廣告

2012年1月31日 星期二

‘Aftershock’/ Insatiable consumers are undermining...

‘Aftershock’/ Insatiable consumers are undermining democracyBy ROBERT B. REICH 我們每個人都是共犯 ‘Aftershock’/ Insatiable consumers are undermining...

iPhone 真正的關鍵在設計和軟體啦

包刮台灣某本新書談 iPhone 4S 台灣憂鬱等的說法都沒說到重點
因為真正的關鍵在設計和軟體啦

韓國媒體曾理直氣壯地聲稱iPhone是“韓國手機”,因為韓國大廠生產iPhone最貴、最關鍵的零組件,而打不進核心產業鏈的台商,只能賺辛苦錢……

2012年1月26日 星期四

Conoco Phillips agrees $160m payout for China oil spill

Conoco Phillips agrees $160m payout for China oil spill

Rococo service station Conoco Phillips had come under criticism for its handling of the oil spill

Conoco Phillips and China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) have agreed to pay $1bn yuan ($158m; £101m) for the oil spill at their Penglai offshore field in China.

The spill, which happened last year, saw almost 3,200 barrels of oil and fluids being leaked into the Bohai Bay.

Groups of fishermen from the area had filed lawsuits demanding compensation for alleged loss of livelihood.

The Penglai oil field is China's largest offshore facility.

Conoco Phillps said in a statement that the compensation will be paid "to settle public and private claims of potentially affected fishermen in relevant Bohai Bay communities".

'Environmental stewardship'

The two firms had come under severe criticism from local fishermen as well as environmental groups, which accused them to trying to initially cover up the spill.

They had alleged that the companies had announced the spill almost a month after they had discovered the leaks.

Both Conoco Phillps and CNOOC have denied those allegations.

The US-based Conoco Phillps said that it would also set aside 100m yuan from a previously-announced environment fund to help improve fishery resources in the area.

"Conoco Phillips is committed to delivering on environmental stewardship as a responsible corporate citizen in China and around the world."

邦農業部的一頁日曆

杜邦農業部的一頁日曆

台中家的餐廳牆上掛一面日曆,約30*55公分,每日一張。據說是跟小姨調貨的。我一讀,發現是台灣杜邦公司農業部的日曆。這家公司是我近20年前的雇主而農業產品的龍潭廠,我在1989年去參訪過,去見習該廠的安全管理──他廠比起我們是小廠,不過管理上都是公司的樣板。

我們電子部早在1993年被杜邦賣出,而這家農業產品至今仍生意興隆

當年,我喜歡用日本杜邦印刷精美的月曆。現在看這印製很土的日曆,覺得很親切。就撕下一頁,稍加記錄。

魚躍龍門‧祥龍瑞氣 (歲次壬辰 肖龍101) 2012126(星期四 THURSDAY一月初四 十三立春丙……[喜神]西南 [財神]正西 [日煞]北方[日沖]12 []……. []…….)

格言

「別讓多愁善感來折磨自己。快樂使人長壽,並使生活更有意義。」

日曆的下方三分之一是產品廣告。我約算一下,是隔8-9天產品廣告的循環應用

本日為殺虫(有圖)劑廣告;

『--農藥選杜邦‧豐收又健康--

‧農藥廣告第100171號‧使用前請詳閱標示說明‧

萬強® (歐殺滅) 萬強® (歐殺滅)

10 % 溶劑 (農藥製字05230) 10 % 粒劑 (農藥進字02163)

杜邦萬強®,「上下移行,雙管其齊下

DU PONT® 創造科學奇蹟

台灣杜邦有限公司台北市敦化南路16713 電話: (02) 2719-1999

® du Pont de Nemours and Company 之註冊商標

日本NEC公司將砍萬人工作

NEC、国内外1万人規模削減へ 通期1千億円純損失に

関連トピックス

 NECは26日、国内外の計1万人を削減する合理化計画を発表した。携帯電話事業の不振やタイの洪水、欧州危機による景気の落ち込みで業績回復が見込め ないとして、人件費を減らして収益改善をめざす。2012年3月期連結決算の純損益見通しは1千億円の赤字に下方修正した。

 10月時点では150億円の黒字を予想していた。NECは11年3月期も純損益が125億円の赤字で、2年連続の赤字となる。リストラ費用に約400億 円を計上したほか、収益予想が悪化して将来戻ってくると予想していた「繰り延べ税金資産」が740億円目減りしたことが響いた。

 削減する1万人のうち、正社員は半分の5千人で、グループ全体の正社員11万3千人(11年末時点)のうち約4%にあたる。残る5千人はおもに外部委託 が対象。国内が7千人(うち正社員約2千人)、海外が3千人(正社員)にのぼる。9月までに早期退職を募るなどして年400億円分のコストを減らす考え だ。

Japan's NEC to slash 10,000 jobs



A woman walks near a signboard of NEC Corp in Tokyo January 26, 2012. REUTERS/Toru Hanai

TOKYO | Thu Jan 26, 2012 5:15am EST

(Reuters) - NEC Corp said Thursday it will slash 10,000 jobs, almost one in 10 of its workers, in a bid to cut costs as competition from foreign rivals including Apple Inc pushes it deep into the red.

NEC blamed its poor performance on weak demand for its smartphones amid the popularity of Apple's iPhone in Japan, as well as on inroads by foreign rivals into the domestic IT infrastructure business and difficulty in expanding overseas.

It warned it would post a net loss of 100 billion yen ($1.3 billion) for the year to March 31, much bigger than its previous forecast of a 15 billion yen profit and a similar average estimate from eight analysts polled by Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

For the three months ended December 31 it booked a net loss of 87 billion yen.

It also slashed its projection for annual mobile phone sales by nearly a quarter to 5 million phones and most of the job cuts will be in its mobile phone business.

Headcount will be reduced by the end of September and around 7,000 layoffs will be in Japan, Nobuhiro Endo said at a news conference in Tokyo.

Endo said NEC will miss a target to raise overall sales to 4 trillion yen next business year but would still try to reach a goal of boosting its operating profit margin to 5 percent.

The restructuring would result in a charge of 40 billion yen this financial year but would add 40 billion yen to income in the next financial year, Endo added.

