RESPONSES WANTED: External Influences on Progressive Organizations
I am a UT Austin student working on my senior thesis under Professor Paul Green--a former Morning Star colleague and one of the "pioneers" on this site. I am studying the impact of third-party actors--regulatory agencies, professional organizations, suppliers, etc.--on progressive organizations. Essentially, I want to look at the various ways, both direct and indirect, subtle and explicit, that third-party actors impact the ability of progressive organizations like the ones on this site to adopt and maintain their unique organizational practices.
I want to tell the stories of how organizations have felt pressure from third parties to change their non-traditional organizational practices, how this pressure was manifest, and how the organization or individual responded. Further, I am particularly interested in the subtle ways that third-party actors influence organizational decisions. Maybe it's a financial disclosure that requires someone in the organization to assume a disproportionate amount of individual liability, disrupting the internal power dynamics, or maybe it's the simple fact that a supplier gets a little squirmy when a nominally "low-level" employee--to use a grotesque term--is empowered to make important purchasing decisions.
If you are interested in sharing your story for research purposes or even just chatting about your experience of third-party influence with an interested individual, please comment on this topic or contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Thanks in advance!
We recently held a brainstorming session at our office for the newest on-demand course for the Academy—one about the concept of Psychological Safety. During the session, we discussed how one of the things you can do to create psychological safety is to embrace failure instead of avoiding it. But this is hard because failing is not fun. It absolutely sucks. Therefore, it is better not to celebrate the failure itself but rather celebrate the lessons learned from it.
How many times have you heard of companies coaching candidates for ‘senior teams’, ‘top talent’ and ‘future leaders? That is, the ‘special ones’ who are worth coaching attention! Sure, there will be talent brewing who, with good coaching, will go from ‘potentially great’ to ‘actually great’. And some brilliant coaches do great work with senior teams. However, does a ‘coaching for senior leaders’ paradigm pass scrutiny, given how organisations are changing? Or is the potential of other staff hamstrung by a short-sighted view of who is worth investing in?
So, we write a monthly column for MT/Sprout, a Dutch media platform. Last month, we wrote about how our agendas are always packed full with meetings. We followed that with this month's column about how replacing all these meetings with e-mail is not a good alternative. Why? Because there is a big chance you will waste even more time and money. Allow me to explain.