well said, gini. when things go non-linear, we have to question all our assumptions. for example, is the concept of "job" still relevant? how else might people pool their resources and talents and create organizations the serve all their interests? my pet peeve is that we continue to design and build companies based on a hundred year old model that was based on four hundred year old science. there aren't many hundred year old technologies in use, functional or relevant today. there are a few (light bulbs, furniture and paper come to mind), but damn few.
the real tragedy of this economic meltdown is that the people who have dutifully punched the clock have never had their full potential developed by their organizations. aside from the skills required for their immediate jobs, employees are astonishingly ignorant of anything outside their cubicle or workstation. the tragedy we are seeing is the legacy and symptom of a system of leadership , management and organization design based on "check your brain at the door and do just what you're told." is it any wonder when the job is gone they are lost and clueless about what to do?
the good news is that it is only when things are falling apart that real change (for good or bad) can happen quickly. your article and this forum is just one example of the revolution of which we find ourselves in the middle. we don't need to worry about washington. they're clueless. we are the leaders if we decide to be and only we can reinvent business and how the world works. we get the leaders we deserve. the reality is that they follow us.
Twitter
Facebook
RSS
Pinterest
Google+
LinkedIn







[...] was cheering-on Gini Dietrich yesterday as I read her post at Spin Sucks. In short, she wrote about how difficult it is selling change-resistant business leaders on the [...]
[...] Last week I quoted Jeff Jarvis and how he thinks we’re moving to a jobless future. [...]