Shares of NEC finished unchanged from Wednesday's close at 168 yen. In the past 52 weeks, its shares have plummeted 32 percent. The company announced its results and restructuring plan after the market closed.

($1 = 78.2250 Japanese yen)

(Additional reporting by Nobuhiro Kubo; Editing by Edwina Gibbs)

2012年1月25日 星期三

The Thought Leader Interview: Meg Wheatley

The Thought Leader Interview: Meg Wheatley

An expert on innovative leadership warns that too many companies are reverting to fear-driven management. Instead, executives should hold to their values and build healthy corporate communities.

With her first book, Leadership and the New Science: Learning about Organization from an Orderly Universe (Berrett-Koehler, 1992), Margaret J. (Meg) Wheatley began developing a body of work around the links between organizational learning, innovative leadership, and such fields of thought as chaos theory, quantum physics, and neuroscience. Around the same time, she cofounded the Berkana Institute, a U.S.-based not-for-profit organization, dedicated to experimental efforts to build healthy communities around the world, often in highly impoverished areas with many serious challenges. During the next 15 years, Wheatley’s views on communities, and her experience with innovative management practice, made her a central figure in a wide network of pioneers in organizational learning and change.

Then, starting in the mid-2000s and accelerating with the economic crisis of 2008, Wheatley noticed new levels of anxiety among her friends, clients, and business acquaintances. Even the most performance-oriented innovative leaders, when confronted with the harshness of global competition or other severe business pressures, felt compelled to cut back their participative management practices — often at the expense of profitability and growth.

Wheatley responded by turning simultaneously inward and outward. During a 15-month period, she produced two very different books. The first, Perseverance (Berrett-Koehler, 2010), is a small, personal book, a meditation on tenacity in the face of adversity. It is written explicitly for people dedicated to organizational change, who have suddenly found their work much more difficult, and who are looking for ways to sustain their effort and their peace of mind.

Walk Out Walk On, coauthored with Deborah Frieze (a former co-president of the Berkana Institute), is subtitled A Learning Journey into Communities Daring to Live the Future Now (Berrett-Koehler, 2011). It describes seven innovative leadership and community-building initiatives: a self-organizing university in a highland Mexican village, where students build small-scale technologies such as bicycle-powered water pumps as a means of local empowerment; a Brazilian institute that sets up “30-day games” in which players come together to improve conditions in debilitated neighborhoods; a Zimbabwean village dedicated to self-sustaining agriculture in the midst of politically created famine; a remarkable network of people transforming healthcare, education, and social service institutions in Columbus, Ohio; and similarly groundbreaking initiatives in South Africa, India, and Greece. The organizers of all these endeavors walked out of restrictive or confining ways of thinking, and Wheatley argues that anyone can do the same — which might mean changing jobs in some cases, but always means shifting perspective within one’s current situation.

We conducted this interview on several occasions in 2011: first by telephone, then at the annual summer workshops of the Authentic Leadership in Action (ALIA) Institute (where we both teach), and finally at the Cape Cod Institute (where Wheatley leads a seminar each summer). Wheatley’s theme, the value of conscious perseverance, may particularly resonate with strategy+business readers — many of whom face the challenge of managing high-commitment, high-performance enterprises in the face of intensive competitive pressure and rising uncertainty.

S+B: Why is perseverance important right now?
WHEATLEY:
Because so many innovative leaders are struggling to do good, meaningful work in a time of overbearing bureaucracy and failing solutions. Everyone is working harder, and in most cases, in greater isolation. The current pace of work and life, along with increasing fear and anxiety, make it more difficult to have the energy and enthusiasm to keep going. Years of good efforts have been swept away by events beyond anyone’s control, such as the economic crisis or the natural disasters of the past decade.

And decisions made by politicians and senior executives have been very damaging to those long-term efforts: They capriciously eliminate or withdraw funding for programs and processes that have proven successful. It is a very difficult time for innovative leaders.

I notice that when I ask people how much time they spend thinking together with colleagues, reflecting on what they’ve learned from their most recent efforts, they just stare back blankly at me. It’s getting hard to remember what it felt like to manage reflectively — to take time to figure things out together and to learn from experience. With our frantic pace, we’re screaming past one another (and more easily provoked and angered by each other), so we’re losing the one resource, community, that gets humans through hard times. For me, community — people working together and knowing that others are there to support them — is a critically important but largely invisible resource. In most situations (think of natural disasters, family crises, wars, and dislocations), community is the only thing that gets us through. In a time like this, of economic and emotional distress, every organization needs leaders who can help people regain their capacity, energy, and desire to contribute. And this is only accomplished when people work together in community, not in isolation.

But community is hard to find in most organizations. Not only do many leaders deny that this capacity is important, but they’re actually destroying it through their current management approaches.

S+B: For example...?
WHEATLEY:
I have worked with many forward-thinking business leaders over the years. Now, I notice they’re increasingly frustrated. They can no longer motivate people in ways that they know will work. Instead, they’re being driven by imperatives from their boards and bosses. They find themselves doing things that feel meaningless or that waste time — or that they know from experience won’t lead anywhere good. They have to implement continuous cutbacks, and to produce more results with fewer resources. They feel terribly pressured yet believe they have no choice but to respond to these demands.

One of my good friends led the turnaround of his company, one of the world’s top brands. He did it by engaging people: inculcating a strong sense of values, giving people latitude to make decisions and design projects, ensuring that learning was prevalent. Now that he’s retired, that’s all been destroyed. The new leadership is highly restrictive and controlling, using fear as a primary motivator. As a result, the company has been struggling in this current economic climate. And of course it becomes a reinforcing cycle: The worse the financials, the stricter the controls become.

In most companies, we do not have (and I believe won’t have for the foreseeable future) the money to fund the work that we have to do. Leaders have two choices. One, they can tap the invisible resource of people who become self-motivated when invited to engage together. This approach has well-documented results in higher productivity, innovation, and motivation, but it requires a shift from a fear-based approach to a belief in the capacity of most people to contribute, to be creative, and to be motivated internally. Alternatively, they can continue to slash and burn, tightening controls, and using coercive methods to enforce the cuts. This destroys capacity, yet it is the more common approach these days.

