Hello and welcome to work.
I wrote an article in the FT this week about the growing number of Ceos making short videos. (Yes, you read about the trend Here first.) The story was, of course, very popular On LinkedIn. FT commentators were less excited 😕; And some worried about the deep. At that point, one of the appointments that I left out of the characteristic (an error, in retrospect) suggested that deep defenders are potentially less problems when the spectators are accustomed to the appearance and, what is crucial, the intonation of the CEO, so they know the real business when they see it. Then I noticed the False videos terrifying of Ethan Mollick, professor of Wharton and leader of artificial intelligence. Then the situation is. . . unclear.
Keep reading for deep thinking about how to reinvent work life and in office therapy I advise a miserable manager 😒.
As always, send your non -false versions of the workplace: Isabel.berwick@ft.com.
A pause a day helps you work, rest and play 🍫
What happens if you go back to the relentless running tape and ask a deeper question? Can we reimagine our work lives 🤔? Hilary Cottam He did exactly that. The social, innovative and author activist has seen since history that the times of “revolution”, including the technology we are entering now, offer opportunities to shake how we work and live, and to make deep social changes.
Hilary summoned various groups of local people in the meetings that calls “imaginations”, while traveling from Kilmarnock post -industrial to San Francisco focused on technology. I was there to ask questions, listen and learn from the ideas of residents about what constitutes a good job and a satisfactory life.
In his new book, The work we need: a 21st century reinventionHilary acknowledges that we can be paid well, but the “feeling of rough discomfort that feeds the industry of billions of books about the ‘balance between work and life’, work training and ‘well -being programs based on work reveals the truth for most of us. We are disenchanted with work and we are looking for change.” 😓
Hilary’s project led her to name six principles of “a good working life, which [she] Summarize as: basic concepts, meaning, time, care, game and place. “I loved the simplicity of this recipe and I recommend his book: it is practical and full of human wisdom. I spoke with Hilary about how these principles could be applied in business environments.
“I think there are two great things for corporate leaders,” said Hilary. “One is that workers should think that they have meaning in their work, which means that they really need to understand how what they do fulfills a greater purpose.” In particular, leaders “cannot preach values on the one hand and not really care for people on the other.”
The second big point is care. “I would say that everyone who uses people should think that each worker is also a caretaker 👵🏼. And if you start from that perspective, you want a huge loyalty, and you can do quite small alterations … to accommodate care.” Useful actions include offering predictable work schedules and firm time limits.
I was also interested in how to “play” as a principle of good work could fit into a corporate environment. Do we have time to play as the AI revolution extends over us 🌊?
Very, Hilary said: “Historically, the game occurs as a topic when we are in technological revolutions, when people really are afraid of what the next generation of machines is going to do.” Hilary discovered that the people with whom he spoke “would counterproduct the displacement of the phones, for example, against the quality of [real] Life that is played. “Employers do not need to provide the means for the game (without the need for” mandatory fun “🙀). It is important that leaders” make sure the staff has enough energy for the game. ”
In one word: Providing a good job is more than just salary and conditions: it is about creating firm bases for our well -being as humans.
You want more? Hilary 2015’s Ted talk “,”Social services are broken. How can we fix them“He has had views of 1 mn.
Office therapy
The problem: I moved internally to administer a team where there are great inefficiencies. We are preparing to implement improved processes and more automation, but the bad look at the office and the messages under the radar (they are clearly having a parallel conversation on their phones when we have video calls) is depressing me. There are four main resistant people, in addition to other neutral people. Should I say something or plow? They will soon have to change how they work, and I fear it.
Isabel Council: There is little worse for managers than to know that the staff is talking (and probably sharing memes) about you. In fact, you can’t say anything and “warn.” They will have to accept their changes and, honestly, who can remember the office policy even six months after the crisis passes? You can ride this 🏇🏻. Go to friends and family, and if you have a mentor, coach or therapist, even better.
Or, it can breathe deeply and allow staff to vent. You can frame this as “active listening”, because it sounds better and everyone does. In addition, it is not a lie, since, of course, he will be listening👂, and his antagonists can offer good ideas in the midst of ventilation.
