leadership and hierarchy
"Those who follow can not lead!"
this line from Counting Sheep Bigelf jumps from the receiver on and really has me thinking. An area by implementing still a big role in our society has is the economy. The status of "leader" is almost a title of nobility. A quality characteristic that stands out from the ordinary workers. recommended for senior roles. Managers work longer, take responsibility and do not simply end after 8 hours and can be the company company.
me personally is the suspect. For a systematic approach but should only be asked: What is leadership?
aim of the guide is to act to influence (and some thoughts) of people to achieve objectives. The structure of leadership is archaic nature and therefore not democratic. One (the leader / the manager) acts as primus inter pares. It leads. This implies that it is in its discretion, where it leads (target) and how this happens (the leadership and resources to meet the objective). Of course there are democratic governance, for example, lead the groups themselves. However, this is not the rule, either in business or elsewhere. Would it be the would be "managers" unnecessary.
But what can now be said about a manager? In leadership research, there are theories that investigate when leadership is successful. One can focus on qualities of leaders, the behavior of the leader and the leadership situation. Basically, all three concepts justified. What in the whole debate but I think is underestimated is a property. A leader must have vision. The best guide is useless if there is no goal or the led no target can be identified. For an ambitious goal, a vision, take into account efforts. Does this goal is not to perform even the smallest efforts to grumbling and pain.
Here we come now to the glaring problem that the leadership and the hierarchy is, in which it is embedded in the rule is. Can someone who is himself out (that follow) cause at all?
My contention: he can not. The primacy of the leader is lifted in a hierarchy again and twisted. The leader is the leader and subordinate. His position is not better than those of his subordinates. Both need to follow that one leading the way is still to neglect it.
He also does not lead itself, it lacks the leaders in a hierarchy of vision. Even if he has them, they're not important, as not specifying the target of his visions, but that of his superiors. If, in this case to conflict, he has to choose between passing or consequences, both will not work. The leader can determine not only the target is not, he can choose not to get there. In choosing the means of his guide, he is the superior restricted. He can act only to the extent that by its leader gives him freedom.
What then is the task of the leader? He's not a real leader, but a link. He is like the valet, who, while driving a car (virtually a part of the convoy), but only does what others tell him. To try a different picture: he is the shepherd. Does lead the shepherd, the dog is just one executor of his will. The guide is only agent that implements the will of another. We also do not come up with the idea, the chauffeur or shepherd dog to which associated with leadership.
What remains so capture? Who follows another, can not lead themselves. To run it needs its own free will, an own goal. In a hierarchy, as is typical in government agencies and businesses, or even the military, that leadership is hardly possible. The lead decision-makers at the top (if at all possible would result in the company and the supervisory board or shareholders, because ultimately they can provide the management transfer). Hierarchies destroy all management positions . Including design them to steering positions
reasoning can be two things:
1) can be legitimizing the steering wheel in a hierarchy only by the hierarchy itself and the related penalty power. Other concepts like that of a visionary or charismatic leadership can not be maintained in a hierarchy. This course is also the right of managers to yourself then. Initiative and imagination are also required of simple subjects, can not also explain why a manager more than a simple Befehlsausführer is.
2) The status of the executives with whom they are sometimes considered, is untenable. should be questioned
what extent this work in hierarchies, the subordination and consequences of our self-harmony as democratic citizens. In my opinion, would require a rethink on that ground alone. Instead of one-sided as to require subordinate loyalty and obedience, would be of helpful to the employee - employer relationship designed as a market transaction. It is important that both meet at eye level and the choice is yours. Condition would therefore, that the state provides a perfect market, where labor is supplied and demanded.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Homemade Invisible Fence
master's program and student anger
tremble Right now many students (like me) about whether and where to get a master's degree course and study further. The mirror reports now outraged by students of the University of Cologne, who fail at high NC strictly censoring its university.
plays the way I thought about this: is basically the Bachelor-Master system is a good idea. Not everyone needs 10 semester theoretical knowledge, especially in the everyday work is often the case that the theoretical knowledge is at best a basis, a lot of superfluous anyway. And not all constantly talk about lifelong learning? Contrary to other opinions can be thought of as working people also acquire academic knowledge, either through self-study, distance learning in education or training courses.
The idea of having a professional degree to provide for the masses and for the interested and good a degree is quite reasonable. The doctor's also no standard degree. Logically.
appear with this thought in mind, it only logical that just not for all undergraduate students to master space is available, but only for a fraction.
But apparently there is demand - What is it? The fact that students today are more interested in academic and research-based work? Probably not. I maintain that it is fear. A diffuse fear that only the best education is likely to later compete in the labor market and to get a good job. This is of course fueled by diehards who can not come to terms with the new system, and point to the low quality of bachelor's degrees.