S+B: Some might argue that these cuts are reshaping the organization back down to what it should have been in the first place.
WHEATLEY:
I would love it if that were true. Executives could be using this turbulence to shift their business models, redesign their HR systems, change how they motivate people, and rethink their own leadership. But I don’t see that happening. Instead, too many people report that mean-spiritedness is on the rise in their companies. And there seems to be a growing climate of disrespect for individual experience and competence — hiring and firing decisions are made on the basis of finding the cheapest source of labor (and I include executives here). If someone can be found to do the job for less money, because they have less experience and fewer skills, that person gets hired.

What makes one salesperson more successful than another? It’s not the reward and motivation system. It has much more to do with complex factors, like the relationships each person has, the ways they listen, their ability to be self-motivated. Instead of paying attention to these factors, companies are simplifying the criteria and acting as if anybody can do any job, that people are easily replaceable.

If you look at job satisfaction surveys, or you listen to people talk, you realize how this business climate has affected most organizations. Management has gone backward from the 1980s and ’90s, when people routinely talked about workforce engagement and intrinsic motivators. Instead, people are demoralized, disaffected, disillusioned. They’re afraid to talk openly about how they feel, because they want to hold on to their jobs. There’s a lot less freedom to walk out in this economy.

S+B: Where does the fear and anxiety come from? Does it have to do with uncertainty, fear of failure, losing jobs?
WHEATLEY:
It’s all of that. People are anxious because these times warrant anxiety. They feel pushed aside and powerless. And then there’s a more personal fear, not as easy to name. Leaders are afraid that they don’t know how to solve the problems they face. The old models of command and control — budgeting, strategy setting, forecasting, incentives, evaluations — are not effective in a changing, volatile environment. Nothing is working as it should. A friend of mine quoted a highly placed oil executive, who whispered to her after the Gulf of Mexico oil spill: “None of us can figure out how this happened.” And I often hear descriptions of complex problems and crises described as, “We’re in new territory here. We’ve never been here before.”

Around the time I began writing Perseverance, I read a book by Laurence Gonzales called Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why: True Stories of Miraculous Endurance and Sudden Death [W.W. Norton, 2003]. Gonzalez says that when people are truly lost in the wilderness, they go through predictable stages. First, they deny they’re lost; they keep doing what they’ve always done but with a greater sense of urgency. Then, when they begin to realize that they’re lost, they search frantically for any shred of evidence that would indicate that they’re not. Next they deteriorate, both physically and mentally. Their frantic search for the familiar, and their inability to recognize that their current maps aren’t working, leads to the ultimate moment when they realize they are close to death. If they don’t acknowledge that they’re lost and that they need new information to construct an accurate read on their situation, they will die.

When I read this, I thought, “That’s exactly what I see in organizations (and in our political leaders).” Too many leaders fail to realize that the old ways, their mental maps, aren’t giving them the information they need. But instead of acknowledging that, they push on more frantically, desperate to have the old ways work. When human beings work from fear and panic, we lose nearly all of our best reasoning capacities. We can’t see patterns, think about the future, or make moral judgments.

This leads to a terrible cycle, a death spiral. People in fear look for someone to blame; so leaders blame their staff, and staff blame their leaders. A climate of blame leads to self-protective behaviors. People take fewer risks; creativity and participation disappear. New rules and regulations appear, with unintended but predictable consequences: more staff disengagement, more wasted time, more chaos. People spend all their time trying to cope or writing reports to confirm that they aren’t to blame. When I’m speaking with a group and comment about the number of reports people have to write today, or the number of measures they have to track, the audience members roll their eyes and groan.

In addition, the opportunity is lost to cultivate the intelligence, contribution, and engagement of people throughout the organization. When the next crisis comes, people will be less prepared; they’ll leave it to the leader to solve it. When that doesn’t happen, they’ll kick out the leader for not being heroic enough as an individual. This pattern is visible in the statistics on CEO churn that strategy+business publishes. Over the past 10 years, the average tenure of CEOs has gotten shorter. [See “CEO Succession 2010: The Four Types of CEOs,” by Ken Favaro, Per-Ola Karlsson, and Gary L. Neilson, s+b, Summer 2011.] I have a lot of sympathy for leaders who think that it’s their job to keep things in control, but when they use fear as a motivator, they shut down people’s brains and, as leaders, create the conditions for everyone to fail.

S+B: What’s the alternative?
WHEATLEY:
When you’re lost in the wilderness, the only way to survive is to admit that you’re lost — and to stop looking for signs that might confirm that you know where you are. Your old ways of doing things won’t get you out of this situation. Once you realize this, you can look clearly around you, and seek information that will help you rethink what to do. You don’t have to change the situation you’re in; you have to change your mind about it.

For any situation where the old maps are failing, you need to call together everyone who might have information that’s needed to construct a new map. This includes people at all levels of the system — anyone who plays a role that’s relevant. Especially as you face increasingly complex problems that have no easy answers, you need to be brave enough to seek out perspectives from all parts of the system. It takes a lot of courage for a leader to say, “Our problems were caused by complex interactions. I don’t know what to do, but I know we can figure it out together.”

S+B: Isn’t this problem limited to the U.S., Europe, and Japan?
WHEATLEY:
Even in other countries, uncertainty is rearing its ugly head. A colleague in Australia invited me to speak at a forum for CEOs, built around reflection and long-term issues. I said, “You know, in the U.S., you wouldn’t get anyone to attend.” He said that Australia was different; they had survived the global financial crisis pretty well and didn’t share our despair or cynicism. Then came the floods, hurricanes, fires, and more economic turbulence. He wrote me back and canceled, saying that in this new, crisis-stricken environment, none of the CEOs he knew had any time for reflection, either. They were now in panic mode and resorting to command-and-control-style management. A very forward-thinking Australian CEO told me that he’s never experienced such fear-based and risk-averse behaviors as those that now characterize Australian leadership, in both business and government.

S+B: If the situation is this grim and pressured, how can you expect people to rethink the way they operate?
WHEATLEY:
It’s more interesting to reverse that question. Because the situation is so grim and pressured, why aren’t we rethinking how we operate? We are at a turning point. Either we continue to descend into incompetence and failing solutions or we realize where we are and see new ways of thinking and acting. One of my favorite quotes, applicable to this moment, is from the 13th century Sufi mystic Rumi: “Sit down and be quiet. You are drunk, and this is the edge of the roof.”

