I have witnessed good employees got fired because they trusted the company and fell into the trap . The corporate asked for feedback and survey, after they gave honest feedback, they got fired. Is that interesting 😎
Interesting perspective. Biggest takeaway for me is the alternative consideration of authenticity and how to navigate that in the cases where individual and group interests are not aligned.
@7:55 Google is not an exception. Modesty, honesty etc. is not rewarded at Google. The elephant in the room: promotion of consumerism, so far has not been addressed! The interest of the preferred stock holder(s) seems to be in conflict with the interest and well-being of the worker/machinery of the organization.
@2:00 : If Karen May does not see the gap between leadership in practice and in theory, then it is because executives at her level don't make it a point to immerse themselves into the machinery of the company/organization. Why should an executive immerse themselves (at least occasionally) into the machinery of the organization? Because this is where one can see/feel first-hand the dynamics/politics of the-leadership-culture in the organization. The upper executives breed the-leadership-culture across the organization. My definition for the machinery of the organization is: the humans who develop the core product of the organization. The majority of these are located mostly at the lower end of the food-chain. You want to understand what rape is? Ask, the victim, not the perpetrator! As an advanced society we tend to assume that our leadership knows our condition. In fact, leadership of today cares about and maintains our condition only to the extent that we will not revolt to change the whole system to alleviate our condition. Our condition helps the leadership maintain it's power/influence. It doesn't take a genius to understand this. But it does require a way to ask the machinery about what their condition is in such a way that their anonymity will not be compromised. What are the chances of this happening in a highly competitive dog-eat-dog organization?
@3:10 Stanford Business School, one of the most prestigious schools in the *world*, and it's student who are selected from the cream-of-the-crop, who graduate and move on to work in the industry are actually *fired*! This is amazing! Most students who go to and graduate from Stanford carry an attitude of elitism. Google is headed in a similar direction. This is eventually what happens with inbreeding; inbreeding of a certain mentality: elitism. The industry is infested with this disease of hypocrisy within its leadership. And this elite hypocrite class are tightly and covertly knit with the hypocrite-leadership of our nation. Both help each other in exploiting and maintaining misery within the common people.
To Karen May at Google; Is Google really the innovative risk taker that it once was 10+ years ago? It sounds like Jeffrey Pfeffer either sincerely does not know for sure about the current culture in Google, or he is being polite in Karen May's presence.
Work is work. Do it, and go home. Come back the next day, and do more. How hard is that? Very, if you are a talker and not someone who has something doable to do.
I have witnessed good employees got fired because they trusted the company and fell into the trap . The corporate asked for feedback and survey, after they gave honest feedback, they got fired. Is that interesting 😎
Interesting perspective. Biggest takeaway for me is the alternative consideration of authenticity and how to navigate that in the cases where individual and group interests are not aligned.
Finally there is a person who spoke the truth
@7:55 Google is not an exception. Modesty, honesty etc. is not rewarded at Google. The elephant in the room: promotion of consumerism, so far has not been addressed! The interest of the preferred stock holder(s) seems to be in conflict with the interest and well-being of the worker/machinery of the organization.
Great talk thank you very much
The most toxic leader I've encountered in my 25+ year career was a Google People Operations VP who was also a Stanford Graduate.
+Lisa Stone 'Toxic' how?
Are you suggesting "leadership bs" book taught him to become toxic?
@2:00 : If Karen May does not see the gap between leadership in practice and in theory, then it is because executives at her level don't make it a point to immerse themselves into the machinery of the company/organization. Why should an executive immerse themselves (at least occasionally) into the machinery of the organization? Because this is where one can see/feel first-hand the dynamics/politics of the-leadership-culture in the organization. The upper executives breed the-leadership-culture across the organization. My definition for the machinery of the organization is: the humans who develop the core product of the organization. The majority of these are located mostly at the lower end of the food-chain. You want to understand what rape is? Ask, the victim, not the perpetrator! As an advanced society we tend to assume that our leadership knows our condition. In fact, leadership of today cares about and maintains our condition only to the extent that we will not revolt to change the whole system to alleviate our condition. Our condition helps the leadership maintain it's power/influence. It doesn't take a genius to understand this. But it does require a way to ask the machinery about what their condition is in such a way that their anonymity will not be compromised. What are the chances of this happening in a highly competitive dog-eat-dog organization?
A great demonstration of the leadership BS usually produced from business schools...and a speech he has given before.
Great talk!
Professor Jeffrey Pfeffer’s courses on organizational behavior at Stanford GSB has been excellent.
@3:10 Stanford Business School, one of the most prestigious schools in the *world*, and it's student who are selected from the cream-of-the-crop, who graduate and move on to work in the industry are actually *fired*! This is amazing! Most students who go to and graduate from Stanford carry an attitude of elitism. Google is headed in a similar direction. This is eventually what happens with inbreeding; inbreeding of a certain mentality: elitism. The industry is infested with this disease of hypocrisy within its leadership. And this elite hypocrite class are tightly and covertly knit with the hypocrite-leadership of our nation. Both help each other in exploiting and maintaining misery within the common people.
Great talk. But you really need to fix the sound. The noise in the background is too high.
Check the spelling error on the title screen!
To Karen May at Google; Is Google really the innovative risk taker that it once was 10+ years ago? It sounds like Jeffrey Pfeffer either sincerely does not know for sure about the current culture in Google, or he is being polite in Karen May's presence.
more BS... Work is Work. You get a paid check. Save and Invest and get the hell out and do your own thing. Anything else is brain washing ...
Work is work. Do it, and go home. Come back the next day, and do more. How hard is that? Very, if you are a talker and not someone who has something doable to do.
haha
This just sounds like more bs. 25min of rambling on definitions
Ggg
text
The sassy bucket apically squeeze because mechanic postsynaptically reflect during a toothsome shade. efficient, boundless step-father