Does Europe need enemies?

We all know that the current European financial crisis will be a main topic in the upcoming history books. The collapse of Greece, Italy and its debt, France threatened with slashed credit ratings. This week Bloomberg announced that Germany, the largest economy of the European union, stated that they “don’t have any new bazooka to pull out of the bag”. This is only a beginning of the domino effect that started a long time ago

According to the Czech editorialist Martin Ehl, Europe will never recover unless they become more united. And the best way to unite Europe is to face a common enemy together. However, even in Europe’s deepest crisis in history, Europeans are still incapable of creating a common identity. He argues that Europeans are unwilling to admit that what will bring the together is greater than what divides them (source). So where will we find this enemy that is so powerful that it will unite all Europeans?

The statements of Martin Ehl are linked with organizational theory and how organizations create their own identity. Europe is a large continent, with innumerable differences between the boarders. And while the European Union is supposed to represent Europe, highly developed countries such as Norway and Switzerland are choosing to stay outside of the union.

So how can the EU become completely united when its member countries have such different cultures?

According to the Romanian political scientist Alina mungiu-Pippidi, the EU could split into three different groups: the performers, the lame and the laggards, and she further states that we cannot count on a fake European identity to bring everyone together. “The obsession with Europeanness and Europeanism, generally based on an identity defined by a psychological point of view, make us lose sight of what Europe really is: a set of laws and the ability to apply them”.

What we are experiencing today is a multi-speed Europe, which in fact is not a new concept. To give one example, there are in total 10 member countries not even being part of the Eurozone, among them the UK, Sweden and Denmark. The support between these countries of the creation of a non-eurozone has recently increased (source).

If we take a look at Europe in the same way as Schein looks at organizations, we can analyze its culture by looking at the artifacts, values and basic assumptions. And the way we see the culture of Europe is more as a chain of overlapping cultures. It is a continent filled states characterized by different languages, habits, values and behaviors.

Therefore, we dare so disagree with Martin Ehl’s opinions on how Europe will benefit from becoming more united. Ehl argues that in this global economy, we need to lay aside old national and ideological categories, and work towards a stronger European identity. However, we see more a Europe in need of a redefinition of its vision and intentions.

We are interested in hearing the opinions of both European and non-European citizens on this topic. Do you agree with Marting Ehl’s arguemts on how Europe needs to become more united, or do you think the culture clashes we can identify between the states are too high barriers in order to make this actually happen?

How self-motivated are you?

"Your life today is the result of your attitudes and choices in the past. Your life tomorrow will be the result of your attitudes and the choices you make today."

- Author Unknown

Many theorists have argued that complete pictures of the self, the world and the future are essential for mental health. Moreover other criteria of mental health, includes the ability to care about others, the ability to be happy or contented, and the ability to engage in productive and creative work. Within the last one, self-motivation comes into picture.

Are you motivated to achieve what you really want in life? And how hard do you push yourself to get things done? Do you know how to take charge of your goals and achievements? Here is a short Quiz where you can test How self motivated you are. After answering questions you get a nutshell analysis of your ability to set goals for yourself and to achieve them.

Self-motivation is a complex context about setting enough challenging goals for yourself, your belief of your skills and abilities needed to achieve those goals, and your expectations of your success. The article actually gives you a step-by-step guideline how to built and develop self-motivation. It includes such as positive thinking, focusing and setting strong goals, as well as motivating environment. People surrounded by you will certainly have an effect on your motivation. These external factors are all though separate from internal self-motivation factors.

There are two approaches on how to focus in life, according to a recent USA report Personal Directions® program. Individuals with a strong Internal focus are likely to see themselves as having a great deal of influence and control over their life and environment. They tend to feel that they are primarily responsible for what happens to them, and how they shape their personal world. Individuals with a strong External Focus are likely to believe that elements in their environment (external factors) play a very important role in what happens to them. They may feel that the external world has a powerful force that is difficult to shape or control.

In practice most of the people employ a combination of the two approaches. Our perceptions of External or Internal Focus often affects the number of choices and options we see and allow ourselves to have.  This is the basis of decision-making. 