There are always choices. Everything in our world — what we do, who we like, what we dislike — is a choice. When we realize this, and start to act on it, we regain our freedom and control. That doesn’t mean quitting your job out of frustration. It means thinking more deeply about the choices you have made, the choices you will make in the future, what you stand for, and your choice to persevere.

Months after Hurricane Ike devastated Houston in September 2008, I received a text message from a friend who is CEO of a large nonprofit there. She was sitting in a meeting with government officials from FEMA [the Federal Emergency Management Agency]. The level of bureaucracy was heartbreaking and infuriating; people whose homes had been hit hard by the storm were still living with nothing, and nobody knew when the aid that was promised would come (it didn’t arrive for 16 months). Her text message said: “Every day I make a choice not to give up.”

For me, that’s the essence of perseverance. Day by day, situation by situation, you become more conscious of your choices. Sometimes the best response is to keep going, as my friend did. Other times the best choice is to withdraw for a while, reassess the complexity of the situation, and see what will serve your cause, your people, and yourself. You don’t persevere by constantly pushing your head against a wall or by burning out.

It’s also comforting to remember that perseverance is the story of humankind. We all come from ancestors who persevered. We wouldn’t be here without them. It’s our turn now.

S+B: If Perseverance is about being lost, then Walk Out Walk On is about being found — the community-building efforts that you and your coauthor, Deborah Frieze, have worked with. Where did the title come from?
WHEATLEY:
It was coined by a group of students who left high school in India. The school officials had called them “dropouts.” They responded, “No, we’re not failures. The education system is the failure. We know we can contribute more and learn more if we leave this school.” They called themselves “walk-outs.” A bit later, they added “walk on” — meaning that after you walk out, you have to move forward and find a place where you can make a difference. The full phrase is a declaration of commitment to your own potential.

Often, when people walk out of a difficult job or position, they’re full of fear. They don’t know where they’re going. But they know that if they stay, they’ll continue to lose their self-confidence; they’ll continue to shrink and wither. I met a woman who worked for one of the large pharma companies; they’d been through three major mergers during her 12-year tenure. One day she noticed that her job title was now listed as “income-generating unit” on a budget sheet. In other words, she was regarded as a commodity. She thought, “This isn’t the same company I was working for before the mergers.” When she resigned, she told her boss that these transactional values were the reason. He responded, “Don’t leave; we’ll pay you more.”

Walking out of a limiting situation doesn’t necessarily mean leaving the company — or even leaving your position. It means discarding some of the prevailing beliefs that blind you to the capacity that’s in yourself and other people. And opening yourself up to more contribution, intelligence, and capability.

S+B: Can you give an example?
WHEATLEY:
In Columbus, Ohio, several years ago, a group of leaders of local healthcare institutions came together, along with some community members, with the idea that they could rethink their purpose — from the zero-sum game of treating the sick, to a system that would promote optimal health. The convener was Phil Cass, the CEO of the Columbus Medical Association, which is a physicians’ professional group that includes a medical foundation and a free clinic. To bring all these people together, he had to shift his own internal construct of what it meant to be an effective leader. He was already a skilled, traditional heroic leader; now he became the kind of leader whose first responsibility is not to command others, but to ensure that they feel invited and welcome, so they can participate in making something happen that none of them could do alone.

Under his leadership, more and more people in Columbus became trained in productive conversational processes that include all relevant stakeholders in figuring out problems and solutions. This form of leadership continued to spread into many types of institutions — the Ohio Food Bank, hospitals, Ohio State University, even to a federal initiative on homelessness.

Another example is the “Warriors Without Weapons” program that the Elos Institute initiated in Brazil and has spread around the world. In most aid efforts for people on the margins of society, there’s an assumption that their poverty includes a lack of capacity to help themselves. But Elos gathers people together to “play a game,” as they call it. The game is actually an experience of people coming together for days or weeks, outsiders working side by side with residents, to do extraordinarily difficult work, such as cleaning up and rebuilding neighborhoods. They invoke the spirit of play (which is different from fun) to get people past their fear and preconceptions. The participants take risks because it’s “just a game”; they compete with one another; there’s an engaged quality to their relationships. In this way, very difficult work gets done that would otherwise be overwhelming.

In Walk Out Walk On we tell the story of the cleanup of a large, waste-ridden, abandoned warehouse that people in the neighborhood wanted to convert to a community space. Those engaged in the cleanup could spend only 15 minutes each day inside this hellhole; they had no idea if that would be enough to accomplish their goal, but they did realize that had they worked any longer in such terrible conditions, they would have been overwhelmed and given up. And they did accomplish their goal within 30 days!

S+B: These sound like glimpses of a very engaged way of taking initiative and conducting work. But you would be unlikely to see it within the walls of, say, a major consumer products or energy company.
WHEATLEY:
No, I disagree. Good leadership can be found in pockets within any large organization. I’ve dubbed them islands of possibility in some of my past work. The leaders of these pockets routinely meet goals, motivate employees, and achieve high levels of safety and productivity. But, ironically, they never change the behavior of the majority of the organization — even though these few islands reach or exceed the goals set by senior management. There’s a lot of evidence that innovators get pushed to the margins. You’d expect that they would be rewarded, promoted, and given the responsibility of teaching everyone else how to do the same. But instead, they’re ignored or invisible. Sometimes their bosses acknowledge their success, but offhandedly say: “I don’t know how you got these results.” And they don’t show any interest in learning about it. I think of this as an autoimmune response. Bosses don’t want to know how you achieved your results if it’s contrary to the way the system works (or doesn’t work). If they became genuinely interested in these innovative approaches, they’d have to change themselves.

At the same time, most of us know from our own experience what kind of leadership works best. I’ve asked people of many ages, in many cultures, to talk about a leader they were happy to follow and what made that leader memorable. Several factors, such as integrity, a sense of humor, and a clear direction and vision, often come up. But the most common characteristic of good, memorable leaders is that they create the conditions for people to be encouraged, challenged, and supported, to become stronger and more capable as they do their work. The descriptions are always the same: “The leader thought about me and trusted me (just as I trusted him or her). He or she believed that I was capable and supported and encouraged me to stretch and excel; the leader was not focused on making himself or herself look good.”