Whether you get a (good) job, eh ; depends, however, prevent the social opinion not only on hard work and their own education but also to personal relations, general economic conditions and a large dose of luck. After all, there are certainly voices who question whether we still have enough jobs for all, or ever have? Keywords core unemployment. Somehow it seems so logical, that goes back with ever increasing productivity and technological progress, the required amount of man power. Apparently it's also true that disappear within an economic cycle lasting jobs. In a downturn, so work is substituted by capital (that is, people laid off and machinery bought). In this recovery process will now be made not easily reversed. Although it created new jobs, but not as much as in the last upswing.
consequence? Not the bachelor's degree is bad - would make all their master, there would probably not be more jobs. Instead, here is turn the labor market and society. Would prevail on the knowledge that it is not a personal foul is to be unemployed and it would be no social stigma, people probably would have less fear before. A fortiori, if these people will be financially secure as a citizen's income. Search recipe, create jobs, so that even people without qualifications working without end: Or as another alternative. Seems but after decades in which the policy of this recipe looks unlikely.
The Mirror article and the process of application to:
It is good in itself, that after a bachelor once again has the opportunity to apply for other universities and to specialize in other ways. (Eg Bachelor of Electrical Engineering, Industrial Engineering and Master). This is of course best if they apply for all, justice half should be selected and not protectionism prevail according to objective criteria. Such a move is obviously not a nice thing, but not a broken leg. Who outside of the university towns went to school had to move anyway and knows the procedure, since no one complains, why there is no county XY University.
What must be naturally, and objective criteria for selection (which are also understandable). One possibility is of course the NC for the course work. A letter of motivation could help for very specific programs, too. could to describe the motivation for a 8.15 Business Administration Master of course, be difficult to justify, why you are just interested in Industrial and Network Economics, is feasible and for student and Uni helpful. Exactly the same applies for internships abroad - can be a useful criterion, but does not. But why should you get involved socially, if you want to do research? Is a student in a party better suited for a master, as someone who in his spare time alone is more? Certainly not. In
Principle, one could conclude that the Cologne students in the article complain that the university reasonably objectively selects the students. Maybe they make the easy, because they only go on the NC. And perhaps this is unfair because the University of Cologne in fact strictly censored. But that is not a flaw of the Bologna reform, which does indeed express provision for ETCS-Note, which is a relative note, which should be suitable for comparison better. This certainly is potential for improvement.
to demand protectionism, however, is really, really wrong. And that next can go, if you bet everything on one card, of course, should be clear. Complains not much of a poker player when he knocked out because he goes all-in.
The article so what?
1) We need objective and comparable grades, qualifications and selection process. Since the universities hinwurschteln but really prefer the right and does not care what others do, they have to chalk the self.
2) Of course, the new system is linked with efforts, but even in such an important phase, it also depends on each own, get informed and take action. They would then have something like (1 to 1 application rejection) prevented can be. Obviously we are
tremble Right now many students (like me) about whether and where to get a master's degree course and study further. The mirror reports now outraged by students of the University of Cologne, who fail at high NC strictly censoring its university.
plays the way I thought about this: is basically the Bachelor-Master system is a good idea. Not everyone needs 10 semester theoretical knowledge, especially in the everyday work is often the case that the theoretical knowledge is at best a basis, a lot of superfluous anyway. And not all constantly talk about lifelong learning? Contrary to other opinions can be thought of as working people also acquire academic knowledge, either through self-study, distance learning in education or training courses.
The idea of having a professional degree to provide for the masses and for the interested and good a degree is quite reasonable. The doctor's also no standard degree. Logically.
appear with this thought in mind, it only logical that just not for all undergraduate students to master space is available, but only for a fraction.
But apparently there is demand - What is it? The fact that students today are more interested in academic and research-based work? Probably not. I maintain that it is fear. A diffuse fear that only the best education is likely to later compete in the labor market and to get a good job. This is of course fueled by diehards who can not come to terms with the new system, and point to the low quality of bachelor's degrees.
Whether you get a (good) job, eh ; depends, however, prevent the social opinion not only on hard work and their own education but also to personal relations, general economic conditions and a large dose of luck. After all, there are certainly voices who question whether we still have enough jobs for all, or ever have? Keywords core unemployment. Somehow it seems so logical, that goes back with ever increasing productivity and technological progress, the required amount of man power. Apparently it's also true that disappear within an economic cycle lasting jobs. In a downturn, so work is substituted by capital (that is, people laid off and machinery bought). In this recovery process will now be made not easily reversed. Although it created new jobs, but not as much as in the last upswing.
consequence? Not the bachelor's degree is bad - would make all their master, there would probably not be more jobs. Instead, here is turn the labor market and society. Would prevail on the knowledge that it is not a personal foul is to be unemployed and it would be no social stigma, people probably would have less fear before. A fortiori, if these people will be financially secure as a citizen's income. Search recipe, create jobs, so that even people without qualifications working without end: Or as another alternative. Seems but after decades in which the policy of this recipe looks unlikely.