Based on a recent USA report, Personal Directions® is a program which examines motivations and strivings and how these affect decision-making in different areas of your life, in addition to what kind of actions you might wish to take as you look towards the future. Its conclusion is that each one has the capacity to respond to events and to make decisions about the future. Events of the past have an influence and are important; however, they do not have to control the future.

Goal setting gives you a focus, a clear sense of direction and self-confidence that comes by achieving your own goals. Some individuals might have high skills of self-motivation and some might need to have more external support. When it comes to managing organizations, leaders should provide external support for motivating employees. That's why it's vital that leaders and managers keep their team feeling motivated, inspired and that they sets goals. First of all it is wealthy for the employees, and within that it becomes to be wealthy for whole working organization.

Now its your turn take the Quiz and find out how self-motivated you are?

Feedback - the breakfast of champions

Feedback is so personal that both positive and negative feedback is uncomfortable, embarrassing and hard to accept. But the thing about feedback is that it's absolutely necessary for both personal development and the success of a company. So why is feedback so difficult?

Feedback might be one of the most controversial and feared actions in business life. This is the case for both the receiver and the sender. Most managers say they dislike giving feedback and receivers say they do not get enough feedback that they can actually use to develop.

An interesting phenomenon is that the receivers tend to focus on the negative aspects of the message and research shows that this phenomenon is linked to our student life. When students receive feedback on tests and exams they tend to focus on the things they do incorrectly, rather than improving their knowledge by looking at what they did correctly.

Sometimes it can be hard do actually interpret what the sender wants to say. Negative feedback is hard to send, because it involves total honesty and emotions on either side. The result is that senders tend to hide the negative aspects of the messages in-between positive aspects, making the actual message of negative feedback drown. This make development hard and the message must often be repeated which causes confusion and stress.

Cannon, a professor of leadership and organizational studies, claims that feedback should focus on business outcomes. When feedback is framed as a mean to reach a specific business goal, the message is more easily seen as an opportunity to solve a problem rather than to criticize. This benefits not only the sender, but the feedback is suddenly being focused on the employee's development.

Another overlooked point is that practice makes perfect. If feedback is given, it often becomes easier for the sender to deliver and also for the receiver to receive. Also, when only given once or twice a year at formal feedback sessions, the sessions are filled by nervosity and anxiety. Research shows that the result becomes a natural response of fighting and fighting and not the thoughtfulness an effective feedback session requires.

Professor Cannon makes another good point: "There is a big difference between understanding and changing," he says. It is rarely enough to have the conversation. Managers should follow through because change is difficult! Even a slight movement outside of our comfort zone creates enormous tension, and although we might think we have changed, others may think we have not. Research explains this by stereotype. Human nature makes it difficult for others to see us differently.

There are several reasons to why feedback is so difficult. There are also several solutions to how we can make it easier. Respect among the sender and the receiver and mutual trust are key points. Therefore asking for feedback on feedback is a good idea. Feedback is important, and no matter how difficult feedback is, everybody needs feedback, and it's a heck of a lot cheaper than paying a trainer.

Try it! Give us feedback by commenting!

http://www.mrg.com/Articles/index.asp

http://blogs.hbr.org/hmu/2009/04/feedback-that-works.html

Y generation work force – nearly impossible to manage?

“They're young, smart, brash. They may wear flip-flops to the office or listen to iPods at their desk. They want to work, but they don't want work to be their life.” 

This is the definition of generation Y represented by an article from USA today. The Y-generation is qualified young employees born between 1982-1999 who are entering the work environment. They have become one of the most talked about generations in history. Bringing themselves to the organization they set new and unforeseen challenges to managers with their different expectations and working habits. So how should managers take this so-called flip-flop, i-pod, and independent work force into account in their management style?

Y-generation employees are more ambitious and mobile individualistic. They are eager to develop their own career path and working skills rather than staying in one company’s service the whole career. According to an article from USA today, they believe in their own worth. One challenge for managers is how to commit these young employees to the organization and to its culture.

Nonetheless this is also a problem to young Y gen employees. According to the Onboarding Gen Y article, the characteristics Y gen represents, impatient and boundary-ignoring, might become a challenge for them when finding the “perfect job” and workplace. 