I’ve heard this in so many different cultures that it’s convinced me that there’s only one type of leadership that people respond to positively. If we want people to contribute; if we want them to get smarter as they solve each problem or go through each crisis; if we want to develop our organizations to be responsive, smart, and enduring, then we have to change the way we lead. We cannot continue to lead from fear and control. People will step up to today’s challenges only if they are led with encouragement and support, and trusted to contribute.

Islands of possibility are important because leaders have to intentionally create places where people can contribute. Part of a leader’s work is to create firewalls to keep out the bureaucratic, change-resistant forces of the larger organization, so that staff feels free enough to innovate and create. It’s no surprise to me that inside these islands, people meet plan, become more intelligent and responsive to demands and crises, and generally become more capable.

And sadly, it’s no longer surprising to me that the larger organization ignores these islands of possibility. It’s a terrible waste but it’s just the way it is. I wrote Perseverance so people who are doing things right and making a real contribution could keep going in the face of this dynamic of being pushed to the margins, ignored, or misunderstood.

Those of us who are in that position have to expect that we will encounter a lot of difficulties. We’ll feel a lot of strong emotions such as anger or grief; our good work will go unrewarded. Once we know that these things will happen, we can more consciously choose our responses. We can choose to keep going, to influence where we can, to make a difference in the lives of our staff, and to be the kind of leader that people remember with gratitude. We can become skilled at negotiating within those large, frightened bureaucracies so that people can still do good, meaningful work inside them.

S+B: In a talk at the ALIA Institute last summer, you said that the only leaders who succeed are those who have some kind of personal spiritual discipline.
WHEATLEY:
Yes, I’m convinced of this. By discipline, I don’t mean meaningless, repetitive, boring practice. That disables people. Nor do I mean religious practice per se. I mean some regular activity that leads you to reflect on your struggles and challenges in a larger context. For one of my friends, Alcoholics Anonymous serves that role. For others, it can be prayer, meditation, or time in nature. I’m not sure about running or other physical exercise, because I think a practice has to connect you to the rest of life — to take you out of the false perception that you are the center of the universe.

Without that discipline, I don’t see how leaders can maintain their integrity and focus. The prevailing mass culture has schooled a lot of people to follow their passion, find their calling in life, and do what they love. Then they encounter setbacks, failures, disappointments, and very subtle impediments — for instance, their loved ones say, “Why are you working so hard here?” Many people quit. That’s what’s essential about discipline. You do it day after day, even when it’s boring, because you believe ultimately it will lead to a good outcome. The fruit of all this effort becomes apparent only after a long time when it seems not to be going anywhere. Work can begin with passion, but it’s only through discipline that people can persevere.

Brain research is also clear on why we need quiet time, especially when under stress. This spring, I went on a long, solo retreat. I didn’t interact with anyone except my teacher. I witnessed my own mental capacities coming back in full flower. I regained great powers of memory and concentration. I could understand complex ancient texts. I was so mentally alive. Now that I’ve returned to my overly distracted life, I am back to old ways; I’ll walk across a room and not remember what I went looking for. But now I know that my memory loss isn’t caused by aging or deterioration. The cause is distraction, and working in an anxious world. I can regain my mental capacities if I regularly take the time to slow down and focus.

S+B: Not everyone is willing to make that kind of commitment.
WHEATLEY:
One question I ask everyone is, Who do you choose to be as a leader? What is the contribution you hope to make?

It turns out that very few people answer that they care most about success and personal survival. They talk about doing the right thing for the people around them and helping them get through this time.

This question, Who do we choose to be as leaders? is important because it acknowledges the historical moment we’re in. We have to become conscious and make choices about what we value; is it just our quarterly P&L or short-term results? It would be easier to articulate the more noble contributions we want to make if we were in a more dramatic crisis, like another world war. But in this crisis, we have to find the deeper meaning ourselves. I am finding that many people want to be called on to contribute to something larger than themselves right now, to walk out of fear-based leadership practices — and for me, that’s the best motivation possible.

Transformative Times: New Opportunities for Business in an Era of Upheaval

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauder_Institute

Special Report

Strategic Management
Transformative Times: New Opportunities for Business in an Era of Upheaval

In the 20 articles that make up this special report, students from the Joseph H. Lauder Institute of Management & International Studies explore the many ways that the business community has responded to changes in our global economy. They look at individual companies and industry trends, and analyze how startups as well as established firms are taking advantage of transformative events around the world.
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index.cfm?fa=viewFeature&id=2923
_________________________________________________________________

Asia

The Groupon Effect in China
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2899

Talent Management at Multinational Firms in China
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2903

Louis Vuitton and the Traveling Chinese Consumer
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2901

The Trials and Tribulations of Japan's Energy Policy
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2900

Uncorking China's Wine Market
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2898

'Thanks But No Thanks' to Made in China?
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2902

Business versus Ethics: The India Tradeoff?
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2897

Europe

Born in the USA, Made in France: How McDonald's Succeeds in the Land of Michelin Stars
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2906

In Germany, the Oxymoron of Mr. Du
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2907

Small Businesses in Russia: Drowning in a Sea of Giants
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2908

Globalization and the French Horse Racing Industry
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2905

Spain No Longer Battling the Windmills
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2909

Microcultures: Cultural Sustainable Development in France
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2904

The Middle East

The Unexpected Early Winners of the Arab Spring
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2915

Saving Vocational Education in a New Arab World
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2916

Latin America

Are Colombian Flowers Experiencing a U.S. Drought?
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2913

Will a Shortage of Qualified Labor Derail the Brazilian Economy?
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2911

Open for Business: The Pacification of Brazil's Favelas
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2910

From Terrorism to Tourism: Waving the Flag of Development in Colombia
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2914

Building Blocks: The Bright Future of Colombia's Cement Industry
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2912

_________________________________________________________________

產品的成本預估相當簡單:A Gadget Is More Than the Sum of Its Parts

產品的成本預估相當簡單

January 5, 2012, 3:36 pm

A Gadget Is More Than the Sum of Its Parts

As a teenager growing up in the Cleveland suburbs, my first real job was at a Chick-fil-A restaurant in a local mall. I did everything: manned the cash register, made sandwiches and cleaned up.

iFixit's iPhone 4S teardown.iFixitiFixit’s iPhone 4S teardown.
FDDP
The Times’s technology columnist, David Pogue, keeps you on top of the industry in his free, weekly e-mail newsletter.
Sign up | See Sample

It’d be fun to report that that job taught me important skills and precepts that followed me for the rest of my life, but that’d be pushing it.

