the current workplace culture is resistant to change, while others struggle to boost adoption or participation in initiatives designed to increase employee engagement. Some don't yet have senior leadership buy-in, while others don't have the budget they need. Current organizational cultures that resist change are the top roadblock among respondents, with nearly half of respondents citing it as a top challenge.

Cultivating A Strong Workplace Culture

The benefits of cultivating a strong workplace culture include:

Attracting top talent
Make your business stand out by building a compelling corporate culture. When you begin to show you care about the wellbeing and happiness of your employees, you will magnetically attract top talent to your organization.

Bringing out the best in your employees
Stressed employees suffer from decreased productivity, reduced happiness, and increased health issues. By creating a workplace culture that encourages wellbeing, you'll bring out the best in your employees.

Offer healthy eating options. Examples include cafeteria options and areas with an array of smart snacking options. By including items like fresh fruit and an assortment of nuts, yogurt, and granola for employees, you're promoting healthy choices over processed snacks or takeout.

Consider cultural diversity in the workplace. Ensure that you are immersing and integrating everyone into your company culture to create an inclusive work environment.

Have perks onsite. Examples include: massages, onsite fitness classes, meditation and yoga rooms. By creating game rooms or nap rooms, you're encouraging and allowing employees time to clear their heads for a few minutes and return to their jobs with a fresh viewpoint.

Increase employee retention
Employees who are happy in their jobs and feel like they belong are more inclined to stay with their organization. When company culture allows employees to learn and thrive, they know the organization supports, values and understands them.

Increase employee engagement and productivity
Employee engagement has been linked to a multitude of business benefits, including higher productivity, profitability, lower turnover, and higher employee satisfaction rates. By creating a culture of wellbeing, you can drive engagement and efficiency within the organization.

Increase employee levels of satisfaction and teamwork
When employees come to work feeling valued, happy and healthy because they are immersed in a great company culture, they feel more satisfied in their roles and more connected to their teammates.

Conclusion

Organizations used to focus primarily on the bottom line but times have turned to putting employee wellbeing and happiness first. As we've always believed, if you take care of your employees, they will take care of your business. By creating daily positive experiences for employees, you can drive long-term changes in your organization. An organization that invests in its employees through initiatives designed to improve wellbeing, can positively influence culture, increase engagement and drive positive business results. By recognizing employee wellbeing as the foundation to improve company culture and engagement, organizations can be positioned to thrive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Organizational Culture | How Business are Changing Organizational Culture in the Workplace

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's clear that the increase and adoption of employee wellbeing programs in 2017 and beyond is certain. For those who have been in the industry for years, the pace of advancement and innovation has been exciting and inspiring. Businesses are quickly seeing the well-documented linkage between healthier employees and critical business outcomes , such as productivity, engagement and retention.

# data[].attributes.body
This article expanded on Module 1 content. It was about one of the earliest theories of management to be created.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Early Management Theory

Today's managers have access to an amazing array of resources which they can use to improve their skills. But what about those managers who were leading the way forward 100 years ago?

Managers in the early 1900s had very few external resources to draw upon to guide and develop their management practice. But thanks to early theorists like Henri Fayol (1841-1925), managers began to get the tools they needed to lead and manage more effectively. Fayol, and others like him, are responsible for building the foundations of modern management theory.

Background

Henri Fayol was born in Istanbul in 1841. When he was 19, he began working as an engineer at a large mining company in France. He eventually became the director, at a time when the mining company employed more than 1,000 people.

Through the years, Fayol began to develop what he considered to be the 14 most important principles of management. Essentially, these explained how managers should organize and interact with staff.

In 1916, two years before he stepped down as director, he published his "14 Principles of Management" in the book "Administration Industrielle et Générale." Fayol also created a list of the six primary functions of management, which go hand in hand with the Principles.

Fayol's "14 Principles" was one of the earliest theories of management to be created, and remains one of the most comprehensive. He's considered to be among the most influential contributors to the modern concept of management, even though people don't refer to "The 14 Principles" often today.

The theory falls under the Administrative Management school of thought (as opposed to the Scientific Management school, led by Fredrick Taylor).

Fayol's 14 Principles of Management

Fayol's principles are listed below:

1. Division of Work - When employees are specialized, output can increase because they become increasingly skilled and efficient.

2. Authority - Managers must have the authority to give orders, but they must also keep in mind that with authority comes responsibility.