What we all hate about change is not the change itself, but the lack of agency when we are imposed. Anything you can do to restore the feeling of equipment control will be very welcome. (However, they will not thank you; you do not believe your hopes 💐).
PS: If you go down the ventilation route, do not allow the group of four to do this together. Ask them for one. If you can stretch a coffee/lunch for each person discontent, even better. (However, you will have to do the same for the neutrals. Fair’s Fair ⚖️)
Do you have a problem or dilemma for office therapy? We anonymize everything: Isabel.berwick@ft.com.
Insights in the workplace of the US of Charter: Does it give greater impulse to qualified workers?
Is this a greater help for workers who are very skilled in their work? An influential study of MIT of material scientists who used AI tools provided surprising evidence that was the case, finding that the main scientists made more discoveries, while the least qualified saw little improvement. This week, Kevin Delaney, editor in chief of LetterThe research and research company in the future of the works alerted me about a MIT ad To say that I no longer had confidence in the historical research of AI, and its author was no longer in the university 😮.
With that retired article, what can we say about The role of experience and skill? Kevin points out that “several studies indicate that AI tools help more performance workers, reducing the productivity gap among better and less qualified workers, in environments such as customer service call centers.”
Other studies, which involve university debators and Kenyan businessmen, on the contrary, point to greater profits from the use of AI tools to the most skilled. The conclusions are probably diverted due to the nature of the tasks that are studied, Kevin suggests.
Five main stories of the world of work
-
Professionals are losing control of their work: Sarah or ‘Connor analyzes the long -term drop in the amount of “discretion of tasks” that workers have, which means control over what we do in our daily work. Professionals also report it: Is technology guilt?
-
Would you work 32 hours, from Monday to Sunday? The idea of spreading our work hours throughout a week has existed for a long time, but some companies are doing four -day jobs for seven days: Pilita Clark talks to some of them.
-
McKinsey yields 10% of the staff in the two -year profitability unit: The consulting has lost more than 10 percent of the staff in the last 18 months, even through a “unusually hard” performance review, Stephen Foley and Ellesheva Kissin reports.
-
Wall Street vs. Private Equity: Can anyone stop the graduation recruitment recruitment? In a difficult labor market for everyone else, private capital companies go after elite graduates that have jobs in investment banking. A Wild History by Ortenca Aliaj and subject Indap.
-
Prison Minister James Timpson: ‘This is not a quick solution’ Emma Jacobs has lunch with the FT inside a prison with the businessman known for using former prisoners in the chain of repair workshops of his family and dry clerks. It is now installed in the government to supervise the penitentiary reform.
One more thing. . .
Many of you will know Rachel Botsman as an expert in trust and author of the wide management Repetition bulletin. Next month, Rachel’s interpretation of the first “Orgires List” of the world (New York and Erie Railroad Company, 1855) is becoming an installation called “Roots of Trust” in the London Design Biennial (June 5-29). Intrigued? I definitely go. Rachel wrote about the project For FT.
A word from the work community 🌏
Mentioned last week’s bulletin Terms in China’s workplaceAnd I asked for examples of other cultures. We will return to this (keep sending them). I especially like these two:
Uwe Wissenbach writes: “In German, when people are so frustrated with their professional perspectives or work environment that they do not see progress, renounce or renounce internally. ‘Innere Kündigung’ basically it means that you deliver your renunciation letter only for you, continue to go to the office, but you have no motivation to give your best interest or even your interest. The equivalent, I suppose, I suppose, I suppose, I suppose, I suppose, I suppose Silence shit. “
Here there is a colleague from FT, Elodie O’Rourke: “In France, ‘the Pause Lejeuner’, also known as the lunch culture, is sacred.
And finally. . . View of this week’s office 📷
Thanks to Rod Hutchison in KPMG in Edimburg, he writes that he is “very lucky to have a very close view of the castle.” I will say. This will be difficult to overcome, but take Rod’s point of view as a challenge, working to readers. Send photos of castles, cathedrals, the local tesco or its backyard in flower for Isabel.berwick@ft.com.
All who publish all workplaces (or “work from anywhere 🏖️”) will receive a “lucky sauce” of new management and career books 📚.