That job did teach me, however, one important thing about the business world. My best friend, John, worked next door at a watch shop. He told me he could get incredible discounts on the watches — all I had to do was ask. I needed a watch, in fact, so I picked out a $200 model and asked what I’d have to pay. He said $60.

I was appalled. “You mean to tell me that your shop pays $60 for that watch, and then jacks up the price to $200 for the consumer? That’s outrageous! That’s practically robbery! You should be ashamed to work there!”

John was amused, and he proceeded to teach me a lesson. “Oh, really? That’s a big ripoff, huh? Well, let me ask you this: How much do you think Chick-fil-A pays for each of the chicken breasts?”

I calculated that in the massive quantities this chain purchased, it was maybe 40 cents.

“And the bun?” Maybe 4 cents. “The pickle?” One-tenth of a cent. “O.K., and how much do you sell the sandwich for?” $2.40.

Now, it’s been 30 years. All of the numbers in this story are vague recollections — I don’t need e-mail from chicken-farm vendors setting me straight. But I’m quite sure of the result: By the time I’d done the math, John had made me realize that my sandwich shop was marking up its product more than his watch shop. I was the one who should be ashamed.

Right?

I think of this transaction every time somebody does a “teardown analysis” of an iPhone, a Kindle Fire or some other hot new product. These companies buy a unit, take it apart, photograph the components and then calculate the price of each. Then they tally those component costs and try to make you outraged that you’ve paid so much markup.

IHS iSuppli’s breakdown of the iPhone 4S component cost, for the $400 model, is $245.

(Here’s iFixit’s teardown, which is more about photographic evidence of the teardown and less about the prices of the pieces.)

And here’s the iSuppli analysis of the Kindle Fire, which concludes that Amazon is deliberately selling the Fire at a loss — with the intent of making it up in sales of movies, e-books and music. (It costs Amazon $201 to make one, which it sells at $200.)

These are fascinating studies, of course, just as my Chick-fil-A anecdote has its charms. But all of them ignore the elephant in the room: there’s a heck of a lot more expense to bringing a product to market than component costs.

For example, they completely ignore the cost of developing the software. It doesn’t write itself, you know.
What about the cost of the packaging? Would you like them to send your new iPhone in a Ziploc bag?
What about the shipping from China? The royalties, licensing, taxes and insurance? What about the marketing and PR that let you know the product exists? The tech-support department? The factory workers? The sales and accounting teams? The graphic design? The prototypes, field testing and beta testing?

Big companies can’t work out of a rusty van. They need office and lab space somewhere, and that means rent, facilities management, electricity, heating and cooling, water and taxes.

Every time I read about one of those teardowns — whether it’s an i-gadget or a chicken sandwich — I cringe at the fallacy of the entire exercise. If you think that Amazon’s real cost to make that Kindle Fire is $201, then by all means, go to China and cobble one together yourself.

And if the purpose of the analysis isn’t to get you outraged at the markup, then the premise is suddenly a lot less interesting. What, in the end, makes the component costs any more important than all of the manufacturer’s other expenses? Why aren’t people publishing similar exposés about the company’s shipping costs, or real-estate taxes or licensing fees?

It’s actually amazing that the electronics companies have found a way to make their powerful, beautiful machines available to the masses at prices that millions can afford, even after paying all of those expenses (of which the components are just one component). Once you have the facts, the proper reaction isn’t outrage — it’s awe.

蘋果電腦公司的高峰

Apple's Profit Doubles on Holiday iPhone 4S Sales

By NICK WINGFIELD

Though neither iPhones nor iPads existed five years ago, they account for 72 percent of Apple's total revenue.

Apple Sets New Bar

Apple reported its first quarterly results since the death of co-founder Steve Jobs, chalking up new sales and profit records based on runaway holiday demand for the company's iPhones and iPad tablet device.


這種五年內的新產品業務佔7成的現象 可能是該公司的頂點吧?


蘋果於 24 日發表第一季財報,業績超出市場預期,總營收來到 463.3 億美元,利潤達 130.6 億,整體較去年同期約增加一倍。總計賣出 3700 萬隻 iPhone、1543 萬 iPad、520 萬 Mac、1540 萬 iPod,裡面除了 iPod 略受到智慧型手機熱賣影響,銷量相較去年同期小幅下滑,其餘產品皆有成長。

這份截至 2011 年 12 月底的第一季財報中,尤以 iPhone、iPad 兩大明星商品表現最佳,相較去年同期 iPhone 有 128% 的成長,總銷售量來到 3700 萬台;勁敵三星在最近一期的財報,也有 3500 萬隻智慧型手機的成績,戰況激烈。iPad 表現穩定,相較前季的營收與銷售量都有約三~四成間的增長幅度,總計賣出約 1543 台。

Mac 電腦系列,今年銷量維持成長態勢,小幅提昇 26%,總計將近 520 萬台,其中約有 148 萬台的桌上型電腦,以及超過 370 萬台的筆記型電腦。在 iPod 方面雖然最熱賣款是 iPod touch,但整體表現因受到智慧型手機熱賣影響,銷售量雖較 2011 年第四季大幅提昇,但與去年同期相比下滑約 21%。

日本人送禮禮數

日本人送禮禮數

2012年1月23日 星期一

美國TI公司日出(ひじ)工場2013年關廠

米TI、大分の工場閉鎖へ 13年半ばめど500人削減

 米半導体大手のテキサス・インスツルメンツ(TI)は23日、日出(ひじ)工場(大分県日出町)を2013年半ばをメドに閉鎖し、従業員約500人を削 減すると発表した。23日発表の2011年10~12月期決算は純利益が前年同期に比べ約68%減少した。業績の悪化を受け、老朽化した日出工場を閉鎖す ることを決めた。ほかに米テキサス州のヒューストン工場の閉鎖も決め、同じく約500人を削減するという。(ニューヨーク)

2012年1月22日 星期日

外強中乾的 蘋果電腦公司 "i經濟"到"中國血汗工廠"

判斷企業對於社會的貢獻 最重要的指標是它為該社會所創造的工作機會(職缺)
然而 國際分工可能造成一種前所未有的工作機會扭曲
這在蘋果電腦公司的暢銷產品為最明"險"
所以紐約時報這篇說法馬上有近500則讀者回應
這是很值得注意的案子和重要的發展趨勢


The iEconomy
How the U.S. Lost Out on iPhone Work

Apple and its peers are not as avid in creating American jobs as other famous companies were in their heydays.