The Mirror article and the process of application to:
It is good in itself, that after a bachelor once again has the opportunity to apply for other universities and to specialize in other ways. (Eg Bachelor of Electrical Engineering, Industrial Engineering and Master). This is of course best if they apply for all, justice half should be selected and not protectionism prevail according to objective criteria. Such a move is obviously not a nice thing, but not a broken leg. Who outside of the university towns went to school had to move anyway and knows the procedure, since no one complains, why there is no county XY University.
What must be naturally, and objective criteria for selection (which are also understandable). One possibility is of course the NC for the course work. A letter of motivation could help for very specific programs, too. could to describe the motivation for a 8.15 Business Administration Master of course, be difficult to justify, why you are just interested in Industrial and Network Economics, is feasible and for student and Uni helpful. Exactly the same applies for internships abroad - can be a useful criterion, but does not. But why should you get involved socially, if you want to do research? Is a student in a party better suited for a master, as someone who in his spare time alone is more? Certainly not. In
Principle, one could conclude that the Cologne students in the article complain that the university reasonably objectively selects the students. Maybe they make the easy, because they only go on the NC. And perhaps this is unfair because the University of Cologne in fact strictly censored. But that is not a flaw of the Bologna reform, which does indeed express provision for ETCS-Note, which is a relative note, which should be suitable for comparison better. This certainly is potential for improvement.
to demand protectionism, however, is really, really wrong. And that next can go, if you bet everything on one card, of course, should be clear. Complains not much of a poker player when he knocked out because he goes all-in.
The article so what?
1) We need objective and comparable grades, qualifications and selection process. Since the universities hinwurschteln but really prefer the right and does not care what others do, they have to chalk the self.
2) Of course, the new system is linked with efforts, but even in such an important phase, it also depends on each own, get informed and take action. They would then have something like (1 to 1 application rejection) prevented can be. Obviously we are
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Best Car Receiver For Flash Drive
The government and the nuclear lobby
yes on "the eve of the final battle" between nuclear power opponents and proponents. On the topic one can have different opinions - I will here allow a final opinion on whether nuclear power is a future technology or the bad. Downright disgusting I find another aspect: the behavior of
nuclear power plant operators.
We live in a democratic state and it is intended that decisions are not made out of nothing or a whim, but follow a political (and, ideally, society) debate. In the course of this debate is to of course always have the opportunity to comment on it, first right of any person concerned. However, I am not sure if this also applies to legal persons - after all, have no such right to vote. Alone, the process that the company XY is said to have an opinion, I find it strange enough, because this company is so in fact only a construction. One could assume that shape the interests of employees, the management and owners agree to the company. In this case, the company has no own opinion, but only adds all existing individual opinions together. At this point I would doubt again that all shareholders have a homogeneous E.on opinion about nuclear power. To what extent the views of foreign owners (Vattenfall Sweden) is considered is again debatable. Surely in a democracy should the interests of non-voters are considered. In this particular case, however, that foreign nationals are by far the most affected. While in Germany there is interest in yields and safety, environmental protection and a stable electricity supply, had foreign Shareholders (more or less) is primarily a (legitimate) interest in returns. A pure interest return would, in my opinion, therefore, secondary.
should the nuclear power plant operators are glad to know when they are allowed to voice their opinion on the fuel tax and life extension by these considerations. Finally, the state is a higher authority, who represents the sovereign and must consider many interests.
Instead, there is an increasingly harsh tone of voice. Since the policy does not seem satisfied with the proposals of the groups is there is the fear that they would submit to uncomfortable decisions. Obviously they have to threaten only the two reflections and demand. An entity may threaten the state? Of course not. This would yield to the threat, it would be clear that companies can significantly influence the state. That would be profoundly undemocratic because (see above) companies are not democratic units, they are not eligible to vote, they do not even necessarily represent the interests of individuals. Happy to be allowed as of (their managers, employees, shareholders, etc.) in the debate . Participate However, since it is not only an economic debate, but an embracing social debate, they should contact there represent their own personal opinion and act as individuals. I also do not threaten the government because they want to cut child benefit (fictitious example). Democracy can not work if a group exists that has a homogeneous and large enough interest is threatening to take effect. To get a good balance of interests out a democratic debate should consist mainly of individual utterances.