3. Discipline - Discipline must be upheld in organizations, but methods for doing so can vary.

4. Unity of Command - Employees should have only one direct supervisor.

5. Unity of Direction - Teams with the same objective should be working under the direction of one manager, using one plan. This will ensure that action is properly coordinated.

6. Subordination of Individual Interests to the General Interest - The interests of one employee should not be allowed to become more important than those of the group. This includes managers.

7. Remuneration - Employee satisfaction depends on fair remuneration for everyone. This includes financial and non-financial compensation.

8. Centralization - This principle refers to how close employees are to the decision-making process. It is important to aim for an appropriate balance.

9. Scalar Chain - Employees should be aware of where they stand in the organization's hierarchy, or chain of command.

10. Order - The workplace facilities must be clean, tidy and safe for employees. Everything should have its place.

11. Equity - Managers should be fair to staff at all times, both maintaining discipline as necessary and acting with kindness where appropriate.

12. Stability of Tenure of Personnel - Managers should strive to minimize employee turnover. Personnel planning should be a priority.

13. Initiative - Employees should be given the necessary level of freedom to create and carry out plans.

14. Esprit de Corps - Organizations should strive to promote team spirit and unity.

Fayol's Six Functions of Management

Fayol's six primary functions of management, which go hand in hand with the Principles, are as follows:

Key Points

Henri Fayol's "14 Principles of Management" have been a significant influence on modern management theory. His practical list of principles helped early 20th century managers learn how to organize and interact with their employees in a productive way.

Although the 14 Principles aren't widely used today, they can still offer guidance for today's managers. Many of the principles are now considered to be common sense, but at the time they were revolutionary concepts for organizational management.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Henri Fayol's Principles of Management: Early Management Theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Early Management Theory Today's managers have access to an amazing array of resources which they can use to improve their skills. But what about those managers who were leading the way forward 100 years ago? Managers in the early 1900s had very few external resources to draw upon to guide and develop their management practice.

# data[].attributes.body
This Forbes article emphasized how meaningful stakeholder interaction is for better business strategy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The timing is certainly ripe for it. "A road map to help companies integrate social and environmental issues into business strategy, using shareholder dialogue as a means of corporate learning about stakeholder concerns" is being proposed by Cornerstone Capital Group, (CCG) a predominantly female-owned firm. Founded by Erika Karp in 2013, its mission is to help to move capital towards sustainable businesses.

First speaking to this journalist for FORBES in 2013, Ms Karp used the term "corporate sustainability" interchangeably with "corporate excellence."

Her view that sustainability should be core to a business and not stuck in a corner was beginning then to resonate with investors. When John Wilson moved to CCG from TIAA-CREF - the largest private pension system in the U.S. with direct responsibility for engagement with over 8,000 portfolio companies - it was a step towards finding a basis for shareholder engagement as a tool for reform.

CCG has just launched two new tools that it says will help companies make the business case for improved stakeholder relations through shareholder engagement. The first is the "Shareholder Alignment Frontier," a method for identifying public issues that are relevant for corporate performance through ongoing dialogue between management and long-term shareholders.

In its recently published report The Networked Corporation, CCG says:

Just as Ford Motor Company was the archetypal 20th century company, Apple today is the embodiment of the 21st century company. It is the quintessential networked corporation, whose value proposition lies not in physical assets, particular products or even specific skills, but in the quality of its relationships.

Companies today, it says, should be considered "networks" - ones which create value not solely through individual effort, but rather through the interactions of network members - their stakeholders. Understanding how stakeholder interaction influences company financial and operating performance "can yield important strategic insights for companies and investors."

The market is inefficient in doing this, it argues - "it fails to fully capture the dynamics of the long- term, informal relationship between a company and its stakeholders, which can have significant financial implications."

The second tool on offer is a matrix which proposes a generalized business case for addressing social and environmental issues. CCG says it has identified six discrete business drivers affected by non-financial stakeholder relationships. Here, it considers how relationships with supply, demand and contextual stakeholders individually may affect each of the six business drivers, positively or negatively.

The company says it hopes that these will prove to be effective consultancy tools going forward for both corporations and investors intent on a more collaborative approach, involving all segments of the capital markets.

As head of Corporate Governance, Engagement & Research at CCG., John Wilson has almost 20 years in socially responsible investing and corporate governance. Before joining TIAA-CREF in early 2008, he served as Director of Socially Responsible Investing for Christian Brothers Investment Services, an investment adviser to Catholic institutions.