等而下之的狀況就是"中國血汗工廠":

中國血汗工廠?倫敦奧委調查 【2012/1/22 14:45】

〔中央社〕有報導指生產2012年倫敦奧運吉祥物的中國工廠壓榨勞工,工作條件惡劣,倫敦奧運主辦單位表示將全面調查。

今年奧運的兩個吉祥物是現代感的獨眼造型玩偶,名為溫洛克與曼德維爾,生產合同在2010年8月由英格蘭中部的金熊公司(Golden Bear)贏得後,轉包給中國工廠生產。

有媒體披露,這家中國工廠的工作環境惡劣、工人薪水極低。

據英國廣播公司(BBC)中文網今天報導,倫敦奧運籌備委員會的發言人說,他們已經下令對有關指控展開全面調查,並將在調查結束後立即公布結果。

BBC引述金熊公司負責人的話說,他們也將認真處理有關指控。

他並說,這家中國玩具廠事先曾通過國際玩具製造業委員會有關工作環境及條件等方面的檢查。

英國「太陽報」日前報導,位在中國江蘇省鹽城市的彩虹公司是個髒亂的血汗工廠,工人一個月工作時數長達358小時,全月無休,薪水只有93英鎊(約合新台幣4千335元)。

報導說,廠內大約60到100名工人製造吉祥物,按件計酬,每做一件只能領到18便士(約合新台幣8.4元),但在倫敦,30公分高的奧運吉祥物每個售價是20英鎊(約合新台幣932元)。


2012年1月19日 星期四

中華電信的經營和管理的醜聞:藏污納垢的污水庫

中華電信公司的問題 不只是技術的層面 更重要的在經營和管理
尤其是執政黨的藏污納垢的污水庫
你如果有機會看員工名冊的史書就可稍知



蘋論:馬總統不能老是西望中國

如果它樣子長得像鴨子,走路像鴨子、聲音像鴨子,那它一定是鴨子,不可能是別的東西。
中華電信態度像國營事業、對市場的反應像國營事業、組織像國營事業、寡佔的事實像國營事業,那它就是國營事業,不可能是民營企業。

中華電信假民營

北市法規會13日公布去年度消費申訴案 件統計,電信業躍居客訴榜首,其中中華電信去年被投訴507件高居冠軍。法規會主委說,因智慧型手機普及,上網需求大增,中華電信未能及時擴展設備,通信 品質不良,最被消費者詬病。此外,消費者因誤觸或不了解上網費用,產生高額費用,也常遭抱怨。
這隻假民營、真國營的鴨子,因為幾近獨佔市場,成為民眾最無奈的對立物。它長久以來就以費用貴、速度慢聞名於世。「國家通訊傳播委員會」(NCC)多次要求它改革,連馬總統都誓言要它增速降費,它都鴨子聽雷,有聽沒有懂。
消基會12日公布世界各國寬頻費率及速度的比較,台灣平均下載速度為13Mpbs,上傳為2.7Mpbs,遠不及全球寬頻服務平均下載速度的 37.5Mpbs,但是台灣寬頻網路收費高居世界第二,速度是倒數第四。消基會批民眾付高額價格,寬頻網路速度卻不成比例的慢,十分不合理,要求NCC正 視之。消基會董事長又以各國「頂級速度」排名做比較,瑞典已逾1Gpbs(1024Mpbs)。日本是205Mpbs,韓國102Mpbs(新推出 1Gpbs)。中華電信號稱最頂級可提供100Mpbs,近來更推1Gpbs的試點服務,但有距離限制,看到吃不到。
中華電信引用最新資料反駁消基會的舊資料,宣稱台灣的實測平均速度已從民國99年底的全球第35名,進步到15名。消基會說即使資料較舊,但中華電信速度提升至22.22Mpbs,仍遠不及前年全球寬頻調查的平均下載速度37.5Mpbs。

霸王機關積怨多

中華電信運氣好,被消基會修理的時候剛好在選舉前,沒人注意。但是民間長久以來對它累積的怨氣難道還嫌少嗎?這個霸王機關連馬總統的要求都馬耳東風,小老百姓又能怎樣。
馬須知道,網路服務的好壞主導青年選票的走向,主導經濟發展,攸關產業創新。馬總統不能老是西望中國,卻視國內亟待改革的問題為無物。

(網路)抗議之新里程:Sopa and Pipa protests not over, Antinuclear Protesters Disrupt Panel in Japan

Hollywood Loses SOPA Story
The entertainment industry moved to counter growing opposition to antipiracy bills. But its efforts appeared to have little effect as a series of congressional leaders dropped their support for the legislation.





我欣賞朱諸如Wikipedia和Google 等公司的尊守原則的價值觀
Antinuclear Protesters Disrupt Panel in Japan
Wall Street Journal
TOKYO—Protesters denouncing Japan's nuclear watchdog agency as having a pro-nuclear bias held up the initial approval of stress-test results for two idled reactors, as police were called in to break up the demonstration. More than a dozen ...


Wikipedia, Others Go Dark in SOPA Protest

Online sites deliver on promise to rally against the controversial anti-piracy proposals.

READ FULL STORY


Sopa and Pipa protests not over, says Wikipedia

Wikipedia "thank you" page Wikipedia's blacked-out message of yesterday's protest was replaced with a white "thank you"

Related Stories

After a 24-hour blackout, Wikipedia has returned to full working order but declared: "We're not done yet."

The site had blocked its content for 24 hours in protest at proposed anti-piracy legislation in the US.