An interesting experiment: allow the management and the government behind Rawls connect " veil of ignorance". Represented the men actually their own opinion or the opinion represents a CEO of his company because he feels obligated as chief clerk to do so.
second objection: perhaps you are conscious of the environment ministry of the principal-agent problem, not quite. The new head of the Department of Nuclear Safety has negotiated as E.on managers on the part of the nuclear phase of the company. They want the Honourable Minister Röttgen Hennenhöfer and not just criticize lobbying and bias. A strange Connotation, the whole course, and I can only hope that Prime Minister Röttgen within the meaning of principal-agent problem also has the interests of his new department head questioned and explored.
yes on "the eve of the final battle" between nuclear power opponents and proponents. On the topic one can have different opinions - I will here allow a final opinion on whether nuclear power is a future technology or the bad. Downright disgusting I find another aspect: the behavior of
nuclear power plant operators.
We live in a democratic state and it is intended that decisions are not made out of nothing or a whim, but follow a political (and, ideally, society) debate. In the course of this debate is to of course always have the opportunity to comment on it, first right of any person concerned. However, I am not sure if this also applies to legal persons - after all, have no such right to vote. Alone, the process that the company XY is said to have an opinion, I find it strange enough, because this company is so in fact only a construction. One could assume that shape the interests of employees, the management and owners agree to the company. In this case, the company has no own opinion, but only adds all existing individual opinions together. At this point I would doubt again that all shareholders have a homogeneous E.on opinion about nuclear power. To what extent the views of foreign owners (Vattenfall Sweden) is considered is again debatable. Surely in a democracy should the interests of non-voters are considered. In this particular case, however, that foreign nationals are by far the most affected. While in Germany there is interest in yields and safety, environmental protection and a stable electricity supply, had foreign Shareholders (more or less) is primarily a (legitimate) interest in returns. A pure interest return would, in my opinion, therefore, secondary.
should the nuclear power plant operators are glad to know when they are allowed to voice their opinion on the fuel tax and life extension by these considerations. Finally, the state is a higher authority, who represents the sovereign and must consider many interests.
Instead, there is an increasingly harsh tone of voice. Since the policy does not seem satisfied with the proposals of the groups is there is the fear that they would submit to uncomfortable decisions. Obviously they have to threaten only the two reflections and demand. An entity may threaten the state? Of course not. This would yield to the threat, it would be clear that companies can significantly influence the state. That would be profoundly undemocratic because (see above) companies are not democratic units, they are not eligible to vote, they do not even necessarily represent the interests of individuals. Happy to be allowed as of (their managers, employees, shareholders, etc.) in the debate . Participate However, since it is not only an economic debate, but an embracing social debate, they should contact there represent their own personal opinion and act as individuals. I also do not threaten the government because they want to cut child benefit (fictitious example). Democracy can not work if a group exists that has a homogeneous and large enough interest is threatening to take effect. To get a good balance of interests out a democratic debate should consist mainly of individual utterances.
An interesting experiment: allow the management and the government behind Rawls connect " veil of ignorance". Represented the men actually their own opinion or the opinion represents a CEO of his company because he feels obligated as chief clerk to do so.
second objection: perhaps you are conscious of the environment ministry of the principal-agent problem, not quite. The new head of the Department of Nuclear Safety has negotiated as E.on managers on the part of the nuclear phase of the company. They want the Honourable Minister Röttgen Hennenhöfer and not just criticize lobbying and bias. A strange Connotation, the whole course, and I can only hope that Prime Minister Röttgen within the meaning of principal-agent problem also has the interests of his new department head questioned and explored.
Hair Highlights For Dark Brown Hair
A beginning
Nearly 4 years after the end of my first blogs I try, once again. The topics will be quite different nature: personal reflections, commentaries on books, games or movies, or political, economic and social observations.
I also write for some time and am planning to publish some of the texts here from time to time. So read and comment on others may, perhaps, both sides have something like this.
Those who are interested and would like to read along, I should like to add to friends. Some entries will surely be friends-only, as my writing.
If Sogut.
Nearly 4 years after the end of my first blogs I try, once again. The topics will be quite different nature: personal reflections, commentaries on books, games or movies, or political, economic and social observations.
I also write for some time and am planning to publish some of the texts here from time to time. So read and comment on others may, perhaps, both sides have something like this.
Those who are interested and would like to read along, I should like to add to friends. Some entries will surely be friends-only, as my writing.
For questions about myself and I answer you.
The title stems aphorisms of a word battle with Linn.
The
If Sogut.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Waikoloa Beach Resort
This week I did not make it to the next chapter for "Noah's Ark" to prepare and send to my Beta. Therefore there's no update tomorrow. Noah and Mirko get free heat and I also. ^ ^;
And, although I was blessed just by two readers for my regular updates. ^ ^; Now I forfeit it to me like that again. Sorry!
But next week, reflects an update! I promise! ;)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)