dispatches from the new world of work

What's the Framework? (For Anything!)

I "opened" my e-paper yesterday to be bombarded by three front page stories. All of which show us struggling to work out our new world.

First, inadmissible, web posted, cockpit video footage of a U.S. jet firing on British troops by mistake (and killing one). The coroner held up the trial because he did not "officially" have the video released from the Ministry of Defence 1 year after it was published on the Internet. Crazy, right? Is it just me?

Second, two perverts (monsters) meeting in an Internet chat room and openly planning the rape & murder of two young girls. Crazy, right? Is it just me?

Finally, on a serious news site the British politician doing an advertorial/party political broadcast web video clip thinly veiled as a serious interview. He was even asking himself the questions ... No sign of balance at all. Crazy, right? Is it just me?

So what are the new rules for chat room privacy, mobile phones on trains, personal carbon footprints/aeroplane travel, DIY political interviews? Truth is, nobody knows. As with most things in life we're making it up as we go along. Why then would business be any different? Next time someone (i.e., a boss and/or his tame consultant) says they know the answer. Please laugh ... not too hysterically ... you'll get locked up. Our business leaders reflect our political leaders. In the same way our Nation is over-managed and under-led—so are our businesses.

What I think we need from our political/business leaders is less legislation & control and more leadership. We need a framework within which to consider our businesses (& society) NOT the action-by-action legal manipulation of behaviour. A reminder of our guiding reference systems of Business/National aspiration and Shared Values would be a good start. Even if it just helps us to work out if we want to stay and contribute.

What do you think will help us navigate our businesses in the future?

Chris Nel posted this on 02/07/07.

Comments

1- I think the framework should be: "Would I have accepted a job here/do business here/buy this if I had known what this company/government/country was really about? Would I recommend that my grandmother/son do the same?

2- I am sick and tired of politicians pandering to individual religions. I don't care if you worship goats, but if you value human diversity, education, and the right of self-determination, I would certainly like to know that. I'd also like you to prove it.

3- the second comment is about leadership, if you didn't get it.

Posted by John Newland at February 7, 2007 11:30 AM

1. Obtain early the proper finance to become a member of the House of Lords

2. Said finance shall come from front-liners - ALL the money from front-liners

3. Once a "Lord" shift tax burden to front-liners - ALL the burden shall be their destiny - plus a broom so they tidy up pre-Olympics

Posted by sean_lord at February 7, 2007 12:54 PM

So you'll be voting Labour at the next election then Sean!

Posted by Chris Nel at February 7, 2007 1:50 PM

1. Chris - yes! [For Anything!]

Posted by sean_labour at February 7, 2007 2:07 PM

'Lord Sean of America' - That has a certain 'Britishness' about it :-)

You would make a wonderful replacement for Tony Blair - the vacancy is about to become available.

More power to front liners!

Posted by Trevor Gay at February 7, 2007 11:54 PM

one piece that doesn't seem to be even acknowledged is what it must mean for the participants to have situations thrust in the public eye.

I don't know what those US pilots mental state was after that mission but I sure as hell know it wouldn't help me if videos of the event were splattered across the world's media

Posted by PaulH at February 8, 2007 3:33 AM

Chris

You speak of "Leadership" as if it is one of the most obvious activities that is missing from organizational behavior, that we "are over managed and under led." Unfortunately, that is the same as saying that the problem with today's kids is, "poor parenting."

What does that mean? What does over managed and under led mean? What can be done to increase the amount or more importantly the quality of leadership?

In so far as leadership is concerned, I think the answer is found in building trust with our followers, subordinates, peers, etc... Trust that our actions as leaders are true. Trust that our future behaviors as leaders can be predicted by our past behaviors. Trust that what we learn about the stakeholders touched by our actions will not be used to hold them hostage to our whims.

Building sustainable trust is the key.

Posted by John W. McKenna at February 8, 2007 5:12 AM

Thank you John. Trust! Trust! Trust!
What else will help us navigate our business in the future? ALIGNMENT between what we believe we must do to change the world and what we actually do everyday.
Alignment brings about flow brings about change for the better yields trust.

Posted by JoaquÃn at February 8, 2007 8:28 AM

My idea of the proper framework requires leadership, of course, but it will also require something known as "followership." Leaders neet followers to be effective, and in the new world of work the leaders will have to have people with them (behind them?) who share the vision and the passion for the work and the future of the entity. It's almost impossible to lead people who are constantly searching for the next field of greener grass. It's up to us to be good followers as well as good leaders. Effective followers understand that rewards must be earned, not given in advance, and that there can not always be instant gratification of the followers' whims. Leaders need good followers, not self-indulgent smart-asses who think that because they can build a web page they are suddenly God's gift to the global economy.

Posted by Mike at February 8, 2007 8:36 AM

BINGO!

Posted by Tom at February 8, 2007 8:36 AM

Mike, you make a good point. The Leadership/Followership relationship supports success while mitigating the risk of failure for all parties involved as well as for the organization as a whole. The trust component of this relationship enables all parties of the relationship to delay their return, i.e. not demand instant gratification, thereby increasing the organization's ability to flex around opportunities that create success.

Posted by John W. McKenna at February 9, 2007 12:46 AM

Mike,
Thanks for the great insight on "Followership". I'm intruiged as to whether poor followership is a failure in leadership or some other force at work.

Is the "I want / deserve it NOW!" - spoilt brat syndrome you describe something new? If so what's caused it?

Posted by Chris Nel at February 9, 2007 4:47 AM

Chris and Mike
Rather than trying to create a dichotomy vexing followership against leadership, we should focus on the relationship, i.e. the whole vs. the constituent parts. When we quit thinking in terms of linear decomposition and the identification of conflicting parts, the challenge becomes less of an us-vs-them problem and more of a collaborative building of alliances and individual alignment challenge.
When the leaders and followers built relationships and alignment their objectives, trust will enable the "I want/deserve it NOW, spoilt brat[s]" to let go of their need for immediate gratification and become part of a functioning team.

Posted by John W. McKenna at February 9, 2007 5:38 AM

Chris--I could be wrong, but I see it as an outgrowth of the disparate technical savvy of younger employees vs. their leaders, who are usually older; and the whole "new economy" and "Web 2.0" hype that causes unproven employees to somehow believe that unless they are free to sit in a Starbucks all day "working" on their laptop, they are being unappreciated.

Posted by Mike at February 9, 2007 9:57 AM

Mike

I don't believe there is anything inherently different about "Web 2.0" that causes unproven employees to believe that they are undervalued or unappreciated. I think that is a natural sense of "being" for young people transitioning into adulthood and work life. It's like the terrible-twos for 20-somethings.

Take care...

John

Posted by John W. McKenna at February 12, 2007 12:39 PM