Y generation is technologically safe so they are both high-performance and high-maintenance. They have been pampered and nurtured with plenty of activities since they were in pre-school, unlike the generations that have gone before them (USA today). For managers this means new challenges in internal communication. They need to adapt and use new approaches and channels of communication.

"Generation Y is much less likely to respond to the traditional command-and-control type of management which is still popular in much of today's workforce," says Jordan Kaplan, an associate managerial science professor at Long Island University-Brooklyn in New York. "They've grown up questioning their parents, and now they're questioning their employers. They don't know how to shut up, which is great, but that's aggravating to the 50-year-old manager who says, 'Do it and do it now.' " states the article from USA today.

But what about when Y Generation enters into leader positions in an organization? How does their way of leading differ compared to older leaders?

According to recent USA research on the impact of age in leadership style, the challenge facing organizations is to find ways of using and valuing the unique contributions of both younger and older leaders.  Since they both have different approaches to work, this reflects to the way they are managing people. Younger leaders bring in an energizing presence, are open to change, and are focused on achieving results. Older leaders bring a calmer, more considered approach, steeped in past experience and the traditions of the organization. While younger leaders may be focused on self-development in career and abilities, older leaders may be more focused on the development of those workers below them. (MRG leadership report)

As it has always been, organizations must continue to learn and adapt when generational changes take place in the work force. (CMS report) Does this affect the organization’s structure?
 Based on the MRG research, nowadays many organizations have found solutions to fit together young and older workers by using a team-oriented structure. Which means older and younger leaders are likely to be working together. It seems that for today’s organizations’ future success, it is vital and crucial to understand strengths and weaknesses each age groups brings to the organization.

What is your opinion? Is the Y-generation difficult to engage in the organization?  And since there seem to be various differences between young and old workers and leaders, is Y gen nearly impossible to manage?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2005-11-06-gen-y_x.htm

http://www.mrg.com/documents/EnergyExperience_000.pdf

http://cmsreport.com/generation_next

http://onboardinggeny.com/

The link between crisis management and social media

 

In 2010, Greenpeace posted a video on YouTube where they re-made a commercial from Nestlé’s brand KitKat. Instead of the man in the video eating a chocolate, he starts chewing on an orangutan’s finger, and the slogan was changed from: “Have a break, have a KitKat” to “Give the orangutans a break”. The video was meant as an accusation against Nestlé for buying palm oil from Sinar Mas, an Indonesian company known for destroying protected areas and harming the orangutans. Nestlé asked YouTube to remove the video, allegedly due to copyright issues. The video was removed, but it had already caused a big stir and thousands of people posted the video on Twitter, Facebook and other social media forums.

What Nesté did was to reply to angry comments on their Facebook profile in a defensive and arrogant way and went as far as deleting some of their “fans”. This strategy resulted in their 90 000-member fan page on Facebook becoming a forum for hatred and criticism towards Nestlé. However, a quick action from the top management where they went out and apologized and cancelled its agreement with Sinar Mas avoided the issue to spin off and become a real crisis for the company.

What this case shows us is how increasingly important social media is becoming when dealing with crisis management. Whoever Nestlé had put in charge of communication through social media was clearly not well enough qualified and the situation required that the top management took over the situation. This might be caused by a lack of clear communication objectives, which leads to the question of how mismanagement of internal communication can affect external stakeholders’ perspective of an organization.

To put the power of social media into perspective, the Financial Times states that each day more than 10 million people become a “fan” of a brand on Facebook, with the most popular ones being brands such as Coca-Cola and Starbucks. This number clearly indicates that social media has to be managed in a professional manner, and what is communicated through Facebook has to be inline with the communication objectives and vision of the company.

So our question to you is how you think organizations should communicate through social media? Should it be a platform for an open dialogue between the organization and the stakeholders, or should it simply be used as a platform for one-way communication.  

Glass Ceiling – just a title after all?

Has this term become old-fashioned in today’s rapid changing and modern working environment where employees have more opportunities? Based on current research by a management research group ”A new look of glass ceiling”, it has not. There still exists a gap between the number of women and men in senior executive positions in US companies.

However, this is not only an issue in the US. Recently we came across a Finish article in the Economic Life newspaper with the headline: ”Bottom rock – women are almost invisible head of listed companies”. The Finish article stated that in a global perspective, women constituted of only 16 % of executive senior positions in a specific list of companies. In addition, the board members consisted of 26 % in listed companies and 12 % in small ones.

