Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday December 21 2016, @10:38PM   Printer-friendly
from the promote-them-to-where-they-can-do-the-least-damage dept.

Geert Hofstede's "Culture's Consequences" is one of the most influential management books of the 20th century. With well over 80,000 citations, Hofstede argues that 50 percent of managers' differences in their reactions to various situations are explained by cultural differences. Now, a researcher at the University of Missouri has determined that culture plays little or no part in leaders' management of their employees; this finding could impact how managers are trained and evaluated globally.

"We all want a higher quality of life, a desirable workplace environment and meaningful work -- no matter our home country," said Arthur Jago, professor of management in the Robert J. Trulaske College of Business at MU. "In management theory, we focus more on leaders' differences rather than their similarities. By analyzing the data in a new way, I found that managers across country borders and across cultures are more alike than different."

Crud. Does this mean you can't get away from PHB's no matter where you go?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 25 2016, @12:09PM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 25 2016, @12:09PM (#445771) Journal
    Your posts are a different sort of communication failure than aristarchus, but it is just as complete. Your complete failure to read and think is not my gaslighting.

    Here's your main moral failure: "For a transaction with an externality, everyone has a different viewpoint on the proper cost of the externality and they most certainly will not agree on that." Yes, this is tautologically true, because every individual necessarily has a different set of viewpoints, experience, etc.

    It's a truism not a tautology. And I shouldn't have had to remind you of it.

    What you're deliberately glossing over, though, is that these "externalities" as you so glibly refer to them can consist of ruining entire cities or segments of the economy, and different actors have vastly different capabilities to mitigate the damage said externalities do to them...not to mention, these externalities very often affect third parties who had little or nothing to do with whichever hypothetical trade you're thinking of in the first place.

    Well, yes, affecting third parties is the definition of externality. And seriously, what externalities of that scale are still left in the developed world? Regulation is one of the few areas left that can still create and grow externalities to the appropriate scale. Government corruption undermining that regulation is another. Capitalism was tamed decades ago. It's the controlling apparatus that generates the problems today.

  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday December 25 2016, @04:26PM

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday December 25 2016, @04:26PM (#445792) Journal

    Okay, we're done. You've made it quite clear you don't give a damn about anyone and anything but yourself, and you'll bend the entire world around your delusions if allowed. This is willful ignorance. There's no saving you.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...