The encyclopaedia said the site had been viewed 162 million times, with eight million people following instructions to contact politicians.

The protest led to eight US lawmakers withdrawing their support for the proposed bills.

Two of the bill's co-sponsors, Marco Rubio from Florida and Roy Blunt from Missouri, are among those who have withdrawn their support after "legitimate concerns".

But backers of the legislation, led by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), described the action as an "irresponsible" publicity "stunt".

The Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) and Protect Intellectual Property Act (Pipa) have caused considerable controversy among internet users and businesses since the plans were proposed in October last year.

'Melted servers'

Wednesday's co-ordinated action was intended to raise the profile of the debate to those outside of the tight-knit technology community - an objective Wikipedia said had been met.

"More than 162 million people saw our message asking if you could imagine a world without free knowledge," the site said.

Start Quote

I am watching the situation closely”

End Quote Eric Van Der Kleij Chief executive, Tech City UK

"You said no. You shut down Congress's switchboards. You melted their servers.

"From all around the world your messages dominated social media and the news. Millions of people have spoken in defence of a free and open internet."

Elsewhere, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg deemed the occasion worthy enough to post his first tweet in almost three years.

"Tell your congressmen you want them to be pro-internet," he wrote, linking to a longer statement on Facebook.

He continued: "We can't let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet's development.

"Facebook opposes Sopa and Pipa, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet."

Google, which urged its US visitors to sign a petition against the bills, said more than 4.5 million signatures had been gathered.

Advertising campaign

Supporters of the bill were quick to condemn the actions of the websites. Ex-Senator Chris Dodd, MPAA's chief executive, described the blackouts as an "abuse of power".

Ahead of the day's action, Mr Dodd said: "It's a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests."

Analysis

It looks as though the media backers of Sopa and Pipa have lost this round of the battle to Silicon Valley and the web activists.

Meanwhile, Creative America - a group which represents many big names in the movie business including Disney and Warner Bros - has launched an advertising campaign in the US.

A banner advertisement was shown in New York's Times Square offering advice on "what to do during an internet blackout". It suggested reading books, listening to music or watching a movie.

News Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch, a vocal supporter of Sopa, continued to spar with users on Twitter.

He tweeted: "Seems blogsphere has succeeded in terrorising many senators and congressmen who previously committed. Politicians all the same."

Watching closely

In the UK, the plans around Sopa and Pipa have been keenly watched, particularly by those worried about the effect the measures could have on internet companies in the country.

Peter Bradwell, a campaigner with the Open Rights Group, told the BBC: "It's explicit that [Sopa advocates] want to tackle foreign websites.

Creative America TV campaign picture A television advertising campaign supporting the anti-piracy plans has been launched

"We're concerned about the jurisdiction that gives over the kind of things you or I do on the internet in the UK - and the power that gives US copyright holders over the things that we do here."

Mr Bradwell recounted the comments made by Ed Vaizey, Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries, who in July last year said he was looking at some anti-piracy measures being discussed in the US.

"Hopefully, what the storm around this has helped do is highlight why we are so concerned about proposals for new website blocking powers.

"I hope it really helps them understand how they shouldn't make policy, and really should drive home some of the complaints that we've been making."

'Startling'

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport said it did not wish to comment on the protests, nor on the details of Sopa and Pipa.

In pictures: Sopa protests

Wikipedia Sopa protest

Eric Van Der Kleij, chief executive of the Tech City Investment Organisation, told the BBC: "We know that it is important for UK companies but it is definitely something for the US government. I am watching the situation closely.

"Regarding UK regulation, our position is that we are completely committed to an appropriate regulatory environment that protects rights but does not stifle innovation."

The UK's "digital champion" Martha Lane Fox said the blackout technique was surprising.

"Neutrality and equality of access is one of the fundamental principles of the internet," she told the BBC.

"So (while) I understand the concern that many US companies have about the restrictive Sopa law, blackouts are a startling way to show their frustration."

Constructive debate

Echoing the statements of rights holders in the US, Richard Mollet, chairman of the Publishers Association, criticised the blacked-out websites for not engaging "constructively" in the piracy debate.

"They should say: 'OK, there's a problem with copyright infringement. We, as internet companies, have a role here. What can we do to fulfil that role and help rights holders reduce infringement?'"

Creative America pro-Sopa advertisement Creative America posted an image on Facebook of its advertisement on display in New York's Times Square

He argued that while Wikipedia was a valued resource, it would be more noticeable to the world if rights holders were to switch off their content for a day.

"Think what you would lose.

"If you walked around the streets of America or Britain with no creative content available to you, because rights holders had decided to shut up shop, you would be deprived of the BBC, cinemas, radio, bookstores and so on.

"What's at stake when rogue internet sites are available to people and revenues are deprived is a great deal more than the excellent but nevertheless more limited Wikipedia."

More on This Story

Related Stories

2012年1月17日 星期二

陳寬仁《品質人語》/「領導與人格」

下午陳寬仁老師再續他母親90多歲寫的回憶錄書緣:錢石英《果姑話飄泊---側寫中國百年》,因為他知道多年前即轉送某人了,所以補送一本。我們研討要闢一blog來補充說明──我還說此書的一缺點是缺索引,因為書是5百多頁,牽涉到的人物頗多

他補充的一些家族的故事,我就記在族譜和書末空頁處

他介紹許多美國軍制與我國的差別。我們談起前月宜蘭某兵工廠炸死許多專家的慘事。他介紹美國是如何慎重和一板一眼地做這種工作,美國還做許多錄影分析安全的做法,即拆炸彈的在工作時要每一個動作都要說出來……..。他還說在美國參觀 Linear Explosives 公司的防爆牆的構法…….

我勸他先將這輩子一些難忘的長官記下來。他馬上引他在《品質人語》(台北:品質學會2000,頁106-07)中 H. Norman Schwarzkopf 將軍的「我們從差勁的領導中所學到的,遠比從好的領導中所學到的要多得多。你學會不該這樣去做,從而便會知道怎樣去做。」

我們討論兩位中正理工的院長的領導與人格──我從該校的歷史,才知道他們這次投票給馬英九是屬於「含淚投票」一族,即他們學校被併入國防大學……跟馬總統陳冤也沒用


網誌存檔