Many European parliaments support the quota of women members in companies’ boards. For instance, France and Norway have already laid down strict quota laws. In Norway, 44 % of board directors are currently women. And when looking at other global numbers, e.g. in Australia, women have accounted for 27 % of all new board appointments since last summer.

The problem is that there are too few women in top management positions. So what is it about women's ambitions, motivations and expectations that explain why, despite their ability, many choose not to pursue their careers all the way to the top?

According to the Economic Life ,the lack of women in leadership positions can have a number of reasons. Underlying traditions, attitudes, stereotypes, educational choices, women’s excessive self-criticism, the lack of their own activity, as well as difficulties in reconcile work and private life together. In addition are women’s networking abilities limited, and they have a lack of role models and mentors. The fact that things would change by the time is groundless.

There is an acceptable amount of female leaders in the middle management positions. “In Finland the principal rule is that women end up being middle managers, while men take up the positions as top managers”. The challenge seems to be to move up to an executive senior position. So does this mean that women have less ambition than men, or just a different kind of ambition?

According to the Financial Times, the interests between men and women differ. Women might put more high value into setting up a family and they look for different characters of work. “The US's Center for Work-Life Policy indicates how women rank a number of career priorities, such as flexible work arrangements and collaboration, ahead of compensation”.  It is obvious that both men and women care about compensation and social context of the job. But the wage men and women tend to attach to differs.

There is survey evidence that suggests women’s lack of confidence in comparison to men. They are more cautious when applying for jobs and less clear about where their careers are heading. However, other data raise different issues. Research done by McKinsey reckons that women actually remain highly confident throughout their careers, but as they age, their desire to move upwards in the company dissipates faster than men's.

On the other hand, US research states that men and women differ less in leadership styles in top management positions, than at lower management levels. Women in executive roles tend to be just as oriented to strategic thinking and as willing to takes risks as men. It may be that learning to take a more analytical and broad approach to problem solving is a key attribute of women leaders who break through the glass ceiling.

Stereotypes about how men and women ought to behave still appear to play a part in today’s corporate reality. In our opinion, glass ceiling is a current challenge in today’s working environment. However, the issue is moving in a positive direction. What is your point of view? Is the glass ceiling a current problem or is it only a title after all?

Are you a Fast Zebra?

 

The authors of the book “Leading Outside the Lines”, John R. Katzenbach and Zia Khan, describe Fast Zebras as employees who can quickly absorb information, adapt to sudden challenges and act constructively, in the same way as Fast Zebras survive a visit to the watering hole, while the slower members get attacked by predators lurking in the shadows. Smart managers and leaders need to know how to manage the Fast Zebras who work for them. And the Fast Zebras themselves should understand their value and importance. In this blog post we will explore how Fast Zebras deal with the issue of motivation.

Take the quiz and find out if you are a Fast Zebra: http://www.vcs-gsa.com/FastZebra/index.php

Motivation is a key element for all managers. Question number three asks how you will ensure that people are motivated and have the right attitude. If you were a Fast Zebra you would “Instill pride… because fun and money aren’t the best motivators. Pride is, and it comes from rising above difficult experiences”. If finding pride in the work you do is the best motivation, how do you as a manager ensure that this happens?

In order to find out how to best motivate employees, we decided to learn from one of the most successful CEOs over history: Jack Welch. According to Welch, “No company, large or small, can succeed over the long run without energized employees who believe in the mission and understand how to achieve it”.

Energy often comes from being in a team with other people. A good team spirit can lead to commitment and a feeling of belonging. You believe in the same mission, and together you understand how to achieve it. However, a challenge in today’s international working environment is that people have different views on what good teamwork is. How can you know how to be a good team player in cases where different cultures are being mixed? This is where managers are facing an increasingly important task.

Therefore we ask you: What makes you energized? What makes you believe in the company’s mission? And how will you understand how to achieve it? The answers to these questions will send us at least one step closer in becoming Fast Zebras.

Sources:

http://www.vcs-gsa.com/FastZebra/index.php

http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/may2008/sb20080523_761806.htm