There, he led the company's shareholder advocacy, social screening, and proxy voting functions as well as participating in the company's outreach to religious communities around the United States. "I have been distilling the experience of what these conversations have to do with corporate drivers," he tells me. Or, in other words, as he puts it: "When it comes to something like climate change: how do you get people to do the right thing?"

A key step forward may lie in understanding exactly where the issues lie in a life cycle for the business: are they 'non-financial' in that they require monitoring but not much action, "pre-financial," "transitional" or "financial?" It is the "transitional" issues - the ones that come along at a time of considerable change - that can also provide great opportunity for those businesses quick to act and be ahead of the curve, says the report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Managing 'Stakeholder Interaction' For Better Business Strategy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The timing is certainly ripe for it. "A road map to help companies integrate social and environmental issues into business strategy, using shareholder dialogue as a means of corporate learning about stakeholder concerns" is being proposed by Cornerstone Capital Group, (CCG) a predominantly female-owned firm. Founded by Erika Karp in [...]

# data[].attributes.body
This Bloomberg article was about a management program that aims to train new McDonald's management staff in China.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Zhou Xiaobu runs from one end of a table to another, grasping a piece of a jigsaw puzzle her team is assembling as part of a leadership training exercise for McDonald's (MCD) managers. "Go, go, go!" yells their instructor, exhorting them to work for the prize, a box of Danish butter cookies that will go to the first group to build the company's trademark Golden Arches. Above their heads a sign reads: "Learning today, leading tomorrow." The thick green binders stuffed with paperwork on each of the 31 students' desks indicate this is no place for slackers.

Such is the seriousness of purpose found at McDonald's new Hamburger University near Shanghai, where the chain aims to crank out a new generation of leaders to fuel big expansion plans in China. While the 20th-floor training center is no Harvard, landing a spot at the Chinese campus of Hamburger U. (McDonald's has seven worldwide) is actually more difficult than getting into the Ivy League icon. (Less than 1 percent of McDonald's applicants get in, making Harvard's 7 percent acceptance rate look downright welcoming.) Zhou was one of only eight people hired from among 1,000 applicants for a management trainee position in the central Chinese city of Changsha. She then had to compete with 43 other workers at her store to be named first assistant manager, earning her a slot at Hamburger U.

Getting into the school is so competitive because more than 26 percent of China's 6.3 million college graduates were unemployed as of July 1, compared with a 4.2 percent jobless rate for its urban workforce. That has caused grads who wouldn't normally consider a food-service career to give Mickey D's a look. "The main reason McDonald's put up Hamburger University is to professionalize the sector, making it easier to recruit better people," says Joel Silverstein, president of Hong Kong-based consultants East West Hospitality Group.

McDonald's is counting on students schooled in store operations, leadership, and staff management at the Shanghai campus to power its mainland growth. So far it's been outpaced by rival Yum! Brands (YUM), parent of KFC and Pizza Hut. McDonald's operates 1,300 stores in China and aims to have 2,000 by 2013. Yum already has 3,700 in China, where it earned 44 percent of its $1.33 billion operating income in the first three quarters of 2010. An approving Wall Street sent Yum's market value up 40 percent last year, vs. McDonald's 23 percent.

McDonald's plans to raise investment in China by 40 percent this year after boosting such spending by 25 percent in 2010. It opened a record 165 outlets in China last year and plans 1,000 more by the end of 2013. Analysts say the chain can't meet that goal without minting more local managers to run individual stores and chart regional strategy. "They are preparing a base that will allow them to accelerate that rate of expansion," says Peter Jankovskis, co-chief investment officer of OakBrook Investments.

Hamburger U., which will cost McDonald's 150 million yuan ($22.8 million) in the five years through 2014, trained 1,000 of McDonald's almost 70,000 Chinese employees last year, says Susanna Li, its head. An additional 4,000 will attend classes through 2014. "We'll make sure the people pipeline is ready," she says.

The bottom line: McDonald's has big growth plans in China. It has opened a Hamburger University campus there to train managers to run those new stores.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hamburger University Shanghai Is Sizzling

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zhou Xiaobu runs from one end of a table to another, grasping a piece of a jigsaw puzzle her team is assembling as part of a leadership training exercise for McDonald's (MCD) managers. "Go, go, go!"