Comments on: Flawed leaders vs. enlightened cultures.

By: Gil Yehuda

Gil Yehuda — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 01:51:09 +0000

Mick my friend, you speak the truth. And I know exactly where you are coming from. Sometimes transparency reveals that which management wants to hide -- their ineptitude. Groupthink and collective intelligence is no guarantee of right-think and intelligence. Wrong-thinking can be filtered by group dynamics, but it can also be magnified too. Cass Sunstein does a great job discussing some of these issues in his book Infotopia, a book I highly recommend. It's good hearing from you. I hope you are doing well.

By: Mick T.

Mick T. — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:09:30 +0000

You could replace the words "manager" or "management" to make the same point about any other position or field. People (and organisations) can have an innate inability to realise that they may be mediocre at something. Web2.0 technologies can help ideas percolate and bypass mediocre management. However, if an organisation as a whole is mediocre; mediocre mgt who hire mediocre staff, and innovation is squelched, there may not be a community able to recognise and promote new good ideas. I keep thinking of an Joel on Software essay about design where he used GM car designers as an example (I can't find a link to the essay at the moment). If the designers have no sense of taste (an elusive, hard to define characteristic) and the organisation has no sense of taste, whose to question the design of their cars? And if you ask the designers they'll say they have good taste (and not medicore or bad taste). Web2.0 in such a closed community may only reinforce the status quo. Such companies may be doomed to mediocrity and failure as all the real bright sparks have already fled or been extinguish.

By: Gil Yehuda

Gil Yehuda — Wed, 27 May 2009 18:36:36 +0000

Olivier, your contribution is worth much more than 2 cents to me or to my readers. Thanks for sharing.
1. You are right. I used the HBR article as a launch point to a question. I did not intend to highlight these insights as particularly earth shattering. Rather they resonate with most people.
2. Indeed, and this is the rub. We believe that flawed leaders will persist. Evidence demonstrates that flawed leaders pose a barrier to E2.o adoption. And yet, E2.0 has demonstrated success, in some cases improved corporate environments to address some of the bad-habits of the past.

A co-worker once told me (in a Zen Koan like manner, but with his heavy Irish accent) that if you put a cucumber in vinegar, the cucumber becomes vinegary, but the vinegar does not become cucumbery. Who is the vinegar?

3. I’m afraid of taking the “what really is E2.0″ bait.

I admire the fact that you think about and express your thoughts on this topic and how to improve it. Indeed there are many sides to view E2.0 — one is from the perspective of the consultants and practitioners who seek to improve their craft and provide better services to the market. Another is from the perspective of clients who identify needs that they hope can be addressed. There is always an interesting gap, and that’s the area that I’m looking at. I look forward to reading more of your thoughts about this too.