- Opinion & Analysis
- Read Time: 3 min
Too often, business students see little overlap between the jobs they plan to do — and those they consider most socially responsible or would most enjoy.
Register free for 3 free articles per month, commenting privileges and free updates.
Showing 21-40 of 47
Research shows that attention to pay and benefits is necessary but not sufficient to retain talent. So why do so many corporate leaders continue to use compensation as their primary retention tool? And what should they do instead to keep their best people, particularly in emerging markets such as India, where both local and global employers are clawing for talent?
“Political influence may come at the cost of lower productivity,” explains Anders Olofsgård, a senior fellow at the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics at the Stockholm School of Economics. “Politicians are expecting something in return from you. One way to pay back politicians is through jobs. So you may be locked into keeping higher employment than you otherwise might be.” Olofsgård and co-author Raj M. Desai, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution, argue that bloated staffs are no bargain for any company.
Departing employees leave with more than what they know; they also take with them critical knowledge about who they know. That information needs to be a part of any knowledge-retention strategy.
In times of adversity, many organizations miss the opportunity to rethink their business model to optimize their positioning for the recovery ahead. Recessionary economies may not require re-engineering or moving noncore competencies outside the organization for greater efficiency. Oxman suggests four critical ways to prepare for economic recovery.
How one company implemented a “telework” program that transformed paper-based processes and reliance on voice communications into automated procedures supported by full-scale connectivity.
The corporation has emerged as perhaps the most powerful social and economic institution of modern society. Yet, corporations and their managers suffer from a profound social ambivalence. Believing this to be symptomatic of the unrealistically pessimistic assumptions that underlie current management doctrine, Ghoshal et al. encourage managers to replace the narrow economic assumptions of the past.
Why do companies frequently make bad investment decisions and continue to blunder, even after the weaknesses in their capital budgeting analyses are evident? Because, say the authors, they don’t integrate capital budgeting into their overall strategy. To address this, the authors present a framework for dynamic capital budgeting that can help managers make intelligent investment decisions with a long-term strategy in mind.
When companies downsize, managers need to consider how to bolster their employees’ morale in order to maintain productivity and engender flexibility. The authors propose a four-stage approach — gleaned from interviews and surveys — that will mitigate worker mistrust and disempowerment and will, they say, help build a better company.
Making an explicit link between people’s personal needs and business goals can be a catalyst for changing work practices. In the end, both the company and the employees benefit.
Showing 21-40 of 47